Originally Posted By Mr X ***There's a series of bells that start ringing before the gates go down, and I'm sure someone who is blind would be familiar with what they mean. There are also separate gates that go accross sidewalks at newer grade crossings, and I'm sure that ones with trains going that fast would need to be retrofitted to have them. There's no way to make 100% safe, but there are enough different means of communicating the danger, so I think they do a pretty good job with it*** Or, you could simply have decent infrastructure to begin with (but better late than never), which treats high speed lines with the consideration they need and has NO crossings nor track-accessible platforms etc... Jeez, you guys think putting a school crosswalk across a runway is acceptable too!?
Originally Posted By Mr X ***"Watching those American videos, you can clearly see whata craptastic infrastructure situation is going on" The US really has a 3rd world look and feel, doesn't it?*** Well, I dunno about "third world", but it certainly looks hardly different from when I was growing up in the 70's (so yes, in that sense very third world since that stuff is getting dilapidated). Which makes sense, since it was Reagan who essentially put a halt on progress in America by gutting all the infrastructure creation and repair programs.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan I'm starting to think that teleportation may never happen here if we can't even agree on high speed trains.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper fku...not sure what to tell you...but I've got pictures of us boarding Eurostar trains and they is a Eurostar Italia. They aren't super high speed trains...but they are definitely ES.
Originally Posted By Manfried Here's the approach to build your precious high speed trains. Start a non-profit. Collect donations to design, build and operate it. All those in favor of one can start donating money towards it. The only rule, no taxes to help out, including its operation for life. Now a non-profit does get some government subsidies as it does not pay taxes, so we the taxpayers will help out, in a way.
Originally Posted By plpeters70 <<The only rule, no taxes to help out, including its operation for life.>> I'm curious, are you against your tax dollars being used to build/repair roads? How about building airports? If you're ok with your money going there, why not rail service?
Originally Posted By fkurucz "fku...not sure what to tell you...but I've got pictures of us boarding Eurostar trains and they is a Eurostar Italia. They aren't super high speed trains...but they are definitely ES." Actually, not related to the Eurostar network. Its a entirely different system. They just use the name. <a href="http://www.eurostar.com/dynamic/index.jsp" target="_blank">http://www.eurostar.com/dynami...ndex.jsp</a> Notice Eurostar Italia is not mentioned on that website. Also from wikipedia's "Eurostar Italia" entry: "The name Eurostar is used under license from Iveco, which owns the trademark and used the name for one of their trucks. Despite the identical name, there is no relation between this service and the Eurostar railway service that runs through the Channel Tunnel."
Originally Posted By SpokkerJones "Still, it seems rather bizarre to me that someone like Spokker thinks it's fine and dandy for safety to be thrown out the window" To me, basing a society around the automobile is throwing safety out of the window. Safety costs money and money is not infinite. No matter what mode of transportation you are using, there is some risk. That being said, I would rather cross the railroad tracks than cross an intersection.
Originally Posted By SpokkerJones I'm not opposed to building automatic gates on train platforms, but it's a large cost for only marginal safety benefits. Today, few people are accidentally falling off platforms. There have been high-profile but rare incidents caught on video. Those who wish to do themselves in will jump over the barriers.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo Lol 2oony. Thanks for that. Manfried, what is your problem with using tax dollars to do amazing things. That is partially what they are there for. And if America is going to prosper, then America needs to work together. I was shocked by the poor state of California last time I want back. The shanty cardboard box town under the freeways of San Francisco was particularly shocking. It is one of the many reasons I chose to stay in Europe. Sadly in the UK, the right wing selfish whack jobs gained power last year and have been ruining the place ever since.
