Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
High Speed Trains Vs. Air Traffic  
User currently offlineFerroviarius From Norway, joined Mar 2007, 231 posts, RR: 0
Posted (7 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 19738 times:

Good evening.

I should like to start a thread on the resp. advantages and disadvantages of High Speed Train Traffic and Air Traffic on certain high frequency traffic corridors. I am not aware that this subject would have been discussed any earlier.

Obviously, High Speed Trains will not be able to replace Airplanes on long distance routes, i.e. mainly routes crossing oceans or vast and more or less un-inhabited areas like Northern Siberia or the Sahara. Neither will high speed train lines be economically sustainable on city pairs as, e.g., Vancouver - Edmonton. However, traffic between the North East of the US and Chicago, or Chicago and the Pacific Coast, or the North East and Texas would, I do not doubt, economically justify new high speed rail links.

As has been demonstrated in Japan and Europe, noticeably France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Sweden, the UK, and, to a somewhat minor degree, other countries, High Speed Trains, besides having a number of considerable technical and economical advantages as compared to airliners, can compete with the latter, provided the infrastructure, i.e. High Speed Train Lines, do exist and the distances between departure point and arrival point do not exceed a certain limit, which, itself is dependent on the actual speed of the trains on the resp. lines (i.e. a magnitude that changes with increasing train speeds). Tokyo - Osaka, Paris - Marseille, Cologne - Munich, Stockholm - Göteborg, London - Paris - Lyon - Avignon - Marseille, Milan - Rome, Madrid - Sevilla a.s.o. can be covered faster or within approx. the same time by train as by plane, and, since there are normally no such things like check-in times, ground transportation between Airports and City Centres, Security Checks, Baggage Limitation, "Fasten Seat Belts" a.s.o. on trains, are more convenient to travel by train. Also, night trains provide sleeping cars with private rooms a.s.o. so that one can cover long distances during the night without being more or less tired and "limp" on the next morning., although at a price, which might exceed a lot of traveller's budgets.
As far as I know, the maximum speed in commercial high speed train traffic is at present 350km/h, i.e. approx. 217 statute miles per hour or 189 knots.
At the same time (ref. newest edition of "La Vie du Rail"), the SNCF ("Société Nationale des Chemins de Fer", the french state railway system) is conducting trial runs on the new LGV Est ("Ligne à Grande Vitesse Est", i.e. high speed railway line between Paris and Strasbourg) employing a double decker TGV ("Train à Grande Vitesse" = High Speed Train) and have so far attained approx. 560km/h, i.e. approx. 348 statute miles per hour or 302 knots. Though the aim of these trials, more or less in-officially, might be to prove that there is no need for the Maglev, one might be inclined to assume that the results of these trials will result in commercial speeds on classic high speed lines in this magnitude within a foreseeable future.

Of course, a modern electric engine, thermodynamically, is much more efficient (roughly by a factor of two, since the efficiency of modern electric locomotives are, astonishingly enough, as large as >90% calculated "from the electric wire to the couplers", while the most efficient non stationary gas turbines might attain thermodynamic efficiencies of max. 50%) and much less pollutant than a gas turbine. Also, there is no dependency on oil. On the other hand, electric high speed train traffic has its technical challenges, e.g. the problem of the contact between the pantograph and the electric wire, the tunnel problems when crossing mountainous regions (two trains racing at speeds exceeding a certain limit and meeting in a tunnel will experience super sonic speeds relative to the streaming air, will have to be pressure isolated to compensate for the violent compression and de-compression effects and so on) but these problems can be solved.

So, will we, sooner or rather later (?), see high speed train lines between New York and Chicago, Chicago and the West, the North East and Texas? Which other lines?

Will there be the political will to challenge "the air industry"? Or will the ongoing discussions on CO2 reduction, the oile prices a.s.o. economically enforce the construction of high speed rail lines?

Will hence, e.g., JFK-ORD by air be history within a foreseeable future?

Thank you in advance for your comments on the issue.

Best,

Ferroviarius

266 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineDeltAirlines From United States of America, joined May 1999, 8903 posts, RR: 12
Reply 1, posted (7 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 19695 times:

The only real routes that would economically sustain HSR in the US are corridor-type routes. Right now, we have Boston-New York-Philadelphia-Washington as HSR; it's quite possible other corridors, most likely such as Los Angeles-Las Vegas, would be the best bet for HSR. Stuff like Northeast-Texas is well over 1000 miles; NYC-Chicago is about 750 miles, which is quite a haul for train travel.

User currently offlineFlymeFASTER From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 65 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (7 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 19651 times:

Considering the success of HSR in Japan and Europe, it seems to be a no-brainer as being smart for the future in the USA. Unfortunately, when it comes to transit, much of the time the USA has no brains. Again, that's when it comes to transit. Sounds harsh, but I say that from experience as Pres./Founder of The Monorail Society, which follows ground transport advancements such as monorail and monorail maglev - http://www.monorails.org


Bigger planes & bigger windows? Thanks, but I'd rather you fly me faster!
User currently offlineTransWorldSTL From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 568 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (7 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 19594 times:

Quoting Ferroviarius (Thread starter):
However, traffic between the North East of the US and Chicago, or Chicago and the Pacific Coast, or the North East and Texas would, I do not doubt, economically justify new high speed rail links.



Quoting FlymeFASTER (Reply 2):
onsidering the success of HSR in Japan and Europe, it seems to be a no-brainer as being smart for the future in the USA.

The problem is, in the US, we would have to build above ground tracks almost the entire length of the lines, which would be extremely expensive.. And very few routes would have a high enough demand (at least, currently) to make it worth it for developers.


User currently offlineSW733 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6330 posts, RR: 9
Reply 4, posted (7 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 19528 times:

Quoting TransWorldSTL (Reply 3):
The problem is, in the US, we would have to build above ground tracks almost the entire length of the lines, which would be extremely expensive

Aren't most trains in the world above ground most of their length? And of course it's going to be expensive, but if they can do it in Japan and Europe (where there is less land and it's generally more expensive), why can't they do it in the USA? They can, but they wont, because it is not a public transportation based country.

I almost always pick a train over a plane unless I am on a connection from somewhere where it just doesn't make sense to swtich from a plane to a train. It's just so much easier and hassle free, flying is such a pain these days.


User currently offlineRemcor From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 358 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (7 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 19507 times:

Quoting TransWorldSTL (Reply 3):

The problem is, in the US, we would have to build above ground tracks almost the entire length of the lines, which would be extremely expensive.. And very few routes would have a high enough demand (at least, currently) to make it worth it for developers.

Problem is you can't just throw some high speed rail between two city centers and call it a day. That's usually a plan doomed to failure. If you really want to revolutionize things you need a comprehensive city-to-city transport plan. This includes intra-city networks to get people TO and FROM the train station. Otherwise you'd need to rent a car, which might not make it cost effective for the passenger. It's really too bad that all those trolley lines in American cities were torn up many decades ago.

LA-Las Vegas might be a good choice if they can get the station within walking distance of the Strip. On holiday weekends that I-15 can be a nightmare drive.

[Edited 2007-03-10 23:21:19]

User currently offlineAA737-823 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 5847 posts, RR: 11
Reply 6, posted (7 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 19494 times:

Wow, I like your post. I agree and disagree as follows:

Thermodynamically, you're right- rail cars (even inefficient rail loco's) are far more efficient means for transport than aircraft.
HOWEVER:

Quoting Ferroviarius (Thread starter):
Also, there is no dependency on oil.

Not necessarily correct. In this country, we generate our electricity from (primarily) nat gas, oil, and coal.

Otherwise, let me see...

The problem with the high speed rail is that it is slow. Even the speeds you've listed are far slower than jet aircraft. In this country (as elsewhere, but more so, because we're not willing to sacrifice anything in the name of ecology) we value SPEED. My time is worth more than anything else, so don't stand in my way.

