×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Transporting a 15-Meter-Wide, 600-Ton Magnet Cross Country

Soulskill posted about a year ago | from the will-take-a-lot-of-stamps dept.

Science 152

necro81 writes "Although its Tevatron particle accelerator has gone dark, Fermi Laboratory outside Chicago is still doing physics. A new experiment, called muon g-2 will investigate quantum mechanical behavior of the electron's heavier sibling: the muon. Fermi needs a large ring chamber to store the muons it produces and investigates, and it just so happens that Brookhaven National Laboratory outside NYC has one to spare. But how do you transport a delicate, 15-m diameter, 600-ton superconducting magnet halfway across the country? Very carefully."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

152 comments

Hello datacenters (4, Funny)

dadelbunts (1727498) | about a year ago | (#43786361)

I would be so tempted to just drive by datacenters wiping all their data. It probably wouldnt work BUT I CAN DREAM CANT I!

Re:Hello datacenters (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43786473)

No you CAN'T.

Re:Hello datacenters (4, Funny)

dadelbunts (1727498) | about a year ago | (#43786581)

The dream police, they live inside of my head. The dream police, they come to me in my bed. The dream police, theyre coming to arrest me, oh no.

Re:Hello datacenters (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43786929)

I also came in your bed. Technically, it was in your wife but there was no way she could hold it all in.

Re:Hello datacenters (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43787097)

I also came in your bed. Technically, it was in your wife but there was no way she could hold it all in.

Give me a break — a woman can hold about about four liters of cum in her ass.

Re:Hello datacenters (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43787447)

You didn't realize he's gay, and his "wife" is a transvestite?

Re:Hello datacenters (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43788677)

Modded -1 Offtopic. Glad I posted it AC.

You fuckers have no humor anymore.

Re:Hello datacenters (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43788149)

No you CUNT. (Make sure that you know what he actually intended to write before you correct him.)

Re:Hello datacenters (2)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about a year ago | (#43786701)

Even if you could drive it around with the coils kept superconductive and under current, good luck trying to avoid all the buildings with structural steel inside!

Re:Hello datacenters (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43787935)

don't worry, I saw it this morning. It, and the truck, was hanging from a steel railroad underpass.

can you knock out the ez-pass scanners with this? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43787029)

can you knock out the ez-pass scanners with this?

Cross country? (1)

jeffmeden (135043) | about a year ago | (#43786467)

Brookhaven to Batavia is only about 1000 miles by even a lax road route. Where the heck is this thing going, on a national tour? The web site claims it will travel 3,200 miles. Is it going to spring break first?

Re:Cross country? (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43786561)

FTA: "The Muon g-2 ring, an electromagnet made of steel and aluminum, begins its 3,200-mile trek from New York in early June. From there, it will sail by barge down the East Coast, around Florida's tip into the Gulf of Mexico, then up the Mississippi River until it arrives in Illinois."

Re:Cross country? (2)

bdcrazy (817679) | about a year ago | (#43786571)

I would imagine bridge clearances and weight limits on bridges would be at least 2 of the issues leading to the path chosen. (others would be things like permits, powerlines etc)

Re:Cross country? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43786579)

From the article:
"... involves loading the ring onto a specially prepared barge and bringing it down the East Coast, around the tip of Florida and up the Mississippi River to Illinois. The ring is expected to leave New York in early June, and land in Illinois in late July. Once it arrives, the ring will be placed onto a truck built just for this purpose, and driven to Fermilab in Batavia, a suburb of Chicago."

Re:Cross country? (2)

tibit (1762298) | about a year ago | (#43786593)

It would be way too complex, logistically, to have it shipped by road directly. It pretty much blocks one direction of traffic on a divided highway. It will travel probably a 100 miles or so over land, and the rest by barge - down the east coast, and up the Mississippi River.

Re:Cross country? (2)

peragrin (659227) | about a year ago | (#43787159)

Up to the st Lawrence and it can dock in Chicago. That would actually be shorter and faster than the Mississippi As the river and locks would slow things down out on the great lakes themselves they can get up to full speed.

