• Our team is working to address issues posting quotes or media to the forums. Please bear with us as we get this sorted out.

China Opens World's Longest High-Speed Rail Line

Status
Not open for further replies.

ikyung

Distinguished
Apr 17, 2010
566
0
19,010
6
"China apparently has assumed debt of nearly $640 billion to create the network"

China : Okay, let's just push the debt to America. Huehue.
 
G

Guest

Guest
8 Hours on a train over a distance of 1,428 seems very competitive compared to traveling on a plane with the security hassle.
 

Marco925

Distinguished
Aug 11, 2008
967
0
18,990
1
1,428 miles at speeds up to 186 MPH
What? you couldn't give us metric considering that you guys KNOW that a large chunk of us are canadian? Come on toms. No canadian contests and this, we want our own canadian site.
 

wintermint

Distinguished
Sep 30, 2009
1,150
0
19,460
72
[citation][nom]iKyunG[/nom]"China apparently has assumed debt of nearly $640 billion to create the network"China : Okay, let's just push the debt to America. Huehue.[/citation]

You do know that we owe China money right? Not good for any of us if China is in debt as well.
 

sacre

Distinguished
Jul 13, 2006
379
0
18,780
0
lol imperial.. "furlongs".. 3 of this in that, 12 of that in this..

What a joke of a system.

Oh and wow, hopefully its cheaper than a plane
 

alidan

Splendid
Aug 5, 2009
5,303
0
25,780
0
correct me if im wrong, but china hired a japanese firm to help plan and build it, fired them, stole the designs, than made it themselves, when it crashed, they buried it in a mass grave...

i have to say with that track record i would never get in a moving train in china.
 

CaedenV

Splendid
[citation][nom]jupiter optimus maximus[/nom]8 Hours on a train over a distance of 1,428 seems very competitive compared to traveling on a plane with the security hassle.[/citation]
Except when you blow up a train it is a lot more disruptive and takes a lot longer to repair than when a plane is taken out. When a plane goes down it is a terrible tragedy, but you simply redistribute the routes on other flights to acomodate for the change. When a train is blown sky high then the physical route is gone, and must be repaired before things can get moving again.

Still, I would love to see more high speed rail here in the states (or any high speed rail). It can be a much more convenient way to travel (especially with kids), and in theory should cost less than flying as there are way less fuel and maintenance costs involved.

However, here in the States I think it would make more sense to work with our current highway system. I read a few articles about a system where you could have a center 'lane' for electric cars where your car would dock to some sort of pulley system. Once docked you could sleep/work/watch a movie while your car is recharged, then when you get close to your destination you would be ejected from the system in the city you wanted to travel to, and you would be fresh and ready to go. Trains and other forms of mass transit simply do not fit the American lifestyle very well (for better or worse), and a system like this would make much more sense here.
 

Marco925

Distinguished
Aug 11, 2008
967
0
18,990
1
[citation][nom]CaedenV[/nom]Except when you blow up a train it is a lot more disruptive and takes a lot longer to repair than when a plane is taken out. When a plane goes down it is a terrible tragedy, but you simply redistribute the routes on other flights to acomodate for the change. When a train is blown sky high then the physical route is gone, and must be repaired before things can get moving again.Still, I would love to see more high speed rail here in the states (or any high speed rail). It can be a much more convenient way to travel (especially with kids), and in theory should cost less than flying as there are way less fuel and maintenance costs involved.However, here in the States I think it would make more sense to work with our current highway system. I read a few articles about a system where you could have a center 'lane' for electric cars where your car would dock to some sort of pulley system. Once docked you could sleep/work/watch a movie while your car is recharged, then when you get close to your destination you would be ejected from the system in the city you wanted to travel to, and you would be fresh and ready to go. Trains and other forms of mass transit simply do not fit the American lifestyle very well (for better or worse), and a system like this would make much more sense here.[/citation]
Even in China, with their lax safety laws have proven that this is one of the safest methods of transport possible. I think High speed rail can very well fit into the american lifestyle. Public transit is used extensively in high density areas like new york, and to get across the country, people are using planes. HS trains could be used to replace some of the planes as a cheaper alternative. And for the safety, a collision between HS Trains is almost unheard of, There aren't even enough incidents to fill a hand in the world history of high speed rail.
 

JOSHSKORN

Distinguished
Oct 26, 2009
2,382
19
19,795
1
[citation][nom]iKyunG[/nom]"China apparently has assumed debt of nearly $640 billion to create the network"China : Okay, let's just push the debt to America. Huehue.[/citation]
It's ok, with the workers at Foxconn being underpaid, they'll catch up in no time.
 

MisterZ

Distinguished
Nov 25, 2012
61
0
18,630
0


8 hours on a train compared to 3 hours in the air is competitive? Even factoring in check in and security, which is about an hour, you're looking at half the time going by air.
 
G

Guest

Guest
You haven't taken into consideration the traveling to and from airports.
 
G

Guest

Guest
OK, so maybe actual, in-travel duration of the trip via train takes about twice as long. Still, the caveats of "by air" travel would be NEGATED. For example, "take-off" and "landing" concerns would not apply (think of weather delays and cancellations, icing due to high-atmospheric travel in cold temperature, faulty landing gear activation).

Also, "by train" travel means that an emergency stop or need to evacuate the vehicle does NOT mean having to 1) find an airport, or 2) somehow resolve the problem of being thousands of feet above sea level not to mention ground level. Let's also not forget that travel expenses would almost (even if not at first given the expense of the initial construction) be significantly lower than traveling by train.

Also, (since I'm tired and the list of what makes by-rail/train travel competitive could be thicker than some books) there's always the fact that some people cannot, or refuse to, travel by plane due to the fear of flying (not everyone likes seeing clouds *BELOW* them when they look out the vehicle's window!!

-Francisco
 

Pherule

Distinguished
Aug 26, 2010
591
0
19,010
8
[citation][nom]Marco925[/nom]What? you couldn't give us metric considering that you guys KNOW that a large chunk of us are canadian? Come on toms. No canadian contests and this, we want our own canadian site.[/citation]Who cares about Canada? (aside from you/Canadians)

The reason Toms should use the metric system is that the modern world uses the metric system, not because of Canada. The USA uses an ancient system that should have been scrapped a long time ago.

Now I need to rant at Google. I typed "186 mph in kmph" and Google returned "did you mean 186 mph in kph"? Umm excuse me Google, are you stupid? kph? What the hell is that? Kilo's per hour? Last I checked, the symbol for kilometers was km. Use kmph you foolish Google.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS