Talk:Bering Strait crossing

message: Should we change the €60b $100b change to the original €60b, and in turn 77 billion US dollars because the dollar has strengthened significantly since the last change? Justinba1010 (talk) 21:10, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Euros to Dollar

message: I believe Strauss is not the designer... and that Charles Alton Ellis is.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.229.224.50 (talk) 16:41, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Golden Gate Designer

message: Article has some serious issues, both overall quality and point of view(it seems to be written by someone who is clearly a proponent of the project). I don't know enough about the topic to feel comfortable doing the work myself, but it needs to be done.Arvis21 18:35, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
:I think we should rename the article to "Bering Strait Bridge". The bridge has been proposed a few times. One of the proposals used the name "Intercontinental Peace Bridge", to promote it, but I don't think that is the best name for us to use for the proposed bridge. I will change the name one week from now if no objection. A link from "Intercontinental Peace Bridge" will be kept. BIL 15:52, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please go ahead. Makes sense to me. Jarfingle 17:33, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

text: The name "Bering Strait crossing" is standard language, and the fact the there is a book (by James Oliver) with that name does not alone disqualify that name. There are two movies called Australia and we don't change the name of the article Australia for that sake. I don't really believe that the article is copied from the book. In early September 2006 this article was well developed, see link and many parts of today's version was there already.--BIL (talk) 20:35, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

text: Would you prefer this image?  It used to be the one used.  ---- Work permit (talk) 22:19, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Quality and Name

message: Can anyone add more info on the possible plans of contructing a tunnel and/or bridge across to the other side elsewhere? I am quite curious as to whether any steps have been taken to decide to build infrastructure links across the:
:*Strait of Messina
:*Fehmarn Belt
:*Cook Strait
:*Palk Strait
:*Strait of Tartary
:*Irish Sea
:*Strait of Bonifacio
:*Surigao and San Bernardino Straits
:*Hainan Strait
:*Strait of Georgia
:*Kvarken
:*Chacao Channel bridge
:*Strait of Magellan
Anyone with inside knowledge on any of these? I've posted similar requests elsewhere. Gruesome Twosome! 8v] //Big Adamsky 17:38, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: *Bass Strait is another possibility. njh 23:47, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Fixed link across elsewhere?

message: Since there isn't a bridge right now, how do you travel over the land between Alaska and Russia with your car or motorhome? Could a boat or ferry pick up something as large as a motorhome? Zachorious 12:18, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Simple answer, you don't at all. There is no road from the Bering strait to major cities of Alaska. Same on the russian side. There are tourist flights in the summer, but before about year 2000 that did not exist because it is a Russian military sensitive area. BIL 15:35, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Tongue-in-cheek answer: jump in your DeLorean, set the dial for eastern Asia at about 60,000 BC, and start walking... Good grief. It's like Bubba taking a flight into Toronto and wondering why it would be a bad idea to take a cab to Banff, or showing up at a US/Canada border crossing and wondering where is all the snow and why can't I find any polar bears for his toddler to ride on... Garth of the Forest (talk) 06:33, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If you want to see what the ranges on both sides, the people and the strait itself actually look like, get hold of the photographic book Divided Twins by Boyd Norton and Yevgeny Yevtushenko. Absolutely breathtaking photos, powerful poems (by Yevtushenko) and informative captions.Strausszek (talk) 00:26, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

text: Simple method, though there might be some security issues.  Asia ships an enormous number of shipping containers to North America, and while a lot of them just don't come back, many are shipped back empty.  It is possible to buy passage on a freighter to get across the ocean (significantly cheaper than air fare or a liner, but far less comfortable).  It's reasonable to assume you'd be able to rent space in one of those cargo containers for your car, too.  These days dock authorities might gripe about it, but it may well be possible.  That said, you won't be seeing the Bering Strait itself, but you can get your vehicle to Asia that way. Rashkavar  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.6.164.143 (talk) 07:51, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: How do you do it now?