Re: Cross country? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43787605)

It was shorter to go the St. Lawrence and that was plan A. After careful study, it was safer and cheaper to take the longer route...as long as there are no hurricanes...

Re: Cross country? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43787651)

P.S. Either route the barge ride ends at the same point on the Illinois Waterway around Lemont.

Re:Cross country? (2)

lexarius (560925) | about a year ago | (#43786615)

Apparently tipping it more than a few degrees causes permanent damage. If you have to detour around very small hills, you might have to detour a very long way.

Re:Cross country? (3, Informative)

Nukenbar (215420) | about a year ago | (#43786629)

Like most hung things, it is easier to take via water, even if the ground sea distance is much greater than a straight line approach.

The majority of the trip will be via barge.

Re:Cross country? (3, Interesting)

icebike (68054) | about a year ago | (#43786825)

Here's an Idea, why not move the Scientists? Greyhound bus.

Or telecommute?

Re:Cross country? (3, Informative)

funky49 (182835) | about a year ago | (#43786963)

Basically they are moving the instrument to a facility that can make a better stream of particles to steer into it.

Re:Cross country? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43786981)

Because they need the muon beam at fermi labs, and not the scientists.

Re:Cross country? (4, Insightful)

jeffmeden (135043) | about a year ago | (#43787019)

Here's an Idea, why not move the Scientists? Greyhound bus.

Or telecommute?

They need to get *muons* into the ring, not the scientists. And Muons only survive on their own for 2 microseconds so even telecommuting [spreadnetworks.com] is out of the question.

High Energy Physics (2)

Roger W Moore (538166) | about a year ago | (#43788485)

And Muons only survive on their own for 2 microseconds

That's easy to fix - boost them to ~260 GeV and they will last long enough to make a 1,600 km journey. It's the 1,600 km of vacuum pipe and focussing magnets that is the real problem.

Re:Cross country? (5, Informative)

krlynch (158571) | about a year ago | (#43787079)

We usually prefer airplanes to buses (lots cheaper, given the time value of money.....)

The cost of running the experiment again at Brookhaven (which had been our initial idea) would be significantly higher than moving it to Fermilab, because of the cost of required accelerator upgrades at Brookhaven. Fermilab has protons to spare, and the experiment fits into the larger muon program at the Lab. http://www.fnal.gov/pub/science/experiments/intensity/ [fnal.gov]

Re:Cross country? (2)

cusco (717999) | about a year ago | (#43787183)

Why didn't they barge this through the Great Lakes instead of up the Mississippi? The only reason occurs to me is perhaps some spots on the Chicago River might have been too narrow where it passes under bridges, but even that seems unlikely.

Re:Cross country? (4, Informative)

krlynch (158571) | about a year ago | (#43787469)

Both routes were considered, but I'm not sure why one was chosen over the other. Presumably input from the companies bidding on the contract had something to do with it.

Re:Cross country? (4, Informative)

LoRdTAW (99712) | about a year ago | (#43788721)

It is a lot easier to move 600 tons by barge than by land. The size and weight makes it impossible to go over bridges and most roads. Not only is the weight highly concentrated, 1.2 million pounds for the magnet and probably another 300,000+ for the modular platform trailers & tractor but the width is nearly 50 feet. At that weight your speed is severely limited, always below 5 mph and you are limited to moving at night only. From the map, I would guess it might make its way south on floyd then onto a barge in the bay. I don't see how they could get it anywhere on the north shore unless they go up floyd to 25 and take lilco rd to use the docks at the power station (if it fits up those roads). From there its an easy trip on water. No bridges, narrow roads or worries about weight. Its open water until the Mississippi.

You also have to take into account the cost and process to apply for permits. You have to plan the route in advance and have it approved by the DOT. By law you need a police escort for a load that large in NY, more money. Imagine planning a route for hundreds of miles involving police escorts, road closures, moving only at night, slow speeds and having to deal with routing around bridges (if possible) and maybe needing to reinforce bridges/overpasses. It can and has been done many times but its costly and time consuming. It can take upward of a year or more to plan a move that big.

Re:Cross country? (4, Informative)

gman003 (1693318) | about a year ago | (#43787253)

They're moving the magnet to a particle accelerator. It's already at one, and it generated some interesting findings, but the particle accelerator it's currently at is too weak to give a margin of error low enough to safely call it a discovery.

