PDA

View Full Version : Time to finally create high speed trains




Fredom101
11-24-2010, 08:08 PM
All of this TSA madness is causing people to not fly and either sacrifice their plans or waste time driving.

But air travel SHOULD be outdated at this point. Bullet trains can get people place MUCH faster than planes, and much more safely. IF we had a free market, air travel would be a thing of the past and we'd be getting on trains that would take us from LA to SF in a mater of a couple of hours. They're already invented, but the government is blocking progress.

This is what really upsets me about all this. Everything the government does just impedes progress. Hopefully there is a huge agorist backlash to all this and people figure out better ways to travel and give the proverbial middle finger to the TSA AND the welfare-queen airlines. :mad:

jmdrake
11-24-2010, 08:16 PM
I'm curious. How is the government blocking progress on bullet trains? Last I heard the government was keeping Amtrack on life support and Obama was trying to get states to accept "stimulus" money for bullet trains but that's not getting rebuffed by newly elected republican governors. Anyway, trains aren't the answer to the TSA madness. They've already hinted that they'll expand their tyranny to ground based mass transit.

cswake
11-24-2010, 08:21 PM
Forget bullet trains, why do you think the TSA will stop at airplanes? The TSA is not worried about hijacking(s), because the gun and steel doors solved that. They're concerned about a random person walking into a public place and blowing people up. Any public place qualifies and "safeguarding" airplanes is just the start.

noxagol
11-24-2010, 08:23 PM
Trains with cargo space on the bottom to park your car and passenger space up top to sit in while you travel.

Not to mention, if trains got popular then they would just be at train stations too, the TSA that is.

oyarde
11-24-2010, 08:25 PM
As far as I know , feds already work the trains on the Northeast seaboard . They use Immigration though .

Fredom101
11-24-2010, 08:46 PM
I'm curious. How is the government blocking progress on bullet trains? Last I heard the government was keeping Amtrack on life support and Obama was trying to get states to accept "stimulus" money for bullet trains but that's not getting rebuffed by newly elected republican governors. Anyway, trains aren't the answer to the TSA madness. They've already hinted that they'll expand their tyranny to ground based mass transit.

By not allowing a free market they are impeding progress. Amtrak is a joke because of government control. Allowing competition in trains would give us all kinds of neat stuff that we can't imagine now, because gov't is in the way. Remember, stimulus money is the reverse of progress.

Fredom101
11-24-2010, 08:47 PM
Forget bullet trains, why do you think the TSA will stop at airplanes? The TSA is not worried about hijacking(s), because the gun and steel doors solved that. They're concerned about a random person walking into a public place and blowing people up. Any public place qualifies and "safeguarding" airplanes is just the start.

Yes I'm saying in a free market scenario. I guess I'm smoking some good stuff tonight. :D

jmdrake
11-24-2010, 08:56 PM
By not allowing a free market they are impeding progress. Amtrak is a joke because of government control. Allowing competition in trains would give us all kinds of neat stuff that we can't imagine now, because gov't is in the way. Remember, stimulus money is the reverse of progress.

Well that's one way to look at it. Another way is that the "free market" in this country doesn't want trains. The countries that have bullet trains aren't exactly "free market". But hey, lets scrap Amtrack and see what happens. In the meantime the TSA has made it clear they're going after ground mass transit anyway so the porno scan / pat down issue doesn't seem relevant.

Fredom101
11-24-2010, 09:02 PM
Well that's one way to look at it. Another way is that the "free market" in this country doesn't want trains. The countries that have bullet trains aren't exactly "free market". But hey, lets scrap Amtrack and see what happens. In the meantime the TSA has made it clear they're going after ground mass transit anyway so the porno scan / pat down issue doesn't seem relevant.

Well we don't know what the market wants because government subsidizes airlines as well as Amtrak. My point is more that we need a free market, meaning, massive progress and market-driven security.

jmdrake
11-24-2010, 09:07 PM
Well we don't know what the market wants because government subsidizes airlines as well as Amtrak. My point is more that we need a free market, meaning, massive progress and market-driven security.

I agree. I think the first step is to petition city councils to throw the TSA out of municiple airports.

Zippyjuan
11-24-2010, 09:19 PM
The cost of trains (building and operating the trains and system) is very high compared to the numbers of people who actually use them. The work best ony up to certain distances (don't have a number for that) due to how long it may take you to travel by train vs an airplane (of course it takes so long to get though the airport these days that is probably a bigger number than it used to be) and to destinations where your end is fairly close to where you want to get to (stores, businesses, homes). Spread out cities like anywhere but back east are not that attractive to train travel for that reason. Without subsidies Amtrack would have gone out of business long ago. They want to build one on the West Coast.

