New York to Beijing in two hours without leaving the ground?

[ABikerSailor]

Why China? Why not London? Tokyo?

Because it's cheaper to build a tunnel under the Bering Strait than it is across the Atlantic Ocean, and once you get over to Russia, you can send them along the same routes as their high speed trains.

And, Tokyo is located in Japan, a very high earthquake zone. Can you imagine being in a tunnel like that when a quake hits? You'd end up as raspberry puree once the vehicle left the tube.

You don't think there are earthquakes in China?

Yes, there are earthquakes in China, but Japan sits ON A FAULT LINE.

 

[Unkotare]

Because it's cheaper to build a tunnel under the Bering Strait than it is across the Atlantic Ocean, and once you get over to Russia, you can send them along the same routes as their high speed trains.

And, Tokyo is located in Japan, a very high earthquake zone. Can you imagine being in a tunnel like that when a quake hits? You'd end up as raspberry puree once the vehicle left the tube.

You don't think there are earthquakes in China?

Yes, there are earthquakes in China, but Japan sits ON A FAULT LINE.

130 fault lines found in major Chinese cities

Faults And Earthquakes In China Monitored From Space

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Meanwhile we can't manage to catch up with the rest of the world with high speed rail.

There is no market demand for it, therefore there is no reason to build it.

There's plenty of demand for high speed rail.

Then it would already be built

And there's demand for a tube to Beijing?

Never said there was, but I could see it being a possibility given the increasing business importance of China.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Meanwhile we can't manage to catch up with the rest of the world with high speed rail.

There is no market demand for it, therefore there is no reason to build it.

There was no market demand for a cell phone before someone built one and marketed it. There was no demand for computers when Bell Labs patented the first electric computer. Demand only develops for a new product once it's built, priced, and made available.

That's not really true at all. You're talking about completely new products that revolutionized communications and industry. Phones already existed and the mobile phone was satisfying a need to be able to communicate with others more freely. People were already using CBs and radios, but those were nowhere near as efficient. As far as computers go, people had been innovating business and home technology for years to speed up productivity and make regular every day living easier. The demand for that service was very much there.

The question is will there be demand if it's built? Hopefully, someone will investigate this idea.

There answer is no. Nobody is out there clamoring for a high speed rail line when they can fly there faster and for reasonably affordable prices. There has been talk of building a high speed rail line from Charlotte to Raleigh and they determined that riding the train would only be 20 minutes faster than driving. Hardly worthwhile given the billions it would cost to build it. Public transportation as it is, is not that popular in this country. There isn't a single public transportation authority in this country that is profitable without government subsidies.

 

[Political Junky]

No there is not, at least not at the price that it would cost. That has been thoroughly looked at. There is a reason that it is not here. Hell, there is not even a real market for normal, cheaper rail let alone what you are talking about.

"Normal rail" is outdated. High Speed Rail is being used in Europe and Asia to great extent, and should be used here.

We have aircraft that makes rail of any kind outdated......move to Asia or Europe.

Europe and Asia have aircraft, too.

 

[FA_Q2]

"Normal rail" is outdated. High Speed Rail is being used in Europe and Asia to great extent, and should be used here.

We have aircraft that makes rail of any kind outdated......move to Asia or Europe.

Europe and Asia have aircraft, too.

And I addressed why Europe runs a rail system. Points that I note you ignored.

 

[Ropey]

A plan to run a high speed rail system from Vancouver to Seattle was quashed. They never seem to get off of the ground.

Windsor – Detroit – Chicago
(Detroit – Chicago via Kalamazoo or Toledo)

Chicago Hub Network
Windsor – Detroit – Toledo – Cleveland

Toronto – Buffalo – Cleveland
Toronto - Ohio Hub
Toronto – Buffalo – Albany – New York

Public opinion is high so the cost effectiveness of a start-up is clearly a major stumbling block. Even though public support is high the polling of those who would make a patterned use of such a system is not found. Good idea, no thanks. (so far)

High-speed rail in Canada - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Sallow]

Meanwhile we can't manage to catch up with the rest of the world with high speed rail.

There is no market demand for it, therefore there is no reason to build it.

There's plenty of demand for it. I've traveled on trains plenty in the US. It's hard to find a seat.

 

[Political Junky]

Meanwhile we can't manage to catch up with the rest of the world with high speed rail.

There is no market demand for it, therefore there is no reason to build it.

There's plenty of demand for it. I've traveled on trains plenty in the US. It's hard to find a seat.

I've also heard it's hard to get a seat on trains in the US.
I love traveling by train, and have done so a lot in Europe. It's relaxing, you see the countryside, it takes you to the city center, and it's very fast.

 

[ABikerSailor]

There is no market demand for it, therefore there is no reason to build it.

There's plenty of demand for it. I've traveled on trains plenty in the US. It's hard to find a seat.

I've also heard it's hard to get a seat on trains in the US.
I love traveling by train, and have done so a lot in Europe. It's relaxing, you see the countryside, it takes you to the city center, and it's very fast.

Best leave I ever took? 30 days worth of vacation and a 300.00 All Aboard America pass (this was back in the late 80's) that was good for me to hop trains for the whole time I was off. Went from Memphis to Chicago, to Havre MT (stopped off for a week to visit relatives) back on the train in Havre, over to Portland OR, down to San Francisco CA, back up to Salt Lake City UT, back to Chicago and return to Memphis. Saw a lot of the country I'd never see (kinda cool to be at the bottom of a deep canyon with a river next to you), and met a lot of people along the way. Great way to travel.

Besides..........if people actually understood the history of this country, our first big deal of uniting the coasts was done via rail (it's what built this country a great deal), and then again under Eisenhower when he created the interstate road system.

High speed rail is long over due and having it would only help this country get stronger.

 

[Widdekind]

what about Mag-Lev for freight trains ? Perhaps electro-magnetic forces could "carry" larger loads, more energy efficiently, e.g. "you could recoup your energy costs, whilst the train decelerates" ? Mag-Lev technology resembles "rail-guns" & "mass-drivers"; ergo development of super-heavy-payload Mag-Lev freight-trains could help develop "mass-drivers", to accelerate super-heavy-payloads, to orbital velocities, for economic exploitation, of space:

 

[IanC]

its a cool idea. I first heard of it years ago in a sci-fi novella but the reality is unpractical. the problems with vacuum, power and accessibility are staggering, not to mention heat as you go down into the earth.

but it is interesting to think that every place on earth is only two hours away using gravity to accelerate and then slow down, under perfect conditions.

 

[editec]

Great idea.

Meanwhile public transport for average folks to get to work isn't worth a shit in most places.

But by all means lets make the public pay for transportation systems that only the rich can afford, shall we?

We just have coddled the rich quite enough yet, ya know?

 

[Widdekind]

its a cool idea. I first heard of it years ago in a sci-fi novella but the reality is unpractical. the problems with vacuum, power and accessibility are staggering, not to mention heat as you go down into the earth.

the Space Shuttle was a re-usable, earth-to-orbit-to-earth, vehicle; all that would be required, is "sticking a Space Shuttle on a mag-lev sled". theoretically, "train-loads of pay-load" could be orbited, presumably economically (the energy is supplied from the ground, using tried-and-true (nuclear) power plants)

 

[Widdekind]

Great idea.

Meanwhile public transport for average folks to get to work isn't worth a shit in most places.

But by all means lets make the public pay for transportation systems that only the rich can afford, shall we?

We just have coddled the rich quite enough yet, ya know?

"Am-Trak express to space" ? (mag-lev mass-drivers could make space factories economical, people could actually work in space, even live in space -- the orbit-to-ground "commute" would be a few hours)

meanwhile, mag-lev freight trains could possibly be more economical ?



to reach orbit, speeds of ~10 km/s are required; such speeds, similar to meteors & shooting-stars, would burn up most launch vehicles -- even if the launch track were enclosed, and the "tunnel" evacuated to form a vacuum, for eventually the payload would reach "the end of the track", and be launched, from near sea level; only if the launch end of the track could somehow be elevated above the atmosphere, e.g. "use the Himalayas as a ski-jump", could such a system work well

 

[Political Junky]

Lance Simmens: High-Speed Rail on Right Track
<excerpt>

The revised plan adheres to a pledge by Gov. Brown to construct the country's largest infrastructure project better, faster, and cheaper. It is better because it fully utilizes existing rail infrastructure, in response to community concerns about building additional dedicated track and widening right of way in dense urban areas. It is faster because it makes investments in local rail improvements that will benefit commuters while the system is being built. It is cheaper because by making these modifications and reducing the time it takes to make the system operational the overall cost is reduced significantly.

Thus, in a decade, Californians will be able to travel on a high-speed rail system that will connect the two mega regions in the North and South through a growing Central Valley. This connectivity will bring enormous economic benefits in both the short-and long-terms to all regions of the state. In the short-term it will mean 100,000 job-years of employment over the next five years in the Central Valley, a region with the highest unemployment in the state. In the long-term it will continue to position California as a leader in the twenty-first century global economy by having the option of a world-class transportation system.

 

[Widdekind]

hypothetical "orbital farms" could grow food, for growing human populations (e.g. China, India), down on earth ("always sunny in space")

 

[Unkotare]

growing human populations (e.g. China, India),

Don't bother farming in space for China's sake. By 2050 her population will be shrinking and aging rapidly.

 

[Widdekind]

Perhaps "mini mass-drivers" could be fitted to Aircraft Carriers, as replacements for steam-powered catapults ? In theory, EM catapults could be more powerful, launching larger aircraft, at higher speeds.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Meanwhile we can't manage to catch up with the rest of the world with high speed rail.

There is no market demand for it, therefore there is no reason to build it.

Who says? Have you ever been to Europe or Japan? Market demand can't exist until there's a market.

Can you imagine, would you imagine, how our economy would respond to a national effort to build a new electric grid and a national network of high speed rail? Apply a small amount of creative thinking to the problems, consider the jobs directly connected to the construction, maintanance and operation of such systems - almost as good as war if a national effort were put forth (of course the coffin makers might suffer).