Further, our rail system in this nation is NOT conducive to high-speed use. The northeast corridor, served by Amtrak's high (higher, anyway) speed Acela Express, is limited to only about 80-90 mph on the vast majority of its run, due to track quality. THIS MEANS, all new infrastructure would be required. That would cost a LOT of money, all in the name of replacing jet air travel, whose infrastructure is already in place.

I am a HUGE fan of trains, and ride them whenever it's practical (which, in this country, isn't often). But I don't see long distance high-speed rail ever becoming a reality for us. UNLESS the price of oil shoots upward, in which I see a tremendous rise in cross-country LOW speed rail. All else equal, slow is cheaper than fast. And that's the only motivation I can see for this nation to move 'backward' to rail use. High oil.

You might be interested to know that there is a group in Texas that is trying to push forward a high-speed rail link between Dallas, San Antonio, and Houston. I am in support of this effort in concept, and (ironically) so are American Airlines and Continental. See their website at http://www.thsrtc.com/

I think that medium distance high-speed rail has more potential than anything longer. In the USA, anyway.

R


User currently offlineStarGoldLHR From Heard and McDonald Islands, joined Feb 2004, 1529 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (7 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 19468 times:

Quoting TransWorldSTL (Reply 3):
The problem is, in the US, we would have to build above ground tracks almost the entire length of the lines, which would be extremely expensive.. And very few routes would have a high enough demand (at least, currently) to make it worth it for developers.

Rubbish. It's all politics and peoples attitudes. The US could build much cheaper high speed lines than they cost in Europe due to the wider spread between cities, less legacy "land use" which means open land can be utilised faster.Just as in europe rail roads can run over land, and build tunnels / bridges over or under roads as required, rather than the network of "Level Crossings".

The US has 2500 miles of open country. In Europe we operate trains at ground level between pairs of cities geographically much closer than many US cities (London, Paris, Brussels etc etc).

To go 2500 from NY - San Francisco, would cover relatively few major cities... Pittsburg, Cleveland, Colombus, Chicago, Denver and so on.

To do the same in Europe (Lisbon, Madrid, Toulouse, Paris, Brussels, Rotterdam, Amsterdam, Dusseldorf, Berlin and Warsaw).. many more cities/countries..

true.. a coast to coast US high speed line is unlikely, just as the same is true in Europe.. simply distance is too far. High Speed Rail can / will work upto 750 miles at 200mph before Airlines truly make sense over time. But this distance network doesnt exist at this distance either in the US or Europe, more likely 200-400 miles currently.


With a train of 200mph from New York to Chicago could be achieved non-stop in about 4.5 hours.
When you consider the 2 hour flight, 1 hour check in and 30 minute either side of the airport transfers to the city centre.. then Rail competes.

However Boston-DC doesnt work for the same reasons as Europe.. the land is too crowded.

DC-Florida, Florida-Texas, LA-Phoenix, LA-Vegas, LA-San Francisco, San Francisco-Seattle, San Francisco- Salt Lake city-Denver all could work (basically all the old 1950's traditional railroad routes), however they need their own lines, not shared railroad lines with freight etc etc.

Best hope for this is Union Pacific or CSX but it would require a major mind shift/mood swing in population thinking. Part of the problem is the current state of the railroads in the US.. Ive traveled by rail all over the world, as US trains are in a worse state than most regular Chinese railroads. Given this, to most Americans, the thought of riding for 4 hours in a highspeed tin of beans is akin to people flying 8 hours on a Tiger Moth, or sailing by Cargo ship to Europe.
They don't know how good it can really be.



So far in 2008 45 flights and Gold already. JFK, IAD, LGA, SIN, HKG, NRT, AKL, PPT, LAX still to book ! Home Airport LCY
User currently offlineTransWorldSTL From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 568 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (7 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 19460 times:

Quoting SW733 (Reply 4):

Aren't most trains in the world above ground most of their length? And of course it's going to be expensive, but if they can do it in Japan and Europe (where there is less land and it's generally more expensive), why can't they do it in the USA?

By above ground, I meant in the air.

Japan and Europe, as others have said, already have a public transportation infrastructure built up. In the US, only the Northeast Corridor has any really in depth form of public transportation.

US cities are for the most part, too suburbanized to have public transportation be very affective... If I wanted to, I could jump in my car right now and be at the mall in about 15 minutes... Or I could take the bus... If I took the bus, I would be there in about an hour and fifteen minutes... I could drive to STL (airport) in about 20 minutes.. Or, I could take the light-rail system.. That would take a little over an hour, not including me driving to the light rail station.


User currently offlineTransWorldSTL From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 568 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (7 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 19443 times:

Quoting StarGoldLHR (Reply 7):
Rubbish. It's all politics and peoples attitudes. The US could build much cheaper high speed lines than they cost in Europe due to the wider spread between cities, less legacy "land use" which means open land can be utilised faster.Just as in europe rail roads can run over land, and build tunnels / bridges over or under roads as required, rather than the network of "Level Crossings".

Well, here in the USA, most people have cars.. And if you put these tracks on ground-level, you would have A LOT of road crossings.. People don't like to stop at the crossings, even if there are gates/lights... Add a high-speed train to the mix, and you have disaster.

I just can't see something like this happening in the US for a VERY long time, as people would much rather fly.


User currently offlineEugdog From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2001, 518 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (7 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 19398 times:

The rule of thumb is that business people will use the train if the overall trip is less then 3 hours compared to a 1 hour flight. For leisure travelors 5 hours is maximum before they choose the train (this according to the SNCF - this explains the need to bring the Paris Marseilles train journey to a maximum of 3 hours).

In the US the train should be competitive with the NY - Washington route. But New York (LGA) and Washington Airports (DCA) are very close to the city centre (as compared to most airports in Europe) so this put presure of trains to be less the 3 hours). Also the sheer convienicance of the Shuttle give travelors the option of turn up and go (but then security delays could work agains the planes)

Trains to Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland can never compete with the plane for business travellors as they could not really be under 3 hours unless new technology comes. Also the density of traffic is much lower then in Europe

Chicago may be 750 miles as the crow flies but the rail line will be much longer as it cannot go as the crow flies. Also whilst a train may reach a speed of 200mph it practice it will spend large amounts at less then that due to bends and gradients. So it highly unlikely that trains could bring NYC and Chicago within 4.5 hrs. The low density of traffic compared to in Europe also makes it far less economic.

Another problem with trains is that very few want city centre to city centre traffic. Most people will start or end their journey in the suburbs where there is more likely to be airport. This is because people tend to live in the suburbs and not in the city centre

Another advantage of airports is people can park their cars at the airport making it more practical if you coming from your home. I wanted to to Manchester from London- I chose the plane because the airport was one hour away and I could park there. To take the train would mean a tedious trip to the city centre by public transport. In London most people living in the suburbs are closer to an airport then to the city centre train station, (when I mean closer - i mean in time to get there by driving)

So overall the train has far limited use in the US then Europe.

[Edited 2007-03-11 00:05:44]

User currently offlineFloridaflyboy From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 2015 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (7 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 19328 times:

Quoting Eugdog (Reply 10):

I agree very much with essentially everything you said. There are significant markets in th U.S. that could potentially work for HSR, but in reality, the majority of the routes just can't compete with air travel because of the distances, and the convenience for business travelers, in my opionion. Welcome to my RU list.



Good goes around!
User currently offlineBoysteve From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2004, 940 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (7 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 19319 times:

As Eugdog has pointed out, 3 hours is the key. If the rail journey is 3 hours or less it will generally win a larger share of the market than air. The rules for business and leisure travellers maybe different but that all comes down to frequency of rail travel.

