Campus Dakota
The Union => Spout => Topic started by: zman on January 28, 2010, 01:16:12 PM
-
http://www.wired.com/magazine/2010/01/ff_fasttrack/all/1
This is a pretty cool article on bullet trains coming to the U.S. I especially like the part about the train in France that can go 357 mph
A souped-up, 25,000-hp TGV with oversize wheels holds the current record for non-maglev trains. Journalists on the title run reported dizziness at 300 mph and difficulty standing at around 335 mph.
I want to ride that! ;D
What do you think about some of the routes in California, the Midwest, Florida, Texas, and the North East. I guess I would be more likely to ride if it was cost effective. But who is the target? Business people?
-
http://www.wired.com/magazine/2010/01/ff_fasttrack/all/1
This is a pretty cool article on bullet trains coming to the U.S. I especially like the part about the train in France that can go 357 mph
A souped-up, 25,000-hp TGV with oversize wheels holds the current record for non-maglev trains. Journalists on the title run reported dizziness at 300 mph and difficulty standing at around 335 mph.
I want to ride that! ;D
What do you think about some of the routes in California, the Midwest, Florida, Texas, and the North East. I guess I would be more likely to ride if it was cost effective. But who is the target? Business people?
If they were able to secure the rails so that a cow or something wouldn't wander on it, or some dumbass with an 89 corsica getting stalled on it...
I think the target would be people that would want to go on a vacation but not want to deal with the hassle of flying. The main thing is offering a decent ability to bring along baggage (Amtrack now only lets you bring 2 bags on without extra charges... WTF!?) I much rather deal with going on a train than dealing with flying... I've always wanted to go on a train vacation through the Canadian Rockie's or something similar like this. Just simple, relaxed and partially out of touch with humanity but if you want it its there. Some nice time to just sit and take in surroundings.
http://www.rockymountaineer.com/en_US/
-
Yea, they would need some sort of rail protection.
Vacation purposes would work pretty well, especially with the ever changing flying rules.
I have heard those "touring" train rides are pretty cool. I should try one out sometime, but checking out that site it looks like trips range from about $600 to $2500 per person... is that expensive for a train experience like this?
-
The best part about going to Europe was getting on of those rail passes that give you a certain number of train trips in a certain period, within X or Y number of countries. You can get on whichever train you want at your own schedule and they stamp it. It was like having a subway pass.
With a better rail system in this country, it would improve travel drastically for road-trippers. You wouldn't need to worry about your car, just be able to get back to the train station. At present, there aren't enough passenger trains every day to even think about doing this.
-
That sounds like a great way to travel in Europe. While I agree that we need a much better system, I think the reason we dont nationally have a system like Europe is partially because of the physical size of the country as well as many major metropolitan areas being spread out.
But I think it definitely needs to be looked into like the article says.
-
It's not that there aren't enough pax trains. Its that aviation has out performed rail in this country effectively killing it. For those of you who play the market, (or those of us that were avid (like the super nerdy type) model railroaders in their youth) know that that has turned around because of 9/11 and the recent economic downturn.
The issue is, rail travel hasn't put up the technology yet to be competitive with motoring the highways or flying. With the advent of mag lev's we've seen that change, however its important to note that the infrastructure in this country isn't exactly "built for the successes of rail travel" and furthermore, I'm not certain our society is either. By that I mean, people are going to want a train to stop in every little town along the way to "connect" places rather than get from A to B. This is the same problem aviation has faced and frankly, the same problem thats bankrupting it. Sending a DC-9 into grand forks or thief river falls instead of "just fargo" kills them.
The other issue that's been pointed out, securing the rails. Ultimately, this will (to be most effective) need to be buried, or elevated. That or they would need to send a lead train through to ensure clear tracks, or perhaps a warning horn on the tracks (like a claxon or something) but no one would go for that.
All of that said, I think this is simply awesome (if it happens) notice I said if as opposed to when. Literally, growing up in love with trains has shown me that the only thing certain in the rail industry is that it is dead in this country and people don't GAF about it. With the airline industry though treating their customers the way they have for so long, this is likely the only time in recent history that I'd say it stands a chance of being profitable let alone successful (wait switch those).
Lastly... its unfortunate that this rail system will be built by politics instead of engineers or transportation analysts. By that I mean, the reason certain places are getting rail systems is largely political (or at least partly) and that will have unfortunate ramifications for its success. Much like aviation, the only companies making any money in rail transport these days are freighters (check CSX stock) and the fact that AMTRAK is a government run company scares me.
-
The issue is, rail travel hasn't put up the technology yet to be competitive with motoring the highways or flying. With the advent of mag lev's we've seen that change, however its important to note that the infrastructure in this country isn't exactly "built for the successes of rail travel" and furthermore, I'm not certain our society is either. By that I mean, people are going to want a train to stop in every little town along the way to "connect" places rather than get from A to B. This is the same problem aviation has faced and frankly, the same problem thats bankrupting it. Sending a DC-9 into grand forks or thief river falls instead of "just fargo" kills them.
That is true, the use of the hub and spoke method, with too many spokes, does draw done on a lot of revenues... but it seems people demand it and the airlines try to meet that demand. We probably would have the same problem with trains as you said. Is there any way around this? Does our society just have to change or do we have to just go with what the people want?
The other issue that's been pointed out, securing the rails. Ultimately, this will (to be most effective) need to be buried, or elevated. That or they would need to send a lead train through to ensure clear tracks, or perhaps a warning horn on the tracks (like a claxon or something) but no one would go for that.
Do you know what is the most common method in other countries?
Lastly... its unfortunate that this rail system will be built by politics instead of engineers or transportation analysts. By that I mean, the reason certain places are getting rail systems is largely political (or at least partly) and that will have unfortunate ramifications for its success. Much like aviation, the only companies making any money in rail transport these days are freighters (check CSX stock) and the fact that AMTRAK is a government run company scares me.
Unfortunately politics rules the country in many many decisions... the experts dont usually get to decide things like this.
Do you think this should be government run, government subsidized, completely private, or some mix?
-
The common method in other countries is to build a tunnel, elevated system, or a "channel" (similar to the main (and largest) rail corridor in the US which runs into North Platte Nebraska). In europe trains rule... but the high-speed ones are only in certain areas.
Nextly, I think if you look at CSX or the freighters, they are private and making a buck, but AMTRAK is government and bankrupt. The companies need to be private, though the rails can be government owned/controlled (think highway is to tractor trailer concept). But that said, the "big money" in aviation is made by carrying freight. Since rail already has this stuff separated, it will be difficult to profit.