Thus, they're moving it to a more powerful accelerator, since moving the accelerator to it is not exactly an option.

Re:Cross country? (2)

mpeskett (1221084) | about a year ago | (#43787345)

They're sure going to feel silly when they realise how easy it really was all along. Especially if they ever find out that some guy from the internet beat them to the punch on such an obvious idea.

Re:Cross country? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43787473)

As someone totally ignorant of this: why?

Why is it easier to transport huge things via water, rather than ground.

No doubt, having asked this question, the answer will be mind-numbingly obvious in retrospect.

Re:Cross country? (3, Informative)

bws111 (1216812) | about a year ago | (#43787641)

For starters, this thing weighs 600 tons. It would have to cross hundreds of bridges, most of which are probably not rated for 600 tons. And of course it is much wider than normal travel lanes and would move very slowly, creating a traffic nightmare. Then there is the can`t tilt more than a few degrees, which would make crossing mountains kind of hard.

Re:Cross country? (1)

tompaulco (629533) | about a year ago | (#43787941)

Then there is the can`t tilt more than a few degrees, which would make crossing mountains kind of hard.

Not to mention oceans.

Re:Cross country? (3, Informative)

mrvan (973822) | about a year ago | (#43788381)

As sibling says, bridges and hills are a problem. Major waterways are generally constructed so that bridges are either really high (as in 30ft+) or have some part that can be opened.

Anything that fits on a truck is easy to transport over land, but stuff that is significantly larger and can't be moved in parts is difficult over land. On the water, major ports and waterways are pretty wide. For example, the coast pilot linked a boatnerd.com [1] (who doesn't love that url) says for the mississipi - illinois waterway connection:

(10) Mississippi River-Illinois Waterway-
(11) depth, 9 feet (2.7);
(12) width, 80 feet (24.38 meters);
(13) length, 600 feet (182.88 meters);
(14) vertical clearance 17 feet (5.18 meters);

So, you can transport something that is roughly 20x150 meters. Some random internet site [2] says that "The standard barge is 195 feet long, 35 feet wide, and can be used to a 9-foot draft. Its capacity is 1500 tons. Some of the newer barges today are 290 feet by 50 feet, double the capacity of earlier barges." So, if we get one of them "newer barges', we can transport something that is 75 x 15 meters and weighs 3000 tonnes using equipment that is standard on the infrastructure.

A random wiki quote [3] says that "In the United States, 80,000 pounds (36,287 kg) is the maximum allowable legal gross vehicle weight without a permit.". So, with standard equipment you can transport something on the ground up to 36 metric tons, or about 0.1 percent of what fits on the barge*. Of course, you *can* transport something bigger than that, but then you get into serious logistic operations with special equipment, road closures, etc etc, while the barge can just be loaded up and sail away.

tl;dr: roads are made for fast and flexible transportation of relatively small amounts of cargo; shipping is made for slow transportation of bulk and large items.

[1] http://www.boatnerd.com/facts-figures/cpgreat.htm [boatnerd.com]
[2] http://www.caria.org/barges_tugboats.html [caria.org]
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semi-trailer_truck [wikipedia.org]

*) I'm totally ignoring any possible short tonne, long tonne, metric tonne etc errors here, since that won't make a dent into a 3 orders of magnitude difference...

Re:Cross country? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43788851)

The best part is you wouldn't need to anchor down the magnet on a ship, it would stick to it like a fridge magnet :-)

Re:Cross country? (1)

kobatan (1103577) | about a year ago | (#43786767)

It's going by barge for most of the journey. From the article: "It will float from New York Harbor in June, down the East Coast, around Florida, up the Gulf Coast and up the Mississippi River by July."

Re:Cross country? (2)

jeffmeden (135043) | about a year ago | (#43786945)

It's going by barge for most of the journey. From the article: "It will float from New York Harbor in June, down the East Coast, around Florida, up the Gulf Coast and up the Mississippi River by July."

I got the barge part, but the Mississippi part was buried a bit further. I pictured a trip across the Great Lakes. Don't they know about the Erie Canal?