For example, In the 1990's the split between air and rail from Manchester to London was 50/50. The train ran every hour and took 2.5 hrs whilst the flight took 1 hour.
After 2000 the rail journey became a mess, it got a bit slower (2h 40 mins but longer at weekends) but was also unreliable with many train running late. The market split between rail and air dropped to 40%/60% in air's advantage
Since 2005 the rail is vastly improved. The journey is now 2h15m from London-Manchester on average, or 2h05m London-Stockport which is actually nearer to Manchester Airport. The train also now runs every 30 minutes throughout the day. The train now has 60% market share compared to 40% for air, a role reversal. From 2008 there will be a train every 20 minutes from London - Manchester and air will take a kicking again.


User currently offlineSJCRRPAX From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (7 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 19295 times:

Quoting Eugdog (Reply 10):
Another problem with trains is that very few want city centre to city centre traffic. Most people will start or end their journey in the suburbs where there is more likely to be airport. This is because people tend to live in the suburbs and not in the city centre

I'd just like to point out that at least in California, all major Airports (LAX, SAN, SJC, SFO, OAK) are closer to the city center than the suburbs. SMF is out of town but the city center is probably more convient than in the middle of nowhere north of town. HSR plan for California will connect quite a few of those airports (depending upon the plan which is implemented, I expect that for LAX, SAN, SJC, and SFO the HSR will arrive at an airport terminal instead of "downtown". It will also connect directly to BART and the "Baby Bullet Trains" in the SF bay area, the Trolly in San Diego, and I have heard the Metro Red Line in LA --- but that's all at least 16 years away if they start building today.


User currently offlineGAIsweetGAI From Norway, joined Jul 2006, 933 posts, RR: 7
Reply 14, posted (7 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 19273 times:

Quoting Ferroviarius (Thread starter):
Obviously, High Speed Trains will not be able to replace Airplanes on long distance routes, i.e. mainly routes crossing oceans or vast and more or less un-inhabited areas like Northern Siberia or the Sahara.

This idea may be a bit far-fetched, but it'll do a trans-Atlantic crossing in about 1 hour:
http://www.popsci.com/popsci/science...84010vgnvcm1000004eecbccdrcrd.html

Quoting Ferroviarius (Thread starter):
560km/h

Are you sure it isn't 360 km/h? Or was this a trial run? (I may be getting confused.)



"There is an art, or rather a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss."
User currently offlineOzGlobal From France, joined Nov 2004, 2721 posts, RR: 4
Reply 15, posted (7 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 19269 times:

Quoting Ferroviarius (Thread starter):
As has been demonstrated in Japan and Europe, noticeably France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Sweden, the UK, and, to a somewhat minor degree, other countries, High Speed Trains, besides having a number of considerable technical and economical advantages as compared to airliners, can compete with the latter.....

Quite. High speed trains are always better than air travel for distances up to around 1000km (600miles). Anyone who says otherwise is simply ignorant, inexperienced and unduly attached to parochial socio-economic thinking.

By high speed train, we do not me the 'half-pregnant' curiosities found in OECD countries who can never finish making up their minds about such infrastructure : Acela - USA, InterCity - UK, Tilt Trains - Oz; modern technology trains running at a third or less of their top speed due to non-investment in new high speed lines. The US, the UK and Oz have NO high speed trains.

Let me cite an example of the typically uniformed consumer opinion from these communities in relation to high speed rail travel:

Quoting AA737-823 (Reply 6):
The problem with the high speed rail is that it is slow. Even the speeds you've listed are far slower than jet aircraft. In this country (as elsewhere, but more so, because we're not willing to sacrifice anything in the name of ecology) we value SPEED. My time is worth more than anything else, so don't stand in my way.


Wrong. High speed trains, ie. those cruising at around 300km/h (200mph) or more, over short to medium haul (up to 1000km (here after do the miles conversion yourself - good for your soul), are usually FASTER door-to-door than flying.

High speed lines are mult-billion Euro/Dollar investments that serve a nation for years to come. It is not a problem of cost / benefit, the business case is more than compelling. It all depends on your politics and attitudes (as another poster has stated). Nations who have a longer term planning horizon and see essential infrastructure as part of the common good build high speed rail networks (France, Germany, Japan). Nations who have a minimized notion of the common good invest public money in highways and view rail investment as borderline communist. This behaviour rewards a clutch of private trucking interests by building a free national logistics network for them, whilst the same trucking traffic represents 99% of the wear and tear on the roads. It also panders to the illusion of independence offered by private car travel. It's all about attitudes and bias.

Because high speed rail between short to medium distance city pairs is always better, faster and more comfortable, airlines normally down-scale capacity or even discontinue operations once the high speed line opens. e.g. Paris - Brussels 310km, 1:15 by TGV, Air France no longer fly this route, but code share with SCNF (railway). Air travel is now a poor second choice for routes such as Paris - Lyon, Paris - London, Paris - Bordeaux, Paris - Marsailles. When new lines open over the next two years. Paris - Strasbourg (June 2007), Paris - Turin and Paris - Cologne will all become faster by train door-to-door. Germany and Japan: same story.




Quoting TransWorldSTL (Reply 9):

Well, here in the USA, most people have cars.. And if you put these tracks on ground-level, you would have A LOT of road crossings.. People don't like to stop at the crossings, even if there are gates/lights... Add a high-speed train to the mix, and you have disaster.

Well, I don't want to shock anyone, but here in Europe most people have cars too. As for level crossings (road crossings) if you're serious about building a high speed line, you build a lot of overpasses and and bridges. In France the there are 1000's of km's of high speed line (300km/h +), 800 TGV's run daily and I don't believe there are any level crossings on the high speed track network.

It is beyond serious dispute that Boston- NY - Baltimore - Washington should have a high speed line. It does not today (I caught the Acela in Nov and it was still much better than flying: space, more comfort and city centre to city centre travel, but is NOT a high speed train).

It is nonsense to say that the US (or UK or OZ) for that matter cannot have a high speed train service because the rail network will not support it. How do you think Japan, France and Germany got their high speed networks?????? They INVESTED and BUILT them because the business case is there when you take a responsible, longer term view. Population densities in the N.E. of the US, the UK and the SYD-CBR-MEL corridor in Oz EXCEED the demand of many routes already operating in France and Germany on high speed line. The obstacle is pure political bias and ignorance of the benefits.

The TGV Europe Est line is current doing speed trials before opening in June and reducing travel time Paris - Strasbourg from 4:15 to 2:20. The target speed record is 570km/hr. As part of the same programme of work, SNCF hope to raise the cruising speed of the entire TGV network from 300 to 320 or even 360 km/h!



When all's said and done, there'll be more said than done.
User currently offlineOzGlobal From France, joined Nov 2004, 2721 posts, RR: 4
Reply 16, posted (7 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 19257 times:

Quoting GAIsweetGAI (Reply 15):
Quoting Ferroviarius (Thread starter):
560km/h

Are you sure it isn't 360 km/h? Or was this a trial run? (I may be getting confused.)

360 is new target cruising speed. 570 is the target trail speed record. Old world record, also set by TGV, was 515. It seems from the first post, they have already hit 560km/hr on the current trials of the TGV Europe Est line.



When all's said and done, there'll be more said than done.
User currently offlineScrubbsYWG From Canada, joined Mar 2007, 1495 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (7 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 19248 times:

I think it really depends. The eurostar is one great example. 2.5 hours travel time from paris to london, centre to centre. Its quite an amazing thing. and only need for 30 minute check in. It must be done right in order for it to work well.

User currently offlineOzGlobal From France, joined Nov 2004, 2721 posts, RR: 4
Reply 18, posted (7 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 19236 times:

Quoting ScrubbsYWG (Reply 19):
I think it really depends. The eurostar is one great example. 2.5 hours travel time from paris to london, centre to centre. Its quite an amazing thing. and only need for 30 minute check in. It must be done right in order for it to work well.

...Reducing to 2:15 in June.



When all's said and done, there'll be more said than done.
User currently offlineOzGlobal From France, joined Nov 2004, 2721 posts, RR: 4
Reply 19, posted (7 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 19228 times:

Quoting SJCRRPAX (Reply 18):
I have rode the TGV trains in France, and if we ever get our act together in California I hope we either buy Japanese or something home grown. Great train system in France, but the TGV trains seemed to have a side to side sway and on one journey I noticed two people had gotten motion sick, and I wasn't feeling that greatest either, another couple of hours and I probably would have lost it also and I have never had any air sickness on a plane.

