Jump to content


Infrastructure Development Projects


39 replies to this topic

#21 Feathers

Feathers

    Premium Member

  • Moderators
  • 698 posts
  • LocationFloating in the Breeze

Posted 30 December 2017 - 12:26 AM

Still, the country needs a major overhaul in all facets of the infrastructure. Trump likes to build. I say let him build. Learning from past mistakes and the history of crooked business practices should help steer things in a positive direction. Benefiting the public more.


  • 0
Posted Image



#22 Feathers

Feathers

    Premium Member

  • Moderators
  • 698 posts
  • LocationFloating in the Breeze

Posted 01 February 2018 - 06:16 PM

:bumpsmall:


  • 0
Posted Image

#23 status - Guest

status - Guest
  • Guests

Posted 06 February 2018 - 11:31 AM

I think it's important to consider some of the possible negative and positive aspects of what has become known as 'defensive architecture'. It's an ancient concept of building. Looking at the reasons it has been used historically may shed some light on these pros and cons. 


  • 0

#24 Ghostly Machines

Ghostly Machines

    Premium Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 272 posts

Posted 06 February 2018 - 01:45 PM

Mankind can build great things. History shows this. Which constructions serve a society best. Which ones deserve to be maintained for all future generations to live and grow with? What can todays society build that can last for 2000 years? 


  • 0

7mDFXjl.gif


#25 Ghostly Machines

Ghostly Machines

    Premium Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 272 posts

Posted 07 February 2018 - 03:10 PM

It's Time to Invest in the United States Rail System
 
It's time to make infrastructure sexy again, and we can start by fixing the United States rail systems.
 
Believe it or not, there was a time in the US when riding a train was luxurious. There were classy dining cars, moonlit rides across the countryside and you could even get lucky in a sleeping car.
 
Those days are long gone.
 
Today, despite the fact that Amtrak ridership has increased by 50 percent in the last 15 years and continues to increase along the Northeast Corridor, train travel is anything but sexy.
 
That's because our nation's rail systems are relics of another time.
 
 
united_states_of_underinvestment.jpg
 
Why Can't the United States Build a High-Speed Rail System?
 
The problem isn't geography, demographics, or money—it's federal will.
 
Virtually every wealthy nation in the world has invested in a high-speed rail network—with the striking exception of the United States. From Japan to France, even from Turkey to Russia, trains travel through the country at speeds of 150 miles per hour or above, linking city centers and providing a desirable alternative to both air and automobile travel. Meanwhile, outside Amtrak's 28 miles of 150-m.p.h. track in rural Massachusetts and Rhode Island, the American rail network is largely limited to speeds of 110 m.p.h. or less. There are few reasons to think the situation will change much in the coming decades.
 
So why has the United States failed to fund and construct high-speed rail?
 
The problem is not political process. Most of the countries that have built high-speed rail are democratic, and have submitted the projects to citizen review; others, like Germany and Russia, have federated governments similar to ours that divide general decision-making between levels of authority. Nor is it geography. The British and French completed a 31-mile tunnel under the British Channel 20 years ago, while many American cities are located in flat regions with few physical construction obstacles. Nor is it the characteristics of our urban areas. While U.S. cities are less dense than those of many other countries, the Northeast is denser, more transit reliant, and more populated than most areas served by high-speed rail abroad. Nor still is it money. Though the United States invests less in infrastructure than other developed countries do, America nevertheless remains an immensely wealthy nation perfectly capable of spending on new rail links if desired.
 
What's missing is a federal commitment to a well-funded national rail plan. Instead, we have a political system in which the federal government, having devolved virtually all decision-making power to states, cannot prioritize one project over another in the national interest. We have a funding system that encourages study after study of unfundable or unbuildable projects in places that refuse to commit their own resources. And we have a bureaucracy that, having never operated or constructed modern intercity rail, doesn't understand what it takes. This helter-skelter approach to transportation improvements is fundamentally incapable of supporting large-expenditure, long-range projects like high-speed rail.
 
This wasn't always the case. In 1956, Congress approved a significant increase in the federal gas tax, and with it a national plan for interstate highways. That plan, which included a steady stream of funding and a clear map of national priorities, was mostly completed over the next three decades. Though implemented by states, highway alignments were chosen at the national level, with the intention of connecting the largest cities, regardless of political boundaries. Funding came almost entirely (90 percent) from the national government and was guaranteed as long as a route was on the national map. Physical requirements for roadways were mandated at the national level and universally applied. And construction was completed by state departments of transportation that were technically knowledgeable, accustomed to building such public works, and able to make decisions about how to move forward.
 
The result was a system of roadways that most Americans rely on, often daily. The interstate system is unquestionably the nation's transportation lifeblood.
 
