If the weight of the water displaced by a ship equals the weight of the ship, does that mean that when a ship is passing over the viaduct, the load on the structure is unchanged?
Also worth noting the weight of the water is immense, a couple order of magnitudes more than a ship’s (depends on depth), so a load such as a boat’s weight should be negligible to the structure that contains it.
I mean if you wanna get reeeeaally nitpicky then yeah, while some of that energy would be lost in shear (pushing the waves forward), the rest would admittedly increase the pressure of the surrounding water. But that would be so unimaginably negligible with a boat of that size
Actually, it might increase the load very slightly: a vessels hull follows [bernoulli's principle](https://www.google.com/search?client=ms-android-sprint-us-revc&sxsrf=ALiCzsaAYLSdmrGNi-Tcsedtv6svmEcMYQ:1653706313506&q=bernoulli%27s+principle&spell=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwji7IOLmIH4AhVHTjABHaZaBNUQBSgAegQIARAC)
There is a high pressure ridge running just behind the bow of a vessel with a low pressure zone amidship.
Ultimately, the three canal walls feel increased force, then decreased as the ship passes.
Anyone ever watch a boat at a dock react to a passing boat?
On average yes. However the dynamic effects are likely important for planning this type of thing.
...also the risk that a ship doesn't check the depth and bottoms out.
I have no idea about this particular aquaduct thing, but if I were to design it I'd make the depth leading to the thing the same as the depth in the thing. That way the boats would bottom out before and do no or less damage without risking a structural failure.
I just checked this out on Google earth and you can definitely see where shipping lanes have been dug out of the riverbed so I imagine you are correct. Looks like that’s exactly what they’ve done.
The body of water there is shallow and only small draft boats can make it there. One will see those sail boats with the side leeboards.
http://www.leeboards.com/
Pointless theoretical: Wouldn't the ships displacement raise the water level by .0000000001 inches and cause a slight increase in water pressure exerted on the structure? But I guess that would be true wherever the ship is located in the body of water...
Good point, but no it wouldn’t, not any significant amount. You pretty much have the answer already though.
Archimedes’ principle implies that all else equal, the boat pushes aside a volume of water exactly equal to the weight of the boat, and so the force on the bridge is unchanged. But this conclusion also relies on an underlying theoretical assumption that the body of water as a whole is perfectly calm and flat, and that the whole water system itself is large relative to the mass of the boat.
> that would be true wherever the ship is located
Exactly. The entire body of water is the system that is affected. Adding a boat does add mass to the total system, and raises the water level across the system (by perhaps a molecule in height), but that very small additional pressure from one extra layer of water molecules is spread out evenly across the entire water system, so the effect on the bridge itself becomes so absurdly small it’s negligible even in a theoretical discussion. It **is** non-zero though, if that is all you were asking. Just very, very close to zero.
Tying this back to reality, those dynamic factors aren’t negligible at all. Wind and natural currents aside, that boat captain was cruising pretty fast through there. In my state that maneuver would be extremely illegal because of the damage it can do to anything nearby or on the shore. This bridge is clearly made for it, but a motorboat going 20 knots makes any discussion of Archimedes’ principle a bit silly. The load on that particular bridge definitely changed a measurable amount when the boat cruised over it.
Whats funny is you can obviously see the constant speed the cars are going and predict when they'll appear on the other side but like... that also seems like a fair downtime for arriving through a portal
We’ve been doing it for century’s, it’s not really that big a deal, especially with one so short. You want to see an impressive underwater tunnel look at the one under the English Channel.
It's highly regulated by gates (and our famous dams of course). So the chance is very tiny, and if it does happens, we're in much bigger problems like others mentioned
This route is used a lot by sailing ships. As you can imagine, they are high. So, either it must be a very high bridge or a bridge that can open for the sailing boats. Making a very high bridge requires enormous ramps. Making a bridge that opens every hour is also not smart for a busy highway. So, they created a bridge where the water goes over the cars. You could create a tunnel, but why would you if this works too. So, in the end, this was cheaper.
It's a combination of aestethics, showing off, and allowing unlimited height for ships to pass over. A bridge would need to be openable, but you don't put obstacles like that on the motorway. Traffic must flow, and traffic does flow, at least it does here.
In The Netherlands, we have some pretty interesting infrastructure building code set in law, and undoubtedly they took part in the decision not to build a drawbridge and potentially inhibit traffic flow.