I don't doubt your experience, but the only reason this would happen is if the TGV is traveling at a reduced, but still 'elevated' speed on 'classic' (old) track which is not up to high speed specification. This is VIOLENT on the Acela on stretches of track between Washington and NY. I saw a steward thrown against a wall, lossing a tray of food on the Acela. I have ridden the TGV/Eurostar and Thalys endlessly and not experience any significant or sustained 'swaying'.



When all's said and done, there'll be more said than done.
User currently offlineWunalaYann From Australia, joined Mar 2005, 2839 posts, RR: 25
Reply 20, posted (7 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 19186 times:

Quoting OzGlobal (Reply 16):
I don't believe there are any level crossings on the high speed track network

Better yet, there are none. Simply because basic railway regulations forbid level crossings at speeds higher than 160 kph (100 mph). That is one of the reasons why HSR infrastructures are so much more expensive than regular rail tracks. Roughly €8-to-15 million per kilometre, depending on topography, hydrography, geotechnical constraints, etc.

Regarding infrastructure costs, I would just mention the fact that airports ARE infrastructures and that they cost just as much if not more than 500 km of HSR. Not to mention running costs (staffing, maintenance, pollution, etc.).

All in all, you are looking at very comparable costs per km or passenger.

So in the end it comes down to social choices (I did not say "socialist", thank you very much). Looking at the sky in London or New York, and listening to the, hum, "music" of air traffic in such places, I personally believe that short-haul flights could be favourably replaced by HSR shuttles.

Cheers.


User currently offlineGAIsweetGAI From Norway, joined Jul 2006, 933 posts, RR: 7
Reply 21, posted (7 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 19113 times:

Quoting OzGlobal (Reply 17):

Thanks for the clarification. (Just goes to show how distracted I am at times, like when I watch the French news.)



"There is an art, or rather a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss."
User currently offlineCXfirst From Norway, joined Jan 2007, 3071 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (7 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 19082 times:

Quoting Ferroviarius (Thread starter):
Obviously, High Speed Trains will not be able to replace Airplanes on long distance routes, i.e. mainly routes crossing oceans

We have the technology to build ultra high speed trains, but not the funds. There was an article in a magazine I read about a year ago. It was about a proposed ultra high speed line going from London under the atlantic, surfacing on Southern Greenland going under water again and surfacing in Newfoundland and then going down to New York. The only problem was that they couldn't devolop it at that time as the technology was so new that it would cost far too much. However, they predicted in 2025 or so, it would be economically feasable.

-CXfirst



From Norway, live in Australia
User currently offlineGAIsweetGAI From Norway, joined Jul 2006, 933 posts, RR: 7
Reply 23, posted (7 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 19056 times:

Quoting CXfirst (Reply 24):
There was an article in a magazine I read about a year ago. It was about a proposed ultra high speed line going from London under the atlantic, surfacing on Southern Greenland going under water again and surfacing in Newfoundland and then going down to New York.

This one?  Smile

Quoting GAIsweetGAI (Reply 15):
This idea may be a bit far-fetched, but it'll do a trans-Atlantic crossing in about 1 hour:
http://www.popsci.com/popsci/science....html



"There is an art, or rather a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss."
User currently offlineCXfirst From Norway, joined Jan 2007, 3071 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (7 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 19019 times:

Quoting GAIsweetGAI (Reply 25):
This one?

yes, but the article I read was in Norwegian and went into far more detail. It can be found on the internet (the article) but you have to be a subscriber to that particular magazine.