message: Copy and paste this: 
--One Salient Oversight 06:00, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Userbox available

message: Russia's idea of a tunnel has made pretty big news recently.  Just wondering if it's worth some mention here.  Here's a link: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601082&sid=a5OJJzlp0xwM&refer=canada Yubimusubi 04:52, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, Stuky created TKM-World Link Yubimusubi 00:19, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not totally new idea, there is a link here to a news article from 2001. The russian wiki-article linked from here is actually about the tunnel not a bridge and relatively long also. -- BIL 22:41, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

text: TKM-World Link got copied into Bering Strait Tunnel, which got copied into Bering Strait bridge.  It is possible that the final connection will be a tunnel for the two long sections and a bridge between the two islands (the short section). 199.125.109.84 22:49, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Railroad tunnel 64 miles, highway tunnel both 25 miles, highway bridge between the two islands. 121.102.47.215 (talk) 08:17, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

text: Which articles? There isn't enough material for TKM-World Link, and there is no way that the Bering Strait tunnel is a separate project from the Bering Strait bridge. 199.125.109.84 23:22, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Russia's Tunnel

message: :...including continuations on land, at $105 billion. This excludes the cost of new roads and railways to reach the bridge.
Aren't the continuations on land the same thing as the roads and railways to reach the bridge?
DallasEpperson 03:47, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Conflicting sentences?

message: Bering Strait Tunnel has been merged into Bering Strait bridge.  For discussion there see talk:Bering Strait Tunnel. 199.125.109.84 22:39, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: See also

message: So give a summary if it is worth the cost or not. Jidanni 14:14, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: On the whole, no. The amount of goods and people that would need to be taken that way is minimal and there aren't even any continuous networks of road up to the Bering Strait. On the Russian side, no roads apart from local trails for thousands of miles; you have to go to go something like 2.500 miles to the southwest before you reach a steady road or railway network. There are no real access roads on the American side either, and upkeep of roads in those climate conditions would be extremely difficult. To make it better, the Bering Strait area is occasionally seismically active isn't it? Air or sea transports are much cheaper and require much less investments.Strausszek (talk) 00:04, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There was also no link between east and west Canada until someone built it. Economically, this would be a godsend since it would bridge Europe, Asia and the Americas via terrestrial transport so expensive shipping would not need to be used. 99.236.221.124 (talk) 07:26, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There was a recent study of the carbon costs of transportation modes. It reached the surprising conclusion that air travel had less total emissions than either road or train travel due to the enormous investment in the infrastructure.   Will Beback  talk   07:42, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The question was, "worth the cost or not?"  Carbon isn't a cost, it's Global Warming propaganda.  Costs are in dollars, not Carbon.  You guys are really programmed.98.165.15.98 (talk) 02:04, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, given the current trend, it's likely that carbon emissions may cost money. But the reason I brought it up is that maintaining infrastructure requires work. Work that emits carbon and costs money. The study was about carbon emissions, but the point is the same.   Will Beback  talk   02:21, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

text: Well, you shouldn't count infrastructure into the cost of transportation because the cost of the infrastructure pays for itself in a few years by the cheaper transport 99.236.221.124 (talk) 20:39, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: No, that was the point. The tens of thousands of miles of road require continuous repair. According to this study, the combined carbon output of airports and airplanes is less than that of roads and cars or rails and trains, given their assumptions and parameters. I can't recall if they covered sea shipping but I believe it's quite low too. It's counterintuitive. I mentioned it to point out that a railway with a long tunnel and at least hundreds of miles of rail over perma(?)frost, all requiring considerable maintenance, might not not have lower carbon emissions than other forms of transportation. I'll see if I can find it and add something here if it mentions this proposal.   Will Beback  talk   08:33, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

text: FYI, here's a study on linking Alaska by rail to Canada and the lower 48 states. Alaska Canada Rail Link.   Will Beback  talk   00:24, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

text: In my opinion, no it is not worth it. For freight, shipping is less expensive, since hte sea is already there, and you don't have to build expensive roads, railways and bridges. For passenger travel, air is better. Faster which is important with the long distances. Cheaper since you don't have to build expensive roads, railways and bridges. What they should build in Alaska is local roads so that transportation of supplies is easier. Today food and other supplies to western Alaska is transported by air which is expensive. --BIL (talk) 10:45, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

text: Well, about the so called 'propaganda' on our rising carbon emissions and deforestation, that is a big issue as we have seen a vast number of studies that this is a problem. Anyway wouldn't this also lower the price of international travel? Setting up a bisectional bidirectional tunnel, one side for electric train, and the other for freight and cars with great care for the set ups in emission release, carbon monoxide is extremely poisonous.http://www.piarc.org/en/order-library/16636-en-Road%20tunnels:%20vehicle%20emissions%20and%20air%20demand%20for%20ventilation.htm This would also create more economic stability in impoverished areas of the world like east Russia, and Alaska. Justinba1010 (talk) 21:10, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Worth it?

