Re: World's First Fuel Cell-Powered Train Locomotive Slated for 2008

From: Ian St. John (istjohn_at_noemail.ca)
Date: 08/19/04 

Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 22:13:22 -0400

daestrom wrote:
> "Ian St. John" <istjohn@noemail.ca> wrote in message
> news:1PdUc.7972$ZI1.365730@news20.bellglobal.com...
<snip>
>>>> Always one excuse or another. Everyone else had it easy. Only in
>>>> America is it just TOOO hard. Want some cheese with that whine?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Didn't say it was *hard*. Just that your "one answer fits
>>> everywhere" attitude is stupid.
>>
>> I said nothing about one answer fitting all. The economic advantages
>> of electric HSR are obvious.
>
> No, they are not. Not when the population density is much lower and
> more spread out. Not if you can't fill a train with enough paying
> passengers because there isn't enough of them wanting to go to the
> same terminal from the same terminal.

"if you build it, they will come". Fact is that the barrier to HSR is the
fact that there is no HSR and therefore no incentive to denser communities.

>
> You're being closed minded in thinking electric HSR is 'obvious'.
> Sure, it is 'obvious' if all the circumstances that make it the best
> choice are duplicated. But you aren't thinking about what sort of
> circumstances go into it. But what if passenger rail service itself
> is the *real* problem?

What if your anus is just trying to eat your head? How can we tell from the
fact that your head is up your ass?

>
> HSR just expands the radius of service territory somewhat by putting
> more territory within an 'acceptable' travel time. But even then, it
> cannot provide 'acceptable' travel time cross-continent, or even
> half-way across the continent.

Acutally that is theoretically possible with an evacutated or
hydrogen/helium filled underground tunnels running trains at mach 9.

> So a second infrastructure (wide
> spread air travel) is needed for cross-continental travel.

So your delusion is that air travel can make a cross country commute
possible? Not even with the SST..

> And with
> that second infrastructure in place, HSR becomes redundant and falls
> into obscurity.

The obscurity is your mental disease which seems to prevent any ideas taking
root. Very common in 'Rust Belt' America.

>
> If you study what happened to passenger rail service in the US in the
> '50's and '60's, you will understand more about service in the US.
> Look past some of the minor issues of union feather-bedding and
> antiquainted operating rules and examine *why* passengers started
> flying and driving instead of taking the train. What does HSR do to
> aliviate any of those issues? Nothing.

Sure. I wasn't limiting my critique of the U.S. to mere ignorance and
arrogance. There is certainly a lot of curruption and political sandbagging.

>
> Rail right-of-ways were well established before air travel. But with
> lots of cheap land for airports, the US airline infrastructure has
> been able to saturate the same geography.

Mainly because U.S. trains had establihsed themselves as slow, noisy and
with no fixed schedule. Given the lack of progress in train technology,
being 'leapfrogged' by air is logical.

> As an example, I can drive
> about the same distance to get to either a passenger rail station, or
> a major US airport. From the airport, my choices of destination are
> many more than from the rail station. So even if the rail were HSR
> (with electric equipment), it would not be the preferred
> transportation.

non-sequitor. The same access pertains to the both. There is no need for
'exclusivity' which is just your red herring. And comparing travel, the taxi
times are much shorter for trains( stations within the city vs airport way
outside) and more comfortable. A comparison of a New York( Empire State
Building) to Washington DC ( White House) came down to 10 minutes difference
in over three hours of travel using the current slow speed Acela trains.
With real HSR the train would have won.

>
>> I just pointed out that you essentially have to
>> build a separate dedicated 50 kv grid to service it. And you can get
>> the same speeds without that massive investment with the turbo train
>> ( a turbine equivalent of the Acela with all the same features and
>> from the same company ).
>>
>
> If the electric service were the only hold up for HSR, then you would
> have a point. But passenger rail service in general in the US is not
> suffering because of some 'massive investment' with the turbo train.
> Rather, passenger service as a whole suffers from several problems
> that electrification will not solve.

Still whining. Want some more cheese? Is that it?

<snip>
>> And is obviously guilty of. I am much more aquainted with the
>> realities of Europe and the east. As has been noted, the
>> backwardness of American stems, not from 'it's too hard, sniff
>> whimper' but the inabilty of America to work for common goals which
>> is necessary where it is more than a one man job.
>>
>
> So, before when you 'whined' about how Americans always say "its too
> hard...", you now recant and say America's 'backwardness' stems from
> its 'inability of America to work for common goals...'. Well, which
> is it?

There is no conflict here. Part of the backwardness comes from the whining,
some from the arrogance,..

<snip>

But do go on about your brags. It serves to illustrate my point.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Worlds First Fuel Cell-Powered Train Locomotive Slated for 2008
    ... Fact is that the barrier to HSR is the ... > more territory within an 'acceptable' travel time. ... > flying and driving instead of taking the train. ... > that electrification will not solve. ...
    (sci.energy.hydrogen)
  • Re: Gas Solution: Reasonable?
    ... HSR would likely need to be double tracked anyway, ... moving at 200 mph would likely have to be 20 miles long and train ... investment in track and rolling stock needed to achieve those speeds. ... I know all about passing siding mishaps with passenger trains. ...
    (misc.transport.road)
  • Re: Worlds First Fuel Cell-Powered Train Locomotive Slated for 2008
    ... > fact that there is no HSR and therefore no incentive to denser communities. ... >> flying and driving instead of taking the train. ... Could you explain why you think US passenger rail declined in the ... >> either a passenger rail station, or a major US airport. ...
    (sci.energy.hydrogen)
  • Re: Worlds First Fuel Cell-Powered Train Locomotive Slated for 2008
    ... > fact that there is no HSR and therefore no incentive to denser communities. ... >> flying and driving instead of taking the train. ... Could you explain why you think US passenger rail declined in the ... >> either a passenger rail station, or a major US airport. ...
    (sci.energy)
  • Whitelegg on high speed rail
    ... The supporters of HSR argue that it will increase the capacity of the ... rail system to move people and freight, stimulate the economy, steal ... decker trains for passenger travel. ... Paris are frequently double-decked and give passengers a non-cattle ...
    (uk.railway)