 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsGeneralRural LivingHome AutomationSecurity AlarmsConstructionRepairPlumbingCleaningPest ControlLawn and Garden |
Homeowner Forum / Construction / September 2008New Design for Gibraltar bridge
Hi, all, Are there anybody who is still interested in Gibraltar bridge? Recently it was said that a tunnel is being planned: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7515125.stm We actually have a creative idea to build an economical and feasible bridge which potentially can save billions of dollars compared with all existing designs or the tunnel. But we are not sure how we can promote the idea. If you are a company or institution who is seriously interested and also can influence the outcome of the Gibraltar bridge, please reply to me. Thanks and have a great day! Jason Zhao and his father > Are there anybody who is still interested in Gibraltar bridge? > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > We actually have a creative idea to build an economical and feasible > bridge which potentially can save billions of dollars Well you can patent a design but not a concept... My concept for the Gibraltar bridge is a sagging bridge with a jet engine pointing upwards every 100 feet on both sides of the bridge and along the sag. Then to level the bridge just run the jet engines... > Well you can patent a design but not a concept... > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Then to level the bridge just run the jet engines... Actually as I describe my jet engine bridge and draw it...I can patent it but it applies to bridge use in general and not to some bridge in particular...but that's actually better. Patent pending... >> Well you can patent a design but not a concept... >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > but it applies to bridge use in general and not to some bridge in > particular...but that's actually better. Patent pending... And my concept...as I first called it...is a specific element of a bridge design and is therefor a system. Patent pending... >>> Well you can patent a design but not a concept... >>> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > And my concept...as I first called it...is a specific element of a bridge > design and is therefor a system. Patent pending... And of course when I said jet engines every 100 feet I meant...regularly spaced jet engines along the bridge and on both sides of the bridge. >>>> Well you can patent a design but not a concept... >>>> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > And of course when I said jet engines every 100 feet I meant...regularly > spaced jet engines along the bridge and on both sides of the bridge. And what I really meant was...periodically spaced jet engines along the bridge and on both sides of the bridge. >>>>> Well you can patent a design but not a concept... >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > And what I really meant was...periodically spaced jet engines along > the bridge and on both sides of the bridge. Sure you didn't mean appropriately oriented, independently acting, reaction force application devices of any kind positioned symmetrically, or asymmetrically, in such a manner as to compensate for naturally occurring, or man made, steady and/or variable structurally destructive loads?  Signature------- Charly Coughran ccoughran@DELETE-TO-RESPOND-UCSD.EDU >>>>> Well you can patent a design but not a concept... >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > And what I really meant was...periodically spaced jet engines along the > bridge and on both sides of the bridge. No that's...regularly spaced but likely asymmetrically spaced jet engines along the bridge and on both sides of the bridge. > No that's...regularly spaced but likely asymmetrically spaced jet engines > along the bridge and on both sides of the bridge. Andy comments: Wouldn't you save a lot of money by having just one BIG jet engine in the middle, and cables connecting it wo assmmetrically spaced contact points along the bridge.... It could be refueled by a dirrigible..... Andy in Eureka, Texas Civis Eurekus Sum > Wouldn't you save a lot of money by having just one BIG jet engine >in the middle, and cables connecting it wo assmmetrically spaced >contact points along the bridge.... If the engine fails, down comes the bridge. > It could be refueled by a dirrigible..... Whynot use a pipeline runnig from the shores to the engines? And where would the fuel for these engines come from? The bin Laden family or Mohammed Atta's survivors? Signature"This item demonstrates how stupid the average American is. Every ninety minutes someone in this country is hit by a train. A train, okay? Trains are on tracks; they can't come and get you. They can't surprise you when you step off a curb. You have to go to them. Got that?" --George Carlin > If the engine fails, down comes the bridge. Andy writes: You are such a pessimist !!!! All we have to do is to pass a law that says the engine will not be allowed to fail.... ... I don't think you understand the political think-do ..... Andy in Eureka, Texas ">> >> If the engine fails, down comes the bridge. >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > ... I don't think you understand the political think-do ..... Andy in Eureka, Texas \ Or repeal a law, gravity >... I don't think you understand the political think-do ..... I guess so. I always thought that the laws of physics overrode the laws of man. -- -- "Foley, we should have known it was you...." --From the movie Beverly Hills Cop. On Sep 25, 8:33 am, necromancer > I guess so. I always thought that the laws of physics overrode the > laws of man. Andy comments. You are observant... Remember.... the US Supreme Court has ,.... BY LAW.... classified the tomato as a vegetable..... in opposition to every botanist and vegetabilist on planet earth.... go google it.... So much for "facts" Andy in Eureka, Texas >> Well you can patent a design but not a concept... >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >but it applies to bridge use in general and not to some bridge in >particular...but that's actually better. Patent pending... Instead of jet engines, how about hot-air ballons? <bg> >> Are there anybody who is still interested in Gibraltar bridge? >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >> We actually have a creative idea to build an economical and feasible >> bridge which potentially can save billions of dollars I remember watching the Extreme Engineering show on this and other topics. I hated that show. The only episode that I thought fell into the realm of possibility was the Bering Straight Bridge. A 50-mile bridge over fairly shallow waters and some of the technology had already been figured out on the Confederate Bridge in Canada (the ice problem). "But a huge barge filled with oil has lost control of her systems and is heading straight for the bridge... Can the bridge stand up to the force of a fully loaded barge?... (few dramatic moments later) Everything's OK. The engineering team has seen to it that nothing bad will ever happen..." (not exactly how they played it out but not too far from it) They changed it a few years later and had that nerdy guy climbing around on a few construction sites. That was far more interesting. Some of the dumb ideas I remember: - a floating tunnel across the atlantic - the Gibraltar Bridge (not the idea of someone coming up with something that worked - more just the idea that they presented - it looked like it'd collapse under it's own weight) - I think they had a mile-high building or some pyramid building in the middle of Tokyo Bay They may as well have had an episode on building a dome over NYC. >> Are there anybody who is still interested in Gibraltar bridge? >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >pointing upwards every 100 feet on both sides of the bridge and along the >sag. 100 ft? No way, I think you can go 100 meters easily! >Then to level the bridge just run the jet engines... "Captan, we need more power on engine 4,345!" "Give her all you can Scotty, we've got to level the bridge before the Klingons attack!" Oh, sorry, got carried away! > On Sep 21, 3:11 pm, zhaojason2...@gmail.com wrote: > Hi, all, [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > all existing designs or the tunnel. But we are not sure how we can > promote the idea. The problem with a bridge is that A) at the narrowest point, the Strait is still 8 miles (~13km) wide, and B) the Strait isn't exactly shallow...it's several hundred feet deep (200+ meters) and at one location is over 1,000ft (305m) deep. And one of the busiest maritime shipping lanes in the world to boot... Froggie |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.