baron-pierreIV 1691 Report post Posted January 7, 2007 Luckily, there have been no terrorist incidents on any of these high-speed lines. Just wait for the first one and that'll kill the whole idea. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rei 9 Report post Posted January 7, 2007 Luckily, there have been no terrorist incidents on any of these high-speed lines. Just wait for the first one and that'll kill the whole idea. you wish? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lee 126 Report post Posted January 8, 2007 I travel regularly on the new Virgin tilting trains called Pendolino in the UK. I must admit that I am very happy with the service after years of under-investment in rail in the UK. Although the fastest trains in the UK are still the Eurostar trains with a speed of 186mph. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rei 9 Report post Posted January 8, 2007 I travel regularly on the new Virgin tilting trains called Pendolino in the UK.. Pendolino is a trade mark which identify a specific category of high-speed trains used all over Europe, projected for the first time by Fiat in the '70s Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lee 126 Report post Posted January 8, 2007 Pendolino is a trade mark which identify a specific category of high-speed trains used all over Europe, projected for the first time by Fiat in the '70s Yes, I only became aware of that recently. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Olympic USA 4 Report post Posted January 9, 2007 Actually alot of people don't know this but there are several studies underway to offer more high speed rail in the United States.......some already mentioned earlier such as the California plan. There are also plans in the midwest, southeast, Florida, and Texas. In fact, I was reading where Texas was actually very close to creating a high speed rail triangle to connect Houston, Dallas, San Antonio, and Austin but it ultimately died after Southwest bitched and moaned. Here are a few links and a map showing proposed high speed railways here in the USA (notice that a few go into Canada as well....in particular Montreal and Vancouver). Answers.com high speed rail in the USA Southeast High Speed Rail Corridor. this is a proposed rail corridor that would run from Wasington, DC to Charlotte, NC initially and further expand into Atlanta, parts of South Carolina, Alabama, and Florida. California high speed rail authority Picture from the USDOT about proposed high speed rail corridors in the USA: Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
baron-pierreIV 1691 Report post Posted January 9, 2007 you wish? Don't put words in my mouth, Rei. All I said was that I'm just glad that those terrorist-murderers think no farther than killing people in train stations -- and not yet on the actual tracks. Can you imagine patrolling the tracks 24/7? That would make riding the bullet trains 30x even more expensive than riding the now moth-balled supersonic Concorde jets!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
baron-pierreIV 1691 Report post Posted January 9, 2007 Actually alot of people don't know this but there are several studies underway to offer more high speed rail in the United States.......some already mentioned earlier such as the California plan. There are also plans in the midwest, southeast, Florida, and Texas. In fact, I was reading where Texas was actually very close to creating a high speed rail triangle to connect Houston, Dallas, San Antonio, and Austin but it ultimately died after Southwest bitched and moaned. Here are a few links and a map showing proposed high speed railways here in the USA (notice that a few go into Canada as well....in particular Montreal and Vancouver). Answers.com high speed rail in the USA Southeast High Speed Rail Corridor. this is a proposed rail corridor that would run from Wasington, DC to Charlotte, NC initially and further expand into Atlanta, parts of South Carolina, Alabama, and Florida. California high speed rail authority Picture from the USDOT about proposed high speed rail corridors in the USA: Those plans have been around for years. I think with the advent of terrorism (whether muslim extremists, local loonies like Tim McVay; or the eco-terrorists), the idea just doesn't seem too feasible these days. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rei 9 Report post Posted January 9, 2007 Don't put words in my mouth, Rei. All I said was that I'm just glad that those terrorist-murderers think no farther than killing people in train stations -- and not yet on the actual tracks. Can you imagine patrolling the tracks 24/7? That would make riding the bullet trains 30x even more expensive than riding the now moth-balled supersonic Concorde jets!! well I don't understand what the hell your previous post had to do with the main topic.. why did you introduced the terrorist issue suddenly? I find it inappropriate. mah.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
baron-pierreIV 1691 Report post Posted January 9, 2007 well I don't understand what the hell your previous post had to do with the main topic.. why did you introduced the terrorist issue suddenly? I find it inappropriate.mah.. Where DOES it say that you can't bring in other angles of the topic? What is WRONG with discussing it? Do you just get on a plane these days WITHOUT thinking, okay, this is NOT the way it used to be? Certainly the ease of travel has changed because of the harsh realities of life. If these thoughts DON'T occur to you, then you must be an ostrich with your head in the sand or some other hole!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rei 9 Report post Posted January 9, 2007 you said: "Luckily, there have been no terrorist incidents on any of these high-speed lines. Just wait for the first one and that'll kill the whole idea" by these words you seemed to wish the hypothesis.. cinical as usual! well that's your part here no? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Moose 5 Report post Posted January 9, 2007 Those plans have been around for years. I think with the advent of terrorism (whether muslim extremists, local loonies like Tim McVay; or the eco-terrorists), the idea just doesn't seem too feasible these days. Trains have been bombed, remember? Still they have to bomb by a factor of several thousands more to make train travel as dangerous as road travel. Investing in train service in and between US cities would certainly save more US lives per dollar than the so called war against terror... Now back to the issue: In sparsely populated Norway there has been preciously little investment in high speed trains, and we only have one line, the airport express trains that takes you from Oslo airport to downtown in 19 minutes/210 km/h: The building of the line was marred with large budget overruns. Still, even if Norway is the most sparsely populated country in Europe with rugged topography, the long distance mobility is the highest in Europe. Almost all the traffic between the major cities goes by air, and the air traffic numbers between Oslo and the three larges cities are all in the millions, and the routes between Oslo and Bergen, Trondheim and Stavanger are actually among the most trafficated in Europe. The socialist government of Norway with its green profile has thus started to investigate the possibility of building a high speed train network betwen Oslo and the larger regional cities in Norway (Trondheim/Bergen/Stavanger) and Gothenburg in Sweden to reduce the air traffic. The travel distance would in all cases be roughly 500 km which could take 2 1/2 hours downtown-downtown, and if fares are not much higher than air-fares this would effectively kill most of the air traffic. A prelimnary study conducted by a German firm (VWI) concluded that Oslo-Trondheim would be most feasible due to lower construction costs....but I must say I would be very suprised if Norwegian politicians are able to pull off this in the short term. Their track record when it comes to infrastructure is not very impressive when thinking about the resources of this country. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Moose 5 Report post Posted January 9, 2007 Where DOES it say that you can't bring in other angles of the topic? What is WRONG with discussing it? Do you just get on a plane these days WITHOUT thinking, okay, this is NOT the way it used to be? Certainly the ease of travel has changed because of the harsh realities of life. If these thoughts DON'T occur to you, then you must be an ostrich with your head in the sand or some other hole!! What I think about terrorism paranoia in air travel is that every time I have to take off my boots in the securite check Osama won another victory.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
baron-pierreIV 1691 Report post Posted January 9, 2007 What I think about terrorism paranoia in air travel is that every time I have to take off my boots in the securite check Osama won another victory.... In that he has; but that is a small price. And besides, what victory will that be in the history books? THe man who made air travel a little more bothersome? I certainly wouldn't want that on my epitaph. Do as I do. Go directly to the airport in your jamies, bath robe and slippers. And then just change after you go thru the detectors so you don't have to do it twice. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Moose 5 Report post Posted January 9, 2007 (edited) I've never heard of Brio, though I have at various times had train sets and done layouts with landscapes etc. I've tended to mainly use German kits _ Fleishmann and Marklin. Brio is sold in Sydney, at least it used to be when I lived there Brio is wooden (and Swedish) and can be used for small kids, unlike Marklin etc. Edited January 9, 2007 by The Moose Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
baron-pierreIV 1691 Report post Posted January 9, 2007 you said:"Luckily, there have been no terrorist incidents on any of these high-speed lines. Just wait for the first one and that'll kill the whole idea" by these words you seemed to wish the hypothesis.. cinical as usual! well that's your part here no? Kinda stupid thinking. So all topics here have to rosy and pollyanna-ish and unrealistic? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Moose 5 Report post Posted January 9, 2007 In that he has; but that is a small price. And besides, what victory will that be in the history books? THe man who made air travel a little more bothersome? I certainly wouldn't want that on my epitaph. Do as I do. Go directly to the airport in your jamies, bath robe and slippers. And then just change after you go thru the detectors so you don't have to do it twice. Ever tried bath robe in Norwegian winter? The problem is, I never check in but run straight to gate with only carry on luggage, and usually have so little time that changing to slippers or whatever on my way from the train to the security check is out of question. I will remember to bring slippers on my next holiday, however Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hakeem 0 Report post Posted January 10, 2007 Okay... my favourite thing on this whole board: that communist party pic you have. That's really a communist party! I really don't think Mao would have been much fun at a party. Just a thought... ahhh finally, i was getting sick of all those fucking airbus/boeing arguments. i have been fond of trains in general since a very young boy, and have an extensive Brio train set (if anyone knows about it. i would think so, it seems pretty international). I'm always disappointed and distressed when polititions in BC come up with billions upon billions of dollars to fund new highway projects AND privitize and sell off rail assets. the expensive sea to sky, to whistler, would have been quite suited for a TGV style train.now, on to the trains in question. i have never ridden a high speed