China tests 300 mph train.

[alfred russel]

Lets get back to talking about trains.

[Sheilbh]

I don't think you understood what I was trying to say:

1) My understanding is that the UK subsidizes less than its continental counterparts, resulting in the price differences, and

I think so.  Our annual subsidy to the train companies is roughly the same as the running costs of British Rail before it was privatised.  Back then it was significantly less than in continental Europe.  One of the problems of our uniquely inefficient method of privatisation is that I don't think there's been as much private investment by the train companies as needed to improve them.  So we're stuck with a more limited network, high prices and often kind-of crappy trains - it's like our own version of your healthcare system

I agree with your general point on the US.  Having said that I'd read that large parts of the highway network were in pretty bad repair due to under-investment.  Also I do think there's an argument for large intercity rail networks just to connect different parts of the network.  But in terms of investment and high-speed rail then it's clearly best to be focussed on relatively high population density areas - such as the North-East and maybe some parts of the West coast.

[alfred russel]

I agree with your general point on the US.  Having said that I'd read that large parts of the highway network were in pretty bad repair due to under-investment.  Also I do think there's an argument for large intercity rail networks just to connect different parts of the network.  But in terms of investment and high-speed rail then it's clearly best to be focussed on relatively high population density areas - such as the North-East and maybe some parts of the West coast.

There is a lot of generalization I'm doing, but I think there is a difference between intra city roads - which tend to need a lot of work and suffer from overcongestion - and inter city roads. My thoughts are that we need a lot more rail--but if the intra city variety. Most of our cities have a terrible public transport system. Even in a magical world that someone wanted to take a train from Seattle to Los Angeles, they will probably want to rent a car once they get where they are going.

What makes rail travel attractive in Europe aren't just the distances, but also the absence of a need for a car at the destination. Take the chunnel between paris and london. It may be more expensive than flying, but it goes from city center to city center and seamlessly connects to the public transport grids. The flight may be a lot shorter and cheaper, but I suspect most people prefer the train.

[Sheilbh]

There is a lot of generalization I'm doing, but I think there is a difference between intra city roads - which tend to need a lot of work and suffer from overcongestion - and inter city roads. My thoughts are that we need a lot more rail--but if the intra city variety. Most of our cities have a terrible public transport system. Even in a magical world that someone wanted to take a train from Seattle to Los Angeles, they will probably want to rent a car once they get where they are going.

Oh I'd agree with that.  The reason for inter-city rail, in a country like the US, would seem more like connecting different, but far more developed intra-city commuter networks.  That's like what exists in Europe but with less people. 

What makes rail travel attractive in Europe aren't just the distances, but also the absence of a need for a car at the destination. Take the chunnel between paris and london. It may be more expensive than flying, but it goes from city center to city center and seamlessly connects to the public transport grids. The flight may be a lot shorter and cheaper, but I suspect most people prefer the train.

I think the train journey takes almost the same as the flight.  But as you say you're in the centre, there's no hassle of airport security (Eurostar security and check-in is far less lengthy) and, from people I've spoken to, it's better for working on than a plane...

I love Eurostar

[alfred russel]

I think the train journey takes almost the same as the flight.  But as you say you're in the centre, there's no hassle of airport security (Eurostar security and check-in is far less lengthy) and, from people I've spoken to, it's better for working on than a plane...

I love Eurostar

It isn't just airport security: it is also the fact you need to get to the airport on the way out, and from the airport to the city center. If you take cabs in London and Paris on both ends of the journey, you could easily pay more in cab fares than your tickets cost, and the travel times will be about the same as the time in the air.

I've gone on enough rants with airplane security, but the difference between subway and airplane security makes no sense to me.

[KRonn]

What makes rail travel attractive in Europe aren't just the distances, but also the absence of a need for a car at the destination. Take the chunnel between paris and london. It may be more expensive than flying, but it goes from city center to city center and seamlessly connects to the public transport grids. The flight may be a lot shorter and cheaper, but I suspect most people prefer the train.

Nay, we just need those inter city trains to be able to carry passenger's autos with them, just like a ship ferry. Easy solution!   

[Ideologue]

I think the train journey takes almost the same as the flight.  But as you say you're in the centre, there's no hassle of airport security (Eurostar security and check-in is far less lengthy) and, from people I've spoken to, it's better for working on than a plane...

I love Eurostar

It isn't just airport security: it is also the fact you need to get to the airport on the way out, and from the airport to the city center. If you take cabs in London and Paris on both ends of the journey, you could easily pay more in cab fares than your tickets cost, and the travel times will be about the same as the time in the air.

I've gone on enough rants with airplane security, but the difference between subway and airplane security makes no sense to me.

Even Al-Qaeda's finest might have trouble crashing a subway train full of fuel into a skyscraper at 500mph.

[MadImmortalMan]

Having said that I'd read that large parts of the highway network were in pretty bad repair due to under-investment.

If that's true, I've not witnessed significant evidence of it in my travels. What I have witnessed is under-capacity areas where the population and transportation needs have outgrown the infrastructure.

[alfred russel]

Even Al-Qaeda's finest might have trouble crashing a subway train full of gasoline into a skyscraper at 500mph.

Supposedly we don't have to worry about that now that pilots are safely locked away.

[mongers]

Having said that I'd read that large parts of the highway network were in pretty bad repair due to under-investment.

If that's true, I've not witnessed significant evidence of it in my travels. What I have witnessed is under-capacity areas where the population and transportation needs have outgrown the infrastructure.

I think this is common to many areas of the world, hell in the small market town I live in every early morning and mid-afternoon to end of the working day, we have mini-gridlocks.

[Sheilbh]

Supposedly we don't have to worry about that now that pilots are safely locked away.

From what I've read that change has had the biggest impact on security.  The rest is broadly negligible.  It's like massive government make-work program for wankers

[DGuller]

It's like massive government make-work program for wankers

That's not entirely accurate.  Properly conducted enhanced pat-downs involve contact with other people's penises, not with your own.

[alfred russel]

Supposedly we don't have to worry about that now that pilots are safely locked away.

From what I've read that change has had the biggest impact on security.  The rest is broadly negligible.  It's like massive government make-work program for wankers

I think most people know a lot of the security is stupid, but what politician wants to cut back on security when a plane may be bombed immediately afterwards?

Subway systems are also vunerable to bombings (obviously), but no politician can propose a screen when it would keep millions from getting to work on time.

Personally, if I'm going to be killed in a bombing, I'd rather go on a plane rather than an overcrowded subway train at rushhour while in a narrow tunnel. Even aside from terrorism, I think some of those trains may be safety hazards with the way people squeeze in.

[Iormlund]

I think the train journey takes almost the same as the flight.  But as you say you're in the centre, there's no hassle of airport security (Eurostar security and check-in is far less lengthy) and, from people I've spoken to, it's better for working on than a plane...

I love Eurostar

It isn't just airport security: it is also the fact you need to get to the airport on the way out, and from the airport to the city center. If you take cabs in London and Paris on both ends of the journey, you could easily pay more in cab fares than your tickets cost, and the travel times will be about the same as the time in the air.

As an example, it takes me about 15 min to get to the railway station. Less than 90 minutes later I'll be in downtown Madrid. And of course I'll be able to work and stay connected the whole time.

[Ed Anger]

Lets get back to talking about trains.

I think model railroaders are a bit weird. Especially those N scale fucks.