| Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 [message #398697 is a reply to message #398654] |
Fri, 28 August 2020 10:21   |
scott
Messages: 4237
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> writes:
> On Thu, 27 Aug 2020 16:58:39 -0000 (UTC), John Levine
> <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
>
>> In article <cfcekf596bhvph3ct7olkl3m36sjn4tgah@4ax.com>,
>> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> How much money do interstate highways make? All transportation is heavily
>>>> subsidized, highways, airports, etc. It’s a public service. The US has a
>>>> third-world rail system, for short-haul intercity (east and west coast) it
>>>> is more cost-effective than flying, and if we upgraded our system to the
>>>> equivalent of the rest of the world it would be faster downtown to
>>>> downtown.
>>>
>>> It's funny that our inferior rail system moves a higher percentage of
>>> our freight than does the rail system in the EU. It's passengers in
>>> the US who don't like trains.
>>
>> We have no way to tell, because for most people in the US, there's no
>> train for them to like. Despite what you might have heard, at least
>> until the pandemic most of Amtrak's long distance trains are full,
>
> Source?
You didn't provide a source for your claim above, turnabout is fair play.
|
|
|
|
| Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 [message #398698 is a reply to message #398664] |
Fri, 28 August 2020 10:26 |
scott
Messages: 4237
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> writes:
> On Thu, 27 Aug 2020 12:03:10 -0700 (PDT), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>> Isn't there a high cost to starting and stopping
>> a freight train to enter and leave a passing siding
>> on a single track line? To wait for clearance on
>> congested track? Don't shippers want faster delivery?
>
> A little bit of diesel. And if shipers wanted faster delivery they'd
> have paid for air freight.
Silly fellow - most freight shipped by rail (coal, lumber, various liquids,
grain, grain products (starch, alcohol), standard shipping containers)
cannot be shipped by air economically or otherwise.
|
|
|
|
| Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 [message #398702 is a reply to message #398696] |
Fri, 28 August 2020 11:13 |
Dan Espen
Messages: 3867
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes:
> Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> writes:
>> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>> You can't just stick an airport in a swamp (thankfully). There's the
>> matter of roads (or even trains) to get to and from the airport.
>
> Although there is always DIA as a counterexample....
Defense Intelligence Agency? Dow Jones Industrial Average?
Nope, I'm sure you mean DEN Denver International Airport.
People also ask
Is Den and DIA the same airport?
Type in the name of our airport — you know, D-I-A. ... Southwest, United
and Delta have no idea where DIA is. That's because the official
abbreviation of Denver International Airport is DEN.
But locals call it DIA.
So, I remember there was something different about access to that
thing...Oh, yeah, right from downtown by rail. Really nice.
They needed a right of way but Denver is surrounded by a wasteland.
I forget how much of the tracks were underground.
Beautiful city with the Rockies in the distance.
I remember thinking they look like an impenetrable wall.
So I had to drive over there to see. You can drive right
thru those mountains and there were all kinds of beautiful
houses in there. Never saw it in winter.
I'm only slightly tempted to leave scenic NJ for that place.
--
Dan Espen
|
|
|
|
| Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 [message #398704 is a reply to message #398694] |
Fri, 28 August 2020 13:13 |
|
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 07:20:16 -0700, Peter Flass
<peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 27 Aug 2020 16:45:20 -0700, Peter Flass
>> <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 27 Aug 2020 11:59:52 GMT, Niklas Karlsson <anksil@yahoo.se> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > On 2020-08-26, J Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> What are you proposing, that passenger railroads be run at a loss so
>>>> >> that people who don't like to fly can ride trains?
>>>> >
>>>> > I don't know about Amtrak in particular, but it is my understanding that
>>>> > essentially every passenger railroad in the world runs at a loss and the
>>>> > difference is made up by taxpayers' money. An exception may be Japan
>>>> > Rail, but some claim this is mostly due to creative accounting.
>>>> >
>>>> > It's seen as a worthy goal to encourage riding trains rather than flying
>>>> > or driving. I can understand if this is not a palatable message in the
>>>> > US political climate.
>>>>
>>>> Fine, build a train that can get me to Los Angeles in 8 hours.
>>>
>>> From where? Riverside?
>>>
>>> There’s a sweet spot for trains. Obviously cross-country (US and Canada) is
>>> not it. The Northeast corridor, and maybe as far south as Miami, LA to San
>>> Francisco, although I see the California high speed rail is bogged down in
>>> politics. Maybe Dallas to Houston, etc.
>>
>> Where are you going to put the track in the Northeast Corridor? It's
>> some of the most expensive land in the country. This is something
>> poeple forget about trains--that track has to go all the way along the
>> route, it's not like an airport that you can stick in the local swamp.
>>
>
> The right of way is there. It just needs some significant upgrades.
So what are you proposing, elevated track everywhere to give
additional lines? Tunnel underneath? Or just shut everything down
and starve Boston while you do the upgrades?
|
|
|
|
| Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 [message #398706 is a reply to message #398704] |
Fri, 28 August 2020 13:38 |
Dan Espen
Messages: 3867
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> writes:
> On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 07:20:16 -0700, Peter Flass
> <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Thu, 27 Aug 2020 16:45:20 -0700, Peter Flass
>>> <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> > On 27 Aug 2020 11:59:52 GMT, Niklas Karlsson <anksil@yahoo.se> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> On 2020-08-26, J Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> What are you proposing, that passenger railroads be run at a loss so
>>>> >>> that people who don't like to fly can ride trains?
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I don't know about Amtrak in particular, but it is my understanding that
>>>> >> essentially every passenger railroad in the world runs at a loss and the
>>>> >> difference is made up by taxpayers' money. An exception may be Japan
>>>> >> Rail, but some claim this is mostly due to creative accounting.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> It's seen as a worthy goal to encourage riding trains rather than flying
>>>> >> or driving. I can understand if this is not a palatable message in the
>>>> >> US political climate.
>>>> >
>>>> > Fine, build a train that can get me to Los Angeles in 8 hours.
>>>>
>>>> From where? Riverside?
>>>>
>>>> There’s a sweet spot for trains. Obviously cross-country (US and Canada) is
>>>> not it. The Northeast corridor, and maybe as far south as Miami, LA to San
>>>> Francisco, although I see the California high speed rail is bogged down in
>>>> politics. Maybe Dallas to Houston, etc.
>>>
>>> Where are you going to put the track in the Northeast Corridor? It's
>>> some of the most expensive land in the country. This is something
>>> poeple forget about trains--that track has to go all the way along the
>>> route, it's not like an airport that you can stick in the local swamp.
>>>
>>
>> The right of way is there. It just needs some significant upgrades.
>
> So what are you proposing, elevated track everywhere to give
> additional lines? Tunnel underneath? Or just shut everything down
> and starve Boston while you do the upgrades?
There are 2 or more sets of tracks everywhere I've seen.
You work it out.