Re:Cross country? (1)

kobatan (1103577) | about a year ago | (#43787153)

I assume they ruled it out for one reason or another. I live in the UK. I don't have enough local knowledge to comment further sensibly.

Re:Cross country? (1)

bws111 (1216812) | about a year ago | (#43787501)

The Erie Canal is not used for commercial traffic very much anymore. 2008 was its busiest recent year, and there were only 42 shipments that year.

Re: Cross country? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43787751)

Erie Canal locks were too narrow. Northern route would have to go through N. Atlantic and St. Lawrence Seaway. Average wave height in N. Atlantic larger than hugging coast. Also ended up 300k cheaper due to barge and tug requirements. Ends at same place...Lemont, IL. Shipping in June to beat peak hurricane months.

Re: Cross country? (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about a year ago | (#43788045)

Erie Canal locks were too narrow. Northern route would have to go through N. Atlantic and St. Lawrence Seaway. Average wave height in N. Atlantic larger than hugging coast. Also ended up 300k cheaper due to barge and tug requirements. Ends at same place...Lemont, IL. Shipping in June to beat peak hurricane months.

Why the N. Atlantic. How about hugging the Canadian coast? As you can tell, many people here want to give up their jobs in electronics and software and become shipping agents.

Re:Cross country? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43787059)

Yes, in fact, it is going on spring break first. RTFA.

Re:Cross country? (1)

peragrin (659227) | about a year ago | (#43787137)

Um at 3,200 miles I bet it goes by ship up the St Lawrence around the channels and locks and docks in Chicago.

That would br roughly that for range. and takes a lot of the traffic out .

Re:Cross country? (1)

shoor (33382) | about a year ago | (#43788151)

That was my thought too (up the St Lawrence), but I read enough of the fine article to see that it's going down the Atlantic seaboard and then up the Mississippi. I understand going by water as much as possible, but why that route?

UPS (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43786595)

UPS and lots of bubble wrap!

Boat (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43786753)

3200 miles? Boat around florida and up the mississippi.

How do you transport a 600-ton magnet... (1)

Jaegs (645749) | about a year ago | (#43786765)

By using another 600-ton magnet, flipped around, of course.

Cover it with a tarp... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43786823)

Cover the thing with a tarp, and you've got a mysterious huge disc-shaped object being trucked around escorted by police... Can't wait to see the alien conspiracy sites light up!

If they can deliver this safely.... (1)

mark-t (151149) | about a year ago | (#43786859)

... then I can see absolutely no reason that a package that is clearly marked fragile, and probably nowhere near as fragile as this monstrosity, should be mishandled in transit *EVER* again.

I hope they pull this off.

I look forward to an age where couriers can actually be relied upon to deliver such goods without subjecting them to g forces beyond what their structural integrity can withstand.

Re:If they can deliver this safely.... (2)

Nidi62 (1525137) | about a year ago | (#43787103)

... then I can see absolutely no reason that a package that is clearly marked fragile, and probably nowhere near as fragile as this monstrosity, should be mishandled in transit *EVER* again.

I hope they pull this off.

I look forward to an age where couriers can actually be relied upon to deliver such goods without subjecting them to g forces beyond what their structural integrity can withstand.

I think most couriers/handlers see "fragile" more as a challenge than as a warning. You know, see how far it can bend before it will break, that kind of thing.

Re:If they can deliver this safely.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43787113)

I look forward to an age where couriers can actually be relied upon to deliver such goods without subjecting them to g forces beyond what their structural integrity can withstand.

They can!

You just have to be willing to pay $2-3 million for the trip.

Re:If they can deliver this safely.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43787193)

I'm sure if you use whatever shipping company they are using your fragile package will arrive safely.
You'll probably have to pay a bit more than when using USPS or similar.

Re:If they can deliver this safely.... (1)

Nemyst (1383049) | about a year ago | (#43787487)

I'm sure if you pay the same price they do to ship your fragile package it'd arrive in pristine condition too.

Wonder what they collected? (3, Funny)

QuasiRob (134012) | about a year ago | (#43786869)

By the time it arrived I wonder if it was covered in bits of wire, steel cans, bikes. screws and other random bits of iron.

