High Speed Trains

  • metta

    Posts: 39075

    Aug 31, 2012 6:09 PM GMT
    Japan to Build World’s Fastest Train: A 310MPH Maglev Monster

    bullet-train-hairyegg-537x397.jpg

    http://www.stumbleupon.com/su/2ogYRi/inhabitat.com/japan-announces-plans-to-build-worlds-fastest-train/


    China to Push Ahead With High-Speed Rail Expansion Plans

    http://www.4-traders.com/news/China-to-Push-Ahead-With-High-Speed-Rail-Expansion-Plans--14430554/

    Future of California high-speed rail looks green
    http://newscenter.berkeley.edu/2012/07/26/california-high-speed-rail/
  • metta

    Posts: 39075

    Aug 31, 2012 6:14 PM GMT
    China, India Continue High Speed Rail Expansion Plans

    http://www.cahsrblog.com/2012/08/china-india-continue-hsr-expansion-plans/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=china-india-continue-hsr-expansion-plans&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
  • tazzari

    Posts: 2923

    Aug 31, 2012 6:28 PM GMT
    I took Amtrack from Seattle to Portland; I bet we hit 50 several times!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 31, 2012 6:29 PM GMT
    this is so friggin cool! I had no idea this was coming to fruition.

    article saidThe study, published today (Thursday, July 26) in the journal Environmental Research Letters, comes three weeks after lawmakers authorized $4.7 billion in state funds, which freed up an additional $3.3 billion in federal funds, for the high-speed rail project. The system promises to link Sacramento, San Francisco, Los Angeles and San Diego with trains traveling at a top speed of 220 mph.

    The bill, signed into law by Gov. Jerry Brown last week, allows initial construction on the 768-mile rail system to begin next year.


    a little surprised that CA is making this such a high priority given its budget turmoil though...
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 31, 2012 6:33 PM GMT
    homastj said
    a little surprised that CA is making this such a high priority given its budget turmoil though...


    Think FDR and the New Deal.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 31, 2012 6:46 PM GMT
    Ex_Mil8 said
    homastj said
    a little surprised that CA is making this such a high priority given its budget turmoil though...


    Think FDR and the New Deal.


    it's great for their economy long-term, I'm sure, but they have crushing, crushing budget problems. this comes out of that budget. I'm concerned about what else will be suffering for the sake of these trains?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 31, 2012 6:53 PM GMT
    homastj saidI'm concerned about what else will be suffering for the sake of these trains?


    This presumes a zero sum game in government funding, which is false. Federal and state governments (like corporations), can issue bonds for capital projects, which is how California HSR is funded from the state (the Feds are providing money, as well as private investors). These bonds don't make anything else in the budget "suffer."

    Now, of course, the devil is in the details, and we could fill up this entire forum with esoteric economic arguments about bond funding, the Federal stimulus package and what the effects of those are, but here's my incredibly boiled down opinion on both (cause someone will probably bring it up):

    If you're a government, given the historic low interest rates worldwide, there's never EVER been a better time to issue bonds. It's essentially free money. As for the US Treasury: given current currency markets, there's never EVER been a better time to print money -- it's essentially zero cost at this point.

    Other ecomomically minded folks may disagree in the details, but to your original concern of "suffering" the answer is most definitely: nobody.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 31, 2012 7:01 PM GMT
    QUOTE AUTHOR GOES HEREThis presumes a zero sum game in government funding, which is false. Federal and state governments (like corporations), can issue bonds for capital projects, which is how California HSR is funded from the state (the Feds are providing money, as well as private investors). These bonds don't make anything else in the budget "suffer."


    okay, makes sense. thanks!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 31, 2012 8:02 PM GMT
    WhyWhySee saidCanada needs high speed rail! Imagine the speed we could get out on the Prairies!


    It could be pulled by giant herds of moose!
  • jim_sf

    Posts: 2094

    Aug 31, 2012 8:19 PM GMT
    WhyWhySee said
    LIEV said
    WhyWhySee saidCanada needs high speed rail! Imagine the speed we could get out on the Prairies!


    It could be pulled by giant herds of moose!

    Reindeer are faster.


    Right? I mean, reindeer get Santa to every house on the planet in just one night. Clearly, there's some relativistic speed going on there.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 31, 2012 8:34 PM GMT
    They have been talking about this for the last 4 1/2 years...!!
    It's time they build the darn thing!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 31, 2012 8:57 PM GMT
    The highest speed train we have in the USA runs from Washington DC where I live to NYC. I think it goes about 125 mph.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 31, 2012 9:15 PM GMT
    Here in the UK our "wise" Government has given a go-ahead for the construction of a new line from London to Birmingham, about a hundred miles long, which will cut through beautiful countryside, destroy some properties and devalue many more, with the cost of many millions - just for the sake of shaving twenty minutes off the journey time between these two cities.

    Once opened, the service will be expensive to run and will take many years to pay itself off, if it ever would. Most media journalists as well as the public believe, rightly, that this project will be a complete waste of money, and that despite the poor state of the economy as it is - most believe that far more important projects connected with our day-to-day living, such as schools, hospitals, bin collection, road and present rail maintenance and other such amenities, should have taken priority over this new rail line project, if there is so much money - our taxes as well as private profit - floating around.

    The truth is, we already have a fully functional rail connection between London and the North, including Birmingham. These are fast trains, averaging 125 mph, which is sufficient for a geographically small island which makes up Britain. I have used these services myself, and I can say that our present rail system as it is, is fast and efficient, although they can improve on punctuality.

    In truth, our Tory Cabinet bow to the wishes of a few business executives who wish to arrive at their destination a few minutes earlier. When one of these executives opens his mouth, our Government bows the knee. When we, the common people object, then we are spat upon.

    Welcome to the United Kingdom.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 31, 2012 9:18 PM GMT
    Yeah, that doesn't make much sense for England since you already have a pretty good rail system from what I have observed. The worst one I ever experienced was from Brussels to Amsterdam about 5 years ago. Slow, slow, slow!
  • studflyboy87

    Posts: 194

    Aug 31, 2012 9:21 PM GMT
    The SF Bay Area to LA Area is the busiest air route in the world. There is not a better place for high speed rail. For anyone who has been to Europe, Japan, or other major countries in the world, you know that high speed rail is everywhere. It's about time the US starts doing what the rest of the world has been doing for over 50 years.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 31, 2012 9:25 PM GMT
    tazzari saidI took Amtrack from Seattle to Portland; I bet we hit 50 several times!


    i take Amtrak to go to Boston and DC from NYC. I think we hit 50 several times as well.

    Trains in America are a disgrace. 24 hours to go from NYC to Chicago. 9 hours to go from NYC to Pittsburgh.

    these people outta dey damn mindsicon_exclaim.gificon_evil.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 31, 2012 9:55 PM GMT
    NotThatOld saidHere in the UK our "wise" Government has given a go-ahead for the construction of a new line from London to Birmingham, about a hundred miles long, which will cut through beautiful countryside, destroy some properties and devalue many more, with the cost of many millions - just for the sake of shaving twenty minutes off the journey time between these two cities.

    Once opened, the service will be expensive to run and will take many years to pay itself off, if it ever would. Most media journalists as well as the public believe, rightly, that this project will be a complete waste of money, and that despite the poor state of the economy as it is - most believe that far more important projects connected with our day-to-day living, such as schools, hospitals, bin collection, road and present rail maintenance and other such amenities, should have taken priority over this new rail line project, if there is so much money - our taxes as well as private profit - floating around.

    The truth is, we already have a fully functional rail connection between London and the North, including Birmingham. These are fast trains, averaging 125 mph, which is sufficient for a geographically small island which makes up Britain. I have used these services myself, and I can say that our present rail system as it is, is fast and efficient, although they can improve on punctuality.

    In truth, our Tory Cabinet bow to the wishes of a few business executives who wish to arrive at their destination a few minutes earlier. When one of these executives opens his mouth, our Government bows the knee. When we, the common people object, then we are spat upon.

    Welcome to the United Kingdom.


    I am pretty neutral on HS2, but then I do not live in London, Birmingham or anywhere in between. I can envisage the benefits of an extended high speed rail network between London and Manchester and London and Leeds and eventually up to Scotland. I think these would help to take the pressure off the population centres of London and the south east, which are just going to keep on growing. We have to start planning major infrastructure projects, not just for the next few years, but for 30 years ahead.
  • O5vx

    Posts: 3154

    Aug 31, 2012 10:05 PM GMT
    LIEV said
    WhyWhySee saidCanada needs high speed rail! Imagine the speed we could get out on the Prairies!


