Traveling

Jun 11, 2007 15:56

I think I'm much like most folks in that I "know", from my perch atop the barstool, what's best for my city/country/world/whaddevah, and I do pontificate about it in this journal quite a bit to you, my long-suffering captive audience. I think I'm unlike most in at least two respects: first, I don't necessarily happen to be drunk when I do so - ( Read more... )

airplanes, trains, philosophical rant

Leave a comment

Comments 10

little_carrot June 11 2007, 21:15:32 UTC
I'm a train guy anyway, so it goes more or less without saying that I agree with your proposal, and look forward to reading your newsletters.

In terms of trucks and trains, there is a proposal/desire/pipe-dream to see a European style trucks-on-trains system on the 81.

Reply


jcsbimp June 11 2007, 21:16:55 UTC
and second, I do try to actually determine whether or not these are workable solutions I'm spouting.

You.walk.the.walk,man...and.I.for.one.greatly.admire.you.for.that.

Today.was.one.of.those.oppressive.days.at.Azkaban.where.I.was.talking
with.others.who.want.to.go.from.stodgy.and.hierarchical^rewards^based
to.linear.and.communicative,but.cannot.get.active.buyin.from.the
leadership.there.because.there.is.too.much.at.risk.for.the.indi^
vidual.career.climber.and.the.person.who.hoards.rather.than.shares.
This.was.one.of.our.most.outspoken.champions.and.she.was.at.her
wits.end.about.it.

Sometimes.it.is.all.we.can.do.to.stand.up.straight...but.some.of
us.actually.MOVE.FORWARD...Right.on,man.

Reply


kouaidou June 11 2007, 21:18:55 UTC
I absolutely adore the Japanese train system, and I would love it if we could get an incorporated train system like that in the US, but I guess the obvious big difference in our situation is simply the US being that much bigger. I can't speak for France, but Japan's train system has the advantage that the country itself is basically a thin line of easily connected cities. The area that the shinkansen covers runs about 1500 miles, covering roughly the range (and longitude) of Boston to Atlanta with a few minor branch-outs to reach the western coast. Even then, that's only about half the mileage even from DC to Denver, and it doesn't take into account all the branching out you'd have to do to reach many of the other major cities in the US ( ... )

Reply


debboamerik June 11 2007, 21:24:09 UTC
One of the big reasons we don't have more high-speed rail is that our terrain is incredibly varied. Another is that the distances involved are in fact more vast than in other countries with these systems. Hence our one high-speed line, which runs through several densely-populated metro areas along some of the less varied terrain in the nation.

Also, you cannot use high-speed lines for freight. That has been proven to degrade track at a tremendous rate and cause derailments. One of Amtrak's biggest safety issues is that it runs on the same lines used for freight. The problem is exacerbated with the special kind of track you need for high-speed rail, as the Germans unhappily were forced to learn.

There are, in fact, practicalities involved.

Reply

scooterbird June 12 2007, 04:30:56 UTC
Good points, and of course I never said there weren't such practicalities which got in the way.

Most of the proposals I've heard of for high-speed rail in the U.S. are for the very northeast corridor that gets all the traffic. (It really isn't up to standards of other countries; even the MARC has only one fully electric route.) It does seem, however, that improving the one line that's already doing well rather than improving other lines around the country is...counter-intuitive.

Reply


simonator June 11 2007, 23:07:56 UTC
Well one of the difficulties is simply that the rails are full up with freight. I'm under the impression that in Europe a larger percentage of freight is moved by truck rather than by rail. Long distances in the U.S. make passenger rail less competetive versus air, they make rail MORE competetive versus trucks. I would guess that most imports that are shipped more than, say 1200 miles (oops, say 2Mm) from the port of embarcation are on railroads for part of the journey. And heavy freight IS inconsistant with high speed passenger use. You can't easily mix high and low speed on the same track, and the freights wear down the roadbed to an extant that is inconsistant with high speed operation ( ... )

Reply

starfyrone June 12 2007, 04:17:52 UTC
A few months ago I was reading about ocean shipping, according to the article I was reading shipments arrive from asia on the west coast, and sit in harbour or warehouse for months, because the overland frieght transportation network is saturated. The ships are big enough that the can't use the canal, and it is currently moreeconomical to let non-perisables wait however long than take the ship round the horn. I was curious about the opposite route, from east to west coast ( are the trains and trucks deadheading?) but the article didn't mention that.

Reply

scooterbird June 12 2007, 04:32:51 UTC
And the nation is losing truckers, at least the independent ones, due to high gas prices. I would suspect the large trucking companies are feeling the pinch as well.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up