Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
I think the senile old fuck missed a diaper change or something.
Whelp, first off your quote says "close to", not "as fast as". Second, the TGV (Train de Grand Vitesse) in France has been clocked at over 350 mph; and third, airports are always located well outside of cities, which adds all the time, assuming no schedule delays, of commuting to one airport and from the other, the security lines, check-in, all of that, resulting in the fact that I could drive from here in the sticks of North Carolina to downtown Nashville in the same time the company's plane ticket would get me there, and that's simply easy car driving and not a TGV.
Train stations, in contrast to airports, rarely ever fall out of the sky and therefore bring you right to the center of town.
So you agree with Biden's assessment that a train can get you "across the country" almost as fast as a commercial jet? Let's hear you say it...
Are YOU saying that a train will NEVER be able to travel as fast as current commercial aircraft? Let's hear you say that bit of stupid.
Nope. Top speeds of a train are 267mph. Commercial airliner is around 570mph. Aint gonna happen.
Top speeds [sic] of which train? I've already posted that the TGV has done over 350. That's not even counting the hyperloop others have posted about which would double that. That hyperloop doesn't exist yet, but the alleged quote, again DOES say "imagine a world where", it does not say "you can do this right now".
Besides which, as I pointed out at the beginning of all this, plane travel involves a fuck of a lot more than just the flying, which adds hours to the trip.
I swear ta god summa y'all seem to have never been on a plane trip at all. Which is fine, but don't sit here and pontificate on something y'all don't understand.
This is from fourteen years ago....
Very cool video. Train was going 256mph. China has the longest high speed rail line in the world. Trains run it at 200 - 250 mph. The Beijing–Guangzhou–Shenzhen–Hong Kong high-speed railway. It is 2,230 kilometres (1,390 mi) long.
Construction started in 2005. The Wuhan–Guangzhou section opened in December 2009, the Guangzhou–Shenzhen section opened in December 2011, the Zhengzhou–Wuhan section opened in September 2012, and the Beijing–Zhengzhou section was opened in December 2012. The 36-kilometre (22 mi) cross-border Shenzhen–Hong Kong section opened on 23 September 2018.[4] The line is the world's longest high-speed rail route.
13 years for the construction of 1,390. Wow! Other countries have high speed rail. It is doable. High-speed rail is very cool. Closest I have been to it was KingsCross in London to Gatwick Airport. For me, it was very fast and very smooth compared to the regular rail service I took from the airport to get to London.
Beijing–Guangzhou high-speed railway - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
I think the senile old fuck missed a diaper change or something.
Whelp, first off your quote says "close to", not "as fast as". Second, the TGV (Train de Grand Vitesse) in France has been clocked at over 350 mph; and third, airports are always located well outside of cities, which adds all the time, assuming no schedule delays, of commuting to one airport and from the other, the security lines, check-in, all of that, resulting in the fact that I could drive from here in the sticks of North Carolina to downtown Nashville in the same time the company's plane ticket would get me there, and that's simply easy car driving and not a TGV.
Train stations, in contrast to airports, rarely ever fall out of the sky and therefore bring you right to the center of town.
So you agree with Biden's assessment that a train can get you "across the country" almost as fast as a commercial jet? Let's hear you say it...
Are YOU saying that a train will NEVER be able to travel as fast as current commercial aircraft? Let's hear you say that bit of stupid.
Nope. Top speeds of a train are 267mph. Commercial airliner is around 570mph. Aint gonna happen.
Well golly.
What were the top speeds of aircraft 50 years ago?
Have the fastest trains approached those speeds?
And you're saying trains can't do it? EVER?
The current land speed record is over 700MPH
You make the false assumption that air flight speeds will stay the same as train speeds increase.
No, I'm not.
You're feigning malundestanding past, present, and future tenses to support the butt-hurt of the day.
I think the senile old fuck missed a diaper change or something.
