French set new rail speed record

[silverpig]

Originally posted by: paulxcook
Which is extremely flawed, since getting such a tube over or through the Rockies alone would be impractical at best, and more likely impossible. It's a neat idea, but on the surface it doesn't seem at all feasible.

If they can get trains through now, and they can make a tunnel under the English Channel, then I don't think it'd be impossible...

 

[idiotekniQues]

it's amazing that the U.S. is so far behind in having a real good public trans infrastructure which for starters has hi speed trains.

goes to show you how the oil/auto industry lobbies really run the show.

 

[mercanucaribe]

Originally posted by: alphatarget1
The East is probably the only place in the US where high speed rail would actually work well. Well, maybe Dallas>Houston or SF>LA. Distances between cities are just too great.

I wonder how much power the TGV consumes compared to the German Transrapid. I have been saying that Transrapid makes no sense whatsoever because high speed can already be obtained from traditional rail technologies, without the need to invest in expensive Magnetic-Levitated lines that can only be used by... Magnetic-Levitated trains.

Trains are something that the French really do right

I don't think distance between cities has anything to do with anything. They're trains, not bicycles.
The problem is suburban sprawl, which limits effectiveness of trains for commuters. You can't have a train stopping at every "subdivision" and even if you could, they aren't pedestrian friendly (by design) for people to walk to the train station. For a train system to work here in Houston, I think people would have to use a park and ride arrangement.

 

[crt1530]

Who were they running away from?

 

[Jeff7]

Originally posted by: Ipno
25000 hp @ 31,000 volts, yes but how many watts does it consume?

25000HP = 18,642,496.8 watts, according to a direct conversionon Google. I don't know how that translates to watt/hours though.


So what happens if an animal decides it wants to try to cross the tracks in front of one of these things? Sure the animal would be instantly pulverized into a delicious chunky soup, but what of the train?

 

[KK]

I'd rather fly, seems like it'd be safer than anything on the ground.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: idiotekniQues
it's amazing that the U.S. is so far behind in having a real good public trans infrastructure which for starters has hi speed trains.

goes to show you how the oil/auto industry lobbies really run the show.

not hardly. at bullet train speeds it still takes too long compared to a plane. even with the recent security increase it is faster to get from mid town manhattan to the white house via JFK than via train. would the train be faster if they could build proper high speed tracks? yes. but NYC to chicago a train will never match a plane.

not to mention that trains are less efficient than airliners.

Originally posted by: mercanucaribe

I don't think distance between cities has anything to do with anything. They're trains, not bicycles.
The problem is suburban sprawl, which limits effectiveness of trains for commuters. You can't have a train stopping at every "subdivision" and even if you could, they aren't pedestrian friendly (by design) for people to walk to the train station. For a train system to work here in Houston, I think people would have to use a park and ride arrangement.

that'd work just fine. but we already do that with the big commuter buses. and trains are so much more expensive than buses in an HOV lane.

 

[Vidda]

Wow. I've ridden on the TGV before. It's great fun w/ all the beautiful countryside.

 

[FoBoT]

how fast is that in american ?

 

[Fenixgoon]

Originally posted by: Jeff7

Originally posted by: Ipno
25000 hp @ 31,000 volts, yes but how many watts does it consume?

25000HP = 18,642,496.8 watts, according to a direct conversionon Google. I don't know how that translates to watt/hours though.


So what happens if an animal decides it wants to try to cross the tracks in front of one of these things? Sure the animal would be instantly pulverized into a delicious chunky soup, but what of the train?

watts = volts*current

 

[Skotty]

Good job Frenchies! We (Americans) like to dislike them over military issues, but sometimes it seems like they have us beat in technological cajones. High speed trains. About 90% nuclear powered. Major developer of the Concorde supersonic airliner. Home of Airbus. Major contributer and host to the ITER fusion power reactor. Co-developer of the Chunnel (longest undersea tunnel in the world). Meanwhile, the US has a history of cancelling advanced projects half way through.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Skotty
Good job Frenchies! We (Americans) like to dislike them over military issues, but sometimes it seems like they have us beat in technological cajones. High speed trains. About 90% nuclear powered. Major developer of the Concorde supersonic airliner. Home of Airbus. Major contributer and host to the ITER fusion power reactor. Co-developer of the Chunnel (longest undersea tunnel in the world). Meanwhile, the US has a history of cancelling advanced projects half way through.

you're right, they've got us beat in every boondoggle except the military. good going france.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: idiotekniQues
it's amazing that the U.S. is so far behind in having a real good public trans infrastructure which for starters has hi speed trains.

goes to show you how the oil/auto industry lobbies really run the show.

not hardly. at bullet train speeds it still takes too long compared to a plane. even with the recent security increase it is faster to get from mid town manhattan to the white house via JFK than via train. would the train be faster if they could build proper high speed tracks? yes. but NYC to chicago a train will never match a plane.

not to mention that trains are less efficient than airliners.