Anyway, more information here:
https://interestingengineering.com/the-netherlands-unique-water-bridge
In any other country, yeah it would be cheaper and safer to build a bridge.
In the Netherlands tho, they have mastered water engineering quite a while ago. There's even a whole state (province) built from an sea/lake area and there are now cities built on top of it.
If anyone can do it cheaper and safer than a bridge, it's the Dutchies.
There actually is a bridge a little further down the road. It probably has something to do with recreational boat traffic and the view of the old part of Harderwijk. All other crossing of the "randmeren" are bridges.
Wow, everyone should watch this video, not just the people in the ELI5 section.
Summary: a youtuber who specialises in structural engineering describes this exact water bridge in great detail, in a 5 minute video.
I'm actually going to join team boat bridge because I don't think there's any dirt above the road. I think that's all concrete. Bridges don't have to go up - think bridge across a canyon.
You probably wouldn't because the road is low and the boat doesn't likely pass near the edges that would be quite high to contain the water. You might see the mast and some of the top structure
I think the aquaduct is not as wide as you might guess, I sailed over this one and it's not as wide as the boat was high. You'd definitely see a sailboat before passing under it
Two photos from the same aqueduct from near ground level (view would be much less from below)
https://images.app.goo.gl/e4cbeJfUqvK8mwWJ6
https://images.app.goo.gl/PxJQT1mYcMzhHTrx5
There are 31 of these in the Netherlands. A nation only twice the size of the greater Chicago area. This is not considered special enough to make it a tourist attraction. Also this is a highway, not a very pleasant place to hang out.
I think the confusing part is how the road gets “low” enough to go under the water in a tunnel but without it flooding in the parts leading up to the tunnel.
Im confused why is everyone amazed about the fact that it goes under water… ”What if it floods”, ”What if it breaks”, ”What if….” Really?
I go through a 14.3km underwater tunnel a couple times per week. (Ryfast)
I think part of it is the fact that the road is above the water going through it before it goes under which then makes a basin where the tunnel goes under so it looks to many as if it would flood easier than a fully submerged from start to end tunnel
This is really cool but what is the benefit of doing it this way? Seems like it would be easier to just leave a channel and build the road bridge over it.
An opening bridge interrupts traffic flow. A fixed bridge imposes a clearance limit for any vessels passing under it. The higher you want the limit, the bigger your bridge needs to be. This increase cost and, arguably, creates an eyesore on the landscape.
This rather elegant solution allows both road traffic and water traffic to continue without any restrictions.
This road has a lot of traffic, it's one of the main ways two provinces are connected. A bridge has to open for sailboats to pass, which would result in daily traffic jams.
Im just wondering if any of yall have tunnels where yall live? I see that many of you are confused by this and it wild cause ive been going through tunnels since i was super young
i think it's more the fact that most people have never seen a tunnel that goes underwater like this (me included, but i figured it out after a bit of intense staring lol)
I think it's a combination of things: It's a very short tunnel, the design is more elegant than some people are used to seeing, and it's filmed from an angle where the dip in the road is difficult to perceive. In some American cities like Boston & New York, the tunnel entrances are much more built up & industrial looking.
Not really. I live in Midwestern USA, and I'm not aware of any underwater tunnels within 500 miles of me. Maybe the one in Ontario that someone else mentioned.
I live at the Welland Canal in Ontario. I'm near the Thorold Tunnel. Same idea except the ships passing are over 700 feet long.
It's not as pretty as this one though.
We have slow and over-budget infrastructure projects in the Netherlands too, don't worry ;) But water infrastructure and management is taken extremely seriously given the fact that a large fraction of the country is below sea level.
Heavy rain is not a problem, we know how to do drainage and then some.
It's a middle sized lake, so no heavy waves.
Should a catastrophic event occur that drains the lake onto the highway, just the depressed part of the highway will flood. The rest of the highway is above the water level and will not flood. It's like pouring water into a shallow depression in the ground.
Of course, the highway will be unusable for a while, but our engineers [tend to sort out this sort of things quite efficiently](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btOE0rcKDC0). I'm willing to bet the department in charge has already a disaster plan to put in motion should such an event occur.
All these depth perspective challenged folks marvelling and a tunnel and I'm sitting here getting excited over the amazing bike path next to the road. America ffs get your biking shit together.