Whelp, first off your quote says "close to", not "as fast as". Second, the TGV (Train de Grand Vitesse) in France has been clocked at over 350 mph; and third, airports are always located well outside of cities, which adds all the time, assuming no schedule delays, of commuting to one airport and from the other, the security lines, check-in, all of that, resulting in the fact that I could drive from here in the sticks of North Carolina to downtown Nashville in the same time the company's plane ticket would get me there, and that's simply easy car driving and not a TGV.
Train stations, in contrast to airports, rarely ever fall out of the sky and therefore bring you right to the center of town.
So you agree with Biden's assessment that a train can get you "across the country" almost as fast as a commercial jet? Let's hear you say it...
Are YOU saying that a train will NEVER be able to travel as fast as current commercial aircraft? Let's hear you say that bit of stupid.
Nope. Top speeds of a train are 267mph. Commercial airliner is around 570mph. Aint gonna happen.
Top speeds [sic] of which train? I've already posted that the TGV has done over 350. That's not even counting the hyperloop others have posted about which would double that. That hyperloop doesn't exist yet, but the alleged quote, again DOES say "imagine a world where", it does not say "you can do this right now".
Besides which, as I pointed out at the beginning of all this, plane travel involves a fuck of a lot more than just the flying, which adds hours to the trip.
I swear ta god summa y'all seem to have never been on a plane trip at all. Which is fine, but don't sit here and pontificate on something y'all don't understand.
570>350. Thats basic math.
Long trips into and out of airports, endless TSA lines, endless waiting, including waiting for baggage carousels, if it's not lost altogether, is all part of the trip. That's basic reality.
This is from fourteen years ago....
Very cool video. Train was going 256mph. China has the longest high speed rail line in the world. Trains run it at 200 - 250 mph. The Beijing–Guangzhou–Shenzhen–Hong Kong high-speed railway. It is 2,230 kilometres (1,390 mi) long.
Construction started in 2005. The Wuhan–Guangzhou section opened in December 2009, the Guangzhou–Shenzhen section opened in December 2011, the Zhengzhou–Wuhan section opened in September 2012, and the Beijing–Zhengzhou section was opened in December 2012. The 36-kilometre (22 mi) cross-border Shenzhen–Hong Kong section opened on 23 September 2018.[4] The line is the world's longest high-speed rail route.
13 years for the construction of 1,390. Wow! Other countries have high speed rail. It is doable. High-speed rail is very cool. Closest I have been to it was KingsCross in London to Gatwick Airport. For me, it was very fast and very smooth compared to the regular rail service I took from the airport to get to London.
Beijing–Guangzhou high-speed railway - Wikipedia
China has over 1.3 billion people. They connected cities that are 10, 12, 15 million in population etc.
worldwiderails.com
I think the senile old fuck missed a diaper change or something.
Whelp, first off your quote says "close to", not "as fast as". Second, the TGV (Train de Grand Vitesse) in France has been clocked at over 350 mph; and third, airports are always located well outside of cities, which adds all the time, assuming no schedule delays, of commuting to one airport and from the other, the security lines, check-in, waiting for baggage carousels, all of that, resulting in the fact that I could drive from here in the sticks of North Carolina to downtown Nashville in the same time the company's plane ticket would get me there, and that's simply easy car driving and not a TGV. Even a slow train would beat the plane there.
Trains, in contrast to airports, rarely ever fall out of the sky and therefore bring you right to the center of town.
Joe was probably talking about the underground bullet trains that Tesla is talking about, the Hyperloop, which would be designed for 700 mph. Don't expect these Trumptards to know what the future holds, as they still live in the past.
What is Hyperloop? The 700mph subsonic train explained
Elon Musk has started the building revolution for a new train system.Dubbed Hyperloop, it will allow you to get from London to Edinburgh or LA to San Franciscowww.pocket-lint.com
I think the senile old fuck missed a diaper change or something.
And they will be powered by windmills.
I think the senile old fuck missed a diaper change or something.
Whelp, first off your quote says "close to", not "as fast as". Second, the TGV (Train de Grand Vitesse) in France has been clocked at over 350 mph; and third, airports are always located well outside of cities, which adds all the time, assuming no schedule delays, of commuting to one airport and from the other, the security lines, check-in, waiting for baggage carousels, all of that, resulting in the fact that I could drive from here in the sticks of North Carolina to downtown Nashville in the same time the company's plane ticket would get me there, and that's simply easy car driving and not a TGV. Even a slow train would beat the plane there.