Back when I lived in the Bronx, I lived right next to the tracks for
the New Haven. 4 sets of tracks. Although only two sets over the
nearby bridge.
One day we heard this horrible noise and the ground shook.
A freight train had come off the tracks. We walked out and took a look.
I was amazed at how far that train plowed through everything, tracks,
ties, switches. It came off the tracks and just kept going.
Not rolling on it's wheels they were gone.
It didn't make it to the bridge but it was at least a few blocks.
The train was back up in a couple of days.
--
Dan Espen
|
|
|
|
| Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 [message #398708 is a reply to message #398704] |
Fri, 28 August 2020 14:28 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 07:20:16 -0700, Peter Flass
> <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Thu, 27 Aug 2020 16:45:20 -0700, Peter Flass
>>> <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> > On 27 Aug 2020 11:59:52 GMT, Niklas Karlsson <anksil@yahoo.se> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> On 2020-08-26, J Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> What are you proposing, that passenger railroads be run at a loss so
>>>> >>> that people who don't like to fly can ride trains?
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I don't know about Amtrak in particular, but it is my understanding that
>>>> >> essentially every passenger railroad in the world runs at a loss and the
>>>> >> difference is made up by taxpayers' money. An exception may be Japan
>>>> >> Rail, but some claim this is mostly due to creative accounting.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> It's seen as a worthy goal to encourage riding trains rather than flying
>>>> >> or driving. I can understand if this is not a palatable message in the
>>>> >> US political climate.
>>>> >
>>>> > Fine, build a train that can get me to Los Angeles in 8 hours.
>>>>
>>>> From where? Riverside?
>>>>
>>>> There’s a sweet spot for trains. Obviously cross-country (US and Canada) is
>>>> not it. The Northeast corridor, and maybe as far south as Miami, LA to San
>>>> Francisco, although I see the California high speed rail is bogged down in
>>>> politics. Maybe Dallas to Houston, etc.
>>>
>>> Where are you going to put the track in the Northeast Corridor? It's
>>> some of the most expensive land in the country. This is something
>>> poeple forget about trains--that track has to go all the way along the
>>> route, it's not like an airport that you can stick in the local swamp.
>>>
>>
>> The right of way is there. It just needs some significant upgrades.
>
> So what are you proposing, elevated track everywhere to give
> additional lines? Tunnel underneath? Or just shut everything down
> and starve Boston while you do the upgrades?
>
I think most rail thru cities already uses some combination of the above.
There are relatively few grade crossings there IME. Outside the cities
there are grade crossings and curves that are too sharp to allow higher
speeds. There are ways of fixing these problems, plus adding welded rails,
that don’t require shutting everything down - expensive, but do-able.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 [message #398709 is a reply to message #398708] |
Fri, 28 August 2020 14:38 |
Niklas Karlsson
Messages: 265
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2020-08-28, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> I think most rail thru cities already uses some combination of the above.
> There are relatively few grade crossings there IME. Outside the cities
> there are grade crossings and curves that are too sharp to allow higher
> speeds. There are ways of fixing these problems, plus adding welded rails,
> that don’t require shutting everything down - expensive, but do-able.
Wow, welded rails aren't used already? Around here, I think it's
exclusively welded, with smoothing the rails off to make for a smooth
ride.
But then, the US and Europe are worlds apart when it comes to
railway/-road culture, I gather.
Niklas
--
I think it's a beautiful day to go to the zoo and feed the ducks.
To the lions.
-- Brian Kantor
|
|
|
|
| Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 [message #398710 is a reply to message #398708] |
Fri, 28 August 2020 14:46 |
scott
Messages: 4237
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>> So what are you proposing, elevated track everywhere to give
>> additional lines? Tunnel underneath? Or just shut everything down
>> and starve Boston while you do the upgrades?
>>
>
> I think most rail thru cities already uses some combination of the above.
Indeed. High-speed rail on the SF peninsula will use the existing
ROW from Gilroy to SF, and a new tunnel from the south side of SF (4th & townsend)
to the ferry building terminal. Along some of the ROW they
may need to reacquire property that was part of the ROW twenty
years ago when a couple of peninsula communities grade separated
the caltrain ROW (by elevating the tracks on new earth) because they
only elevated two tracks worth of ROW, and the upper peninsula really
needs four tracks for proper handling of locals and high-speed trains.
|
|
|
|
| Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 [message #398714 is a reply to message #398709] |
Fri, 28 August 2020 14:50 |
scott
Messages: 4237
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Niklas Karlsson <anksil@yahoo.se> writes:
> On 2020-08-28, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> I think most rail thru cities already uses some combination of the above.
>> There are relatively few grade crossings there IME. Outside the cities
>> there are grade crossings and curves that are too sharp to allow higher
>> speeds. There are ways of fixing these problems, plus adding welded rails,
>> that don’t require shutting everything down - expensive, but do-able.
>
> Wow, welded rails aren't used already? Around here, I think it's
> exclusively welded, with smoothing the rails off to make for a smooth
> ride.
Well, the US does have 94,372 miles of track (as of 2014), down
from 250,000 miles of track (as of 1918). That's a lot of track
to replace to get welded rail, and most of it is only used for
freight.
https://www.railserve.com/stats_records/railroad_route_miles .html
Welded rail is used in many passenger transportation cooridors and
most light-rail applications.
|
|
|
|
| Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 [message #398721 is a reply to message #398656] |
Fri, 28 August 2020 15:54 |
hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Thursday, August 27, 2020 at 7:40:16 PM UTC-4, Peter Flass wrote:
> US trains are pathetic. Acela, the pride of AMTRAK could run at 150mph, but
> is limited to 66mph because of outdated track. Most passenger trains run a
> lot slower. It’s usually faster (and more comfortable) to drive. Too bad,
> because the times I have ridden trains I had about 3x the room as on a
> plane, and could get up and move around whenever I wanted. The aisles were
> wider, too, and the seats much more comfortable.
The speed of Acela varies by location. On the old PRR
segment it goes at 135 mph. On the Metro North segment
it goes about 70. On parts it can go 150.
There are proposals to build an entirely new straight ROW
for the NEC. But very expensive.
A hybrid approach might be prudent, such as rebuilding
the worst bottlenecks.
Amtrak developed a number of plans to improve service
on congested travel corridors, to get the most bang
for the buck. Good ideas. Too bad Congress had no interest.
|
|
|
|
| Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 [message #398730 is a reply to message #398706] |
Fri, 28 August 2020 16:51 |
|
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 13:38:52 -0400, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com>
wrote:
> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 07:20:16 -0700, Peter Flass
>> <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 27 Aug 2020 16:45:20 -0700, Peter Flass
>>>> <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >> On 27 Aug 2020 11:59:52 GMT, Niklas Karlsson <anksil@yahoo.se> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> On 2020-08-26, J Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> What are you proposing, that passenger railroads be run at a loss so
>>>> >>>> that people who don't like to fly can ride trains?