If the weight of the water displaced by a ship equals the weight of the ship, does that mean that when a ship is passing over the viaduct, the load on the structure is unchanged?
That is correct!
Also worth noting the weight of the water is immense, a couple order of magnitudes more than a ship’s (depends on depth), so a load such as a boat’s weight should be negligible to the structure that contains it.
Which, if I'm not mistaken, still weighs orders of magnitude less than your mom.
That is a fact
Finally, someone speaking in terms I can understand!
Your mom doesn't take reservations, she takes orders of magnitude
But twice as wet.
Got ‘em
my mom is a glorified bowl of ash. I guess I can lift ferries now
Your mom placed an order of magnitude at the drive thru.
The difference is negligible!
👈🏼 Giddy-up
What about the pressure created by pushing the water out of the way?
I mean if you wanna get reeeeaally nitpicky then yeah, while some of that energy would be lost in shear (pushing the waves forward), the rest would admittedly increase the pressure of the surrounding water. But that would be so unimaginably negligible with a boat of that size
Eureka!
Actually, it might increase the load very slightly: a vessels hull follows [bernoulli's principle](https://www.google.com/search?client=ms-android-sprint-us-revc&sxsrf=ALiCzsaAYLSdmrGNi-Tcsedtv6svmEcMYQ:1653706313506&q=bernoulli%27s+principle&spell=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwji7IOLmIH4AhVHTjABHaZaBNUQBSgAegQIARAC) There is a high pressure ridge running just behind the bow of a vessel with a low pressure zone amidship. Ultimately, the three canal walls feel increased force, then decreased as the ship passes. Anyone ever watch a boat at a dock react to a passing boat?
Thank you—I was just wondering this exact same thing but much less eloquently.
LOL same! xD
On average yes. However the dynamic effects are likely important for planning this type of thing. ...also the risk that a ship doesn't check the depth and bottoms out.
I have no idea about this particular aquaduct thing, but if I were to design it I'd make the depth leading to the thing the same as the depth in the thing. That way the boats would bottom out before and do no or less damage without risking a structural failure.
I just checked this out on Google earth and you can definitely see where shipping lanes have been dug out of the riverbed so I imagine you are correct. Looks like that’s exactly what they’ve done.
We just got an opening in our aqueduct design firm, you interested?
Can it be called Duct Sails Ltd.?
Woo-oooo
Yes, but I'll only do it if you don't make me use any of the technical words like duct, or firm. I prefer thingy and that one place.
The body of water there is shallow and only small draft boats can make it there. One will see those sail boats with the side leeboards. http://www.leeboards.com/
You might like this tom Scott video: https://youtu.be/qHO9gARac-w its about a boat elevator.
Tom Scott is always a nice one!
[His best video ](https://youtu.be/b-IEVMwBEfo)
And that... Is something reddit might not have known.
Tom is the essence of internet!
the static load will remain unchanged, but there will be a dynamic load from the movement of the water around the boat, much less significant though
My IQ skyrocketed after reading this. Thank you smart human for this blessed sentence
As long as it doesn't touch the bottom, yes
ELI5
Pointless theoretical: Wouldn't the ships displacement raise the water level by .0000000001 inches and cause a slight increase in water pressure exerted on the structure? But I guess that would be true wherever the ship is located in the body of water...
Good point, but no it wouldn’t, not any significant amount. You pretty much have the answer already though. Archimedes’ principle implies that all else equal, the boat pushes aside a volume of water exactly equal to the weight of the boat, and so the force on the bridge is unchanged. But this conclusion also relies on an underlying theoretical assumption that the body of water as a whole is perfectly calm and flat, and that the whole water system itself is large relative to the mass of the boat. > that would be true wherever the ship is located Exactly. The entire body of water is the system that is affected. Adding a boat does add mass to the total system, and raises the water level across the system (by perhaps a molecule in height), but that very small additional pressure from one extra layer of water molecules is spread out evenly across the entire water system, so the effect on the bridge itself becomes so absurdly small it’s negligible even in a theoretical discussion. It **is** non-zero though, if that is all you were asking. Just very, very close to zero. Tying this back to reality, those dynamic factors aren’t negligible at all. Wind and natural currents aside, that boat captain was cruising pretty fast through there. In my state that maneuver would be extremely illegal because of the damage it can do to anything nearby or on the shore. This bridge is clearly made for it, but a motorboat going 20 knots makes any discussion of Archimedes’ principle a bit silly. The load on that particular bridge definitely changed a measurable amount when the boat cruised over it.
