Please Note: As explained here, due to limitations in the Gallery software, some Challenge submissions may include a larger version of the same image (e.g. for mosaics).
Before voting, please check in the description and comments section to see if the author has posted one of these. However, it should not be a disadvantage if an author just has the required Gallery image.
I would like help from an engineering point of view, applied to SC4 obviously.
I am working on a very big project that involves some radical thinking... I make full use of SC4 and Mods, lots of mods, to create the largest city of a country set in the fictional world of a book I'm writing.
Thing is... Because I fell in love with natural growth style of play, I started the city as a tribal settlement... some 800 years before the nowadays milestone. I faced many challenges and many more awaits me. But one in particular I can't get my head around not even searching the internet. Can you help?
Here's the question:
How can (if at all) I raise the level of a big canal from sunken to say a 8-10 metre elevation so that it's not sunken anymore?
Here's the picture:
Bita Canal starts from Branny Bay Reservoir, less than a km South, where the Vidupe Aqueduct finally ends and brings its water supply. The Reservoir water level is carefully controlled so that water flows nicely to various locations in the area, with the use of a canal system which is still under development. The water level of the Reservoir can be raised as water supply is still abundant and the first portion of the canal system is sunken (an engineering decision also to deal with flooding).
Local developers need Bita Canal to proceed North to Fadalipe Citadel to bring water to the masses, but excavating a sunken canal right inside a densely populated area is advised against. Another proposal is the development of a network of sewers, but public opinion votes for an open canal to stream fresh water, and we can build that sewage for the waste water. Frankly, the Council agress with public opinion and we would much rather prefer a nice tight canal with fresh water that streams right past people's homes so that in future they can take that pleasing stroll by the canal and socialize.
So. If possible, how can developers elevate Bita sunken canal?
If you have the straight answer to this engineering question then please post a reply. I would definetely appreciate the help and participation.
In case you don't but you have some other idea, please post a reply too. I like ideas. If I can't use them straight away I put them in a labeled drawer for later use.
For now, Fadalipe developers will push for a simple sunken canal that ends in a reservoir close to the city, so people can have access to new fresh water, as supply was running low.
There is also a poll for you to vote for, if you fancy. (I saw some CJers use it and I thought it would be fun to try) I will consider the result and find the best possible engineering solution to accommodate it.
Thank you in advance
Let me know if this is the wrong section to post this. If needed I can post it somewhere else.
(You can find the City Journal here:)
The Peace and Recovery post does contain some photos of the aqueducts and their projects. Maybe it can help ignite ideas.
The still ongoing question 'how close were the nazis to have the atomic bomb' was answered a few years ago. They were ready in 1941. They knew how to get the material and they knew how to built it. The only thing they didn't had was a reactor to produce plutonium. But why didn't they built this reactor?
Nazis were always aware they never would have been able to produce charged uranium in an amount crucial for the war. This was their believe. So the atomic bomb wasn't really high on their priorities list. But in 1941 the so called 'uranium project' around Werner Heisenberg had discovered another fission product: plutonium. And they developed also a method without the need of uranium235 (charged uranium), the implosion driven chain reaction.
According to Heisenbergs own memories, in 1942, he was asked by Albert Speer (minister of armaments industry) how long it would take to make an 'uranium bomb' (the nazi-german atom bomb project was called 'uranium project' and therefore the familiar name by this time was 'uranium bomb' instead of 'atomic bomb'). He answered, about 3 years, concealing that they were ready to built a plutonium only bomb. (Well, he even didn't lie). That was the point, according to Heisenberg, Nazi leaders lost interest on the 'uranium project'.
Until 2007 there was no proof for this testimony given in 1952. By then in an archive in Moscov was discovered a patent application from Carl Friedrich von Weizsäcker, written in 1941. Weizsäcker by this time was a member of Heisenbergs research team on the 'uranium bomb'. Weizsäcker died in 2007 and therefore a biographer who wanted to write about him, made this discovery. This patent application describes exactly the plutonic bomb. As this application seems never to have been handed over to nazi authorities - it seems true what Heisenberg wrote later. They were ready to built it since 1941 but they didn't tell it to authorities and therefore no fission reactor was built to produce the necessary plutonium.
But then - this are really strange coincidences.
As till summer 1941 the manhatten project didn't made any great progress by searching how to get the process stable to split uranium 235 from uranium ore. Then suddenly they discovered how they could split plutonium from the uranium and they developed the idear of an implosion based bomb (the principle later leaded to the two-stage-reaction of the hydrogen bomb), all at the same time. And in 1942 they had in Chicago the world wide first reactor ready to produce plutonium. And it is the next strange coincidence that the russians shortly after the end of ww2 made the same progress, so that Edward Teller and Andrei Sakholov had both the exactly same concept for a nuclear fusion based weapon ready at the same time, in 1948.
And the world wide first nuclear bomb, the trinity test bomb, was a plutonium only bomb with the principle of an implosion bomb - exactly as described by Weizsäcker in 1941 in his unpublished patent application.
The bomb on Hiroshima, 1945, was a complete different technology than the bomb in the trinity test. The Hiroshima bomb was build in a more 'old fashioned' way, not to compress the material, but to unite materials (plutonium and uranium235) to reach critical mass.
Apart from plutonium and uranium 235 there are roundabout 200 other fission products you can get by shooting neutrinos on an uranium core.
Don't want to go for a conspiration theory - but it's strange that they went for the same combination of fission product and technique to cause a chain reaction, as there are quite many possible combinations to realize a nuclear bomb.
Well, it's know Weizsäcker and Heisenberg met Niels Bohr - guess when - 1941 in Copenhagen. And until today this meeting is a big enigma to historians - what was the reason? What did they talk about? Heisenberg later explained, he wanted to convince Bohr, that the germans weren't able to built the bomb and therefore americans should stop researches too. But it's also known that Bohr remained deeply shocked by what they told him. And his memories are completely different. Until his death Weizsäcker was asked about that meeting and Weizsäcker always said "Bohr missunderstood us completely". Well, maybe not? Maybe thats the key to this enigma? Maybe they told him about the possibility to built a plutonium based implosion bomb. And Bohr recognized the possibility and told Teller. And Teller ... well the rest of the story is known.
Recently Browsing 0 members
No registered users viewing this page.