message: How far is it from Siberia to Big Diomede? And how far from Little Diomede to Alaska? --Uncle Ed (talk) 18:36, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Answer - about 40 km (25 miles) for both distances. -- BIL (talk) 21:36, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Tunnel distances

message: Are there any plans to build a road from Anchorage or Fairbanks to the Bering Strait? I have tried to find info about an extension of the Elliott Highway, a good starting point for a road between Fairbanks and Nome. Nothing found. Googling about "road nome fairbanks" finds very little. A NY Times article from 1908 (!) about winter dog trails. Nothing else. Anyone knows?  -- BIL (talk) 21:36, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Less than a year after the above comment, things started to happen. Googling about "road nome fairbanks" now finds a lot since the governor of Alaska did in January 2009 put forward a proposal about a road. Russia has repaired the Kolyma Highway to Magadan and is interested in extending it. Possibly roads to both sides of Bering Strait are open within a decade or two. --BIL (talk) 18:29, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Road

message: I think it would be good to make it clear what the actual purpose of such bridge would be. I don't think its obvious to most people that going through the bering straight is much closer than going over the pacific ocean. On a standard map, it looks like a detour, while on a globe, its obvious that  it's a straight path. It would be nice to have a map of the pacific ocean that shows how ships travel from guangzhou to san francisco in what appears to be an arc and some explanation of that.
Also, much of chinas production happens inland, meaning that trains first have to tranport goods to the coast, and then have it transfered to ships. Once the ships are in the US, the cargo is once again transfered to trains or whatever and transportet to the east where most americans live. These changes of means of transport are very expensive.
So thats two suggestions for where the article could head in the future.81.235.136.245 (talk) 20:09, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: The actual purpose

message: Deleted the sentence referring to WWII.  Since American aid to Russia was by plane, I don't see how it's relevant to the proposed bridge/tunnel.  It'd be different if there was a sense that a bridge or tunnel was discussed by either party. Louiebb (talk) 23:26, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: WWII reference

message: The article states that George W. Bush and Vladimir Putin discussed the proposal at their meeting in Sochi in April but I can't find any references to confirm that the topic actually made the agenda. I'm pretty sure it didn't. Anyone know for certain? ProgHead777 (talk) 11:51, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Bush/Putin meeting

message: I've removed all references to Great Britain from the lede.  As a purely technical point, yes the Bering Strait crossing would create a land route from my home in London to North and South America, and also the two American continents would for the first time have land route to Asia, Africa and Europe, of which Britain is an offshore island accessible in turn by road tunnel.
To mention the British connection in the lede is, I feel, distracting and unnecessary.  I don't think the transatlantic freight and passenger aircraft businesses will be worrying about millions of people streaming up through Alaska across the Bering Strait, across Russia, through Europe to France to the Pas de Calais and onto the EuroTunnel just to avoid a grueling air flight or boat journey. --TS 00:01, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It would be almost twice as cheap to take the tunnel from LA>Anchorage>Vladivostok>Moscow>Berlin>Paris>London than taking a first class flight from say LA>London. I'm guessing if it's a train line it would be about a days travel while if it's a car it would take a few days. I doubt it would be used for passengers as much as for freight and petrol pipe through since it costs about 500$ per 100 kilos to do it by plane and 100$ per 100 kilos to do it by boat (a pipe would cost .15$ per gallon of crude to transport 90km) 99.236.221.124 (talk) 20:36, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The distance London-LA over Russia would be at least 18,000 km (12,000 miles) and it would take at least three weeks to drive with a realistic distance per day. The trains could do it in one week, if the speeds are raised a lot. Cost aware people would not use first class flights so flying would probably be cheaper anyway, and much more compfortable. --BIL (talk) 19:08, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Using current trains and schedules, it takes three days to get from London to Moscow (with a couple of changes of train) at a cost of about $455,1 and another week to get to Vladivostock, for $1600 1st class. It's 36 hours (and about 1000 miles) from Seattle to Los Angeles, with a seat costing $128. It's roughly 3,000 miles from Seattle to Vladivostok overland. If it makes the same speed as the Amtrak train then it would take another 4.5 days. So without major upgrades to other segments, it would take over two weeks to go from London to L.A., with many train changes along the way. The current segments would cost about $2200 (plus food), and presumably the fare for a Bering Crossing would also be considerable. The current cost of flying nonstop is about $1000 for economy, and $5000 for business class, and it take about 18 hours.   Will Beback  talk   21:23, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Great Britain/Channel Tunnel