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> I don't know about Amtrak in particular, but it is my understanding that
>>>> >>> essentially every passenger railroad in the world runs at a loss and the
>>>> >>> difference is made up by taxpayers' money. An exception may be Japan
>>>> >>> Rail, but some claim this is mostly due to creative accounting.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> It's seen as a worthy goal to encourage riding trains rather than flying
>>>> >>> or driving. I can understand if this is not a palatable message in the
>>>> >>> US political climate.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Fine, build a train that can get me to Los Angeles in 8 hours.
>>>> >
>>>> > From where? Riverside?
>>>> >
>>>> > There’s a sweet spot for trains. Obviously cross-country (US and Canada) is
>>>> > not it. The Northeast corridor, and maybe as far south as Miami, LA to San
>>>> > Francisco, although I see the California high speed rail is bogged down in
>>>> > politics. Maybe Dallas to Houston, etc.
>>>>
>>>> Where are you going to put the track in the Northeast Corridor? It's
>>>> some of the most expensive land in the country. This is something
>>>> poeple forget about trains--that track has to go all the way along the
>>>> route, it's not like an airport that you can stick in the local swamp.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The right of way is there. It just needs some significant upgrades.
>>
>> So what are you proposing, elevated track everywhere to give
>> additional lines? Tunnel underneath? Or just shut everything down
>> and starve Boston while you do the upgrades?
>
> There are 2 or more sets of tracks everywhere I've seen.
> You work it out.
There have to be more than 2 sets for high speed passenger rail. And
they have to be arranged so that it's hard for anybody to get hit by
the train.
> Back when I lived in the Bronx, I lived right next to the tracks for
> the New Haven. 4 sets of tracks. Although only two sets over the
> nearby bridge.
>
> One day we heard this horrible noise and the ground shook.
> A freight train had come off the tracks. We walked out and took a look.
> I was amazed at how far that train plowed through everything, tracks,
> ties, switches. It came off the tracks and just kept going.
> Not rolling on it's wheels they were gone.
>
> It didn't make it to the bridge but it was at least a few blocks.
>
> The train was back up in a couple of days.
|
|
|
|
| Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 [message #398731 is a reply to message #398708] |
Fri, 28 August 2020 16:52 |
|
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 11:28:16 -0700, Peter Flass
<peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 07:20:16 -0700, Peter Flass
>> <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 27 Aug 2020 16:45:20 -0700, Peter Flass
>>>> <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >> On 27 Aug 2020 11:59:52 GMT, Niklas Karlsson <anksil@yahoo.se> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> On 2020-08-26, J Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> What are you proposing, that passenger railroads be run at a loss so
>>>> >>>> that people who don't like to fly can ride trains?
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> I don't know about Amtrak in particular, but it is my understanding that
>>>> >>> essentially every passenger railroad in the world runs at a loss and the
>>>> >>> difference is made up by taxpayers' money. An exception may be Japan
>>>> >>> Rail, but some claim this is mostly due to creative accounting.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> It's seen as a worthy goal to encourage riding trains rather than flying
>>>> >>> or driving. I can understand if this is not a palatable message in the
>>>> >>> US political climate.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Fine, build a train that can get me to Los Angeles in 8 hours.
>>>> >
>>>> > From where? Riverside?
>>>> >
>>>> > There’s a sweet spot for trains. Obviously cross-country (US and Canada) is
>>>> > not it. The Northeast corridor, and maybe as far south as Miami, LA to San
>>>> > Francisco, although I see the California high speed rail is bogged down in
>>>> > politics. Maybe Dallas to Houston, etc.
>>>>
>>>> Where are you going to put the track in the Northeast Corridor? It's
>>>> some of the most expensive land in the country. This is something
>>>> poeple forget about trains--that track has to go all the way along the
>>>> route, it's not like an airport that you can stick in the local swamp.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The right of way is there. It just needs some significant upgrades.
>>
>> So what are you proposing, elevated track everywhere to give
>> additional lines? Tunnel underneath? Or just shut everything down
>> and starve Boston while you do the upgrades?
>>
>
> I think most rail thru cities already uses some combination of the above.
> There are relatively few grade crossings there IME. Outside the cities
> there are grade crossings and curves that are too sharp to allow higher
> speeds. There are ways of fixing these problems, plus adding welded rails,
> that don’t require shutting everything down - expensive, but do-able.
Are there ways of making the freight train get out of the way? Are
there ways of keeping old ladies from stalling in crossings?
|
|
|
|
| Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 [message #398737 is a reply to message #398731] |
Fri, 28 August 2020 18:15 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 11:28:16 -0700, Peter Flass
> <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 07:20:16 -0700, Peter Flass
>>> <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> > On Thu, 27 Aug 2020 16:45:20 -0700, Peter Flass
>>>> > <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >>> On 27 Aug 2020 11:59:52 GMT, Niklas Karlsson <anksil@yahoo.se> wrote:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>> On 2020-08-26, J Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> What are you proposing, that passenger railroads be run at a loss so
>>>> >>>>> that people who don't like to fly can ride trains?
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> I don't know about Amtrak in particular, but it is my understanding that
>>>> >>>> essentially every passenger railroad in the world runs at a loss and the
>>>> >>>> difference is made up by taxpayers' money. An exception may be Japan
>>>> >>>> Rail, but some claim this is mostly due to creative accounting.
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> It's seen as a worthy goal to encourage riding trains rather than flying
>>>> >>>> or driving. I can understand if this is not a palatable message in the
>>>> >>>> US political climate.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Fine, build a train that can get me to Los Angeles in 8 hours.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> From where? Riverside?
>>>> >>
>>>> >> There’s a sweet spot for trains. Obviously cross-country (US and Canada) is
>>>> >> not it. The Northeast corridor, and maybe as far south as Miami, LA to San
>>>> >> Francisco, although I see the California high speed rail is bogged down in
>>>> >> politics. Maybe Dallas to Houston, etc.
>>>> >
>>>> > Where are you going to put the track in the Northeast Corridor? It's
>>>> > some of the most expensive land in the country. This is something
>>>> > poeple forget about trains--that track has to go all the way along the
>>>> > route, it's not like an airport that you can stick in the local swamp.
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> The right of way is there. It just needs some significant upgrades.
>>>
>>> So what are you proposing, elevated track everywhere to give
>>> additional lines? Tunnel underneath? Or just shut everything down
>>> and starve Boston while you do the upgrades?
>>>
>>
>> I think most rail thru cities already uses some combination of the above.
>> There are relatively few grade crossings there IME. Outside the cities
>> there are grade crossings and curves that are too sharp to allow higher
>> speeds. There are ways of fixing these problems, plus adding welded rails,
>> that don’t require shutting everything down - expensive, but do-able.
>
> Are there ways of making the freight train get out of the way? Are
> there ways of keeping old ladies from stalling in crossings?
