Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

JeremiahBoogle t1_j70srny wrote

>They are also more vulnerable to tsunami, as they couldn't be anchored in bedrock to the same extent a traditional city could. They would fare even worse than the cities we've built on dredged "reclaimed" shorelines. Likewise they are vulnerable to rogue waves, should they be open water or shore impacting. You need to learn more about rogue waves if you think they only occur on open ocean. One sank the Edmund Fitzgerald on a Great Lake, for example, and rogue waves can absolutely hit shorelines.

I can promise you that after spending a good majority of my career working at Sea & most my life around boats, I can probably speak with greater authority on rogue waves or waves in general more than yourself.

The danger that rogue waves pose to ships is in general is the risk of a capsize or in truly bad cases, a pitch pole.

A rule of thumb being that any breaking wave higher than the beam of the vessel is enough to risk a capsize.

In reality for something like a floating city that will be extremely large, even compared to todays ships, the risk of capsize will be non existent.

These cities would be so large in relation to the waves that they would pose no risk of that kind, actually I would say the greatest risk would be to fatigue of such a large structure due to the constant bending and torsional forces over a long time. But I'm not designing it, and presumably they would build it somewhere sheltered.

Lake superior does not count as sheltered by the way, its classed as a 'lake' because its landlocked, but due to its size it might as well be a sea.

Again, tsunamis. A tsunami is dangerous when it hits the shore, go and look at videos & you can see various vessels at anchorage just off the coast being barely impacted by them, at sea they are not even noticeable, its only when the reach land that the wave builds to a dangerous height & breaks.

And I actually agreed with you that a floating city is a bad idea compared to living on land, harder to maintain, scant available resources, hard to build. They are a science fiction idea & even if built will still be reliant on land support.

I just disagreed with some of your reasoning.

1