-CXfirst



From Norway, live in Australia
25 LimaNiner : Rail infrastructure is expensive, so it doesn't make economic sense in a country as vast and sparsely populated as the U.S., except in areas like the
26 Post contains images JetMech : G'day Ferroviarius , Very interesting thread you've started here! I'm not too sure about this paragraph though; With a gas turbine, the entire energy
27 Yflyer : I doubt it will ever happen, but what I would like to are more airports with rail connections, and more airlines code sharing with railroads like CO d
28 Articulatexpat : A couple of points about HSR in the United States. Earlier, FlymeFASTER commented that the US doesn't tend to make good choices with respect to transi
29 AlexInWa : Lets take SEA-PDX for example, if I could use a train that would do it in 1 1/2 hours I would never set foot on a flight again. If you take waiting ti
30 Articulatexpat : I've taken Amtrak Cascades SEA - PDX. Despite the great scenery and the clean, comfortable trains, there are only one or two trips per day: no time s
31 AlexInWa : Well not to start a fight but you have 5xdaily service between SEA-PDX on Amtrak. Not all on the Cascade service. However I will agree that hourly ser
32 SJCRRPAX : I have rode the TGV trains in France, and if we ever get our act together in California I hope we either buy Japanese or something home grown. Great t
33 Spacecadet : Then the obvious follow-up question is, why aren't we at least investing in areas like the Northeast? Everybody who knows anything about Amtrak - inc
34 VonRichtofen : If you factor in the time it takes for all the BS at airports (getting there 1.5 hours before, checking in, security, etc. etc.) high speed trains ar
35 CXfirst : If trains become popular to the millions, then it won't take long until security as strict as airports come, especially if there are more people per
36 Stirling : Or, a few months of war. It's about priorities. What does the U.S. want more? I could think of many more.... The entire West Coast, from San Diego to
37 Post contains links and images SJCRRPAX : (Repost w/o political baggage!) California has a high speed rail plan, you can read about it at the states HSR website: http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.
38 ANCFlyer : I used the UA Airways shuttle DCA-LGA once - only ONCE. It was an arduous task. DCA isn't bad at all, LGA is a cluster . . . . I found that - all thi
39 Post contains images OzGlobal : Uhhm... We are comparing a potential high speed train service with the airlines, not whatever 19th century service is in place today..... For the sak
40 Post contains images OzGlobal :
41 VonRichtofen : You know what? I wonder if you really need huge population densities to make it work. For example, here in Alberta there's the corridor between Calga
42 XT6Wagon : I think alot of our european friends have no idea how spread out the American population is. I grew up in New Mexico. Its roughly the land area of Ger
43 OzGlobal : We understand very well and have in most cases traveled extensively in the US between said cities. If you take the time to read the discussions above
44 RootsAir : then wat is High speed for US train. I heard it does not exceed 200 km/h
45 XT6Wagon : Where we do have the density, we don't have the ability to build the tracks and stations needed. Largely a matter of will, but far too many times by
46 Post contains links OzGlobal : To avoid speculation, here's a real figure for upgrading the rest of the Paris - Bordeaux line, from Tours to Bordeaux, to full LGV (linge grande vit
47 Post contains links OzGlobal : See also: Land speed records for rail vehicles: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_speed_record_for_railed_vehicles[Edited 2007-03-11 11:19:23]
48 Eugdog : Delighted witht the RU nomination by Floridaflyboy! There are few other important comments about High Speed Train Building new tracks in the US or in
49 OzGlobal : Sounds like whining. It's all about attitudes and political will. Most of the objective parameters for determining the cast for a HST are well unders
50 Eugdog : I am not whining - in fact the case for an HST in England is very strong. What I am saying is that the French political and geographical set up makes
51 Imiakhtar : lol. you obviously haven't visited the UK yet.
52 Bond007 : Why is this any different from driving to an airport ... in the suburbs or any other place? Airports are not located any closer to residential/touris
53 Post contains links Cjpark : " target=_blank>http://www.thsrtc.com/ You also have to deal with interference from Airlines in the United States when it comes to building High Speed
54 FlyLKU : My father was senior counsel for the trade association that represents the airlines. It is located in Washington D.C. and when he had meetings in New
55 SJCRRPAX : Bad example for your argument. The greater LA Area has a population of around 16 million, SF Bay Area 7 Million plus and Fresno is around 1 million (
56 Post contains images Cba : Even the non-Acela slow service is pretty nice. The cars are old, but the seats are very comfortable and each row has an AC power connection, so brin
57 FATFlyer : FYI, the busiest current routes for Amtrak in the US are (using FY2006 numbers) Boston-New York-Washington 9,431,279 passengers San Diego-Los Angeles-
58 Stitch : Europe and Japan had the "advantage" that the USAAF cleared and graded much of their cities during WW2 and left their populations borderline indigent.
59 Cba : Forgot to address the other quote... Transcontinental HSR lines in the US would not be economical, that would be equivalent to rail service between F
60 Eugdog : If a link between LA and SF is sustainable why do you need federal money to fund it. Just is meant by sustainable? Can the fares cover the cost of the
61 Stitch : Expanding the local rail infrastructure (light rail above ground and subways below it) can help that, but it too will add significant cost.
62 Post contains images Cba : Yes, but in Europe and Japan, they build through much more densely populated land! Ever drive between any of the big Texas cities? Houston-San Antoni
63 Hmmmm... : HSR works best for distances of about 1000 miles or less. Planes can not compete. Aircraft need to taxi, wait for ground traffic, wait for clearance,
64 SJCRRPAX : Sustainable means that the fare box revenue would cover 100% of the maintaince cost and operating costs. The capital investment to build the trains c
65 FFlyer : And the price tag of the Iraqi war this far is....$400 billion (?). We could have had the HSR network built!
66 Threepoint : I think most Europeans have a better grasp on US geography than do most Americans. Thanks for that nugget, but that's exactly what has been said in e
67 Philb : Ten years ago I had to regularly vist the EU DG VII headquarters in Brussels from my home in Crowborough in S E England. At the time the Directorate w
68 Dc1030guy : I studied civil engineering in college and took a Railroad Tranportation / Engineering course. My grandfather worked and retired from a railroad. As I
69 Hmmmm... : Aren't airports and the air traffic control system subsidized with government monies? The public subsidizes air travel by billions every year, includi
70 FATFlyer : If air travel between LA and SF is sustainable why do you need federal money for airports and air traffic control? Why do we use federal money for fr
71 Philb : It worked extremely well on the UK West Coast mainline where for over 40 years, on two track (one North, one South) sections in the Midlands only rec
72 Ckfred : High-speed rail is only competitive with air travel at distances up to 300 to 400 milles. From Chicago, high-speed rail would work to St. Louis, Detro
73 RayChuang : Having scanned the entire message thread I think the next thing that will really spur on high-speed ground transportation is maglev trains that can cr
74 Eugdog : regarding the posting above _ I said very clearly that government subsidy is justified because the economic social and enviromental that would arise f
75 Post contains images VonRichtofen : lol, I have actually. But in most of North America we don't shut the country down for a couple inches of snow
76 SJCRRPAX : Yes, that is why the California High Speed Rail Inititive proposes to have many of the airports either serve as the train stations, or be closely lin
77 FATFlyer : You have to consider the current transportation situation between north and south in the state. Southern California's 5 airports to the 3 Bay Area ai
78 Post contains images R2rho : Highly interesting thread! Let me add some comments on my side... A good rule of thumb is that HSR is competitive up to a distance of about 600km or 4
79 Post contains images OzGlobal : Thank you for bringing this sanity check from a US perspective. Ignoring the somewhat self-congratulatory gist of of this post, it is flawed logic. E
80 Philb : OzGlobal: An excellent and well thought out set of replies.
81 Post contains images WunalaYann : Fox News, by the looks of it. More seriously, buddy (Eugdog), do not take it personally but your statement is absolute rubbish. As OzGlobal has so ri
82 Bond007 : I couldn't agree more! Jimbo
83 Post contains images WunalaYann : And Maglev infrastructures are painfully ugly in the landscape. Not that a highway or HSR is my idea of beautification but it is still easier to abso
84 Post contains images RayChuang : OzGlobal, Like I said earlier, I don't think we'll see steel-rail trains go much faster than 330 km/h. The reason is simple: at these very high speeds
85 ANCFlyer : I didn't say Leftie by the way. As to your comment, I'd bet real US$ (or Canadian $) they'd crap all over themselves the minute the first tree was cl
86 Cba : Yeah, I recall that Air France terminated all of their CDG-BRU flights once the high speed line to Brussels was completed, and now code shares instea