train. which is sad. i have always wanted to. i'm impressed with the technology and the willingness to put them in place. there are significant advantages over planes, especially for moderate distances (ie. 500 km). the extra time for security and the fact that airports are more often then not located far outside the city centre make trains very competitive. take for example, going from Kelowna (where i live) to vancouver. it is aproximately 420 km from YKL to YVR, and the flying time is approximately 45 minutes. driving distances are similar, about 450km, and almost the entirety is interstate quality freeway, and, when not blocked with snow, takes approximately 4.5 hours to drive to vancouver. Train route would be significantly longer as there are mountains directly in the way that would be difficult for a train to tackle. the distance would be closer to 550km. total time - downtown to downtown (estimate) air: 45 minute flight + 2 hour check in +15min to YLW + 20 minute bags, etc. at YVR + 35+ minutes from YVR to downtown vancouver total time: 3h50m+ driving: 4.5h (up to 5.5h with rush hour traffic) train: 20 minute check in + 2h train ride + 20 minute out total time: 2h 40 minutes. ~~~~~~~ anyways, now that i have bored you with fake numbers... i don't really know which is my favourite train, though the ICE trains look the most modern. TGV trains look rather... dated. ICE train Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hakeem 0 Report post Posted January 10, 2007 Kinda stupid thinking. So all topics here have to rosy and pollyanna-ish and unrealistic? Baron: Maybe you aren't happy unless there's a chorus line...? Or some can-can girls? Or some kind of *fabulous" over-blown number? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
baron-pierreIV 1691 Report post Posted January 10, 2007 Baron:Maybe you aren't happy unless there's a chorus line...? Or some can-can girls? Or some kind of *fabulous" over-blown number? Totally incomprehensible. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rei 9 Report post Posted January 10, 2007 Kinda stupid thinking. So all topics here have to rosy and pollyanna-ish and unrealistic? terrorist! terrorist! terrorist! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
baron-pierreIV 1691 Report post Posted January 10, 2007 (edited) terrorist! terrorist! terrorist! How about a 4th time? You know, Rei, u're even dumber and more naive than that Hakeem. Just because one discusses it and mentions it, doesn't make one what he or she is talking about. Just because one discusses Mussolini or that Pluto isn't a star, makes you a fascist or whatever. ANd just because you don't discuss it -- doesn't make it go away. Too bad if you don't like it mentioned. This is a FREE and open FORUM; for an OPEN exchange of ideas. If that concept is NEW to you, then u're really quite naive. Or have I uncovered your 'terrorist' plans, maybe? Edited January 10, 2007 by baron-pierreIV Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rei 9 Report post Posted January 10, 2007 Just because one discusses it and mentions it, doesn't make one what he or she is talking about. the problem was how did you say it.. you know.. the tone.. naive? ya may be at least I'll live better and longer than somebody else here Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Moose 5 Report post Posted January 10, 2007 (edited) I don't understand why you guys bother to get so worked up and personal. The Baron have proposed two arguments against high speed trains in the US, here are my answers: Baron argument #1: The US East coast is too crowded for high speed trains, because it has to stop all the time. Answer: One of the most important aspects with high speed trains are the following: 1. They should follow dedicated lines, and hence do not have to stop for other traffic 2. In order to compete with air travel, they should not stop at any small town in between, but adhere to point to point travel as much as possible. Other trains take care of local traffic. Hence, the trains should probably not stop at all between for instance Boston and Manhattan. The travel would be both faster, more hassle free and comfy than air plane. 3. The higher the population, the more feasible high speed trains become. If tiny Norway (4M spread out across a large area) considers building a high speed train network, the US East coast should have had one decades ago. Baron argument #2: Luckily, there have been no terrorist incidents on any of these high-speed lines. Just wait for the first one and that'll kill the whole idea. Answer: In Europe, high speed trains have derailed and crashed. Subways, trains and trainstations have been bombed. In Japan, subways have been gassed. Still, both in Europe and Japan the train traffic continue increase at a rapid pace. Why? Because most people are rational beings. They see that the risk of getting caught in some terrorist act is tiny, especially when comparing with road traffic. Only in the US, more that 40 000 people die on the road EACH year. That is 15x9/11s! If US politicians and media started to consentrate on the real problems of your country (crime, social problems, CO2 emissions, and road deaths) instead of looking for mad men at every corner, the world in general and US in particular would be a much better place. And since this is an olympic site: Trains are one of a number of new ways we have to organize our life to save the precious WOGs! Edited January 10, 2007 by The Moose Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
baron-pierreIV 1691 Report post Posted January 10, 2007 (edited) the problem was how did you say it.. you know.. the tone..naive? ya may be at least I'll live better and longer than somebody else here Tone? You cannot judge a comment's tone correctly on the internet. This link is epecially for you, Rei: An Operetta on Terrorist Events and the like... Edited January 10, 2007 by baron-pierreIV Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