>
Forbthe first, yes. They have these new things called computers which can
track the trains and switch them to the appropriate tracks. Unfortunately
the freight railroads own the tracks, and freight has priority over
passenger, so a fast passenger train might have to sit at a siding to,let a
slow freight go by. I would think Congress could fix this by passing a law
saying that passengers have priority.
For the second, no. People even ignore warnings and try to drive around
closed crossing gates. I just saw a news story where a guy in a
wheelchair(!) got stuck on the tracks and was rescued by a passer-by. The
only solution is to eliminate grade crossings.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 [message #398746 is a reply to message #398737] |
Fri, 28 August 2020 18:29 |
|
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 15:15:13 -0700, Peter Flass
<peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 11:28:16 -0700, Peter Flass
>> <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 07:20:16 -0700, Peter Flass
>>>> <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >> On Thu, 27 Aug 2020 16:45:20 -0700, Peter Flass
>>>> >> <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >>>> On 27 Aug 2020 11:59:52 GMT, Niklas Karlsson <anksil@yahoo.se> wrote:
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>>> On 2020-08-26, J Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>> What are you proposing, that passenger railroads be run at a loss so
>>>> >>>>>> that people who don't like to fly can ride trains?
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> I don't know about Amtrak in particular, but it is my understanding that
>>>> >>>>> essentially every passenger railroad in the world runs at a loss and the
>>>> >>>>> difference is made up by taxpayers' money. An exception may be Japan
>>>> >>>>> Rail, but some claim this is mostly due to creative accounting.
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> It's seen as a worthy goal to encourage riding trains rather than flying
>>>> >>>>> or driving. I can understand if this is not a palatable message in the
>>>> >>>>> US political climate.
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> Fine, build a train that can get me to Los Angeles in 8 hours.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> From where? Riverside?
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> There’s a sweet spot for trains. Obviously cross-country (US and Canada) is
>>>> >>> not it. The Northeast corridor, and maybe as far south as Miami, LA to San
>>>> >>> Francisco, although I see the California high speed rail is bogged down in
>>>> >>> politics. Maybe Dallas to Houston, etc.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Where are you going to put the track in the Northeast Corridor? It's
>>>> >> some of the most expensive land in the country. This is something
>>>> >> poeple forget about trains--that track has to go all the way along the
>>>> >> route, it's not like an airport that you can stick in the local swamp.
>>>> >>
>>>> >
>>>> > The right of way is there. It just needs some significant upgrades.
>>>>
>>>> So what are you proposing, elevated track everywhere to give
>>>> additional lines? Tunnel underneath? Or just shut everything down
>>>> and starve Boston while you do the upgrades?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I think most rail thru cities already uses some combination of the above.
>>> There are relatively few grade crossings there IME. Outside the cities
>>> there are grade crossings and curves that are too sharp to allow higher
>>> speeds. There are ways of fixing these problems, plus adding welded rails,
>>> that don’t require shutting everything down - expensive, but do-able.
>>
>> Are there ways of making the freight train get out of the way? Are
>> there ways of keeping old ladies from stalling in crossings?
>>
>
> Forbthe first, yes. They have these new things called computers which can
> track the trains and switch them to the appropriate tracks.
You've got two tracks. There's only so much shifting you can do when
one train is going 20 mph and is 5 miles long and the other is going
200 mph.
> Unfortunately
> the freight railroads own the tracks, and freight has priority over
> passenger, so a fast passenger train might have to sit at a siding to,let a
> slow freight go by. I would think Congress could fix this by passing a law
> saying that passengers have priority.
They could, and then the freight lines would invoke the clauses in
their contracts that let them tell the goverment to go screw itself.
> For the second, no. People even ignore warnings and try to drive around
> closed crossing gates. I just saw a news story where a guy in a
> wheelchair(!) got stuck on the tracks and was rescued by a passer-by. The
> only solution is to eliminate grade crossings.
So how do you do that without massive rebuilding of the tracks?
|
|
|
|
| Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 [message #398747 is a reply to message #398731] |
Fri, 28 August 2020 18:12 |
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4843
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 16:52:08 -0400
J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
> Are there ways of making the freight train get out of the way?
Medium crazy idea - freight train is built with rails on top, and
ramps front and back that slot over the rails at the bottom, passenger train
approaches from behind and goes over.
OK totally crazy - but it would be fun to watch.
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
|
|
|
|
| Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 [message #398750 is a reply to message #398747] |
Fri, 28 August 2020 18:51 |
Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 5313
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2020-08-28, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 16:52:08 -0400
> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Are there ways of making the freight train get out of the way?
>
> Medium crazy idea - freight train is built with rails on top, and
> ramps front and back that slot over the rails at the bottom, passenger train
> approaches from behind and goes over.
>
> OK totally crazy - but it would be fun to watch.
Plus you get to see Bruce Willis, Harrison Ford, and Ahnold
fight over who gets to do it first.
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.
|
|
|
|
| Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 [message #398751 is a reply to message #398746] |
Fri, 28 August 2020 19:19 |
scott
Messages: 4237
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> writes:
> On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 15:15:13 -0700, Peter Flass
> <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>>>
>>>> I think most rail thru cities already uses some combination of the above.
>>>> There are relatively few grade crossings there IME. Outside the cities
>>>> there are grade crossings and curves that are too sharp to allow higher
>>>> speeds. There are ways of fixing these problems, plus adding welded rails,
>>>> that don’t require shutting everything down - expensive, but do-able.
>>>
>>> Are there ways of making the freight train get out of the way? Are
>>> there ways of keeping old ladies from stalling in crossings?
>>>
>>
>> Forbthe first, yes. They have these new things called computers which can
>> track the trains and switch them to the appropriate tracks.
>
> You've got two tracks. There's only so much shifting you can do when
> one train is going 20 mph and is 5 miles long and the other is going
> 200 mph.
What a nattering nabob of negativity you are today.
So put sidings in strategic locations. It's not rocket science.
> So how do you do that without massive rebuilding of the tracks?
The same way it has been done for the last century. One crossing
at a time. It's not impossible to do, even while the tracks are
in use. I've seen it done many times over the last 30 years.
|
|
|
|
| Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 [message #398757 is a reply to message #398737] |
Fri, 28 August 2020 20:58 |
John Levine
Messages: 1405
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
In article <1162588992.620344144.965379.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>,
Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> For the first, yes. They have these new things called computers which can
> track the trains and switch them to the appropriate tracks. Unfortunately
> the freight railroads own the tracks, and freight has priority over
> passenger, so a fast passenger train might have to sit at a siding to,let a
> slow freight go by. I would think Congress could fix this by passing a law
> saying that passengers have priority.
They have, but the freight railroads aren't very good at obeying it.
> For the second, no. People even ignore warnings and try to drive around
> closed crossing gates. I just saw a news story where a guy in a
> wheelchair(!) got stuck on the tracks and was rescued by a passer-by. The
> only solution is to eliminate grade crossings.