message: I've removed uncited materials, and added cited information.  I've also removed wp:or.  The article as it stood made uncited claims, as well as creating original research by sythesizing conclusions from cited sources.  Specifically, I've deleted statements about rail gauges, alternative access routes, possible sources of income, etc which are not cited from studies specific to the construction of the bridge --Work permit (talk) 05:07, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Well it's not just a bridge, it could also be a tunnel, either for trucks or for trains. 99.236.221.124 (talk) 22:35, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Correction, the crossing.--Work permit (talk) 04:29, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Article cleanup: Citations and original research

message: Please provide references to technical defficulty of guage differences that specifically discuss the proposed bering straight crossing--Work permit (talk) 04:14, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: If it is a notable issue, then you should be able to find a  relaiable source that says so. The key to wikipedia is verifiability.--Work permit (talk) 09:35, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Work permit, The notability policy is about whether or not wikipedia should have an article on a topic.  The important thing in terms of whether or not the article should mention a particular issue is WP:Undue weight.  Yaris678 (talk) 16:35, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: synthesis

message: US and Canada should convert from  standard gauge to  Indian gauge and 25kV AC electrification before they have their high-speed trains.
:Proposed gauges and voltages (in North America):
:#Bering Strait crossing:  Russian gauge and 25kV 50Hz alternating current
:#Alaska:  Indian  gauge and 25kV 50Hz aternating current
:#Canada and continental United States:  Indian gauge and 25kV 60Hz alternating current
:#Mexico and Central America:  standard gauge and without overhead lines
121.102.47.39 (talk) 04:58, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: This IP number is used by someone infamous for adding own suggestions to Wikipedia.--BIL (talk) 18:31, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  North America got proposed by Russia 

message: "forces up to 5000 tons"
tons is not a measurment for force. This should be converted to the International Newton of the USA/Burma/Liberia pound-force.94.145.236.194 (talk) 20:11, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: How about tons of force?  2000 pounds of force is one (short) ton of force.  Such units are used quite often in engineering, even if they're not technically correct.  I'll add the appropriate SI units in parentheses (as the source likely refers to tons) 174.6.164.143 (talk) 08:05, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Taking the above on board, I have simplified the wording to which could produce forces in the order of  on a pier., which uses the  template to do the dirty work (at low precision - .  I am assuming short tons-force as above; change "STf" to "LTf" or "tf" if needed.An alternative wording might be which could produce forces exceeding  on a pier., but either way, I've removed the  tag along with the obtuse wording (less or more). Tim PF (talk) 15:38, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Force 

message: The actual length of the bridge section of the Jiaozhou Bay Bridge is 26.7 km (16.16 mi). The 42 km figure applies to the entire Jiaozhou Bay Connection Project, not of all of which is a bridge. The Lake Pontchartrain Causeway is the longest continuous bridge. Roches (talk) 06:41, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jiaozhou Bay Bridge length 

message: It's occurred to me that drilling the tunnel would create a very large amount of waste rock, which would probably need to be pulled out of the ends of the tunnels. Have there been any plans on what to do with the waste rock? Ship it out through the rail to disposal areas? Dump it in the ocean around the entrances? Fill in the space between the Diomede islands? 98.127.119.21 (talk) 07:23, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: That is a smaller problem, usually addressed when detailed work plans are made. A hill could be built, covered with soil and planted with grass, or dumped into the ocean, or used for road construction. We are very far from such detailed level of planning. Some people believe construction start is soon, but it is for sure not.--BIL (talk) 16:40, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Waste rock? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Bering Strait crossing. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071114102600/http://www.mperussia.com:80/bering_conf_prog_e.html to http://www.mperussia.com/bering_conf_prog_e.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:30, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Bering Strait crossing. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071114102600/http://www.mperussia.com/bering_conf_prog_e.html to http://www.mperussia.com/bering_conf_prog_e.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.voanews.com/english/2007-04-19-voa63.cfm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050319212502/http://media.dsc.discovery.com/convergence/engineering/beringstrait/interactive/interactive.html to http://media.dsc.discovery.com/convergence/engineering/beringstrait/interactive/interactive.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130117104414/http://www.alaskacanadarail.org/ to http://www.alaskacanadarail.org/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:41, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified