Russia proposes Massive Superhighway that will make it possible to drive from U.S. to Europe

a reply to: lamplighters

Surplus oil rigs could be modified as rest stops.
I'm all for it.

a reply to: pl3bscheese

You are as lost as I am on the subject.

The bridge in la. does not cross deep water much nor current and ice.

On top of that the closest point in the straight is over 50 mi.long through deep water

I personally believe that it is possible but it would be unlike any modern feat and closer to the pyramids construction.

Even if you get the bridge built you still have to deal with the weather that would continually bury the road.

The temperature changing enough to effect such would take longer to take effect that it would take to build the road and on top of that such an increase in temperature to the extent you claim in order to have a tube stay in tact would cause such worldwide devastation that would put such nonsense of a road around the world on the back burner for centuries.

originally posted by: deadeyedick
a reply to: pl3bscheese

The temperature changing enough to effect such would take longer to take effect that it would take to build the road and on top of that such an increase in temperature to the extent you claim in order to have a tube stay in tact would cause such worldwide devastation that would put such nonsense of a road around the world on the back burner for centuries.

You can speak for yourself on being lost, but if you're curious enough look into the ET3 evacuated tubes. You're assuming far too much from a state of ignorance. Hope you find what you're looking for.

originally posted by: deadeyedick

The bridge in la. does not cross deep water much nor current and ice.

On top of that the closest point in the straight is over 50 mi.long through deep water.

The Golden Gate is in deeper water with more treacherous currents and was built 80 years ago.

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
a reply to: lamplighters

Surplus oil rigs could be modified as rest stops.
I'm all for it.

I can imagine that oil is a very big reason for the thought of a highway in that area and is likely the driving force behind all the military links being passed in this thread.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I would agree that even though the golden gate is much shorter than the train the gate is much more of a feat and would be a closer comparison to what would be needed to build this road. I mean imagine a 50mi. long golden gate bridge and what building that would be like.

We already have the roads. If Russia wants to pay for a bridge and build something through Siberia then that's their own business. It's pointless and logistically unsound, but go ahead. I won't be driving on any 53 mile long Russian made bridge. If it's anything like the quality of their cars then I think I'll pass. This is such a bad idea. It would be near impossible to maintain and put people in serious danger. What a waste of manpower for something that would never get used. I barely have time to cook breakfast so how does anyone find time to drive around the entire planet? Get a job you hippies.

a reply to: Cygnis

the page has no 'by-line' date... so prove that myself and thousands of other readers of RT or possible USA news sources did not read about this proposal of an inter-continental roadway back in 2012 ?
I swear I knew about this hair brained idea for years now.


I thought back then... if Texas is a bitch to travel through.... What about Siberia which would be some 10X longer

(talk about being asleep at the wheel)







not trying to shoot-the-messenger, my friend...
the proposal says highway but really means a travel/commerce/land-corridor & all that would entail


too bad the idiot/brain-dead USA signed-on to the crappy TPP

Be imaginative. Road transport is slow when considering the distances.

I like the idea maglev trains and even better the vactrain concept - 5,000 mph, so New York to London in time for lunch. Wouldn't that be something?

en.wikipedia.org...

The best way to cross the Bering straights would be by rail inside a covered bridge.

A covered bridge would make it all weather. less ice, snow and wind.

Put cars, trucks and shipping containers on rail cars and haul them across on a electric powered train.

This would make for a smaller lighter bridge but carry more per day across.

Also by connecting russian and US rail lines you could run rail from Europe to the US.

a railroad line from Telkeetna to Nome would be easier to build then a road.

a reply to: deadeyedick
a reply to: pl3bscheese

Technical Challenges

The depth of the water offers little challenge, because the strait is no deeper than 55 metres (180 ft).[15] The tides and currents in the area are not severe.[13] Nevertheless, the route would be located just south of the Arctic Circle. Because the location experiences long, dark winters and extreme weather, including average winter lows of −20 °C (−4 °F) and possible lows approaching −50 °C (−58 °F), construction activity would likely be restricted to five months of the year.[15]

The weather also poses challenges to exposed steel.[15] In Lin's design, concrete covers all structures, to simplify maintenance and to offer additional stiffening.[15]

Although there are no icebergs in the Bering Strait, ice floes up to 1.8 metres (6 ft) thick are in constant motion during certain seasons, which could produce forces on the order of 44,000 kilonewtons (9,900,000 pounds-force) on a pier.[13]

a reply to: Xcathdra

Excellent, what intuition already told me. Tech reverses lack of viability, then each successive moment makes the project that much cheaper. Heck if it was a generation from now we could construct year round remotely with bots.

Just for the record, the Bering Strait is only 161 feet deep.

Lake Pontchartrain is 65 feet deep.

However, there is a set of islands in the middle of the Bering Strait, so it would not be a continuous bridge, it would probably be only half-that for each section.

Would be possible to run a tunnel, much like what connects France to the UK. But this does not take into account tectonic plate movements, should they be an issue, you have a water-filled tunnel, as a possibility.

