NationStates Jolt Archive


The Trans-Continental Bullet

Melphi
01-05-2008, 17:46
With gas prices shooting up the way they are, the need for jobs, and a shift from fossil fuel power plants, why not take a stab at all 3 at once?

A lot of people don't ride trains and buses because, lets face it, they are slow. At least if you have to go very far. Why ride an hour if it would only take you 20min in your own car? that sort of thing. (though in places like new york it might take longer to drive:D)

Why not build a Bullet train system that will run all over, shortening the areas buses would need to run (and thus ride times)? The bullet train itself is faster than regular trains and runs on electricity right?

Better mass transit country wide could relieve the push on gas, but the electricity it would need would not be a small amount. So build new power plants solar, wind, nuclear, something not fossil fuel related and you start a shift in where the power comes from.

The construction and upkeep could proved jobs and get the dollar back up again.


Just a thought.
Arroza
01-05-2008, 17:56
I'd have to drive a hour and change just to get to the nearest bullet train station.

Seriously, what would be the parameters on who gets a station and who doesn't? We have so many urbanized and semi-urbanized areas that you might have a real problem getting to them all. Would a place have to have a million people? 500,000? 10,000?
Melphi
01-05-2008, 17:59
not if it is laid out more completely than mass transit is now.

I don't even know where the nearest bus stop is near me, let alone train station.



Edit: I would start it off in 4 or 5 major areas (basicly divide the USA into 4 or 5 chunks) with a major central station, the smaller stations could crop up from the major stations being inter connected, and then spread it as far as you could to connect as main towns and cities.

You could also even have stations setup to only run for a specific area or city depending on size.


I think getting people to use it would be the bigger problem than it actually working.
Arroza
01-05-2008, 18:01
not if it is laid out more completely than mass transit is now.

I don't even know where the nearest bus stop is near me, let alone train station.

You can't put bullet train infrastructure everywhere. The cost of the lines, and the fact that you can't have a lot of curves on high-speed stretches, would demand that. We actually have a bullet line in the N.E. Corridor already (Amtrak Acela.)
Melphi
01-05-2008, 18:09
You can't put bullet train infrastructure everywhere. The cost of the lines, and the fact that you can't have a lot of curves on high-speed stretches, would demand that. We actually have a bullet line in the N.E. Corridor already (Amtrak Acela.)

O_o didn't know one existed in the USA, you learn something new everyday. The building if the infrastructure was one of the reasons I saw it as a big creater for jobs.
Arroza
01-05-2008, 18:13
O_o didn't know one existed in the USA, you learn something new everyday. The building if the infrastructure was one of the reasons I saw it as a big creater for jobs.

Yeah it actually only runs at around 150 mph for what I remember, but I do also remember that it's supposedly faster to take the train from Manhattan to D.C. as you don't have to go thru airport security, and go way out to Kennedy / Dulles.
Call to power
01-05-2008, 18:16
it could work but I'm not sure if the investment will be made (things like this are expensive especially compared to conventional rail)

what you really need to look at is changing short haul flights (easy jet would be the European example) to train transport as this reduces fuel consumption and as a bonus also congested airspace/airports
Melphi
01-05-2008, 18:17
Yeah it actually only runs at around 150 mph for what I remember, but I do also remember that it's supposedly faster to take the train from Manhattan to D.C. as you don't have to go thru airport security, and go way out to Kennedy / Dulles.

150mph isn't to slow. If I remember right the fastest one in the world can go about 210mph....though I might not be remembering right, it has been awhile.
Philosopy
01-05-2008, 18:20
150mph isn't to slow. If I remember right the fastest one in the world can go about 210mph....though I might not be remembering right, it has been awhile.