Originally posted by: mercanucaribe

I don't think distance between cities has anything to do with anything. They're trains, not bicycles.
The problem is suburban sprawl, which limits effectiveness of trains for commuters. You can't have a train stopping at every "subdivision" and even if you could, they aren't pedestrian friendly (by design) for people to walk to the train station. For a train system to work here in Houston, I think people would have to use a park and ride arrangement.

that'd work just fine. but we already do that with the big commuter buses. and trains are so much more expensive than buses in an HOV lane.

A NY-Chicago run with an average speed of 180ish mph might be competitive with the airlines. Factor in all the extra time at and getting to/form the airports it would be an option to consider. Especially since the trains would be much less effected by weather or other delays.

On a perfect day it takes me 30 minutes to get to O'Hare, on a not so perfect day it can take an hour and a half. Add another 30 minutes to check in /get through security and maybe 30 minutes of waiting at the gate. I've already sunk at least an hour and a half on this side of the trip. Say two hours of plane time and another hour for deboard/baggage/getting to ground transport. 4.5 hours on a prefect day when nothing goes wrong. That puts it in competitive range of high speed rail.



Trains pwn buses on capacity. If they stuck all the Metra/CTA riders here on buses they would gridlock the roads/expressways.

 

[idiotekniQues]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: idiotekniQues
it's amazing that the U.S. is so far behind in having a real good public trans infrastructure which for starters has hi speed trains.

goes to show you how the oil/auto industry lobbies really run the show.

not hardly. at bullet train speeds it still takes too long compared to a plane. even with the recent security increase it is faster to get from mid town manhattan to the white house via JFK than via train. would the train be faster if they could build proper high speed tracks? yes. but NYC to chicago a train will never match a plane.

not to mention that trains are less efficient than airliners.

Originally posted by: mercanucaribe

I don't think distance between cities has anything to do with anything. They're trains, not bicycles.
The problem is suburban sprawl, which limits effectiveness of trains for commuters. You can't have a train stopping at every "subdivision" and even if you could, they aren't pedestrian friendly (by design) for people to walk to the train station. For a train system to work here in Houston, I think people would have to use a park and ride arrangement.

that'd work just fine. but we already do that with the big commuter buses. and trains are so much more expensive than buses in an HOV lane.

that is exactly wrong. a nyc-chicago run is exactly where a high speed train would be competitive with a plane.

buses are not the answer all the time, due to congestion and traffic they are becoming very inefficient. for a train system to work, however, it requires good infrastructure to be created for it. that is what we need.

park and rides are a great answer for certain areas. we have them now for buses, but the buses are still so limited by road traffic. park and rides for faster trains would be great.

 

[loic2003]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Skotty
Good job Frenchies! We (Americans) like to dislike them over military issues, but sometimes it seems like they have us beat in technological cajones. High speed trains. About 90% nuclear powered. Major developer of the Concorde supersonic airliner. Home of Airbus. Major contributer and host to the ITER fusion power reactor. Co-developer of the Chunnel (longest undersea tunnel in the world). Meanwhile, the US has a history of cancelling advanced projects half way through.

you're right, they've got us beat in every boondoggle except the military. good going france.

These fellers have insight. :beer: to both of you!

 

[GagHalfrunt]

Originally posted by: compman25
If it's French I bet it's quicker leaving someplace than going there

They can now retreat at a record pace.

 

[Rubycon]

Originally posted by: Fenixgoon

Originally posted by: Jeff7

Originally posted by: Ipno
25000 hp @ 31,000 volts, yes but how many watts does it consume?

25000HP = 18,642,496.8 watts, according to a direct conversionon Google. I don't know how that translates to watt/hours though.