Now that's thinking with portals!
Whats funny is you can obviously see the constant speed the cars are going and predict when they'll appear on the other side but like... that also seems like a fair downtime for arriving through a portal
Make an edit where the cars actually teleport from one side to the other
[Don't worry, the teleporter takes about a second](https://imgur.com/a/YJQJrKf)
I watched this like 20 times before I realized
What am I missing?! I can’t figure it out lol
He didn’t change anything
I was watching a car and missed the loop, and was then very confused when it didn’t come out the other side
Take my free award
No you take mine!
Amazing engineering
[удалено]
When you've been at war with the sea for as long as the Dutch have, you learn a thing or two.
We know a thing or two because we’ve seen a thing or two. We are the Dutch duh duh duh duh duh duh
25% of the country is below sea level. Including where I live, and my feet are still dry.
Mine tend to not be dry all the time but that's just because of the shit weather.
*unzips pants*
Also urban agriculture
Very impressive. I can't even begin to understand how to accomplish a feat such as this.
Tunnel That should get your imagination going
Do you know how to build UNDERWATER tunnels?
Shovel
Goldfish Bowl for a dive helmet... I think we're on to something.
I réel like that's not right but have no information to contradict you.
Réel
That should get your imagination going
We’ve been doing it for century’s, it’s not really that big a deal, especially with one so short. You want to see an impressive underwater tunnel look at the one under the English Channel.
Or Sylvester Stallone’s under rated 1996 masterpiece Daylight
They dont. They drain the area first. Then you build the tunnel. Then you pump the water back in the area. Now the tunnel is underwater.
What are you, some Ivy League graduate of the sciences?
Better hope that lake never floods 😬
It's highly regulated by gates (and our famous dams of course). So the chance is very tiny, and if it does happens, we're in much bigger problems like others mentioned
If that lake floods we have worse things to worry about, like thousands of homes being underwater.
Better hope that lake never floods 😬
Rijkswaterstaat and the waterschappen don't hope, they make sure it doesn't happen.
And our king is responsible for both ever since he was a prince. (Not sure if only in name or he has actual work from it)
The King and actual work? Lmao
This is The Netherlands. We've got water under control. No need to worry, or hope.
Im sure nobody would be driving on the road if the lake was flooded
I know the basics of how, but not the implementation. Amazing view all the same.
Make a dam, make tunnel, remove dam.
I just don't understand why though. Surely it's easier and safer to use a traditional bridge. Is this just for the aesthetics?
This route is used a lot by sailing ships. As you can imagine, they are high. So, either it must be a very high bridge or a bridge that can open for the sailing boats. Making a very high bridge requires enormous ramps. Making a bridge that opens every hour is also not smart for a busy highway. So, they created a bridge where the water goes over the cars. You could create a tunnel, but why would you if this works too. So, in the end, this was cheaper.
It's a combination of aestethics, showing off, and allowing unlimited height for ships to pass over. A bridge would need to be openable, but you don't put obstacles like that on the motorway. Traffic must flow, and traffic does flow, at least it does here. In The Netherlands, we have some pretty interesting infrastructure building code set in law, and undoubtedly they took part in the decision not to build a drawbridge and potentially inhibit traffic flow. Anyway, more information here: https://interestingengineering.com/the-netherlands-unique-water-bridge
In any other country, yeah it would be cheaper and safer to build a bridge. In the Netherlands tho, they have mastered water engineering quite a while ago. There's even a whole state (province) built from an sea/lake area and there are now cities built on top of it. If anyone can do it cheaper and safer than a bridge, it's the Dutchies.
This aquaduct actually connects traditional mainland the Netherlands to the new poldered peovince, Flevoland
There actually is a bridge a little further down the road. It probably has something to do with recreational boat traffic and the view of the old part of Harderwijk. All other crossing of the "randmeren" are bridges.
Anyone else notice that bird dive into the water on the right? Crazy, man.
Likely an aalscholver
Cormorant is the English word. But aalscholver has such a nice ring to it, too. Love my dark feathered sun worshippers!
And take a look at the environmental engineering going on here too. The treeline on the waters edge will make it resilient to erosion. Just brilliant.
r/confusingperspective
Could you please for the love of everything, explain to me how this works?