Originally Posted By TP2000 I like my car. It's fun. And fast. I like trains too. But back to the 3.3 Million people who would ride the train in its first year the Florida High Speed Rail Authority was stating with a straight face. How hilarious is that?! There are some corridors outside of the Northeast where high speed rail could work. Maybe Seattle-Portland, LA-San Diego, or a couple routes out of Chicago. But if the government boosters who are trying to get these systems off the ground are going to use ridiculously trumped up figures for these things, then they do no service to themselves. Using more realistic figures and being honest about it seems to be a better way to get things done. An instant market of 3.3 Million people taking the train from Tampa to Orlando in 2015? I can now see why Governor Scott is using precious tax dollars to dredge Miami harbor for bigger container ships instead.
Originally Posted By plpeters70 <<To me, basing a society around the automobile is throwing safety out of the window. >> I don't think people realize just how destructive the automobile actually has been to our society. While it's true that it's made America what it is today, we've basically sacrified our future for the convience of being able to drive anywhere, anytime. Because of the car, we've spread out into suburb after suburb - well beyond what our environment can really maintain. I watched it happen in Florida - every year my hometown would build farther and farther from the original city center - malls, roads, subdivisions with McMansions - all only linked by car with no mass transit option. Now we're stuck with it, and there's almost no way we could easily link up all those homes with mass transit - it would require a massive re-build. And not only that, but we're now learning that burning all those fossil fuels is compromising our atmosphere, and heating up the entire planet. If you think things are bad now in the 3rd World, just wait until the food riots start. (And it's not just going to be in the 3rd World.) On top of the environmental damage, we've also been basically funding terrorists and dictators for 40 years so that we can keep our SUVs. Does anyone really think that the Middle East would be as important, and violent, as it is if it wasn't for the oil dollars all of the Western World has poured in. And yet, I still here people complaing about the government trying to do SOMETHING to get us off our addiction to oil and cars, and offer some other options. Do I think the Orlando-Tampa train is enough - heck no, but at least it's a start. It's going to take BILLIONS, if not TRILLIONS, of dollars to make the transition from oil and cars, but if we don't do it, the costs to our future will be much, much higher.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper If it weren't for the automobile I might still be a virgin. So, let's give the car some credit. The train wouldn't have helped me there. Well, maybe it would have.
Originally Posted By TP2000 plpeters70, cheer up and head down to your friendly Chevrolet dealer. He'll sell you an electric Volt sedan today if you want it. The Nissan dealer across the street will sell you an electric Leaf station wagon too. If you live here in SoCal, your friendly Honda dealer can get you in a hydrogen powered Clarity sedan even. While nearly every other automaker has at least one or two high-mileage hybrids to sell you. We are stuck with the car-based suburbs and towns that were created in the last 100 years. But the cars won't burn gasoline forever, as all the new technology already available shows. And all those people moved out to the suburbs because they wanted to, and they enjoy the lifestyle it provides, so most of them will probably happily live in the suburbs forever. (Although some cities do have hip new urban condo neighborhoods for singles and empty-nesters, which has nicely invigorated some rather dreary, dying 20th century urban cores in the last 20 years). In short, cheer up, it ain't that bad, and the dire predictions never seem to pan out quite as well as the book authors and movie producers predict. If that were the case, we would have been eating Soylent Green and sleeping in stairwells by now. SOYLENT GREEN IS PEOPLE!!!
Originally Posted By Manfried I think those who use the airports should pay for it. Roads are paid for through gas taxes and other taxes.
Originally Posted By Manfried "Manfried, what is your problem with using tax dollars to do amazing things. That is partially what they are there for. And if America is going to prosper, then America needs to work together." Because we are broke right now. There is no money to invest right now. But by all means, if you want to put money towards it, go ahead with your own. Just not mine.
Originally Posted By fkurucz "Because we are broke right now. There is no money to invest right now." Unless it involves spending hundreds of billions financing wars of agression. When it comes to that deficits are not a problem.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan Exactly, fkurucz. There's a magical bottomless money pool for that. Teachers and the rest of us can suck it up but any suggestion that we stop spending billions on useless wars is un-American.
Originally Posted By Manfried On the wars, I agree. Let's stop fighting them and bring our soldiers home.