If you wanted a private company to build one on their own dime it would basically be impossible without government help- and not just for the finances. It would be impossible to gain property rights to enough continuous land to be able to construct the track alone.

oyarde
11-24-2010, 09:24 PM
The cost of trains (building and operating the trains and system) is very high compared to the numbers of people who actually use them. The work best ony up to certain distances (don't have a number for that) due to how long it may take you to travel by train vs an airplane (of course it takes so long to get though the airport these days that is probably a bigger number than it used to be) and to destinations where your end is fairly close to where you want to get to (stores, businesses, homes). Spread out cities like anywhere but back east are not that attractive to train travel for that reason. Without subsidies Amtrack would have gone out of business long ago.

I agree , that overhead would be huge . Not cost beneficial in all areas .

SWATH
11-24-2010, 09:25 PM
What makes you think the TSA will not treat trains the same as planes?

noxagol
11-24-2010, 09:50 PM
What makes you think the TSA will not treat trains the same as planes?

Well, you can't fly a train into a building. Well, not very easily...

SWATH
11-24-2010, 09:53 PM
Well, you can't fly a train into a building. Well, not very easily...

Building are not their targets, people are, and you can fit alot of people on a large train. But that is beside the point the TSA would love to get their hands in the pants of train travelers as well.

Carson
11-24-2010, 10:36 PM
I've thought about taking the train for years.

Several times I have researched routes, times and prices.

My conclusion is there needs to be some sort of travel agency that can take the information like a Point A and connect it with a Point B.

The Amtrak thing-a-ma-jigger is useless. By the time you've clicked around, you find your going to have to find a way to get to a point that leaves nearest where you want to leave from and the station will be hundreds of miles from you. Then you've got to do the same thing at your destination. And I'm talking leaving major cities not some out of the way places.

Here the link if you want to give it a shot. If you got some time on your hands try from Fremont, California to San Diego, California.

http://www.amtrak.com/servlet/ContentServer?c=Page&pagename=am%2FPage%2FHomePage&p=1237405732502&cid=1237405732502

noxagol
11-24-2010, 10:39 PM
Yes, the whole amtrak system is a nightmare to navigate if you wish to utilize it to get from a to b and it typically takes twice as long as it would to drive.

It is a 17-18 hour ride from Carbondale, IL to New Orleans. From here, you also have a 2.5 hour car ride to get to Carbondale from the St. Louis area. St. Louis has station, but it is only for east to west I believe, but I could be wrong.

Driving takes about 10-12 hours to get there.

mediahasyou
11-24-2010, 11:25 PM
The 747 cruising speed is around 550mph. (max speed 594mph) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_747

The world's fastest train's maximum speed is 350mph. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_Railways_CRH2

When compared to planes, trains are still the caboose in terms of speed.

Flirple
11-25-2010, 02:26 AM
YouTube - Obama Replaces Costly High-Speed Rail Plan With High-Speed Bus Plan (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNixDlRoMvA)

GreenLP
11-25-2010, 03:10 AM
The world's fastest train's maximum speed is 350mph.
I don't think I'd want to be traveling that fast on the ground!

tangent4ronpaul
11-25-2010, 03:40 AM
I didn't know they had scrapped their plans for high speed rail. The proposal was obscenely expensive, though and would require taking a ton of land.

TSA is planning to put those same scanners/procedures in train stations.

A big problem with trains is the impossibility of protecting all that rail. With an aircraft, you need to get a bomb on the plane, with a train you only need to take out a section of rail equal to the wheel base of the loco to guarantee a derailment. Doing in a bridge or tunnel makes repairs a nightmare, especially if it's in a remote location. Traditionally in UW, repair crews are ambushed, same principle as AQ setting off a car bomb and waiting for rescue workers to arrive before setting off another. With aircraft, this isn't a factor. Our electric grid and POL/NG pipeline system has the same problem.

-t

moostraks
11-25-2010, 06:52 AM
TSA's Mass Transit link:

http://www.tsa.gov/what_we_do/tsnm/mass_transit/index.shtm

"Mass Transit is "...transportation by a conveyance that provides regular and continuing general or special transportation to the public, but does not include school bus, charter, or sightseeing transportation." (U.S. Code Title 49, Subtitle III, Chapter 53 §5302)

Mass transportation modes include:

* Inter-city buses
* Trolleybuses
* Subway & commuter rail
* Demand response services
* Heavy and light rail
* Automated guideway transit
* Cable cars
* Monorails
...TSA seeks to advance mass transit and passenger rail security through a comprehensive strategic approach that enhances capabilities to detect, deter, and prevent terrorist attacks and respond to and recover from attacks and security incidents, should they occur. TSA's strategic priorities for mass transit and passenger rail security are:

* Focus efforts to mitigate high consequence risk to transit assets and systems, particularly underwater and underground infrastructure;

* Expand employment of random, unpredictable deterrence; and

* Build security force multipliers with training, drills and exercises, and public awareness"

They will expand the invasive procedures. They had to start somewhere and airlines gave them a group of business travelers as well as middle class family travelers. Target them to accept these invasive measures based upon previous necessity. Whether for the common good or because complaining makes one a domestic extremist one portion of the herd complying then sets precedence for the rest of the herd to be forced into compliance...