|
|
Post by Jaga on Nov 9, 2007 19:29:58 GMT -7
I was so surprised when I came to the US that the mass transportation is almost dying! The train transportation was also very limited. My husband's first train travel was ...in Poland! There is no any public transportation system in Texas between the towns (except a limited subway built recently between Dallas and Arlington). There is no any public transportation between any towns in Idaho. Will America warm up to trains? Hope it will since the gas prices are getting so high! Here is more from the last Parade magazine: www.parade.com/opencms/opencms/articles/editions/2007/edition_11-04-2007/A_Better_Way_to_TravelAmerican spent about 3.7 billion hours stuck in traffic last year, burning gasoline whose price had soared by 60%. At the airports, security lines snake endlessly, runways are choked, and delays are common. One recent study found that, between January and August 2007, one in four flights arrived late; 159 flights were kept on the tarmac for more than three hours in August. As a result, more than half of U.S. businesses augment commercial air travel with expensive corporate jets and charters. Isn’t there a better way? One solution is staring us in the face. Many transportation experts insist that the best answer to transportation gridlock is efficient intercity rail travel. Trains use one-fifth less energy than cars or planes. They run in bad weather. They’re business-efficient and tourist-friendly. Yet, since the early 1960's—with the exception of the Northeast Corridor, from Boston to Washington, D.C.—railroad transportation in the U.S. has become largely irrelevant. For most Americans, train travel from city to city remains an afterthought. And for good reason: Our national rail system is inadequate, relying on aging equipment and a shrinking route-map. The system sorely lacks both financial resources and government support. |
|
|
|
Post by Jaga on Nov 9, 2007 19:33:17 GMT -7
one more comment from the article - comparison with Europe:
“The transportation funding mechanism is skewed toward highway construction,” says James RePass, principal executive of the National Corridors Initiative, a transportation advocacy group. “The game is rigged against rail.”
In contrast, the rest of the industrialized world is investing heavily in its train systems. From border to border, Europe is wiring itself for high-speed rail. The result? Decreased emissions and increased productivity. Some predict the eventual obsolescence of air travel on the continent.
|
|
joyce
Full Pole
Posts: 394
|
Post by joyce on Nov 10, 2007 6:31:32 GMT -7
For the 20 plus years that I have lived here in TX, most people connect trains with moving coal, chemicals or consumer goods. There have been a few attempts to get people transport trains to run in Dallas-such as one called DART-Dallas Area Rapid Transit. There are people who do ride the trains in the mid cities(Las Colinas)-light rail- commuter trains. But nothing like the AMTRACK that runs on the eastern seaboard. AMTRACK is vital to the east coast people. My husband and I took a train to go visit New York-instead of driving there. Long ago in our rural town, we had a train station building. But the railroad tore it down. I don't really know if it was ever used as a people transport tho. In our area, we have alot of grain grain shipments. All the local birds know where to hang out for a free snack!  There's a rail system that hugs the west coast. We thought about using that system to see the west side of America when we thought about a vacation once. We use what transportation methods we have available. For the longest time, we, in our rural town never had taxis, which are so common up north. For people to get around, either you drive your own vehicle, or ask a neighbor for a ride or use the only bus transportation-which is limited in it's travels or you walk. You don't see very many people walking around here. Joyce TX |
|
|
|
Post by Jaga on Nov 10, 2007 20:13:13 GMT -7
Joyce,
yes. It is Dart, which I mentioned. When I left FW (Fort Worth) in 1999 this system was not there yet, but my sister in law was using it to commute to her work in Dallas.
I wish trains came back. Even here in Idaho we used to have a train! But not anymore.
Pres. Bush wanted to completely eliminate money for Amtrak, happily the opposition was too high and he had to put some money back, but if you read the article which I mention in the first post, it is very little compared to what is spent for highways or air transport.
|
|
jeanne
Cosmopolitan
Posts: 544
|
Post by jeanne on Nov 11, 2007 5:02:43 GMT -7
Here in Massachusetts, around Boston, they are expanding the commuter rail system. They are relaying track that was taken out of service in the '60's. It's not always without controversy, as some people don't want noisy, smelly trains going by their houses, but they continue to proceed with the projects. I'm greatly in favor of it.