87 XT6Wagon : The problem is that they need to invest huge piles of cash to upgrade the tracks, and add extra tracks in california. Its not just that Union Pacific
88 Post contains images ANCFlyer : Agreed. Several Months ago there was an article in Trains Magazine (I have every issue back to 1949 ) on this very topic. Trains running up to SMF al
89 OzGlobal : Yes, you're right. There are limitations, but they may be higher than we previously thought. 360 is already planned for the TGV network. Maglev does
90 TransWorldSTL : To get from STL - NYC by rail, one of the routings on AMTRAK is through Canada.. And it takes over a day... For $500. Or, you could fly in about 2 ho
91 EvilForce : Another real advantage is the on-time performance of high speed rail. In 2003 JR Central (Japan's high speed rail company) reported that the Shinkanse
92 Cba : Exactly. A rail is not a true high speed line unless the track is specially designed for and used only by high speed passenger trains. The TGV in Fra
93 Sam1987 : Ultimately the issues to compare are: - Price - Reliability - Comfort - Time - Preferences Each traveller would rank the above issues in a different o
94 Bond007 : But in most cases, where a HSR link exists and for short routes (
95 Pelican : While it is true that network non-integration is a big problem which will prevent probably every country with a developed train network from building
96 Leskova : I'll just provide a simple example - and this isn't even fully High Speed... From Frankfurt to Zürich, the published flying time is 55 minutes (65 mi
97 Sam1987 : Not in the UK! London to Newquay, for example, is around 220 miles (if that?) and it takes 6 hours by train. Hence there are Air Southwest and Britis
98 SJCRRPAX : I am not sure why you would make that argument if you live in Europe. If you have ridden eurostar, you know that you must make a reservation and you
99 VonRichtofen : Yeah but does the UK have proper HSR like the TGV or ICE?
100 Post contains links FAT5DEP : David Levinson from the University of Minnesota offers some interesting insight regarding HSR in California. http://blog.lib.umn.edu/levin031/tra...gh
101 Post contains images R2rho : Hey people, let's not forget the Spanish AVE, please!
102 SJCRRPAX : Thanks for that link. A lot of his observations I believe I made in some of my posts. Where I think he is missing the ball is that HSR in California
103 Threepoint : Of course they do, needing to accelerate and slow down just like any mobile form of transport. But the time constraints you attirbute to planes are s
104 Bond007 : Well, hardly a good comparison. By my simple math, that averages less than 40mph, so obviously not a high-speed route is it! Well, not so negligible
105 Philb : There is no High Speed rail link to Newquay from London - you are comparing apples and pears. The current timetable shows the fastest journey at 4 hou
106 Articulatexpat : His anti-rail bias is not just obvious but shrill. The bit about spruced-up 19th Century technology was inane. Certain concepts were simply good from
107 OzGlobal : " target=_blank>http://blog.lib.umn.edu/levin031/tra...#more Just the latest in a venerable tradition of professional rail crushers in the US. Just re
108 Stirling : Metro populations 2000 Stockton 563,000 Modesto 447,000 Merced 210,000 Fresno 799,000 Visalia 368,000 Bakersfield 661,000 These figures are substanit
109 HiJazzey : My understanding is that railways have to be worked really hard to be economically viable. Railways demand very high utilisation, so it will only work
110 Rwessel : Before you attribute the demise of light rail in the U.S. after WWII entirely to market forces, you might want to look up the Great American Streetca
111 Post contains images ANCFlyer : Well, if the Combat Boot fits. Lowered emissions are only half the battle. If memory serves, the German ICE trains are electric. Can't get any more e
112 Leskova : They are, indeed - though there is/was a diesel powered version for routes that were not electrified yet. I'm not absolutely certain, but I think the
113 ANCFlyer : I quite understand that . . . but there aren't the diesel exhaust emissions from the locos traveling to and from all day long. I'd rather have a stat
114 OzGlobal : In France now, the TGV runs off the national power grid, 95% of which is nuclear. The 'tree huggers' in Europe have turned pro-nuclear due to the pro
115 ANCFlyer : Well, please send some of them to the States to talk sense to our Tree Huggers here . . . perhaps, the light will come on - albeit dimly I'm sure.
116 57AZ : Unfortunately, outside of certain regions-specifically the West Coast (CA, OR and WA), the upper Midwest and the Northeast Corridore-high speed rail o
117 Burkhard : The high speed line from Cologne to Frankfurt was built up completely from scratch. Length 173 km. From Frankfurt Airport to Bonn/Siegburg, 143km, it
118 PanHAM : Not in Germany, unfortunately. Here, these clowns still believe that windmills can do the job. Your calculation is a bit optimistic in many ways. Fir
119 Ferroviarius : They are, indeed - though there is/was a diesel powered version for routes that were not electrified yet. I'm not absolutely certain, but I think the
120 Post contains links Vincewy : Well just got back from Taiwan and took the high speed rail 4 times, absolutely fabulous, some of the domestic flights will be gone because of high sp
121 Ktachiya : Allow me to add my knowledge into this since I just took a course about this in university a couple of months ago. Japan and Europe have a width of t
122 OzGlobal : Ehhh?? The Acela built a couple of years ago runs on the old, antiquated track network. There IS NO HS track in the US. Isn't is specious to compare
123 Post contains links A342 : Modern diesel engines can overcome that. MTU builds some engines for military vehicles that could also be suitable for trains. They rev at over 3000r
124 OzGlobal : Really don't know why a number of people have said this. I took the Shinkansen last March from Shinugawa, Tokyo to Kyoto. Outward in 2nd class, which
125 Ktachiya : I don't mean to criticize you, but just reminder that it's Shinagawa Shinugawa means *Dead River* Yes true, for a long time, JL, NH and Skymark and o
126 Post contains links Vincewy : Quoting OzGlobal (Reply 124): Really don't know why a number of people have said this. I took the Shinkansen last March from Shinugawa, Tokyo to Kyoto
127 OzGlobal : Having spent some time in Tokyo, I could easily believe it's "Dead River".
128 Post contains links Chase : Firstly, thank you for starting this thread. Here is are some links you may find interesting - it is for a proposed high speed rail network, laid out
129 Post contains links OzGlobal : Just in case you missed it earlier, here it is again: TGV Europe Est at 553 km/hr in Feb.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x1Bel_LcjZg&NR Plus some g
130 Texan : There are plans underway already to build high speed rail lines in certain areas of the US: The Keystone Corridor (Pittsburgh-Philly); The Trans-Texa
131 Post contains links Vincewy : Bombardier has been working on HSR that doesn't require electric lines http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JetTrain Don't know how far this will go, given th
132 IRelayer : Speed, flexibility, and cost are the reasons that you will never see HSR adopted as widely in the US as it is in Japan and Europe. Japan and Europe ar
133 OzGlobal : Overconfident, under-informed, American myth. American is NOT special. Europe is not small. As already stated, it is ultimately the inability to imag
134 IRelayer : Ok...interesting response. Are you angry at me or something? Never said America was special, nor did I mean to imply Europe as a whole was "small", r
135 Feroze : The Schengen Agreement has eliminated border controls between the majority of Western European countries. The UK is not a signatory and therefore sti
136 FlyBoeing : Hmmm... One thing that is definitely inhibiting HSR in the U.S is that the radius any particular station can serve is inhibited by the lack of conveni
137 Emirates029 : Where did you travel from?
138 OzGlobal : Not angry, just frustrated that after all that has been argued above and largely accepted, you are re-introducing what I consider the standard specio
139 OzGlobal : Ah, yes; Those 'captial costs' and 'taxpayer dollars'. Funny how we only think of them in connection with rail and not with the roads we are so addic
140 Feroze : Sorry, should have said. I travelled from London Waterloo
141 JoFMO : Population density is relatively irrelevant in this context. An effective high speed rail system needs two large metro areas well above 2 million inh
142 PanHAM : It is widely accepted in Europe that the cost pof rail infrastructure is paid from taxes, whereas the operation of long distance trains should not on
143 Cubsrule : We've touched on a few of the high speed rail proposals floating around the States, and the one in the Midwest linking Chicago and St. Louis is actual
144 JoFMO : I agree that 1000km currently is a little bit off the edge. But with France beginning 320km/h trains, Spain planning 350km/h and France considering 3
145 PanHAM : no doubt about that. An Amtrak operation like from Chicago to STL or to DET, arebstand alone operations that really need dedicated tracks ALL the way
146 Texan : To really be effective, though, we need better intracity public transport in the large cities. New York, DC, Boston, and Chicago all have pretty good
147 Atmx2000 : Highways are cheaper by the mile and allow for more extensive network. Airports are far more flexible because they allow for connections between far
148 Boeing7E7 : Key issues: 1. Rail, at least in the US may be outdated and impossible due to the right of way issues - massive tunneling and elevations would be req
149 OzGlobal : Errhm.... I hope you're not suggesting that the US is special this time because it has a 3-dimensional landscape. What is this defeatist nonsense? Ar