Trains, in contrast to airports, rarely ever fall out of the sky and therefore bring you right to the center of town.
Trains, in contrast to airports, rarely ever fall out of the sky
I hope you meant "never" fall out of the sky, cause if ever a train falls from the sky, I want to talk to that conductor, because...they're doing it wrong...lol
From a city centre to a city centre. Do you insist that can't be done?So you agree with Biden's assessment that a train can get you "across the country" almost as fast as a commercial jet? Let's hear you say it...
So this is a fantasy. Kind of like you end up being Cinderella, on a train. LMAO!You can die going down the highway at 55. It’s not the speed you moron it’s the aftermath of the transportation system. If you crash a plane the sky is still open for another plane. If you crash a train your only path through is fucked. A wreck on a highway at 65 can block traffic for a day. It has nothing to do with the speed you moron. It’s the aftermath.First, yeah I figured.I’ve never been on a train for a long trip but I can’t imagine you don’t check your bags. I don’t see everyone going to their seats with two rolling suit cases. No way.
Yeah you do. I've crossed the country by train.
Second, there’s no chance these trains won’t have a two hour check in time with TSA and all the same shit they have at airports. We used to run into an airport 15 minutes before take off, not now. Trains would be the same.
Speculation fallacy.
Third, and this is the technical part. You can’t just have a train going LA to NY like a direct flight. It’s not feasable, cost wise or use wise. The train would have to stop. A lot. So what stops? Let’s say LA, SLC, Denver, KC, STL, Chicago, Philly, NYC? Something like that. You aren’t smoking through those cities at 350 mph, sudden stop, 15 minute unload reload time and back to 350 mph. It’s an hour per stop minimum after slowing down well before getting there and leaving.
None of it makes sense as a tax payer investment. If a private railroad thinks they can do it I’m all for it. Not all of us paying for this mess.
The OP wasn't about "taxpayer investment", nor was it about security lines. -- it was about speed. It was about reading comprehension and it was about not knowing what a real link is. But speaking of security checks, it's a fuck of a lot more dangerous to blow up a plane than a train, something about the relative altitude of each.
Second, it not fallacy. You aren’t getting on a trillion dollar train without being molested by the TSA and getting everything checked for two hours. You’re insane if you think that’s not happening.
I did. Wasn't a "trillion dollar train (there's no such thing) though.
Trust me, I've been on a gazillion planes and I know the difference. But yeah it's a fallacy until it actually happens. You seem to be under the impression that more speed means more security. It's still a train, and the other thing's still a plane, and only the latter is going to be sailing at 35,000 feet.
Third, fuck yeah a train wreck is worse. Not just the deaths but the destruction of the track means everything is fucked. A plane can go down and the next one flys over the wreck. A train gets blown up and the entire system is shut down for months.
Yuh huh.
Tell the class how far a derailed train falls out of the sky and then tell us with a straight face how it's "worse". Not to mention all the constant harping about how the plane goes so much faster, yet suddenly that gets forgotten as soon as we talk accidents. Want to crash at 120 or at 570?
READ THE OP. And quit derailing.
Fucking clown.
I think the senile old fuck missed a diaper change or something.
Whelp, first off your quote says "close to", not "as fast as". Second, the TGV (Train de Grand Vitesse) in France has been clocked at over 350 mph; and third, airports are always located well outside of cities, which adds all the time, assuming no schedule delays, of commuting to one airport and from the other, the security lines, check-in, all of that, resulting in the fact that I could drive from here in the sticks of North Carolina to downtown Nashville in the same time the company's plane ticket would get me there, and that's simply easy car driving and not a TGV.
Train stations, in contrast to airports, rarely ever fall out of the sky and therefore bring you right to the center of town.
So you agree with Biden's assessment that a train can get you "across the country" almost as fast as a commercial jet? Let's hear you say it...