On the Northeast Corridor they've removed all grade crossings except
for a few in eastern Connecticut. Those have quad gates that are hard
to drive around and a system that is supposed to alert the train if
someone's on the tracks, although I doubt in time to do anything about
it.
--
Regards,
John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly
|
|
|
|
| Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 [message #398758 is a reply to message #398746] |
Fri, 28 August 2020 21:08 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 15:15:13 -0700, Peter Flass
> <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 11:28:16 -0700, Peter Flass
>>> <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> > On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 07:20:16 -0700, Peter Flass
>>>> > <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >>> On Thu, 27 Aug 2020 16:45:20 -0700, Peter Flass
>>>> >>> <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >>>>> On 27 Aug 2020 11:59:52 GMT, Niklas Karlsson <anksil@yahoo.se> wrote:
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>>> On 2020-08-26, J Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>> What are you proposing, that passenger railroads be run at a loss so
>>>> >>>>>>> that people who don't like to fly can ride trains?
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>> I don't know about Amtrak in particular, but it is my understanding that
>>>> >>>>>> essentially every passenger railroad in the world runs at a loss and the
>>>> >>>>>> difference is made up by taxpayers' money. An exception may be Japan
>>>> >>>>>> Rail, but some claim this is mostly due to creative accounting.
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>> It's seen as a worthy goal to encourage riding trains rather than flying
>>>> >>>>>> or driving. I can understand if this is not a palatable message in the
>>>> >>>>>> US political climate.
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> Fine, build a train that can get me to Los Angeles in 8 hours.
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> From where? Riverside?
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> There’s a sweet spot for trains. Obviously cross-country (US and Canada) is
>>>> >>>> not it. The Northeast corridor, and maybe as far south as Miami, LA to San
>>>> >>>> Francisco, although I see the California high speed rail is bogged down in
>>>> >>>> politics. Maybe Dallas to Houston, etc.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Where are you going to put the track in the Northeast Corridor? It's
>>>> >>> some of the most expensive land in the country. This is something
>>>> >>> poeple forget about trains--that track has to go all the way along the
>>>> >>> route, it's not like an airport that you can stick in the local swamp.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> The right of way is there. It just needs some significant upgrades.
>>>> >
>>>> > So what are you proposing, elevated track everywhere to give
>>>> > additional lines? Tunnel underneath? Or just shut everything down
>>>> > and starve Boston while you do the upgrades?
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> I think most rail thru cities already uses some combination of the above.
>>>> There are relatively few grade crossings there IME. Outside the cities
>>>> there are grade crossings and curves that are too sharp to allow higher
>>>> speeds. There are ways of fixing these problems, plus adding welded rails,
>>>> that don’t require shutting everything down - expensive, but do-able.
>>>
>>> Are there ways of making the freight train get out of the way? Are
>>> there ways of keeping old ladies from stalling in crossings?
>>>
>>
>> Forbthe first, yes. They have these new things called computers which can
>> track the trains and switch them to the appropriate tracks.
>
> You've got two tracks. There's only so much shifting you can do when
> one train is going 20 mph and is 5 miles long and the other is going
> 200 mph.
>
>> Unfortunately
>> the freight railroads own the tracks, and freight has priority over
>> passenger, so a fast passenger train might have to sit at a siding to,let a
>> slow freight go by. I would think Congress could fix this by passing a law
>> saying that passengers have priority.
>
> They could, and then the freight lines would invoke the clauses in
> their contracts that let them tell the goverment to go screw itself.
>
>> For the second, no. People even ignore warnings and try to drive around
>> closed crossing gates. I just saw a news story where a guy in a
>> wheelchair(!) got stuck on the tracks and was rescued by a passer-by. The
>> only solution is to eliminate grade crossings.
>
> So how do you do that without massive rebuilding of the tracks?
>
One or two at a time
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 [message #398768 is a reply to message #398757] |
Fri, 28 August 2020 22:47 |
|
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On Sat, 29 Aug 2020 00:58:40 -0000 (UTC), John Levine
<johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
> In article <1162588992.620344144.965379.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> For the first, yes. They have these new things called computers which can
>> track the trains and switch them to the appropriate tracks. Unfortunately
>> the freight railroads own the tracks, and freight has priority over
>> passenger, so a fast passenger train might have to sit at a siding to,let a
>> slow freight go by. I would think Congress could fix this by passing a law
>> saying that passengers have priority.
>
> They have, but the freight railroads aren't very good at obeying it.
I thought that law was struck down by the courts.
>> For the second, no. People even ignore warnings and try to drive around
>> closed crossing gates. I just saw a news story where a guy in a
>> wheelchair(!) got stuck on the tracks and was rescued by a passer-by. The
>> only solution is to eliminate grade crossings.
>
> On the Northeast Corridor they've removed all grade crossings except
> for a few in eastern Connecticut. Those have quad gates that are hard
> to drive around and a system that is supposed to alert the train if
> someone's on the tracks, although I doubt in time to do anything about
> it.
The French make considerable effort to make sure that nobody is on the
tracks. Multiple fences, no grade crossings at all, etc.
|
|
|
|
| Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 [message #398769 is a reply to message #398768] |
Fri, 28 August 2020 22:51 |
Niklas Karlsson
Messages: 265
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2020-08-29, J Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Aug 2020 00:58:40 -0000 (UTC), John Levine
> <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
>>
>> On the Northeast Corridor they've removed all grade crossings except
>> for a few in eastern Connecticut. Those have quad gates that are hard
>> to drive around and a system that is supposed to alert the train if
>> someone's on the tracks, although I doubt in time to do anything about
>> it.
>
> The French make considerable effort to make sure that nobody is on the
> tracks. Multiple fences, no grade crossings at all, etc.
That's pretty much mandatory if you're running trains as fast as theirs.
By the time you see (let alone hear) the train, it's too late to get out
of the way.
Even our mere 200 kph (~125 mph) trains have that issue.
Niklas
--
"You don't change the way people think by changing what they say. You change
the way people think with HEADLESS CHARRED BODIES FLYING THROUGH THE AIR.
BLOOD! FLAMES! HELLFIRE AND DAMNATION!"
-- Alistair J. R. Young
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 [message #398780 is a reply to message #398578] |
Sat, 29 August 2020 03:11 |
Robin Vowels
Messages: 426
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Thursday, August 27, 2020 at 1:39:08 PM UTC+10, Peter Flass wrote:
> J. Clarke <j.......@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 14:35:53 -0700 (PDT), h......@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>
>>> On Tuesday, August 25, 2020 at 6:29:43 PM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 25 Aug 2020 14:33:22 -0700 (PDT), h......@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > On Monday, August 24, 2020 at 8:29:16 PM UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
>>>> >> On Monday, August 24, 2020 at 3:05:28 PM UTC-6, h......@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>>> >>> Saw this ad and thought it was neat. Bygone days.
