Timeline for How soon will the first underwater cities be built?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 27, 2014 at 23:40 | comment | added | Twelfth | True enough, I guess the colony on the moon still doesn't eliminate the possibility earthlings firing missile into space either. Well said, +1 to your answer for the expansions (floating at a depth city and why chase the rich). | |
| Nov 27, 2014 at 23:34 | comment | added | Henry Taylor | I guess, despite my efforts to keep the motivation of the wealthy minimal, getting them to pay for the research in their despiration without setting the stakes too high, when I brought in the military armories and thereby, military weapons, every sanctuary for the rich became untenable. We are all, ultimately, servants of whoever has the biggest guns. | |
| Nov 27, 2014 at 23:31 | comment | added | Henry Taylor | I had been envisioning "floating at a depth" because any location, regardless of the depth would be a strategic weakness if fixed. Highly mobile is the new "high ground". Hadn't considered depth charges though. I was sort of hoping that the attack against the rich would taper off after they got out of harms way. After all, financial wealth is little more than the ability to influence others in the real world. Once the rich run away from their businesses and their assets, are they really rich any more. Are they really worth chasing. | |
| Nov 27, 2014 at 21:53 | comment | added | Twelfth | As to my 100m depth suggestion, if you are fleeing from a surface army, most depth charges are quite effective to 100m, with later american ones capable of taking out subs at 180m deep. I'd assume if your worry is a surface military, being under that would be a goal. | |
| Nov 27, 2014 at 21:32 | comment | added | Twelfth | I assumed ocean and not lake (figured under lake cities would be easier to spot and lose the isolation factor). Most ocean coastlines are sharp drop offs and there is little for plateaus in the 100m deep range. Even the Mediterranean averages a good 1500 meters deep. I'd be hard pressed to find a suitable location in the 100m deep range...maybe the English channel (though I'd argue against isolation there), but even then it possesses some decently sharp drop offs. Or are you going more of a "floating at a depth" underwater city and not on the ocean floor? | |
| Nov 27, 2014 at 20:47 | comment | added | Henry Taylor | Why would an undersea city have to be deep? Highly mobile and invisible from the surface is all that is really needed. Yes, such a structure would still be trackable by satellites, survellience planes and radar, but that is still a much smaller profile than a floating city or a fixed bunker. I envy your space-city for its remoteness. Extra-planetary isolation is a big security boon. But I think the economics and danger of ferrying the wealthy back and forth from earth to orbit, would offset that security advantage. | |
| Nov 27, 2014 at 20:00 | comment | added | Twelfth | Underground bunkers and space seem like safer and cheaper alternatives than trying to make something that can withstand the pressures while maintaining a usable atmosphere inside. Every 10 meters below is around a 1 atmosphere pressure increase...perfect spheres have the best chance of resisting these, but a single structural fault is fatal (porthole pinhole). Modern atomic subs have a rated 'crush' depth of about 500 meters, no where near the bottom of the ocean floor...and any issue down to a pinhole would be beyond catastrophic. Good idea for an answer, not really feasible. | |
| Nov 27, 2014 at 5:25 | history | answered | Henry Taylor | CC BY-SA 3.0 |