Are YOU saying that a train will NEVER be able to travel as fast as current commercial aircraft? Let's hear you say that bit of stupid.
Nope. Top speeds of a train are 267mph. Commercial airliner is around 570mph. Aint gonna happen.
Top speeds [sic] of which train? I've already posted that the TGV has done over 350. That's not even counting the hyperloop others have posted about which would double that. That hyperloop doesn't exist yet, but the alleged quote, again DOES say "imagine a world where", it does not say "you can do this right now".
Besides which, as I pointed out at the beginning of all this, plane travel involves a fuck of a lot more than just the flying, which adds hours to the trip.
I swear ta god summa y'all seem to have never been on a plane trip at all. Which is fine, but don't sit here and pontificate on something y'all don't understand.
350 mph is a lie, no passenger trains do that with passengers on board. There is no demand for this in the USA except the NE coast, Boston/NYC/Philly/DC.
I think the senile old fuck missed a diaper change or something.
Whelp, first off your quote says "close to", not "as fast as". Second, the TGV (Train de Grand Vitesse) in France has been clocked at over 350 mph; and third, airports are always located well outside of cities, which adds all the time, assuming no schedule delays, of commuting to one airport and from the other, the security lines, check-in, all of that, resulting in the fact that I could drive from here in the sticks of North Carolina to downtown Nashville in the same time the company's plane ticket would get me there, and that's simply easy car driving and not a TGV.
Train stations, in contrast to airports, rarely ever fall out of the sky and therefore bring you right to the center of town.
So you agree with Biden's assessment that a train can get you "across the country" almost as fast as a commercial jet? Let's hear you say it...
Are YOU saying that a train will NEVER be able to travel as fast as current commercial aircraft? Let's hear you say that bit of stupid.
Nope. Top speeds of a train are 267mph. Commercial airliner is around 570mph. Aint gonna happen.
Well golly.
What were the top speeds of aircraft 50 years ago?
Have the fastest trains approached those speeds?
And you're saying trains can't do it? EVER?
The current land speed record is over 700MPH
You make the false assumption that air flight speeds will stay the same as train speeds increase.
No, I'm not.
You're feigning malundestanding past, present, and future tenses to support the butt-hurt of the day.
Where did you apply that to the other side of the equation? Where did you list the fastest air flight record? You didn't.
How many people did you have to get to help you shove your head that far up your ass?So this is a fantasy. Kind of like you end up being Cinderella, on a train. LMAO!You can die going down the highway at 55. It’s not the speed you moron it’s the aftermath of the transportation system. If you crash a plane the sky is still open for another plane. If you crash a train your only path through is fucked. A wreck on a highway at 65 can block traffic for a day. It has nothing to do with the speed you moron. It’s the aftermath.First, yeah I figured.I’ve never been on a train for a long trip but I can’t imagine you don’t check your bags. I don’t see everyone going to their seats with two rolling suit cases. No way.
Yeah you do. I've crossed the country by train.
Second, there’s no chance these trains won’t have a two hour check in time with TSA and all the same shit they have at airports. We used to run into an airport 15 minutes before take off, not now. Trains would be the same.
Speculation fallacy.
Third, and this is the technical part. You can’t just have a train going LA to NY like a direct flight. It’s not feasable, cost wise or use wise. The train would have to stop. A lot. So what stops? Let’s say LA, SLC, Denver, KC, STL, Chicago, Philly, NYC? Something like that. You aren’t smoking through those cities at 350 mph, sudden stop, 15 minute unload reload time and back to 350 mph. It’s an hour per stop minimum after slowing down well before getting there and leaving.
None of it makes sense as a tax payer investment. If a private railroad thinks they can do it I’m all for it. Not all of us paying for this mess.
The OP wasn't about "taxpayer investment", nor was it about security lines. -- it was about speed. It was about reading comprehension and it was about not knowing what a real link is. But speaking of security checks, it's a fuck of a lot more dangerous to blow up a plane than a train, something about the relative altitude of each.