Depending on your reason for the drive, it would cost about $600 one way in gas, if you drove the full length from NYC to London. However, flying takes away the ability to stop and see things would you not, if you were driving. So, in essence, it would be a way to move freight, and for vacationers and crazy kids to travel around.

a reply to: pl3bscheese

Pretty much... Some other things to consider -

Climate change - Several studies have been done which show the arctic Ocean as ice free during Summer months. The time frame went from 2015 to 2050 as to when we would see it ice free during those months. That opens trade between Europe / North America / Asia (northern parts). It cuts about 2 weeks off of travel time compared to current trade routes from the Atlantic and Pacific Ocean routes.

The Arctic circle varies by about 2 degrees based on the Earths axis tilt. Currently the Arctic circle is shifting northwards. Bear in mind the area the bridge would be built is actually south of the arctic circle. As we can see from the picture I posted its not exactly the nether reaches of the lost land of Mu adjusted for cold climate. Part of me wonders if they could build in a heated system for a land bridge that would keep the bridge surface at temperatures above freezing.

The ability to build a tunnel is present which would essentially negate the bulk of weather / climate effects that a land bridge would face.

Humans have this weird knack to finding something we want to do knowing about just how impossible it would be to do, and then going for it. In addition to the bearing straight bridge there is an idea for a bridge going from Spain to north Africa. Apparently they have found undersea ridges at various intervals that could make building a bridge feasible.

Straight of Gibraltar Crossing

Most of whats being described for both crossings has already been done via the chunnel. The crossing between France and Britain through the English Channel.

The channel Tunnel
In this instance the tunnel is 250 feet at its deepest. A Japanese tunnel runs 33 miles and reaches a depth of almost 800 feet down.

We can do it... Its just a matter of countries setting aside their desire to conquer.

a reply to: DISRAELI

Incidentally, a note for the people on this thread confused by the spelling of Bering Strait. It was named after the seaman who discovered it.

Vitus Bering

wiki source

Vitus Jonassen Bering (baptised 5 August 1681, died 19 December 1741)[1][nb 1] also known as Ivan Ivanovich Bering[2] was a Danish born explorer in Russian service, and an officer in the Russian Navy. He is known for his two explorations of the north-eastern coast of the Asian continent and from there the western coast on the North American continent. The Bering Strait, the Bering Sea, Bering Island, the Bering Glacier and the Bering Land Bridge have since all been (posthumously) named in his honour.

According to this article V. Bering wasn't the first who discovered the Bering strait yet it was named after him

Assessing the scale of Bering's achievements is difficult, given that he was neither the first Russian to sight North America (that having been completed by Gvozdev during the 1730s), nor the first Russian to pass through the strait which now bears his name (an honour which goes to the relatively unknown 17th-century expedition of Semyon Dezhnev). Reports from his second voyage were jealously guarded by the Russian administration, preventing Bering's story from being retold in full for at least a century after his death. Nonetheless, Bering's achievements, both as an individual explorer and as a leader of the second expedition are regarded as substantial. Consequently, Bering's name has since been used for the Bering Strait (named by Captain James Cook despite knowledge of Dezhnev's earlier expedition), the Bering Sea, Bering Island, Bering Glacier and the Bering Land Bridge.[21]

a reply to: BrokedownChevy

What a waste of manpower for something that would never get used. I barely have time to cook breakfast so how does anyone find time to drive around the entire planet? Get a job you hippies.

What kind of myopic vision is this ? With this attitude I want to know what do you think about space exploration ? People are not going to Mars and beyond before they will build a simple road on planet Earth.

a reply to: Skid Mark

Most countries in Europe drive on the opposite side of the road than Americans.

England is "most countries" in Europe lol ?

Or yea, may be if you include Gibraltar

a reply to: kitzik

Not to mention that every construction project we do on earth could be a solution to a future construction problem on another planet.

I like to think of Earth as a training ground that prepares us for what we will encounter in space.

As for the posters comment about right hand verse left hand driving there are solution in place. There are road links with cross overs, where a right side drive country gets a reversal at the border, shifting right to left and left to right. A pretty easy solution.


Right side driving = RED
Left side driving = BLUE


Here is just one solution -


Real world right to left to right crossovers

Real world cross overs

a reply to: Xcathdra

As for the posters comment about right hand verse left hand driving there are solution in place. There are road links with cross overs, where a right side drive country gets a reversal at the border, shifting right to left and left to right. A pretty easy solution.

I think majoprity of the cars in the Russian far East (Vladivostok and up till Novosibirsk) are actually suited for Japan , same as England.
I will not say that it is safe driving nonetheless it is a fact on the road. I think Russian authorities banning them from time to time, but they are still used and imported (legally or not I don't know straight from Japan)

a reply to: kitzik

Still an easy fix... The danger lies with the people accidentally driving on the wrong side of the road. If life didn't have a bit of danger then what would be the point?