150 Bond007 : Hmmm .... replace 'Rail' with 'Air travel' !! See the similarity?? ...except of course it's less flexible due to NO intermediate stops via air (well,
151 Boeing7E7 : The rail routes in the US are privately held, designed for medium speed and mostly controlled by freight rail. Passenger rail is subject to it's oper
152 Boeing7E7 : What's frustrating is that you don't seem to grasp our culture, or the concept of funding for such a project in the US. While your government may fee
153 OzGlobal : Your economy can support it many times over and would benefit from it enormously in the corridors already identified. Montana has nothing to do with
154 Boeing7E7 : Tell me where this open unowned open country. I want to stake my claim! How's the Sydney train holding up? People still walking off the coat hanger?
155 OzGlobal : Yes, went to school as a kid in Washington D.C. and learned this. It's never been anything more than self-congratulatory rhetoric as far as I can see
156 COFanNYC : I don't mean to come across as rude or antagonistic, but.... I wonder why the United States has to have high speed rail. If there was a real desire fo
157 OzGlobal : I don't recall anyone saying this. The point is, many US posters have chosen to enter the debate, citing arguments as to why this can't work in the U
158 Cubsrule : I disagree. People in the United States equate intercity rail service with Amtrak. We all know that Amtrak does an exceedingly poor job (for a variet
159 Atmx2000 : Air is more flexible because any number of routes are possible from a starting point without huge capital expenditure that is route specific. As for
160 Post contains links Boeing7E7 : Those are proposed corridors that must be purchased and do not exist right now. You get the point now? That land must be purchased, and if you think
161 YULWinterSkies : Yes, but full of large cities in between which would certainly benefit from it. I mean, many trains on this hypothetic railroad would not travel NYC-
162 OzGlobal : Most assuredly. My passport does not determine which subjects I can address (one of those 'freedoms' we were discussing). It's not about how much moj
163 Post contains images Bond007 : LOL... Yes, EXACTLY the same   ...and I don't speak as an expert (but some knowledge of highway construction), but I'm guessing that per mile, a rai
164 Boeing7E7 : To put this into perspective. Take the population of Australia and shove it into the land mass of Sydney. That is the reality of a large US city, nam
165 OzGlobal : Do people really believe this sort of rhetoric? I take it you approve of them recording your phone calls without court order then. Your taxes pay for
166 Boeing7E7 : Amazing how misinfomed you are about us. Must be all those backwater stories you get on the BBC/Sky and what not about some dumb ass red-neck in Arka
167 Boeing7E7 : It's just like everything else. Europe isn't the top dog so they want to impose their will on the US calling us the big nasty environmental crashers.
168 Post contains links OzGlobal : This discussion needs a non-AV thread, but it speaks for itself: "NSA secret database report triggers fierce debate in Washington" - USAToday 5/11/06
169 HiJazzey : We have that 20-25m divide in Saudi too. But if you want the really excessive gap you need to look at the old airport area in Jeddah. The roads they'
170 Vincewy : At Gard Du Nord (Paris), there're 4 tracks used exclusively for Eurostar, and this area is sealed off from the rest of the station, words are someone
171 Bond007 : No, there is no such things as 'news' on a US TV channel ... it's simply opinion and/or entertainment. Extremely inflated numbers from everything I'v
172 Post contains links Boeing7E7 : It won't change a thing, they'll simply add flights to new destinations. Like California Cities that have little air service today but are continuall
173 R2rho : Please, people! Let's not turn this highly interesting thread into a EU vs US one! I see a lot of the last posts being a repetition of ideas that had
174 Ferroviarius : Good afternoon. Following the discussion, I do a little bit get the impression that it partly turned into a US vs. Europe "clash". While this is not s
175 Boeing7E7 : Air Travel, globally, is only 2% of the greenhouse gas emission problem, and will continue to decline with each new generation of aircraft. It appear
176 Gnomon : I think this is an excellent and interesting thread, the inevitable U.S.-EU debate notwithstanding. Ferroviarius, thanks for stimulating this discussi
177 Boeing7E7 : That would be the function of light rail or other from the airport to the city. You connect the airports to reduce the air travel, much of it connect
178 Rikkus67 : There has been extensive study done here in Alberta, Canada for a high speed train linking Calgary and Edmonton. The distance between the provincial/i
179 OzGlobal : Great post Gnomon. As a very frequent long haul flyer, I say this with a sense of responsibility: even if absolute CO2 emissions from aircraft are onl
180 Boeing7E7 : This of course compared to the continued smelting process to construct rail coupled with the emissions of earth moving equipment to build and continu
181 Ferroviarius : Good evening, I, indeed, have read your answers, Boeing7E7, and contributions to the ongoing discussion (and to other discussions) and appreciate the
182 Post contains images R2rho : Oh no! So now we're all gonna be energy dependent on Norway?!? Help! Oh and thanks, I was missing a post like that, Gnomon! Well argued, even if I ma
183 Boeing7E7 : And for HSR to be effective you would need to tunnel about 80% of it. The rail through the Rockies has winds through areas where the use of highspeed
184 Ferroviarius : YESSSSS, and unless Air France serves Rakfisk and Gammelost even to their First class passengers, the French reactors will not be served Th. Yes, but
185 Boeing7E7 : This is where the US environmental movement will part ways with it's support of HSR. It's a rather amusing debate I've personally witnessed. Go build
186 Post contains links OzGlobal : Exiting routes, in Europe, as has been mentioned are very cognizant of the need to integrate with air and/or provide car access/parking: CDG TGV stat
187 Ferroviarius : Definitely correct! However, the idea is to make the private vehicle redundant downtown by establishing urban traffic infrastructure complimentary to
188 Post contains links Boeing7E7 : Good for Europe. This is the US. It's not the same. All of the Major Cities stations are listed historical and the land around them is build up. Most
189 OzGlobal : I don't think you got the point. These are TOTALLY NEW stations on totally new LGV lines. When you go to a city not on the end of a TGV line in many
190 Boeing7E7 : I don't think you get the point. The availability of developable land and the right of ways for this doesn't exist in the US. You clearly have no con
191 OzGlobal : You've just finished instructing us all on how much open space there is in the US. Now there's no "developable" land. As you point out, there is, ove
192 Boeing7E7 : Did no such thing. Not one of my posts has advocated wide open spaces, only discussed the lack thereof. Didn't shout, the site is doing that. I've tr
193 Travelin man : Union Station in downtown LA does have parking and rental car agencies, just FYI.
194 Boeing7E7 : Not for the level of passenger service that HSR would bring to it.
195 Ferroviarius : I think we do get this issue. The other problem is that, irrespectively of the value the train station and rail routes have to the American Public, t
196 OzGlobal : No, I just have broader ideas of 'value', 'opportunity' and 'success' than are shown in what you're articulating here. HSR is something that can only
197 Post contains images Bond007 : Actually not at all. They are California 'real' costs ... nothing else. Mostly due to California's economic policies, regulatory burdens, and many ot
198 Post contains links PIT : You can take a plane from NYC to CHI and arrive sooner than a train and pay the same price, but a new bus service came out that has fares for one doll
199 Cubsrule : Megabus has a lot of problems (but I think those are outside the scope of this thread). So while it's cute, apparently fairly popular, and presumably
200 Boeing7E7 : And California is furthest along in the process, and those costs are not unique to California. Expand where? They will flock no-where. We are not Pub
201 Post contains images Bond007 : They are (see my earlier quotes), as are most things in California. ...and it shows   For the last time, I know we are not Europe (as do most of the
202 Boeing7E7 : Do you even have one ounce of understanding land ownership laws in this country? Clearly not.
203 Bond007 : LOL ...more than you can ever imagine! Clearly I do! It's amazing we can build highways, roads, airports, landfills, huge housing developments, huge
204 StarGoldLHR : 2000 years ago the romans solved this problem... it's called a Bridge / Tunnel. I take the train between London and Manchester for similar reasons. I
205 Boeing7E7 : You sure don't act like it.
206 Post contains links Vincewy : Perfect example of freeway vs high speed rail comparison, given the current congestions at major freeways in US, who wouldn't want to use high speed r
207 Post contains links OzGlobal : The first signs to confirm what was rumored on this thread. Next week, April 4th to be precise, the TGV Europe Est, Ram V150, will attempt the officia
208 Post contains images Ferroviarius : I am not quite informed for which max commercial speed the LGVs in France are constructed (curve radii a.s.o.). Anyway, talking about 600km/h on tria
209 Boeing7E7 : Please... Check out Boeings record: Facts The Holloman High Speed Test Track holds the land speed record at 8,978 feet per second (6,121 miles per ho
210 Vincewy : I'm not so sure if Meglev will be widely accepted, it's prohibitively expensive and not compatible with current infrastructure if one needs to use ori