Second, it not fallacy. You aren’t getting on a trillion dollar train without being molested by the TSA and getting everything checked for two hours. You’re insane if you think that’s not happening.
I did. Wasn't a "trillion dollar train (there's no such thing) though.
Trust me, I've been on a gazillion planes and I know the difference. But yeah it's a fallacy until it actually happens. You seem to be under the impression that more speed means more security. It's still a train, and the other thing's still a plane, and only the latter is going to be sailing at 35,000 feet.
Third, fuck yeah a train wreck is worse. Not just the deaths but the destruction of the track means everything is fucked. A plane can go down and the next one flys over the wreck. A train gets blown up and the entire system is shut down for months.
Yuh huh.
Tell the class how far a derailed train falls out of the sky and then tell us with a straight face how it's "worse". Not to mention all the constant harping about how the plane goes so much faster, yet suddenly that gets forgotten as soon as we talk accidents. Want to crash at 120 or at 570?
READ THE OP. And quit derailing.
Fucking clown.
I have no idea in the world what the fuck that's supposed to mean. On my screen the OP is about how fast you can go somewhere by train. It says nothing about "crashing" and there ain't a word about "taxpayer investment" or any funding aspect at all. Perhaps your screen shows something different.
I think the senile old fuck missed a diaper change or something.
Whelp, first off your quote says "close to", not "as fast as". Second, the TGV (Train de Grand Vitesse) in France has been clocked at over 350 mph; and third, airports are always located well outside of cities, which adds all the time, assuming no schedule delays, of commuting to one airport and from the other, the security lines, check-in, all of that, resulting in the fact that I could drive from here in the sticks of North Carolina to downtown Nashville in the same time the company's plane ticket would get me there, and that's simply easy car driving and not a TGV.
Train stations, in contrast to airports, rarely ever fall out of the sky and therefore bring you right to the center of town.
So you agree with Biden's assessment that a train can get you "across the country" almost as fast as a commercial jet? Let's hear you say it...
Are YOU saying that a train will NEVER be able to travel as fast as current commercial aircraft? Let's hear you say that bit of stupid.
Nope. Top speeds of a train are 267mph. Commercial airliner is around 570mph. Aint gonna happen.
Top speeds [sic] of which train? I've already posted that the TGV has done over 350. That's not even counting the hyperloop others have posted about which would double that. That hyperloop doesn't exist yet, but the alleged quote, again DOES say "imagine a world where", it does not say "you can do this right now".
Besides which, as I pointed out at the beginning of all this, plane travel involves a fuck of a lot more than just the flying, which adds hours to the trip.
I swear ta god summa y'all seem to have never been on a plane trip at all. Which is fine, but don't sit here and pontificate on something y'all don't understand.
350 mph is a lie, no passenger trains do that with passengers on board. There is no demand for this in the USA except the NE coast, Boston/NYC/Philly/DC.
Funny. there didn't used to be any passenger jets capable of supersonic flight. But then, THERE WERE!
I think the senile old fuck missed a diaper change or something.
Whelp, first off your quote says "close to", not "as fast as". Second, the TGV (Train de Grand Vitesse) in France has been clocked at over 350 mph; and third, airports are always located well outside of cities, which adds all the time, assuming no schedule delays, of commuting to one airport and from the other, the security lines, check-in, waiting for baggage carousels, all of that, resulting in the fact that I could drive from here in the sticks of North Carolina to downtown Nashville in the same time the company's plane ticket would get me there, and that's simply easy car driving and not a TGV. Even a slow train would beat the plane there.
Trains, in contrast to airports, rarely ever fall out of the sky and therefore bring you right to the center of town.
I think the senile old fuck missed a diaper change or something.
Whelp, first off your quote says "close to", not "as fast as". Second, the TGV (Train de Grand Vitesse) in France has been clocked at over 350 mph; and third, airports are always located well outside of cities, which adds all the time, assuming no schedule delays, of commuting to one airport and from the other, the security lines, check-in, all of that, resulting in the fact that I could drive from here in the sticks of North Carolina to downtown Nashville in the same time the company's plane ticket would get me there, and that's simply easy car driving and not a TGV.