Re:Wonder what they collected? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43787273)

you watch out buddy, this thing will pull cars over from the other side of the highway!

Missed opportunity (1)

Experiment 626 (698257) | about a year ago | (#43786875)

This would have made for an awesome episode of "Shipping Wars".

Re:Missed opportunity (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43786979)

No need to ship it, that is outdated thinking.
Just 3-D print it where you want it to be.

It's not a magnet (3, Informative)

hawguy (1600213) | about a year ago | (#43786921)

It's not a magnet, it's an electromagnet, which just makes it a large and sensitive piece of equipment rather than a big magnet.

When I saw the headline and summary, I thought they were going to have to take special precautions to stay away from metals and other materials that could be affected by the huge magnet.

Re:It's not a magnet (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43787199)

I bet you suck dicks.

Re:It's not a magnet (3, Interesting)

hawguy (1600213) | about a year ago | (#43787397)

I bet you suck dicks.

I do, sometimes. Though I'm sure why that's relevant?

Re:It's not a magnet (1)

tompaulco (629533) | about a year ago | (#43787979)

It's not a magnet, it's an electromagnet, which just makes it a large and sensitive piece of equipment rather than a big magnet.

Well, hey, then they can just levitate the sucker.

Move the people... (1)

reg (5428) | about a year ago | (#43786931)

Wouldn't it be cheaper to move the people and the money? 90% of the time the people involved don't even have to be near the machine, with this newfangled internet thing that some people invented...

Re:Move the people... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43787069)

Because then they are in the exact same situation they are in now?
This is why the internet sucks.
You ask how can I do this.
And instead of people just saying "no you can't", or "like this", people go on about doing it some other way that isn't at all what you wanted.
Maybe I actually though about what I wanted before hand, and there's a reason I'm asking how to do it in this specific way.

Re:Move the people... (3, Insightful)

krlynch (158571) | about a year ago | (#43787095)

As I mentioned up above, it turns out to be loads cheaper to move the experiment to Fermilab than to upgrade the accelerator complex at Brookhaven to do the experiment there.

Why is it so fragile? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43786939)

It's a big electro magnet. Why can tilting it a couple of degrees break it?
The article doesn't say as far as I can tell, so I can only assume it's because it was built from crappy parts, or assembled by idiots.

Re:Why is it so fragile? (5, Informative)

cffrost (885375) | about a year ago | (#43787247)

It's a big electro magnet. Why can tilting it a couple of degrees break it?
The article doesn't say as far as I can tell, so I can only assume it's because it was built from crappy parts, or assembled by idiots.

It could be a Bitter electromagnet, [wikipedia.org] which are constructed from thin disks of porous copper.

Re:Why is it so fragile? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43787557)

Thanks.

Re:Why is it so fragile? (5, Informative)

krlynch (158571) | about a year ago | (#43787595)

Well, we might be idiots, but that's not the problem. It's a set of three very large superconducting coils, custom wound on-site in the 1990s, built into cryostats that can't be disassembled, and being moved as a set of monolithic units. They were never designed or intended to be moved, and significant engineering work has gone into determining the mechanical loads they can be safely subjected to.

Re:Why is it so fragile? (1)

tompaulco (629533) | about a year ago | (#43788003)

Well, we might be idiots, but that's not the problem. It's a set of three very large superconducting coils, custom wound on-site in the 1990s, built into cryostats that can't be disassembled, and being moved as a set of monolithic units. They were never designed or intended to be moved, and significant engineering work has gone into determining the mechanical loads they can be safely subjected to.

How much would it cost to build another one at say, Fermilab?

Re:Why is it so fragile? (4, Informative)

Herkum01 (592704) | about a year ago | (#43788115)

If you read the article, it says that shipping is 1/50 of the cost of building a new one.

makes me feel really old (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43787015)

I was BNH(ell) when the g-2 magnet was first installed. I wonder if the FNAL part of the magnets life will be as inconclusive as it has been so far.
 