 
1024px-High-Speed_Rail_Corridor_Designat
 

  • 0

7mDFXjl.gif


#26 Feathers

Feathers

    Premium Member

  • Moderators
  • 698 posts
  • LocationFloating in the Breeze

Posted 07 February 2018 - 03:49 PM

Yes, the whole framework needs an upgrade. Bad railway lines, rotten gas pipes, sanitation problems, the list goes on.
 
 
 
Here's a recent timeline of train derailments involving oil and ethenol:
 
 
BLOG_Timeline.jpg

  • 0
Posted Image

#27 status - Guest

status - Guest
  • Guests

Posted 15 February 2018 - 06:32 PM

Still, the country needs a major overhaul in all facets of the infrastructure. Trump likes to build. I say let him build. Learning from past mistakes and the history of crooked business practices should help steer things in a positive direction. Benefiting the public more.

 

Be careful what you wish for...

 

http://forum.chicken...mation/?p=13699

 

 

national-security-comic.jpg


  • 0

#28 Feathers

Feathers

    Premium Member

  • Moderators
  • 698 posts
  • LocationFloating in the Breeze

Posted 15 February 2018 - 07:32 PM

Be careful what you wish for...

 

http://forum.chicken...mation/?p=13699

 

 

 

 

It's a grand thing to see. Frightening too! Only, it's important to find a way to use this massive machine for the positive benefit of all. How? IDK. But, I believe this is applied psychology in the architectural sense. Generational planning at its finest. Those engineers sure are smart! But, mandates from heaven don't last if the leader(s) are corrupt. That's the way of organic events. They grow their own way. The ecosystem will always remind the egosystem of its place. Only it forgets...


  • 0
Posted Image

#29 status - Deputy Dawg

status - Deputy Dawg
  • Guests

Posted 18 February 2018 - 08:17 PM

 

The Futurism of Walt Disney 
 
ZNxHsNl.jpg
 
Featuring interviews with various Disney Legends and Historians, Great Big Beautiful Tomorrow looks at the various technologies Walt Disney used and developed over the course of his life. From creating the first sync sound animation in 1928 to his unrealized dream of E.P.C.O.T., an experimental city that passed on with him in 1966, this film shows Walt Disney as the futurist he truly was. 
 
 
 
Better than average biography on Walt Disney. His power in the upper echelon of government is clearly seen. Especially after the military took over his studio during WWII. He was a visionary with the power to use his imagination to make his dreams and experiments on social structuring come to life. 
 
cern-lhc.jpg

 

 

Special laws allow Disney eminent dominion powers.
 
 
I believe this is applied psychology in the architectural sense. Generational planning at its finest.

  • 0

#30 status - Ghost

status - Ghost
  • Guests

Posted 26 February 2018 - 04:37 PM

I think it's important to consider some of the possible negative and positive aspects of what has become known as 'defensive architecture'. It's an ancient concept of building. Looking at the reasons it has been used historically may shed some light on these pros and cons. 

 

Ockman sought to uncover the ways in which the built environment stimulates emotions in visitors, a phenomenon which, according to her, emerged by the mid-twentieth century, when buildings tended to become spectacle-buildings.

Reflecting on the aspect of spectacle from a different angle, Douglas Spencer compared the ideologically driven “dreamworlds“ of the cold-war era, ranging from Stalin’s monumental subway stations in Moscow to recent transit spaces. Spencer concluded that the contemporary turn towards austere and optimised designs does not mark the disappearance of dream-forms. It is in fact a continuation of the production of persuasive atmospheres with different means. Smooth and seamless surfaces enable a re-enchantment of the neoliberal maxim of production, which is based on flexibility, mobility, and self-optimisation. In relation to the above, Nina Power noted that putative public spaces constitute the realm in which governments define and police mass or group subjects, hereby suggesting that we are not just living in a reality of increasing individualisation but one that is still deeply structured by (post-)Foucaultian mechanisms of surveillance and control.

Could architecture, instead of just catering to those desires, channel them in a way that counters their susceptibility to agitational tendencies? Even with the assumption that the production of the built environment is always an outcome of multiple negotiations and the economics, and therefore to an extent unable to actualise radical critique, unbuilt design proposals– thanks to the possible “virality“ of their imaginary– might still be an effective tool for subversion. For instance, Estudio 3.14’s proposal for a Barragán-inspired version of Trump’s Mexico border wall found a visual form for the absurdity of a project which instigates, apart from a reign of terror, the illusion to reverse globalisation and return to a state of great national security and social prosperity.

http://conversations...and-neobaroque/


  • 0



Reply to this topic



  


IPB Skin By Virteq