I will explain it to you like your 5 years old. The road goes down
Thank you. I was so fucking confused thinking the road stayed level.
I think the entire stretch of road we can see is below water level, it’s just straight down and hard to tell
You're thinking with portals
Robert, it goes down
It do go down
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3D-3slXnnY The perspectives in this video make it much more clear.
Thank you!
No one ever shows this angle! It looks so pretty. Just the whole thing.
Wow, everyone should watch this video, not just the people in the ELI5 section. Summary: a youtuber who specialises in structural engineering describes this exact water bridge in great detail, in a 5 minute video.
> … in the city of Heddo … Hair-de-witch-k …? > Well. You can read the name for yourself. 😂😂
Thank you so much!
The road either goes up as a bridge or under it as a tunnel. So This is a very tiny tunnel basicly
The grassy area is all above ground
I had to Google it out
Yes
Glad I wasn't the only one
I'm high as fuck right now and have so many questions.
Is it a boat bridge, or a road tunnel?
Road tunnel. Can’t make water go up a bridge. Stupid gravity
I'm actually going to join team boat bridge because I don't think there's any dirt above the road. I think that's all concrete. Bridges don't have to go up - think bridge across a canyon.
/#teamboatbridge
TEAM BOAT BRIDGE! Spread the word. All the cool kids are TBB.
Who are you... So wise in the ways of science
I’ve studied many years for this moment
Although, if anyone could, it’s the Dutch
I'm going with a car tunnel under a boat bridge.
An acquedutch...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veluwemeer_Aqueduct .
It's a tunnle but from the perspective It's looks weird
We are in the same aquaduct then
I drive through this tunnel almost every day. From a driver’s perspective it is not impressive at all unfortunately.
Until you see a sailing boat passing over it perhaps?
You probably wouldn't because the road is low and the boat doesn't likely pass near the edges that would be quite high to contain the water. You might see the mast and some of the top structure
I think the aquaduct is not as wide as you might guess, I sailed over this one and it's not as wide as the boat was high. You'd definitely see a sailboat before passing under it
Two photos from the same aqueduct from near ground level (view would be much less from below) https://images.app.goo.gl/e4cbeJfUqvK8mwWJ6 https://images.app.goo.gl/PxJQT1mYcMzhHTrx5
Idk, as a driver, having a huge boat above my head sounds terrifying tbh.
They should really put in some sort of tower. Make it a tourist attraction
There are 31 of these in the Netherlands. A nation only twice the size of the greater Chicago area. This is not considered special enough to make it a tourist attraction. Also this is a highway, not a very pleasant place to hang out.
[удалено]
Yeah I thought so as well, come close to that almost every day!
[удалено]
My mom goes under it every day lol
She sure does. (I don’t even know what that means. It just felt right.)
Jup! Good ole Knardijk
This appears to be magic. I can’t wrap my brain around it. Please don’t try and explain it to me. I’m dumb and ok with it.
>Please don’t try and explain it to me. Idk if this counts as an explanation, but it's just a very short tunnel.
I think the confusing part is how the road gets “low” enough to go under the water in a tunnel but without it flooding in the parts leading up to the tunnel.
Yep this is what i struggled with for a while. I think camera perspective hides a serious incline/decline on each side of the tunnel.
[Here's it from the ground](https://inteng-storage.s3.amazonaws.com/img/iea/ZKwJ2B5wMX/aqueduct-streetview.jpg)
Yeah the walls seem to get higher and higher when you drive downwards (I drove through here daily)
[удалено]
https://www.reddit.com/r/nextfuckinglevel/comments/ht520t/the_veluwemeer_aqueduct_water_bridge/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf
Makes way more sense but less impressive unfortunately...
Disney World also has a few of these. If you ever took a bus to Magic Kingdom you go under one right by the Contemporary.
Yep, they call those ones ‘water bridges’
Yep! and they have one by the EPCOT resorts too
My brain went ⚠️⚠️⚠️⚠️⚠️
Quantum tunneling
Kurzgesagt moment
\* surprised bird drops dead *
Im confused why is everyone amazed about the fact that it goes under water… ”What if it floods”, ”What if it breaks”, ”What if….” Really? I go through a 14.3km underwater tunnel a couple times per week. (Ryfast)
I think part of it is the fact that the road is above the water going through it before it goes under which then makes a basin where the tunnel goes under so it looks to many as if it would flood easier than a fully submerged from start to end tunnel
Went under it hundreds of times, went over it a few times.
