The Off Topic Topic

[alfred russel]

That's primarily because our rail system uses decades old trains with decades even older track.  A decent high speed rail network would make all the difference.

I don't agree.

It is 245 miles between Atlanta and Charlotte.

That is roughly the same distance from Munich to Frankfurt. These are your options:
a) Direct flight, 1 hour 5 minutes, $225 (per kayak, in mid/late july)
b) Drive, 3h 21min per google maps (without traffic, 4h with traffic)
c) Train, 3h 21 min, $133

So in this case, a train would save you money versus airfare, but not driving. In Europe you get a benefit in that trains leave from the city center and arrive in the city center, where the people are and want to be. So going to the airport and arriving at the airport also has the added hastle and cost of travel to and from those locations. That often tips the scale in favor of train travel. In the US, in general, there aren't true city centers, and not much in the way of public transport should you find yourself in one.

[Ed Anger]

Hmmm, be able to hop into my car and drive where and when I want to or be stuck with a train schedule and then either having to get a taxi or ride public transportation and get a disease from the poors at the destination.

Hard choice for me there.

[alfred russel]

Rails primary importance IMO is in local transport, not so much cross country stuff.
If a town has decent rail links then it opens up employment opportunities to everyone there and means they don't have to have a car to have a life.
Future development IMO will/should follow early 20th century lines of railway stations at the centre and houses being built around them.

As to hsr being useless in the US because of the need to have a car at the destination- this is a problem that needs to be fixed. However, Japan too is a very car centric country. Yet high speed rail works very well here.

Japan also has 120m people and is smaller than Montana. You can't compare Japan to the US.

I'm all for developing intra city rail in US cities. I'm also in a distinct minority on this (at least here) and it isn't going to happen here anytime soon. Until we get halfway decent intra city public transport, I don't see intercity rail ever working.

[Admiral Yi]

Heard on NPR that a state court in California ruled that teacher tenure is unconstitutional.

[sbr]

Heard on NPR that a state court in California ruled that teacher tenure is unconstitutional.

There was a thread on that on EUOT yesterday.  It seemed that it was the particular way the Cali law worked that they didn't like, not tenure in general but I didn't read much of it.

[Tonitrus]

That's primarily because our rail system uses decades old trains with decades even older track.  A decent high speed rail network would make all the difference.

I don't agree.

It is 245 miles between Atlanta and Charlotte.

That is roughly the same distance from Munich to Frankfurt. These are your options:
a) Direct flight, 1 hour 5 minutes, $225 (per kayak, in mid/late july)
b) Drive, 3h 21min per google maps (without traffic, 4h with traffic)
c) Train, 3h 21 min, $133

So in this case, a train would save you money versus airfare, but not driving. In Europe you get a benefit in that trains leave from the city center and arrive in the city center, where the people are and want to be. So going to the airport and arriving at the airport also has the added hastle and cost of travel to and from those locations. That often tips the scale in favor of train travel. In the US, in general, there aren't true city centers, and not much in the way of public transport should you find yourself in one.

Your direct flight timeline (and to some extend trains as well) ignores the pre/post-flight delays (i.e. security).

Intercity maglev trains would be about equally as fast, and would probably be far cheaper than air travel on a day-to-day basis.  What makes it completely impossible, however, is the initial infrastructure costs and obtaining necessary right-of-ways.

But what we really need to maximize convenience, ease of travel, safety and time is automated flying cars. 

[Josquius]

Rails primary importance IMO is in local transport, not so much cross country stuff.
If a town has decent rail links then it opens up employment opportunities to everyone there and means they don't have to have a car to have a life.
Future development IMO will/should follow early 20th century lines of railway stations at the centre and houses being built around them.

As to hsr being useless in the US because of the need to have a car at the destination- this is a problem that needs to be fixed. However, Japan too is a very car centric country. Yet high speed rail works very well here.

Japan also has 120m people and is smaller than Montana. You can't compare Japan to the US.

I'm all for developing intra city rail in US cities. I'm also in a distinct minority on this (at least here) and it isn't going to happen here anytime soon. Until we get halfway decent intra city public transport, I don't see intercity rail ever working.

You can however quite easily compare japan and California or the Boston-Atlanta area.

[Admiral Yi]

Boston-Atlanta?

[Josquius]

Boston-Atlanta?

Whoops. Been reading Gibson.
It's.... Boston-Richmond today iirc?

[Admiral Yi]

Boston, NYC, Philly, DC, aka Teh Northeast Corridor, aka the Boston-DC corridor.

[alfred russel]

Rails primary importance IMO is in local transport, not so much cross country stuff.
If a town has decent rail links then it opens up employment opportunities to everyone there and means they don't have to have a car to have a life.
Future development IMO will/should follow early 20th century lines of railway stations at the centre and houses being built around them.

As to hsr being useless in the US because of the need to have a car at the destination- this is a problem that needs to be fixed. However, Japan too is a very car centric country. Yet high speed rail works very well here.

Japan also has 120m people and is smaller than Montana. You can't compare Japan to the US.

I'm all for developing intra city rail in US cities. I'm also in a distinct minority on this (at least here) and it isn't going to happen here anytime soon. Until we get halfway decent intra city public transport, I don't see intercity rail ever working.

You can however quite easily compare japan and California or the Boston-Atlanta area.

Even California has less than a third of japans population but is bigger than the country.

[Eddie Teach]

Yeah but nearly everyone in California lives near the coast.

[Josquius]

A weird thought that struck me when I was cycling to work in the rain- why is it that human hair naturally grows to cover our eyes?
I mean.... Nature couldn't have expected we would develop scissors to cut it. How did prehistoric man manage

[jimmy olsen]

[Liep]

A weird thought that struck me when I was cycling to work in the rain- why is it that human hair naturally grows to cover our eyes?
I mean.... Nature couldn't have expected we would develop scissors to cut it. How did prehistoric man manage

Concentrated hair growth was probably well after we learned to use tools. So I guess nature already knew.