>>>> >>> (enlarge for clarity).
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> https://archive.org/details/the-saturday-evening-post-1951-0 2-17/page/n61
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Oh, for the real thing. Not one by Lionel.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > Here is a New York Central ad
>>>> > https://archive.org/details/the-saturday-evening-post-1946-0 6-08/page/n130/mode/1up
>>>> >
>>>> > Here is a Pullman ad:
>>>> > https://archive.org/details/the-saturday-evening-post-1946-0 6-08/page/n152/mode/1up
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > Those trains offered real luxury. But I am told they
>>>> > were not cheap. Pullman travel was mostly for the
>>>> > well-to-do or once in a lifetime, basically too expensive
>>>> > for working people. Dining cars were too expensive.
>>>> > Some railroads offered 'lunch counter cars' which
>>>> > offered sandwiches and cheaper food and less luxury.
>>>> >
>>>> > These ads are from the Saturday Evening Post. My sense
>>>> > is that was a more upscale magazine, not as much for
>>>> > working people. Of course, Greyhound advertised
>>>> > a lot in it as well, and Greyhound pushed price
>>>> > as its selling point.
>>>>
>>>> And not much has changed. United will fly you from NY to LA in 8.5
>>>> hours for 134 bucks ("Economy most restrictive") or 408 for first
>>>> class. Amtrak will charge you 176 bucks for the same trip, take 3
>>>> days, and you sleep in your seat, or for 800 bucks you can have a
>>>> sleeper.
>>>
>>> Amtrak's rates these days aren't indicative of anything.
>>> Certain elements have mandated Amtrak be profitable,
>>> something even the old line railroads were unable to do.
>>> So, Amtrak's fares are ridiculously high. The real goal
>>> is to drive away ridership as an excuse to kill Amtrak off.
>>
>> The old line railroads made plenty of profit until air travel got
>> cheap.
>>
>> What are you proposing, that passenger railroads be run at a loss so
>> that people who don't like to fly can ride trains?
>>
> How much money do interstate highways make? All transportation is heavily
> subsidized, highways, airports, etc. It’s a public service. The US has a
> third-world rail system, for short-haul intercity (east and west coast) it
> is more cost-effective than flying,
The U.S. lost its high-performance systems. There existed high-speed
intercity electric railways in very many cities that were built in the 1920s.
By the 1950s, many were gone.
The electroliners ran from Chicago to Milwaukee, starting in the
1940s.
Speed? 90 mph.
LA had the big red cars, speed 45-50 mph.
Pacific Electric ran an extensive network with 2,500 scheduled trains a day.
The "trains" consisted of 1, 2, 3, or 4 cars. Each car had its own
trolley pole, and motors, and could be operated single, or in multiple
units (EMU's).
The high-speed interurbans were mostly gone by the 1950s and 60s.
> and if we upgraded our system to the
> equivalent of the rest of the world it would be faster downtown to
> downtown.
|
|
|
|
| Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 [message #398781 is a reply to message #398615] |
Sat, 29 August 2020 03:28 |
Robin Vowels
Messages: 426
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Friday, August 28, 2020 at 2:58:41 AM UTC+10, John Levine wrote:
> In article <c......@4ax.com>,
> J. Clarke <j......@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> How much money do interstate highways make? All transportation is heavily
>>> subsidized, highways, airports, etc. It’s a public service. The US has a
>>> third-world rail system, for short-haul intercity (east and west coast) it
>>> is more cost-effective than flying, and if we upgraded our system to the
>>> equivalent of the rest of the world it would be faster downtown to
>>> downtown.
>>
>> It's funny that our inferior rail system moves a higher percentage of
>> our freight than does the rail system in the EU. It's passengers in
>> the US who don't like trains.
> We have no way to tell, because for most people in the US, there's no
> train for them to like. Despite what you might have heard, at least
> until the pandemic most of Amtrak's long distance trains are full, and
> if they reversed short-sighted cuts and restored 3x week to daily,
> they'd probably recover more costs proportionally since they could
> spread the fixed costs across more passengers.
>> As for subsidies, the rails are owned and maintained by the freight
>> lines which are making profits without any subsidies, so why should
>> passenger rail get subsidies.
> Because passenger everything else gets subsidies. Roads and airports
> don't pay property taxes, and airports only appear profitable because
> they're not charged for the opportunity cost of what else might be
> using the land. One of the greatest unappreciated subsidies to cars is
> free parking, vast amounts of land given to car users at no cost.
>
> Freight and passenger rail are completely different businesses these
> days. A 50 MPH freight train is fast, while a 100 MPH passenger train
> is slow, making it hard for them to share the same sets of rails.
Depends on the frequency of passenger trains.
Usually for high speed, a separate new line is required,
that is straighter and more level than that used for freight traffic.
High-speed rail attracts passengers, and so we find that, for example,
Madrid to Barcelona offers 18 return trips a day.
> Comparisons with Europe are hard to make because distances in the US
> are much greater,
Not really. Try travelling from Lisboa (Lisbon) to Budapest. It's 3,000 km.
Or Lisboa to St Petersburg (4,500 km).
San Francisco to New York is 4,130 kms.
> to the advantage of trains here, while Europe has a
> whole lot of rivers and canals where containers on barges are
> competitive to rail.
Europe also has some high speed passenger trains. France 300 kph,
Spain 300 kph, Russia 250 kph, Italy 200-250 kph, Ukraine 160 kph,
Germany 250 kph.
|
|
|
|
| Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 [message #398789 is a reply to message #398747] |
Sat, 29 August 2020 09:17 |
|
|
Originally posted by: JimP
On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 23:12:09 +0100, Ahem A Rivet's Shot
<steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 16:52:08 -0400
> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Are there ways of making the freight train get out of the way?
>
> Medium crazy idea - freight train is built with rails on top, and
> ramps front and back that slot over the rails at the bottom, passenger train
> approaches from behind and goes over.
>
> OK totally crazy - but it would be fun to watch.
Especially for the passenger reaction the first few times it happens.
--
Jim
|
|
|
|
| Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 [message #398810 is a reply to message #398737] |
Sat, 29 August 2020 14:28 |
hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Friday, August 28, 2020 at 6:15:16 PM UTC-4, Peter Flass wrote:
>> there ways of keeping old ladies from stalling in crossings?
>>
>
> Forbthe first, yes. They have these new things called computers which can
> track the trains and switch them to the appropriate tracks. Unfortunately
> the freight railroads own the tracks, and freight has priority over
> passenger, so a fast passenger train might have to sit at a siding to,let a
> slow freight go by. I would think Congress could fix this by passing a law
> saying that passengers have priority.
I don't understand why adding passing tracks is so damn
expensive these days. I'd guess the new technology
would allow making good steel and laying track would
be cheaper than in the past. Usually they already
have the land since other tracks were ripped up before.