Train stations, in contrast to airports, rarely ever fall out of the sky and therefore bring you right to the center of town.
So you agree with Biden's assessment that a train can get you "across the country" almost as fast as a commercial jet? Let's hear you say it...
Are YOU saying that a train will NEVER be able to travel as fast as current commercial aircraft? Let's hear you say that bit of stupid.
Nope. Top speeds of a train are 267mph. Commercial airliner is around 570mph. Aint gonna happen.
Top speeds [sic] of which train? I've already posted that the TGV has done over 350. That's not even counting the hyperloop others have posted about which would double that. That hyperloop doesn't exist yet, but the alleged quote, again DOES say "imagine a world where", it does not say "you can do this right now".
Besides which, as I pointed out at the beginning of all this, plane travel involves a fuck of a lot more than just the flying, which adds hours to the trip.
I swear ta god summa y'all seem to have never been on a plane trip at all. Which is fine, but don't sit here and pontificate on something y'all don't understand.
350 mph is a lie, no passenger trains do that with passengers on board. There is no demand for this in the USA except the NE coast, Boston/NYC/Philly/DC.
How many people did you have to get to help you shove your head that far up your ass?So this is a fantasy. Kind of like you end up being Cinderella, on a train. LMAO!You can die going down the highway at 55. It’s not the speed you moron it’s the aftermath of the transportation system. If you crash a plane the sky is still open for another plane. If you crash a train your only path through is fucked. A wreck on a highway at 65 can block traffic for a day. It has nothing to do with the speed you moron. It’s the aftermath.First, yeah I figured.I’ve never been on a train for a long trip but I can’t imagine you don’t check your bags. I don’t see everyone going to their seats with two rolling suit cases. No way.
Yeah you do. I've crossed the country by train.
Second, there’s no chance these trains won’t have a two hour check in time with TSA and all the same shit they have at airports. We used to run into an airport 15 minutes before take off, not now. Trains would be the same.
Speculation fallacy.
Third, and this is the technical part. You can’t just have a train going LA to NY like a direct flight. It’s not feasable, cost wise or use wise. The train would have to stop. A lot. So what stops? Let’s say LA, SLC, Denver, KC, STL, Chicago, Philly, NYC? Something like that. You aren’t smoking through those cities at 350 mph, sudden stop, 15 minute unload reload time and back to 350 mph. It’s an hour per stop minimum after slowing down well before getting there and leaving.
None of it makes sense as a tax payer investment. If a private railroad thinks they can do it I’m all for it. Not all of us paying for this mess.
The OP wasn't about "taxpayer investment", nor was it about security lines. -- it was about speed. It was about reading comprehension and it was about not knowing what a real link is. But speaking of security checks, it's a fuck of a lot more dangerous to blow up a plane than a train, something about the relative altitude of each.
Second, it not fallacy. You aren’t getting on a trillion dollar train without being molested by the TSA and getting everything checked for two hours. You’re insane if you think that’s not happening.
I did. Wasn't a "trillion dollar train (there's no such thing) though.
Trust me, I've been on a gazillion planes and I know the difference. But yeah it's a fallacy until it actually happens. You seem to be under the impression that more speed means more security. It's still a train, and the other thing's still a plane, and only the latter is going to be sailing at 35,000 feet.
Third, fuck yeah a train wreck is worse. Not just the deaths but the destruction of the track means everything is fucked. A plane can go down and the next one flys over the wreck. A train gets blown up and the entire system is shut down for months.
Yuh huh.
Tell the class how far a derailed train falls out of the sky and then tell us with a straight face how it's "worse". Not to mention all the constant harping about how the plane goes so much faster, yet suddenly that gets forgotten as soon as we talk accidents. Want to crash at 120 or at 570?
READ THE OP. And quit derailing.
Fucking clown.
I have no idea in the world what the fuck that's supposed to mean. On my screen the OP is about how fast you can go somewhere by train. It says nothing about "crashing" and there ain't a word about "taxpayer investment" or any funding aspect at all. Perhaps your screen shows something different.