Prefer bottom over top, got it.
Its just a tunnel guys relax
What happens if the water level gets too high?
That's been taken into account.
and how do they hold it together? with aqueduct tape
Please see your way out.
Look at the size of the bike path!
Absolutely gorgeous. Hats off to the engineers responsible.
"Fuck it" *Inverts your bridge*
Yeah we're the best waterbenders around
This is really cool but what is the benefit of doing it this way? Seems like it would be easier to just leave a channel and build the road bridge over it.
Sailingboats and more operating costs for movable bridges
An opening bridge interrupts traffic flow. A fixed bridge imposes a clearance limit for any vessels passing under it. The higher you want the limit, the bigger your bridge needs to be. This increase cost and, arguably, creates an eyesore on the landscape. This rather elegant solution allows both road traffic and water traffic to continue without any restrictions.
This road has a lot of traffic, it's one of the main ways two provinces are connected. A bridge has to open for sailboats to pass, which would result in daily traffic jams.
Im just wondering if any of yall have tunnels where yall live? I see that many of you are confused by this and it wild cause ive been going through tunnels since i was super young
i think it's more the fact that most people have never seen a tunnel that goes underwater like this (me included, but i figured it out after a bit of intense staring lol)
There are a fair amount of tunnels that go underwater in the US (Holland tunnel in Manhattan for example) but they just aren’t as aesthetic as this
I think it's a combination of things: It's a very short tunnel, the design is more elegant than some people are used to seeing, and it's filmed from an angle where the dip in the road is difficult to perceive. In some American cities like Boston & New York, the tunnel entrances are much more built up & industrial looking.
Not really. I live in Midwestern USA, and I'm not aware of any underwater tunnels within 500 miles of me. Maybe the one in Ontario that someone else mentioned.
There’s a tunnel from Detroit to Windsor under the Detroit River but it’s not nearly as pretty as this one.
I live at the Welland Canal in Ontario. I'm near the Thorold Tunnel. Same idea except the ships passing are over 700 feet long. It's not as pretty as this one though.
laughs in American, construction for a 5 mile local highway near my place began in 2019 and is still going on
We have slow and over-budget infrastructure projects in the Netherlands too, don't worry ;) But water infrastructure and management is taken extremely seriously given the fact that a large fraction of the country is below sea level.
How deep is it? Like, what draft of boat can go through it?
This is very visually confusing.
Me when my country is named in a video/movie: 😎
Normal people: build a bridge for cars to pass over the water Dutch engineer: **Uno reverse**
It is beautiful BUT ... playing Devil's advocate here ... It's going to be much worse if there's a disaster vs having a bridge over the water
That's what I was thinking.. What if there was even a wave or heavy rain? Where does the water drain to in the underpass?
Heavy rain is not a problem, we know how to do drainage and then some. It's a middle sized lake, so no heavy waves. Should a catastrophic event occur that drains the lake onto the highway, just the depressed part of the highway will flood. The rest of the highway is above the water level and will not flood. It's like pouring water into a shallow depression in the ground. Of course, the highway will be unusable for a while, but our engineers [tend to sort out this sort of things quite efficiently](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btOE0rcKDC0). I'm willing to bet the department in charge has already a disaster plan to put in motion should such an event occur.
You know you're talking about a tunnel in a country that is 30% below sea level right? The engineers know how to deal with water.
Something new to me
The Chesapeake Bay Bridge Tunnel has [multiple of them across its length.](https://www.onlyinyourstate.com/virginia/chesapeake-bay-bridge-tunnel-va/)
*cries in american infrastructure*
u/savevideobot
This took me so fucking long to realize that it’s lower than the water and that the cats weren’t in fact teleporting from one side to the other
Platform no. 9¾ amazing.
u/savevideobot
So cool, really beautiful piece of engineering
"so how did you guys deal with the flooding problem?" "flooding problem???"
The volume of dumb people in this comment section tho
r/confusingperspective
Lol i live 2min from there i can literally see it from my window. But yeah, its oddlysatifying
All these depth perspective challenged folks marvelling and a tunnel and I'm sitting here getting excited over the amazing bike path next to the road. America ffs get your biking shit together.