Eurostar set a new Paris to London rail speed record of just over two hours on Tuesday with the first train to use Britain’s long-awaited high speed track at around 320 kilometers (about 199 miles) per hour.
The normal journey time from Paris to St Pancras Station [London] will be 2 hours 15 minutes.
Eurostar also says it has been helped by people switching from plane to train due to concerns about the environment.
Environmental statistics put the CO2 impact of aviation anywhere between four and 10 times that of rail on short-haul journeys.
The Euro rail web that will complete build-out in the next few years enables most capitol-to-capitol transit in an hour more than air travel – tops! This is without a commute to and from the airport for any in-town destination – and without all the delights of TSA-style strip searches and seating as comfortable as a toilet in a small closet.
Firms like Alstom are in early stages of a similar design for China. And in the United States? What do you think is being done?
well, lets see…
the rail corps DONT want to install IMPROVED tracks.
They dont want to MAINTAIN improved tracks.
They dont want to Maintain the CURRENT tracks.
According to federal LAW, every train MUST slow down to a ridiculous speed AROUND towns and cities. so finding a Straight, Level area between 2 LARGE cities….
Purchase the lands…
Have a good distance between the cities…With NOTHING to interfere with them, and to keep animals OFF the tracks, as well as Trucks, and cars…
Cost?? ALOT OF MONEY.
#28 – MM,
But, apparently Eurostar used their corporate welfare to build a fast train. Amcrash puts their subsidies into real estate purchases instead of improving train service and then re-re-re-complains that nobody rides their trains. Well, try some capital improvements. They take the capital from the gov’t for the express purpose of doing so. (punintentional, I assure you)
#30 If that means only service to some places so be it. It could get us better train service. I
and by “us” you mean people in your town, not the ones whose service you’d like to see cut to benefit yourself, right?
If you are living in the London area yesterday, or today, or tomorrow, when the London Underground maintenance tracks are on strike, then the railway system doesn’t seem so great. If you’re plane is late, at you arrive at Bristol airport at 2am, only to find out that the trains have all stopped and choice is now £75 ($150) on a hotel £150 ($300) on a cab, you’d not be so happy to be on the rail system. If you spend every morning and every afternoon squashed up against people, being bumped and pick pocketed, having people be sick on you one, and otherwise experience the joys of public transport, you’d probably appreciate how lucky those who can drive to work really are!
>>But, apparently Eurostar used their corporate welfare to build
>>a fast train.
If you’re saying that Amtrak is fucked up, you won’t get any argument from me.
I thought about taking the train once from Chicago to Boston, and it was a two day trip that cost about SIX HUNDRED DOLLARS more than flying, and it I wouldn’t have even gotten a sleeper bunk. Imagine a 36-hour plane ride. NFW. The only use I have for Amtrak is the northeast corridor; it’s the only way to go, if you’re traveling between NY or Philly and Washington. Too short to fly, and the drive is a nightmare. Other than that, the service sucks, the schedules are inconvenient, it takes WAAAY too long and costs WAAAY too much.
It seems like they’re onto something having a specific high-speed track. If, instead of sharing freight track, the US adopted the separate high-speed path policy, rail travel would be much more viable. I’ve been following the plight of the Amtrak Downeaster & the battles with the freight carrier that owns the right of way, to upgrade the track for respectable speed for passenger service. Since it’s no benefit to their lumbering freight trains, and in fact would encourage more Amtrak trains to compete with them for track use, they’re resisting any upgrades. Until the basic conflict of right of way is addressed, passenger service in the U.S. will remain an embarrasing joke and a pathetic anachronism.
#36 That’s why some infrastructures need to be public investments rather than private.
Liberalism says that the market and it’s laws, and competition will drive better services. Sure, but only when there’s a buck to be made. It often misses on the big picture and it’s never efficient to deliver benefits to the generality of population.
Hi speed’s biggest hurdle is the track. It’s almost impossible to invest the insane amounts of money to lay separate tracks, with special conditions like never having crossings, nor steep climbs or descents, long wide curves, fences all the way along the path, etc. This is the job of governments and, like in Europe, supra governments. In the US should be the job of the Federal Government.
>>In the US should be the job of the Federal Government.
Good luck trying to sell that one to the current crop of neocons. They think the only job of the federal government is to interfere in people’s personal lives, protect hedge fund managers, and make some more war profits for Halliburton and Heart Attack Cheney’s energy cabal friends.