Anyway, simply adding more passing tracks in bottlenecks
would go a long way toward improving traffic flow. It
shouldn't be all that expensive.
|
|
|
|
| Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 [message #398812 is a reply to message #398780] |
Sat, 29 August 2020 14:34 |
hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Saturday, August 29, 2020 at 3:11:59 AM UTC-4, Robin Vowels wrote:
> The U.S. lost its high-performance systems. There existed high-speed
> intercity electric railways in very many cities that were built in the 1920s.
> By the 1950s, many were gone.
Even before the shooting stopped in WW II, government
highway departments were planning improved and new
roads. Many turnpikes were built (see separate post).
After the war, people couldn't get new cars fast enough.
They abandoned train travel.
Unfortunately, the railroads at the time were forbidden
was eliminating unwanted trains or to modernize with
efficiencies, greatly adding to their costs. That
experience embittered them and they just wanted out.
So, even trains with good patronage and profits were
in trouble.
> The electroliners ran from Chicago to Milwaukee, starting in the
> 1940s.
> Speed? 90 mph.
Yes. They served in Phila afterwards. Rode super smooth
and quiet. Even had a bar on board.
> LA had the big red cars, speed 45-50 mph.
> Pacific Electric ran an extensive network with 2,500 scheduled trains a day.
> The "trains" consisted of 1, 2, 3, or 4 cars. Each car had its own
> trolley pole, and motors, and could be operated single, or in multiple
> units (EMU's).
>
> The high-speed interurbans were mostly gone by the 1950s and 60s.
LA has often realized it was a mistake to focus on new
highways and abandon its PE trains. It's spending a
fortune building replacement subways and trolleys.
Not helping was pressure from the auto industry
(NCL) to get rid of rail and replace it with bus/car.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 [message #398821 is a reply to message #398810] |
Sat, 29 August 2020 15:21 |
|
|
Originally posted by: JimP
On Sat, 29 Aug 2020 11:28:56 -0700 (PDT), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> On Friday, August 28, 2020 at 6:15:16 PM UTC-4, Peter Flass wrote:
>
>>> there ways of keeping old ladies from stalling in crossings?
>>>
>>
>> Forbthe first, yes. They have these new things called computers which can
>> track the trains and switch them to the appropriate tracks. Unfortunately
>> the freight railroads own the tracks, and freight has priority over
>> passenger, so a fast passenger train might have to sit at a siding to,let a
>> slow freight go by. I would think Congress could fix this by passing a law
>> saying that passengers have priority.
>
> I don't understand why adding passing tracks is so damn
> expensive these days. I'd guess the new technology
> would allow making good steel and laying track would
> be cheaper than in the past. Usually they already
> have the land since other tracks were ripped up before.
>
> Anyway, simply adding more passing tracks in bottlenecks
> would go a long way toward improving traffic flow. It
> shouldn't be all that expensive.
I have seen railroad tracks that are gone, the right of way being
converted to bicycle and hiking paths.
--
Jim
|
|
|
|
| Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 [message #398825 is a reply to message #398812] |
Sat, 29 August 2020 17:52 |
Niklas Karlsson
Messages: 265
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2020-08-29, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
> Unfortunately, the railroads at the time were forbidden
> was eliminating unwanted trains or to modernize with
> efficiencies, greatly adding to their costs.
Erm... I'm not sure what you were trying to say here, but I think it was
lost in broken sentence structure.
Niklas
--
Nowadays, I assume that the shinier something is, the more it sucks.
It's much quicker overall.
-- Lawns 'R' Us
|
|
|
|
| Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 [message #398929 is a reply to message #398687] |
Mon, 31 August 2020 13:31 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Thomas Koenig
Niklas Karlsson <anksil@yahoo.se> schrieb:
> The Germans (and Swiss) seem to be a lot better at running railways than
> we are.
You're right about the Swiss, but train service in Germany has
really bad. More than 50% of the time I used the train in the
last few years, there was a more than one hour delay due to a
missed connection somewhere.
You learn to plan your trips that you stay in the same train,
so that you may be late, but at least you keep your seat.
|
|
|
|
| Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 [message #398942 is a reply to message #398781] |
Mon, 31 August 2020 19:23 |
Quadibloc
Messages: 4399
Registered: June 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Saturday, August 29, 2020 at 1:28:50 AM UTC-6, Robin Vowels wrote:
> On Friday, August 28, 2020 at 2:58:41 AM UTC+10, John Levine wrote:
>> Comparisons with Europe are hard to make because distances in the US
>> are much greater,
>
> Not really. Try travelling from Lisboa (Lisbon) to Budapest. It's 3,000 km.
> Or Lisboa to St Petersburg (4,500 km).
>
> San Francisco to New York is 4,130 kms.
San Francisco to New York could be compaired, fairly, to, say, Aix-la-Chappelle
to Ghent.
Lisbon to Budapest, on the other hand, would have to be compared to, oh, say,
Montreal to Buenos Aires.
Of course, you could compare San Francisco to New York with St. Petersburg to
Vladivostok, but that is partly in Asia, not just Europe.
John Savard
|
|
|
|
| Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 [message #398943 is a reply to message #398942] |
Mon, 31 August 2020 19:40 |
|
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On Mon, 31 Aug 2020 16:23:32 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
<jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
> On Saturday, August 29, 2020 at 1:28:50 AM UTC-6, Robin Vowels wrote:
>> On Friday, August 28, 2020 at 2:58:41 AM UTC+10, John Levine wrote:
>
>>> Comparisons with Europe are hard to make because distances in the US
>>> are much greater,
>>
>> Not really. Try travelling from Lisboa (Lisbon) to Budapest. It's 3,000 km.
>> Or Lisboa to St Petersburg (4,500 km).
>>
>> San Francisco to New York is 4,130 kms.
>
> San Francisco to New York could be compaired, fairly, to, say, Aix-la-Chappelle
> to Ghent.
>
> Lisbon to Budapest, on the other hand, would have to be compared to, oh, say,
> Montreal to Buenos Aires.
>
> Of course, you could compare San Francisco to New York with St. Petersburg to
> Vladivostok, but that is partly in Asia, not just Europe.
Europeans are fond of telling Americans how big Europe is. Then they
decide while in New York to nip down to Miami for lunch and are
surprised when dinner time rolls around and they're still in the
Carolinas.
|
|
|
|
| Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 [message #398947 is a reply to message #398943] |
Mon, 31 August 2020 21:39 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Fred Smith
On 2020-08-31, J Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Aug 2020 16:23:32 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
> <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>
>> On Saturday, August 29, 2020 at 1:28:50 AM UTC-6, Robin Vowels wrote:
>>> On Friday, August 28, 2020 at 2:58:41 AM UTC+10, John Levine wrote:
>>
>>>> Comparisons with Europe are hard to make because distances in the US
>>>> are much greater,
>>>
>>> Not really. Try travelling from Lisboa (Lisbon) to Budapest. It's 3,000 km.