The French TGV holds the conventional rail speed record at 357 mph. Most high speed train sets travel at 186 mph in normal service.
Melphi
01-05-2008, 18:21
The French TGV holds the conventional rail speed record at 357 mph. Most high speed train sets travel at 186 mph in normal service.

like i said, it had been awhile XD.
Arroza
01-05-2008, 18:25
it could work but I'm not sure if the investment will be made (things like this are expensive especially compared to conventional rail)

what you really need to look at is changing short haul flights (easy jet would be the European example) to train transport as this reduces fuel consumption and as a bonus also congested airspace/airports

Sort of agree, a flight from Chattanooga or B-Ham to Atlanta is ridiculous as it's only 160 kilometers. But you have to have infrastructure in first to actually support passenger rail withoug losing an inordinate amount of time compared to the flight. We don't have that yet. I actually like the idea of supplanting shorter (under 500 mi.) flights with rail, I'm still not sure it can/should be done nationally though.

150mph isn't to slow. If I remember right the fastest one in the world can go about 210mph....though I might not be remembering right, it has been awhile.

From wikipedia: What is more useful is the fastest maximum operating speed (MOR) of ANY segment of any high speed rail line, currently 320 km/h (198.9 mph), a record held by TGV and ICE service on part of the LGV Est Line in France. That line has now the fastest scheduled run in the world at 279.4 km/h from Lorraine-TGV to Champagne-Ardennes-TGV (167.66 km in 36 min), followed by other TGVs on the same section at 271.9 and 264.7 km/h.[24]
Melphi
01-05-2008, 18:27
it could work but I'm not sure if the investment will be made (things like this are expensive especially compared to conventional rail)

well it originally started out as an idea between me and a friend just brainstorming out of boredom for a public works project that could create job and such. So cost didn't enter into it to much, after all the Hoover Dam wasn't cheap, but it was needed (I know different circumstanced but you get the idea I hope)

what you really need to look at is changing short haul flights (easy jet would be the European example) to train transport as this reduces fuel consumption and as a bonus also congested airspace/airports

Funny thing is Global Warming is not a reason behind the ideas...it is fuel cost XD.
RhynoD
01-05-2008, 20:33
Having seen a special on this subject on the Science channel or something:

The cost of laying a bullet-train railroad under the atlantic is such that a ticket would cost upwards of $600 per. Plane tickets cost about that, but a plane will get you to Europe in a third the time. To compensate the bullet train would have to have a comparable time, and the only way to achieve that is to create a vacuum in the tunnel, which is difficult at best. At to that the incredible safety issues, and it all means that maybe someday, but not any time in the near future.

Also: Riding this (http://www.lasplash.com/uploads/1/magic_bullet_2.jpg) would be uncomfortable, I think.
This (http://img.alibaba.com/photo/11515908/Silver_Bullet_Vibrator_Sex_Toy.jpg) might be fun...depending on your gender and/or persuasion.
New Manvir
01-05-2008, 20:45
The nearest bus stop to me is about a 45 minute walk. We don't have a train system in my city, and the one that MAY be be built in a couple of years, won't really benefit me at all.
New Manvir
01-05-2008, 20:48
Having seen a special on this subject on the Science channel or something:

The cost of laying a bullet-train railroad under the atlantic is such that a ticket would cost upwards of $600 per. Plane tickets cost about that, but a plane will get you to Europe in a third the time. To compensate the bullet train would have to have a comparable time, and the only way to achieve that is to create a vacuum in the tunnel, which is difficult at best. At to that the incredible safety issues, and it all means that maybe someday, but not any time in the near future.

Also: Riding this (http://www.lasplash.com/uploads/1/magic_bullet_2.jpg) would be uncomfortable, I think.
This (http://img.alibaba.com/photo/11515908/Silver_Bullet_Vibrator_Sex_Toy.jpg) might be fun...depending on your gender and/or persuasion.

Riding bullets? like this?

http://espn.go.com/i/page2/photos2/naked_gun1_195x262.jpg
Ashmoria
01-05-2008, 21:00
The nearest bus stop to me is about a 45 minute walk. We don't have a train system in my city, and the one that MAY be be built in a couple of years, won't really benefit me at all.

same here

new mexico has put in a commuter rail but it doesnt come this far south. id have to drive 45 miles and park my car in an unsecured lot.

i dont see that highspeed rail would ever come near me.
RhynoD
01-05-2008, 21:48
Riding bullets? like this?

http://espn.go.com/i/page2/photos2/naked_gun1_195x262.jpg

http://grumpasaurus.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10001/normal_dr_strangelove.01.jpg