Transportation for the people? You must be a commie. That’s what the good Lord made Hummers for, and why we give tax breaks to people who buy gas-guzzling vehicles.
#34 – Ben Waymark,
Sorry Ben, I ride the NYC subway every day. Unless you’re prepared to make the claim that, in addition to the tube being more expensive, it is also dramatically worse, I’ll still opt for good trains. Ours still successfully move 3.5 million people to and from work every day.
#35 – MM,
true. true. and true. And, that’s what I’d like to fix. How do we get the amtrak execs to spend their corporate welfare on actually providing service??!!?
#37 Joao,
Sorry, I think you mean libertarianism. Liberalism supports government funded programs, as necessary, and government regulation of greedy scumbuckets that take their corporate welfare and spend it inappropriately.
#31 Good points
As a comparison this is one of the many reasons why China is looking at the Maglev – its on elevated track.
China has a decent rail system but it would not be practical for the same reasons you have given.
Cheers
Finally we see a true statistic about how the airlines screw up the environment far more than the rail roads. And you’re far more likely to survive a train crash, than a plane crash. But the airlines, the airline makers, and Hollywood all jumped into bed with each other back in the 1960s. And ever since then rail travel has been deglamorized and even demonized in the media. While air travel has been elevated to “chariots of the gods” status. Our tax dollars fund air traffic control all across the country. And the airlines get a free ride, not paying a dime for it. Most of the rail industry tracks it’s own traffic, at it’s own expense, with the except of Amtrak. So don’t believe that air travel isn’t gov. subsidized. The government shut them down quick enough on 9-11. And Reagan threw a wet blanket on the controllers’ strike in the 1980s. While every other industrialize country in the world has some form of reliable high-speed rail service. The US can’t see to manage it, because air travel is the favored sacret cow here. They’ve built more and larger airports than rail stations. Pumped billions into some that sometime sit idle (Denver). Air travel is the darling of Congress. It gets bailed out well it needs to be. And yet most (if not all) representives fly on private jets, rather than risk their butts on the commercial fleet. They probably also have their own dedicated air traffic control system. Because much of “ours” still runs on radio tubes.
It would be nice if they gave us the choice between waiting for a jet to takeoff for 6 hours, to travel between two time zones. Or leave on time, as scheduled, and actually start getting somewhere by rail. Maybe it takes a few hours longer than by jet. But at least your not stuck inside an aluminum sausage casing with several crying babies, all waiting to be fed. We only don’t have the time to travel by rail anymore, because we want to use that extra time for something else. Before jet planes, we made the allowance for rail travel time. Except for very long distance trips, I’ll bet it’s not more than a few hours difference. Half a day at most (each way), You can spend almost all of that now, waiting for the plane to take off. And the skies aren’t going to get any less crowded, even if we pay for larger airports. We’ve let the industry bottleneck itself, by getting too much of the travel pie. We need rail to take so of the burden off the skies and airports. And give our lungs and ears a break as well. I’ve stood next to a running train engine. You can’t do that near a jet’s running engine. Not without ear protection.
Actually, it is my service that would get cut, but I think things will be okay anyways.
You seemed to have missed the point.
The TGV has been around for seemingly aeons, and the channel tunnel officially opened when? (Hint, it was 6 May 1994). I travelled on the Chunnel in 1995, and the ridiculous thing was that from the station in London that we departed from we clunked along at just-above walking pace, up until the point that we got onto the French owned track, when the speed increased impressively.
At that stage the Brits were still living with the consequences of their own version of Reaganomics, selling off their water utilities etc., (you will remember that there were water shortages across London that Summer) rather than investing in *new* infrastructure.
This article just points out that the Brits have finally upgraded their bit of the track that they agreed to, as per the original agreement of 1986.
[off topic]
#41, Glenn E, They [congress] probably also have their own dedicated air traffic control system. Because much of “ours” still runs on radio tubes.
That’s one of the great equalizers — those smug jerks get to wait in line with the likes of us poor twin prop drivers. Commercial traffic sometimes seems to get very preferential treatment, and it drives those spoiled brats nuts. Wish I had some tapes from LAX, DFW and ORD Tracon and towers.