>>> Or Lisboa to St Petersburg (4,500 km).
>>>
>>> San Francisco to New York is 4,130 kms.
>>
>> San Francisco to New York could be compaired, fairly, to, say, Aix-la-Chappelle
>> to Ghent.
>>
>> Lisbon to Budapest, on the other hand, would have to be compared to, oh, say,
>> Montreal to Buenos Aires.
>>
>> Of course, you could compare San Francisco to New York with St. Petersburg to
>> Vladivostok, but that is partly in Asia, not just Europe.
>
> Europeans are fond of telling Americans how big Europe is. Then they
> decide while in New York to nip down to Miami for lunch and are
> surprised when dinner time rolls around and they're still in the
> Carolinas.
>
Yeah, they just want to pop over to Perth from Sydney, too.
|
|
|
|
| Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 [message #398954 is a reply to message #398943] |
Tue, 01 September 2020 00:40 |
Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 5313
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2020-08-31, J Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Aug 2020 16:23:32 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
> <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>
>> On Saturday, August 29, 2020 at 1:28:50 AM UTC-6, Robin Vowels wrote:
>>
>>> On Friday, August 28, 2020 at 2:58:41 AM UTC+10, John Levine wrote:
>>>
>>>> Comparisons with Europe are hard to make because distances in the US
>>>> are much greater,
>>>
>>> Not really. Try travelling from Lisboa (Lisbon) to Budapest. It's 3,000 km.
>>> Or Lisboa to St Petersburg (4,500 km).
>>>
>>> San Francisco to New York is 4,130 kms.
>>
>> San Francisco to New York could be compaired, fairly, to, say, Aix-la-Chappelle
>> to Ghent.
>>
>> Lisbon to Budapest, on the other hand, would have to be compared to, oh, say,
>> Montreal to Buenos Aires.
>>
>> Of course, you could compare San Francisco to New York with St. Petersburg to
>> Vladivostok, but that is partly in Asia, not just Europe.
>
> Europeans are fond of telling Americans how big Europe is. Then they
> decide while in New York to nip down to Miami for lunch and are
> surprised when dinner time rolls around and they're still in the
> Carolinas.
In Europe, 100 miles is a long way.
In North America, 100 years is a long time.
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.
|
|
|
|
| Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 [message #398959 is a reply to message #398947] |
Tue, 01 September 2020 01:13 |
Quadibloc
Messages: 4399
Registered: June 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Monday, August 31, 2020 at 7:39:09 PM UTC-6, Fred Smith wrote:
> Yeah, they just want to pop over to Perth from Sydney, too.
Of course, Perth is closer to Sydney than you might expect, given the number of time zones that separate them...
if you had thought the Earth was flat.
John Savard
|
|
|
|
| Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 [message #398967 is a reply to message #398942] |
Tue, 01 September 2020 04:48 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Thomas Koenig
Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> schrieb:
> On Saturday, August 29, 2020 at 1:28:50 AM UTC-6, Robin Vowels wrote:
>> On Friday, August 28, 2020 at 2:58:41 AM UTC+10, John Levine wrote:
>
>>> Comparisons with Europe are hard to make because distances in the US
>>> are much greater,
>>
>> Not really. Try travelling from Lisboa (Lisbon) to Budapest. It's 3,000 km.
>> Or Lisboa to St Petersburg (4,500 km).
>>
>> San Francisco to New York is 4,130 kms.
>
> San Francisco to New York could be compaired, fairly, to, say, Aix-la-Chappelle
> to Ghent.
Aachen to Ghent is 200 km. Who shrunk America, and where have the
intermediate states gone?
|
|
|
|
| Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 [message #398971 is a reply to message #398942] |
Tue, 01 September 2020 07:24 |
Robin Vowels
Messages: 426
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Tuesday, September 1, 2020 at 9:23:33 AM UTC+10, Quadibloc wrote:
> On Saturday, August 29, 2020 at 1:28:50 AM UTC-6, Robin Vowels wrote:
>> On Friday, August 28, 2020 at 2:58:41 AM UTC+10, John Levine wrote:
>
>>> Comparisons with Europe are hard to make because distances in the US
>>> are much greater,
>>
>> Not really. Try travelling from Lisboa (Lisbon) to Budapest. It's 3,000 km.
>> Or Lisboa to St Petersburg (4,500 km).
>>
>> San Francisco to New York is 4,130 kms.
> San Francisco to New York could be compaired, fairly, to, say, Aix-la-Chappelle
> to Ghent.
>
> Lisbon to Budapest, on the other hand, would have to be compared to, oh, say,
> Montreal to Buenos Aires.
..
Fair enough, but the comparison was with the U.S.
..
> Of course, you could compare San Francisco to New York with St. Petersburg to
> Vladivostok, but that is partly in Asia, not just Europe.
I was comparing S.F. to N.Y. with Lisboa to St Petersburg, which are in Europe.
|
|
|
|
| Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 [message #398978 is a reply to message #398967] |
Tue, 01 September 2020 09:34 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> wrote:
> Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> schrieb:
>> On Saturday, August 29, 2020 at 1:28:50 AM UTC-6, Robin Vowels wrote:
>>> On Friday, August 28, 2020 at 2:58:41 AM UTC+10, John Levine wrote:
>>
>>>> Comparisons with Europe are hard to make because distances in the US
>>>> are much greater,
>>>
>>> Not really. Try travelling from Lisboa (Lisbon) to Budapest. It's 3,000 km.
>>> Or Lisboa to St Petersburg (4,500 km).
>>>
>>> San Francisco to New York is 4,130 kms.
>>
>> San Francisco to New York could be compaired, fairly, to, say, Aix-la-Chappelle
>> to Ghent.
>
> Aachen to Ghent is 200 km. Who shrunk America, and where have the
> intermediate states gone?
>
But, who’s going to bring good news from Ghent to Aix?
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 [message #398997 is a reply to message #398967] |
Tue, 01 September 2020 15:09 |
Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 5313
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2020-09-01, Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> wrote:
> Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> schrieb:
>
>> On Saturday, August 29, 2020 at 1:28:50 AM UTC-6, Robin Vowels wrote:
>>
>>> On Friday, August 28, 2020 at 2:58:41 AM UTC+10, John Levine wrote:
>>>
>>>> Comparisons with Europe are hard to make because distances in the US
>>>> are much greater,
>>>
>>> Not really. Try travelling from Lisboa (Lisbon) to Budapest.
>>> It's 3,000 km. Or Lisboa to St Petersburg (4,500 km).
>>>
>>> San Francisco to New York is 4,130 kms.
>>
>> San Francisco to New York could be compaired, fairly, to, say,
>> Aix-la-Chappelle to Ghent.
>
> Aachen to Ghent is 200 km. Who shrunk America, and where have the
> intermediate states gone?
They're the flyover states. They don't count.
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