211 OzGlobal : Sour grapes. Oh, well. This is an R&D project. TGV has transported over 1 Billion people to their destinations and we are talking about a built and o
212 Boeing7E7 : And what do you suppose it will be by the time the US actually needs High Speed Ground Transportation? Chicken Feed?
213 R2rho : Making all these distinctions between HSR and Maglev is unnecessary. As long as it's high speed, fine with me. You want Maglev, go for it. For now the
214 Boeing7E7 : HSR would require new right of ways as the rail system and the right of ways are privately held, and as such unavailable. The Govt saw it in their in
215 JoFMO : Is buying land much more expansive in the USA than in Europe or Japan? I mean, the railways in Germany or France also have to pay for acquiring land f
216 Post contains links OzGlobal : Here's the train that we attempt the record next week on the Europe Est line. It is being prepared in a special painjob and has other enhancements for
217 Boeing7E7 : This is where the eminant domain loophole closures are a factor. In a nut shell, private land is serving the higher good by remaining with the rightf
218 ThirtyEcho : When I can look at a sunrise over the Rocly Mountains at 40,000 feet from a train window, you'll have my interest. Somehow, looking at filthy train st
219 HiJazzey : The opposite. In terms of views, nothing beats the train. As you traverse the land you get sweeping views of the countryside, in the plane you're too
220 Bond007 : OK, back to point raised earlier ..... how is this ANY different than building a highway in the USA? Presumably, even less land is required for a rai
221 R2rho : Thanks for the explanation. Looks like there are some legal issues to resolve before even talking about the technical ones. In Europe right of way is
222 Ferroviarius : There is another factor: Depending on the technological standard, on a two lane railway you can transport as many goods and persons as on a six to te
223 Post contains images Baroque : Not a lot I suppose, so is this the start of a bring back Ike to renew America? You could do worse! But hell, how can I sound superior, down here we
224 OzGlobal : The vested interests ready to drive the sort of die hard lobbying we've seen from some of our American friends on this thread.
225 Boeing7E7 : This is the year 2007....[Edited 2007-03-30 23:11:35]
226 Post contains images Bond007 : Oh, and we are so 'last century' ...at least we know what year it is! ...gotta be quicker on the editing Jimbo[Edited 2007-03-30 23:14:59]
227 Post contains links OzGlobal : The TGV at 2:30pm today (Sun 1st Apr 2007) attained a new unofficial record of 568 km/h in preparation for its official attempt on Tuesday 3rd April w
228 Post contains links OzGlobal : It's tomorrow, 12:30 - 13:30 CET !! Here's the trainset being prepared at Alstom!! : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERKVlnBW7Fo
229 Baroque : You have got me quite excited. Nearly as exciting as waiting for the Flying Scotsman but not as smoky!
230 Post contains links OzGlobal : Here's the live feed of the event from France 2 if you would like to watch: http://video-direct.france2.fr/player.php?id=25 They say 560 - 580 km/h i
231 Francoflier : Good thing they're broadcasting it on the web. What time will it start though? Where on france3.fr will it be? So what are the bets? 570, 580? Thaey s
232 OzGlobal : Have a look at the link. Coverage at 12:55 CET. France 2 at 8h had an update you can see on the France 2 site. Let's see if they are down playing the
233 Francoflier : Ok, it's on... Or maybe the 581 kph record held by the maglev?
234 PHKLM : They reached 574 km/h... I think they must be disappointed after putting in all the effort and then coming short 7 km/h.
235 Francoflier : 574+ !! Or 356 Mph... Impressive.
236 OzGlobal : Made it to 574,7 km/h !!! New World Record for rail. Had a whole bunch of dignitaries, journalists and SNCF staff on it as well. Must have been quite
237 OA260 : Looked impressive. My Dad lives in Strasbourg but I normally fly to FRA and take the LH bus. I might to CDG and take the train this summer instead. Wh
238 Post contains images Francoflier : It looked impressive on the video. It's fun that they needed a light jet to keep up with it! (The same corvette that flew alongside the A380 on its fi
239 OA260 : Thats always the way LOL.... Sky News said the official speed was 357.1 MPH for those that need the converstion. So when does this service start?? An
240 OzGlobal : 10 June. Book from 10 April and they have crazy fares like Paris - Strasbourg for 25 euros!! Don't think that will be the standard fare in general! C
241 OA260 : Im due to go over to see my Dad in end of May!! It just changed to 10 June!!!! Thanks for the info .
242 Post contains images Baroque : Thanks for sending the Australian link - well it did have "et aussi" in the lower left! Pity it did not get the 600.
243 PanHAM : just checked the connections on Bahn.de. the shortest is still 4:06 and you have to calculate up to 4:30 hrs, changing in Saarbruecken. The through t
244 Post contains links OA260 : For those interested a English version of the whole project :: http://www.record2007.com/site/index_en.php
245 Post contains links OzGlobal : A huge market of future HSR projects are in the balance: http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/04/03/ap3577703.html Another market of interest. http://a
246 Post contains links Boeing7E7 : Both are being pursued. Maglev will be used to connect SOCAL airports and the Vegas Maglev line to compete with Flight. Rail is a state project, and
247 Baron95 : There is one major reason why rail will NOT work in the US and why it is NOT liked in the US. And it is simple. COMPETITION. If I have no infrastructu
248 OzGlobal : With the TGV Est Line, ICE's will compete with TGV, and many further steps of deregulation will open the HSR network to multiple providers over the s
249 PanHAM : Smart move. That leaves you the choice between AMTRAK and nothing on the rail side. It will definately not help to keep airfares down and it will def
250 Boeing7E7 : People don't care about price on the NE corridor, fares are twice as high as they are on the gold coast (CA) on the same stage lengths. It's all abou
251 Bond007 : Who is 'we' ? The public want fair prices and yes, choices perhaps, if it means a number of price/service options, but so does the public anywhere el
252 Post contains links Laremiller : Der Spiegel published an interesting two-part series yesterday, in English, on emerging train technologies and the future of high-speed rail: http://w
253 Baron95 : Yep. You have competition alright. You can drive your smallish car with $7/galon gas. You can take the monopoly train or you can fly. Please tell me
254 Glom : How can anyone think of travelling in anything without wings? When I save up enough money to buy something like a DA-40, I'm going to drive it (taxi i
255 Bond007 : It was?? Jimbo
256 Flighty : Rail is preferable due to carbon pollution's destruction of the world. In the proper context, air travel is too expensive compared to rail. That is, i
257 Baroque : Close but no cigar! Wiki opines "The rail transport system in Great Britain developed during the 19th century. After the grouping of 1923 under the R
258 Laremiller : Have GM, Ford and Chrysler paid for the U.S. interstate highway system yet? Have the airlines paid the full cost of aviation infrastructure?
259 Glom : I don't know about that, but here the taxes on aviation and motoring are sufficient to pay for the costs of the infrastructure as well as something l
260 Post contains links OzGlobal : Here's the coverage of the event: 574,8 Km/h World rail speed record 2007 Uploaded by V150_
261 Post contains links OzGlobal : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qdrr66ycc-E A really good angle.
262 OzGlobal : All the scoffers who question the value of the investment in this record must be unaware of the plans of China and their search for suppliers: In whic
263 Francoflier : Sorry, but this has to be the lamest piece of CR@P I've ever read on the subject. The reporter is appalled at the energy and money spent on this 'fri
264 R2rho : Oh just ignore them. Der Spiegel is known for its catastrophism, pessimism and criticism towards anything and everything, which makes them have an in
265 Post contains images Francoflier : Well I don't know about the Maglev, but Siemens' Valero seems to be doing OK as it has been sold to Russia for the future Saint-Petersburg - Moscow H
266 R2rho : We like that in Europe too. That's why we have true low-cost airlines. That's why we like to have a competitive choice of travel between air, train,
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains posted Sat Nov 22 2003 16:13:58 by Steph001
Airlines And High Speed Trains posted Mon Sep 9 2002 01:49:57 by Miller22
Global Air Traffic Up 8.4% Ytd 2004 Vs 2000 posted Sun Aug 1 2004 00:20:55 by Rogerroger
New High Speed Cruise Winglet Soon? posted Fri Mar 9 2007 17:01:36 by PC12Fan
Denver Tries Out High-Speed Snow Melters posted Thu Feb 15 2007 20:12:02 by KarlB737
Actual Air Traffic Control Transmissions.. posted Tue Feb 6 2007 06:40:31 by Jmhluv2fly
Straight Answers On Becoming An Air Traffic Contr. posted Mon Feb 5 2007 11:48:38 by TransWorldSTL
Brazil Air Traffic Chaos - What About New Year? posted Thu Dec 21 2006 21:35:14 by Famfmarques
Brazil Air Traffic Disruption posted Wed Dec 6 2006 14:17:18 by Hiflyer
Work On ORD Air-Traffic Control Tower Begins posted Fri Dec 1 2006 17:40:09 by KarlB737
Earthquake On US East Coast Stops Air Traffic posted Tue Aug 23 2011 11:03:42 by NBGSkyGod
Chinese Lanterns And Air Traffic. posted Sun Oct 3 2010 11:20:28 by Cumulus
If Air Traffic Controllers Could Speak Their Mind. posted Mon Sep 13 2010 06:05:10 by Gulfstream650
Air Traffic Control Glitch Delays European Flights posted Fri Aug 20 2010 13:27:09 by oa260