    It could be pulled by giant herds of moose!


    It could be powered by Alberta oil.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 31, 2012 10:10 PM GMT
    studflyboy87 saidThe SF Bay Area to LA Area is the busiest air route in the world. There is not a better place for high speed rail. For anyone who has been to Europe, Japan, or other major countries in the world, you know that high speed rail is everywhere. It's about time the US starts doing what the rest of the world has been doing for over 50 years.


    i can see some ass in the midwest now- , as spittle dribbles down his chin...
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 31, 2012 10:33 PM GMT
    homastj saidthis is so friggin cool! I had no idea this was coming to fruition.

    a little surprised that CA is making this such a high priority given its budget turmoil though...
    It's not without a lot of controversy of course. I think I read somewhere that they're starting the first leg in Bakersfield…I don't know, someone must know someone in Bakersfield to start it there! LOL
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 01, 2012 12:02 AM GMT
    eb925guy said
    homastj saidthis is so friggin cool! I had no idea this was coming to fruition.

    a little surprised that CA is making this such a high priority given its budget turmoil though...
    It's not without a lot of controversy of course. I think I read somewhere that they're starting the first leg in Bakersfield…I don't know, someone must know someone in Bakersfield to start it there! LOL


    Actually, this is not all that unusual. You want to start a new rail system in the place with the fewest problems first, to work out the kinks. Many rail systems were constructed first in the "middle of nowhere." The general public thinks it's stupid and something must be wrong, fanned by the flames of the opposition, and uncorrected by a media that is only interested in controversy and drama, and avoids facts like the plague.

    The opposition to CA HSR is pretty much one single constituency, sometimes astroturfing itself in other guises:

    Rich property owners on the SF Peninsula (Menlo Park, Palo Alto, Atherton, Burlingame) that want the entire thing put underground, but don't want to pay for it.

    Most everyone else in the entire state supports it.

    The opposition is truly galling because the existing Caltrain line nearby these rich nimby communities (that don't give a shit about public transport or public anything, frankly) is much more frequent, slower, noisier and polluting than HSR will be, but these communities are trying to extort HSR with endless lawsuits to solve the existing Caltrain problem on the back of the HSR program. Their slogan is that HSR is a boondoggle. The real boondoggle is this opposition using taxpayer money to improve their properties by taking an existing surface rail right-of-way and spending extra billions to bury it for miles so that their backyards look nicer.

    Oops, I betrayed my crankyness on this topic. I told myself I'd be nice on RJ this year to improve my mental health.

    Ah well.
  • studflyboy87

    Posts: 194

    Sep 01, 2012 12:31 AM GMT
    eb925guy said I read somewhere that they're starting the first leg in Bakersfield…I don't know, someone must know someone in Bakersfield to start it there! LOL


    Bakersfield to Palmdale is first because it is the only section of the entire route that does not currently have rail service. The rest of the route exists and just needs to be upgraded for high speed trains.

    If anyone wants to read their 2012 business plan executive summary, check out the link below. http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/assets/0/152/431/72e92f77-014b-45a0-ad04-6cfd6d79c778.pdf
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 01, 2012 12:59 AM GMT
    McCrankla said
    iguanaSF saidOops, I betrayed my crankyness on this topic. I told myself I'd be nice on RJ this year to improve my mental health.

    You have bigger problems than that. I trademarked the term "cranky"and all of its variants some time ago. You'll be hearing from my attorneys.


    Damn you and your legal machinations! You're always so freakin...

    Err... I mean...

    So pleasant to hear from you once again. I look forward to a fruitful and mutually agreeable discussion with your legal team.

    Best Regads,

    Ig
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 01, 2012 1:09 AM GMT
    Blackguy4you said
    tazzari saidI took Amtrack from Seattle to Portland; I bet we hit 50 several times!


    i take Amtrak to go to Boston and DC from NYC. I think we hit 50 several times as well.

    Trains in America are a disgrace. 24 hours to go from NYC to Chicago. 9 hours to go from NYC to Pittsburgh.

    these people outta dey damn mindsicon_exclaim.gificon_evil.gif


    The Acela train from DC to NYC goes up to 125mph.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 01, 2012 1:09 AM GMT
    The piss-off is that Bombardier, the world leader in high speed rail systems around the world is a Canadian company and we haven't got a train anywhere that could reach 50 mph either