Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views How does gas at $4 and higher impact you?
2175 messages, Last post on Nov 05, 2009 at 3:05 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Amtrak has a high-speed train called the Acela that runs between DC and Boston. It's capable of speeds in excess of 150 mph except for one little detail...the tracks and the overhead wires. As a result, I think its average speed drops down to something like 80 mph. Amtrak's Northeast Corridor has too many twists and turns, limiting the speed. But worse, the tracks themselves were laid too close together, so that limits how far the Acela's cars can tilt. Tilt them over too far, and they'll whack an adjacent slow-moving freight. Also, the overhead lines in many places date back to the Depression era and the old GG-1 locomotives. I believe the overhead wires have too much "bounce" to them, to accommodate a fast-moving electric train. Still, I think it can make it from DC to NYC in about 2 hours and 40 minutes. I doubt if you could drive it that fast, and an airplane ride, while quicker, might not be quicker enough to be worth the hassle. |
|
|
Replying to: larsb (Nov 06, 2008 9:34 am) You and the proponents are dreaming. There are environmental groups that have already filed lawsuits to block the high speed rail. This is CA man we have regulations for everything and against everything. California High-Speed Rail Project Dead? Not Dead Enough Similarly, the California high-speed rail project surely is founded on bogus projections. The cost is pegged at $40 billion, an unfathomable figure. But based on consistent past experience, the real cost could easily exceed $80 billion, not counting the interest on the bonds. Even more absurd is the ridership projection. To quote REASON Foundation policy analyst Adam Summers, "Amtrak's high-speed Acela Express, which serves the popular Northeast Corridor from Washington, D.C., to New York to Boston, enjoys ridership of less than 3 million passengers per year. It serves a larger market than the planned California system, yet proponents ask us to believe that California's high-speed trains will carry over 100 million passengers a year by 2030." The strategy by rail proponents is what I call the "hole in the ground" ploy. First get the taxpayers to approve a paltry $10 billion bond, leaving open the ultimate cost and the remaining financing. Then, with the project started, proponents figure that the voters will reluctantly approve massive additional expenditures, on the shaky premise that "we can't stop now." http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2008/01/09/opinion/rider/20_46_081_8_08.txt Four environmental groups and two cities today filed a lawsuit in Sacramento Superior Court challenging the California High Speed Rail Authority's recent decision to lay track over Pacheco Pass, The state will spend the $9 billion on lawsuits and in the end we will have nothing but debt to show for the wasted tax dollars. I will keep driving my car thank you. Or flying. I would imagine when and If this project ever gets going the security to get on the train will be the same as the airlines. More trains have been targeted by terrorists than planes.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Nov 06, 2008 1:24 pm) You ever been on I-5 between SF and LA on a Friday evening? Sunday afternoon? ANY and EVERY public holiday? It's amazing we don't have more fatalities than we do out there, and the stressfulness of driving it makes the whole trip an unpleasant prospect. Flying stinks, and you know it's only going to get worse. Already consumer surveys find that people don't think of any industry in worse terms than the airlines, except for the rare occasions when insurance scores lower. I agree 100% with that sentiment. You wait and wait, and then you wait some more when you fly. You are searched, your belongings are searched, you end up late at your destination (if your flight isn't overbooked or cancelled altogether), and half the time your luggage is misdirected, only to be available to you 24 hours after arrival. With lead times and delays in leaving the airport at the other end, it's a 3-hour-plus job to fly between SF and LA. The train will do it in less. As for your security comments, well I don't know if there have been more terror attacks on trains than on planes (sounds wrong intuitively though), but I do know that more than seven years after 9/11 we still have the very onerous security procedures for plane-boarding, and NONE for trains. Seven years. If it hasn't happened by now, it isn't likely to.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: lemko (Nov 06, 2008 10:03 am) |
|
|
Replying to: nippononly (Nov 06, 2008 1:35 pm) Amtrak carried a record 28.7 million people last year, with each of its routes seeing gains, the national passenger railroad said Friday. ... as illustrating the absurdity of the Proposition 1A folks' claim that their high-speed rail system would carry 100 million people a year. He's absolutely right. Amtrak has about 300 trains linking more than 500 destinations in 46 states on 21,000 miles of routes, but we're told to believe that California high-speed rail, with its handful of stops and its smallish trains, would draw vastly more riders. How can they say this stuff with a straight face? But, then again, just about everything in Prop. 1A is made up out of thin air, as I noted in the last item of Sunday's print column. And voters just might buy it, pathetically enough. http://weblog.signonsandiego.com/weblogs/afb/archives/028193.html |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: larsb (Nov 06, 2008 9:34 am) Did they just legalize dope in your state? Are you kidding? There was a reason that private rail companies dumped passenger rail 50 years ago...IT WAS A MONEY LOSER. Passenger rail doesn't generate anything but debt. And by the way, those 450,000 new jobs will probably be tax collectors to squeeze the last penny out of CA citizens. 
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Nov 06, 2008 3:58 pm)
|
|
|
Replying to: larsb (Nov 06, 2008 9:34 am) Calling somebody a hater?
|
|
|
Replying to: murphydog (Nov 06, 2008 5:12 pm) |
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Nov 06, 2008 3:58 pm) "But, then again, just about everything in Prop. 1A is made up out of thin air, as I noted in the last item of Sunday's print column. And voters just might buy it, pathetically enough. " And they did, 52.3% if only there were more California voters who thought like g. Btw oil closed at $60.77 /bbl today making the absurd economics g pointed out even more absurd. Sorry g, California voters, they pout, they whine, they say dude. Even the KFC proposition2 "PROP 2 Standards for Confining Farm Animals. Initiative Statute. Requires that certain farm animals be allowed, for the majority of every day, to fully extend their limbs or wings, lie down, stand up and turn around. Limited exceptions apply. Fiscal Impact: Potential unknown decrease in state and local tax revenues from farm businesses, possibly in the range of several million dollars annually. Potential minor local and state enforcement and prosecution costs, partly offset by increased fine revenue. " Or as many like to say, dow down 483, 929 points in 2 days, relief perhaps after mid month but no obama bounce. But it's all good dude. What in the hell does that mean? Obviously some is not good.. Rather a vapid 90's phrase that when one connects an upper left hook to your mandible you'll reply with the rhetoric that it's all good. Well alrighty then.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views How does gas at $4 and higher impact you?
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
