Rj111 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (10 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 1113 times:
Time to dream a little.
Imagine a continuous MAGLEV line was built between SIN and LON (via channel tunnel).
The MAGLEV train (top speed 300MPH) would have a cabin with a bed around the same size as a small hotel room, with various film channels and entertainment, a computer port and internet facilities, all for roughly the same price as a BA first class ticket. Customs would take place on the train.
On a business/work related trip between the following city centre pairs, would you rather travel on the plane or the MAGLEV?
Maglev time: 6 hours
Flight time: 3:45 hours
Maglev time: 14 hours
Flight time: 8:35 hours
Maglev time: 25 hours
Flight time: 13:35 hours
Remember to consider time for check-in ect and travel to the city centre.
Oh, and imagine you have no passion for flying on planes.
PS, no the route would not go via Iraq or Afghanistan.
AzoresLover From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 771 posts, RR: 6
Reply 1, posted (10 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 1065 times:
I'm not one who likes to work on planes when traveling...I look at it as a break from work, worries, etc. I just like to enjoy the trip and staying out of touch. I love trains, so of course I would love riding a Maglev for trips. But especially because the travel time difference isn't all that great considering all factors, you'd arrive fresh, having time to relax, sleep in a bed, enjoy meals as in a restaurant,etc. It'd be like a mini-vacation in the middle of work, in my mind.
Those who want to do something will find a way; those who don't will find an excuse.
SW733 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6462 posts, RR: 8
Reply 2, posted (10 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 1057 times:
I DO have a passion for flying, and i'd still choose the train. At least you get some scenery on top of all the same stuff as the airplane. Yes, I am sure I will get kicked off this website for this opinion, but oh well
OB1504 From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 3638 posts, RR: 6
Reply 3, posted (10 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 1050 times:
MAGLEV for me.
The message you were about to post is too short and probably not of any higher value to the topic at hand. You should think long and hard before posting a message in this forum and make it detailed and a valuable addition to the topic discussed.
Avoid posting "Me Too" messages. These are messages that are posted by people who agree to a point being discussed and post a one liner, "me too!", "Good post Jim!", "I disagree" or similar message. This takes up time as readers must sort through these messages which have no real value to the group at large. Any message containing nothing more than a line or two of text is probably not worth posting.
If you have an opinion on a topic, you should in detail express why you have the opinion and what made you come to that conclusion.
Your post should be relevant to the topic discussed.
Matt D From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 9502 posts, RR: 43
Reply 7, posted (10 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 986 times:
Lots of ideas but no susbtance.
The idea of high speed rail (bullet train) and maglev has been getting pitched to us here in SoCal for at least 20 years.
Nothing has happened. Sure, we have Metrolink and the Metro Rail trolley cars, but that's about it. And both are very limited service.
And most likely,maglev/bullet will never happen. The cost and politics of getting done have essentially killed the projects before they've even begun.
As an example, the current Maglev proposal calls for a maglev train to run between LA and Las Vegas via Riverside and San Bernardino, basically running on the ROW that BNSF now runs all of its freight trains on (and goes right past my house.....along with Amtrak and Metrolink).
Even assuming that the maglev does get built, where are all of those freight trains trains going to run?
There aren't any more existing lines to run on.
What are we going to do? Take those couple of thousand intermodal containers and put them on trucks and run them on the already hopelessly overcrowded freeways? It's a circular "solution" that in the end, won't accomplish anything. It's just trading one problem for another.
Just to give you an example of our failure to lead and plan in terms of rail, look at the Metro Gold Line.
It was originally a Santa Fe line that they and Amtrak ran on between San Bernardino and LA via Pomona, Arcadia, and Pasadena.
All service on that line ended around 1994 in anticipation of building a "light rail" service (basically a bus on wheels or a trolley car). The track west of Arcadia was torn up and sat vacant for nearly a decade before the Gold Line was built.
And now, it runs from Downtown LA to Pasadena. It basically goes nowhere, ending in the middle of the 210 freeway at Rosemead Blvd. The old right of way still exists in the middle of the freeway. The old bridge where the line crossed over the 210 going into Arcadia was torn out. The original line now stops in Arcadia at Santa Anita Blvd, and runs east all the way to San Bernardino.
No trains run on it-that I'm aware of.
Now the MTA is "hoping" to build phase II of the Gold line on this remaining track, which they hope to have in service by 2012 at the earliest.
Now instead of going through all of that trouble and expense, when Santa Fe decided to stop running its trains, they could've sold (or leased) the track to Metrolink, which could've run its standard sized locomotives and coaches that whole way the very next day, where it would be running today.
The tracks, railroad crossings, the safety signals, etc already existed.
Not only would it have cost a minute fraction of what the Gold Line will ultimately cost, but we would've gotten better service and most important, not had to go 18 years (1994-2012) without commuter rail service.
Leskova From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 6075 posts, RR: 68
Reply 8, posted (10 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 977 times:
Well, I'd probably reserve my final decision until after using the maglev...
But after using the real and existing high-speed train link from Frankfurt to Düsseldorf on Friday (with the ICE train riding along at 300km/h parallel to the autobahn - quite fun to watch Mercedes, Audis, BMWs and quite a few Porsches being overtaken by a train) - it took 1 hour 37 minutes from city center to city center - no way would I get there anywhere near as fast by flying...
So I guess that for shorter distances, I'll usually use the train - but for longer distances... I guess I'll stick to flying there...