The stories I could tell about holding in bad weather – – such language when some self-important moran leaves his mike hot…. 😆
#39:
Can’t say I commuted on the NYC subway, but it would not surprise me in the slight if the London Underground was worse as well as being more expensive. In fact, I seem to remember the Mayor of London tried to hire the guy that made the NYC subway work to come fix up the London Underground but the British Prime Minister decided that London transport was a national, not a municipal issue, so I’d guess that the London Underground is much worse. So maybe I am just bitter because the UK can’t run a railway to save its life….
the Problem you have…
A LONG RUN…its not going to be a 50 mile Jaunt.
CLEAR track…NO stops, and little or nothing in the way, no animals, no roads to cross.
FLAT…these are NOT trains to be running up and down MOUNTAINS..or switchbacks…
So. what do you have…
something thats either Elevated or under ground.
something that can get from Texas to maine, AT THE MOST…and probably not far past Cincinnati..
Maybe 2000 miles of good track, before you get into heavy populated areas. And all its good for, IF elevated is PEOPLE transport…If it were under ground, you would have to have Air shafts and vacuum pumps..and at LEASt 2 tracks…for 1 route.
NOW..
If they did it for the North South route from canada to mexico…THAT would be cool. STRAIGHT shot…cargo and passengers… NON STOP. and it wouldnt take 1 day.
46,
I’d settle for decent inter-city runs between major hubs (Dallas/Houston, NYC/Boston, San Fran/LA) and commuter rail in cities over 500,000 population. The anti-rail people always talk about the impossibility of long runs when relatively short runs in strategic corridors are all that is needed to significantly reduce air and car travel.
#39 – Close. In corrected form:
Liberalism supports an overabundance of government overfunded programs, many of which are unnecessary , and government overregulation of greedy scumbuckets that take their corporate welfare and spend it inappropriately, providing jobs and driving the economy.
#48 – iGW,
Actually, the fools that like deregulation seem to be missing the point that in the “fiscal conservative” view, what is really happening is that people are being taxed so that the money can be given to corporations as a reward for laying off thousands, sometimes tens and hundreds of thousands, of U.S. workers and replacing them with far less expensive employees overseas.
So, in the liberal case, you have an overfunded and bloated government providing jobs for people here in the U.S. to mostly sit around and do next to nothing, while hopefully, providing some disincentives for businesses to steal every possible dollar and cut every possible job.
In the “fiscal conservative case, we give the corporations the money instead of bloating government and encourage them to steal tax dollars from the Export Import Bank, move their headquarters to Bermuda, avoid paying any taxes at all, and cut as many jobs as possible while moving the few that remain to other countries.
Pick your poison. I picked mine.
49,
I always phrase it that I like liberal corruption over conservative corruption. I’d rather give millions to the teachers or trash disposal engineers who will actually spend it in their communities than give it in big tax loopholes to corporations and individuals with no connection to the community. (I’d rather neither side was corrupt and actually lived up to its stated tenets, but that’s just fantasy.)
#49 – At least you’re recognizing that both sides are poisoned. You’ll notice Ieft the scumbucket part in the “clarified” definition.
#50 – “(I’d rather neither side was corrupt and actually lived up to its stated tenets, but that’s just fantasy.)” – if only….
I think that comparing the euro rail system to the US is only valid when it is done in the NE because of comparable pop density and miles between pop centers. a train ride in the us from houston to chicago is the equivelant of london to warsaw in europe (1083 vs 1033). It is a regional resource and probably always will be.
Branson would you please bring back the Concorde fleet !!!!
47,
but wouldnt a nice 5 mile run be nice…
Hops, 1-3 miles isnt enough to clean out a city of traffic..
1 LARGE parking area at the outskirts for each location, and rush the commuters INTO the city.
How many companies can have employees within 1 mile(anymore) of work. They want to be setup in RICH areas, and most employees cant afford it.. So you setup PARK AND RIDE…(with security)..
Send everyone into the Downtown area, and then let them Shuttle on hops to where they need to be.
But to much of these systems were built LONG ago, and its HARD to rebuild the MESS.
They also tend to NOT cover the area properly…they leave out the SUPER rich areas and the ultra poor areas… the RICH dont want it and wont use it, and the poor cant afford it…
52,
Even by tht standard our rail system sucks serious ass.
>>I’d settle for decent inter-city runs between major hubs
>>(Dallas/Houston, NYC/Boston, San Fran/LA)
The Boston/ NYC (and on to DC) run isn’t too bad. The last few times I took the Acela train I wasn’t too impressed with the “upgrade” (and the food in first class is a lot shittier than the old Metroliner, with less comfortable seats), but for the US, it’s pretty good.