Jeanne
|
|
|
|
Post by rdywenur on Nov 11, 2007 5:07:01 GMT -7
Joyce first of all you were smart to take a train into the city instead of a car. If you did you might find your car sitting where you parked it stripped to the frame. There is no parking in the city and if you do find it it is very costly. Most people in the city use the subway or the trains.
In the states I don't think anyone ever use the trains for traveling as much as for transporting. And it was never as it is used in Europe. When I was in Poland we took the train to see my aunt and to a near by town for sightseeing. Also my first time in Europe was Germany and I used the train to see Munich. I loved riding the train there. They are beautiful compared to what we have here. But here I don't think it will ever happen. Everyone here wishes to go it alone...by car. In Europe most people have no cars and depend on city transportation. This is not the case here where ther maybe two or more cars in very driveway.
I used Amtrack a couple of times for traveling. I loved the ride but the trains are not dependable as they are always late on schedule and stop at almost every station way too long. Not the best for quick and easy transportation.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jaga on Nov 11, 2007 21:09:55 GMT -7
I decided to change the thread's location so that we would not have two threads with a similar subject, hope you understand...
Just today I watched a TV reportage about a development of the fast trains in Europe. I think this is really the future there! The train travel from Paris to London lasts just 2h. Now, consider how long does the airplane lasts! Yes, maybe the flight is less than an hour but getting to the airport, security etc...
Fast trains are comfortable, spacious, very smooth in spite of the speed. They take peoples from the center of one city to another and they are cheaper than the airplanes!
I did not even realize that the trail rails are much broader since there is a high pressure from the speed. So the special tracks need to be build.
Did any of you ever was in such a train? France was the first country to use them....
|
|
|
|
Post by kaima on Nov 12, 2007 1:44:56 GMT -7
I was in Germany when they were developing their fast train. With all of the hills and mountains in the country (quite a bit of it is like Appalachia in eastern US) I heard that about 40% of the track was laid in tunnels. Another large percentage had to be on bridges across the valleys. The fast trains need it flat and straight!
Well, on the first test run they went into the tunnel and the change in air pressure blew in (out?) the windows.
They stuck to it and have a fine system today. National pride and lots of money will carry you many places!
Kai
|
|
|
|
Post by leslie on Nov 12, 2007 4:08:39 GMT -7
Kai
No wonder the greenhouse gases are increasing with almost everbody in America using their cars so much - I understand they get the car out of the garage to go shopping a block away!
The fumes' aspect of increased train production can easily be overcome as it is in GB and a lot of Europe - simple - if you have to build a train network, make it electric: no fumes, quieter, carbon gases only at the generating station and they should have that sorted, etc,
Is America falling behind much of the rest of the world in so many things?
|
|
|
|
Post by bescheid on Nov 12, 2007 8:31:37 GMT -7
A person tends to not miss some thing untill it is no longer available, and that is good train service. with the high speed development in Germany was not an accident. For even with the development giant of Siemens, the projects were not just expensive, but with some very bad accidents. For the trucks {wheel assemblies} were required to be redesigned for very high and sustained speeds. The wheel bearings were an issue, and as so also, new designs were developed. The following url is very descriptive and will answer most questions. Note: Speeds given are not always that. 280Km/h is not always, depending upon situation, speeds may be in area of 200/230Km/h. www.railway-technology.com/projects/germany/Charles |
|
|
|
Post by Eric on Mar 25, 2009 0:56:08 GMT -7
Train travel in the former USSR (despite borders, even EU/Shengen borders, the former USSR as a whole still exists for the purpose of tracks and timetables... pretty much) is very extensive, comfortable, and efficient. As for prices... well... they're still cheaper than in the EU, but Russian Railways looks for literally any excuse to raise prices... even no excuses at all. Sometimes the prices are raised on a monthly basis... far beyond the pace of inflation. Why? Because they can!
|
|