No tilt.. so lets move it over the ocean? (4, Interesting)

boaworm (180781) | about a year ago | (#43787163)

>> The trip will be tense, because the ring’s massive electromagnet cannot tilt or twist more than a few degrees, or the wiring inside will be irreparably damaged. It will float from New York Harbor in June, down the East Coast, around Florida, up the Gulf Coast and up the Mississippi River by July.

That seems rather risky. Most ships would at one point or another tilt more than a few degrees to either side due to .. waves. No mention on if this is a gyro-stabilized barge perhaps...

Re:No tilt.. so lets move it over the ocean? (1)

mrmeval (662166) | about a year ago | (#43787703)

Ask them. I assume it's some sort of stabilized platform inside. I'm sure such specialty devices have been made in the past and they'd make a custom interior for that device.

Re:No tilt.. so lets move it over the ocean? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43788085)

Or maybe they're going to suspend it from a rope. High tech, I know.

Being landlubbers by birth, we tend to think of the surface of this planet as a hard plane. It's not, and gravity makes damn sure you get reminded of it from time to time.

Re: No tilt.. so lets move it over the ocean? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43787889)

As with most science on the news, this is a greatly simplified description. There are hard specs on how much the rings can flex. There are hard specs on how many g's of force are allowed horizontally and vertically. The ring has been stabilized mechanically to withstand the voyage on fairly rough seas. It will be outfitted with accelerometers read remotely to determine ahead of time if it should head to safe harbor.

Re:No tilt.. so lets move it over the ocean? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43788043)

>> electromagnet cannot tilt or twist more than a few degrees
>> Most ships would at one point or another tilt more than a few degrees

I believe he meant this in relationship to the structure of the device itself. As in, this 15m magnet cannot be allowed to bend or twist. It probably doesn't care in the least what angle it is in relative to gravity.

Re:No tilt.. so lets move it over the ocean? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43788507)

That seems right. I think someone much earlier in the discussion thread erred in saying "tilt or twist". The description I read describing what damage would be done if that happened clearly pointed to "bend or twist" as being the correct statement.

Re:No tilt.. so lets move it over the ocean? (2)

flatbedexpress (1604573) | about a year ago | (#43788271)

Transporting on land will be the easy part. They will use a Goldhofer trailer that has hydraulic leveling axles that will keep the entire deck of the trailer flat and level. But, if it was my equipment, I would make sure their is a large gap from the trailer to the actual magnets so it doesn't affect my control systems for steering the trailer. For the barge, odd are that they will leave the magnet on the Goldhofer trailer. That way, the trailer can keep it from twisting and tilting if the barge does.

Saint Lawrence Seaway (1)

matthelm007 (1392603) | about a year ago | (#43787211)

Wouldn't it be much shorter all around to go by the Saint Lawrence Seaway? Shorter on the water and shorter distance in Illinois???

Re:Saint Lawrence Seaway (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43788555)

Clearly this valuable piece of Federal-built equipment needs to be kept away from possible Canadian terrorists!

YUO FaIL IT!? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43787385)

another folder. 20 cOnvers4tion and

I Know I'm Stupid (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43787463)

I know I'm stupid but, it seems to me that anything that big and that delicate should be built in situ.

It can't twist more than a few degrees and they're going to put it on a rolling barge for almost a month. What could possibly go wrong?

Not that tough (1)

Animats (122034) | about a year ago | (#43787689)

It's not really that tough a job. The thing is about 4 lanes wide, and not excessively tall. There's less than 20 miles of road movement at each end of the trip. So it's going to be a routine big move with brief road closures. Probably late at night.

The rest of the trip is by barge, down the East Coast, around Florida, and up the Mississippi, Illinois, and DesPlanes rivers to Chicago. There are standard barges which can easily handle something of that size. The locks on that route have 110 foot width.

Re:Not that tough (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43788159)

, around Florida

Just as they're heading into hurricane season...

Storage ring, right... (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43788093)

That's just a cover story. They're really moving the Stargate.

Simple (2)

HtR (240250) | about a year ago | (#43788203)

If you turn it on, you should be able to just pull it along behind a train, assuming the tracks could be electrified as needed (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maglev [wikipedia.org] for details if necessary).
Then again, if this "superconductor" really has super powers as its name implies, it should be able to fly.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...