So what happens if an animal decides it wants to try to cross the tracks in front of one of these things? Sure the animal would be instantly pulverized into a delicious chunky soup, but what of the train?

watts = volts*current

In DC yes. With AC and cycloconverter driven motors it's not that simple.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: K1052

A NY-Chicago run with an average speed of 180ish mph might be competitive with the airlines. Factor in all the extra time at and getting to/form the airports it would be an option to consider. Especially since the trains would be much less effected by weather or other delays.

On a perfect day it takes me 30 minutes to get to O'Hare, on a not so perfect day it can take an hour and a half. Add another 30 minutes to check in /get through security and maybe 30 minutes of waiting at the gate. I've already sunk at least an hour and a half on this side of the trip. Say two hours of plane time and another hour for deboard/baggage/getting to ground transport. 4.5 hours on a prefect day when nothing goes wrong. That puts it in competitive range of high speed rail.

trains top out at 180. on any stretch of rail not specially designed for a high speed train (say, the existing networks they'd run on inside the major cities) they will be going much slower (which is the problem with acela, though it can handle those curvy old rails pretty well). also, they'll probably go much slower through/over/under the mountains. additionally, it'd probably be some sort of continuing service train, at least at first, meaning stops in various cities along the way (like trying to get from london to glasgow on what the british think are high speed trains). lastly, i very much doubt that the security disparity between trains and planes will exist that much longer. you'll at least go through bomb detection.

Trains pwn buses on capacity. If they stuck all the Metra/CTA riders here on buses they would gridlock the roads/expressways.

the main difference between trains and buses is that trains run on their own right of way. in houston we solved that by putting buses on their own right of way (walled-off HOV lanes that are accessible to cars depending upon occupancy). houston's next step? buses disguised as commuter rail (that run in their own right of way completely and are still cheaper than trains).

 

[sandorski]

I'd hate to be part of that derailment. :Q:Q

 

[Turkish]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: idiotekniQues
it's amazing that the U.S. is so far behind in having a real good public trans infrastructure which for starters has hi speed trains.

goes to show you how the oil/auto industry lobbies really run the show.

not hardly. at bullet train speeds it still takes too long compared to a plane. even with the recent security increase it is faster to get from mid town manhattan to the white house via JFK than via train. would the train be faster if they could build proper high speed tracks? yes. but NYC to chicago a train will never match a plane.

not to mention that trains are less efficient than airliners.

Originally posted by: mercanucaribe

I don't think distance between cities has anything to do with anything. They're trains, not bicycles.
The problem is suburban sprawl, which limits effectiveness of trains for commuters. You can't have a train stopping at every "subdivision" and even if you could, they aren't pedestrian friendly (by design) for people to walk to the train station. For a train system to work here in Houston, I think people would have to use a park and ride arrangement.

that'd work just fine. but we already do that with the big commuter buses. and trains are so much more expensive than buses in an HOV lane.

Umm, you are wrong. With all the security checks at JFK & DCA (and delays which happen to be 99% of the time), it takes far less time to take the train from one to the other.

 

[ZetaEpyon]

Having traveled on the shinkansen in Japan three times this past October, I can say that I would be very glad to have a similar train service here in the United States.

For those that say that air travel would still be faster, you aren't considering the comfort side of the equation. For similar costs, (at least in Japan) the level of comfort you have on the shinkansen is far in excess of what you'd get on a domestic flight. The amount of room you have, more freedom to get up and walk around, and also a perfectly smooth ride can't be beat.

Of course, I'm sure that we'd probably end up smashed into the thing like sardines in favor of the almighty corporate dollar.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: K1052

A NY-Chicago run with an average speed of 180ish mph might be competitive with the airlines. Factor in all the extra time at and getting to/form the airports it would be an option to consider. Especially since the trains would be much less effected by weather or other delays.

On a perfect day it takes me 30 minutes to get to O'Hare, on a not so perfect day it can take an hour and a half. Add another 30 minutes to check in /get through security and maybe 30 minutes of waiting at the gate. I've already sunk at least an hour and a half on this side of the trip. Say two hours of plane time and another hour for deboard/baggage/getting to ground transport. 4.5 hours on a prefect day when nothing goes wrong. That puts it in competitive range of high speed rail.

trains top out at 180. on any stretch of rail not specially designed for a high speed train (say, the existing networks they'd run on inside the major cities) they will be going much slower (which is the problem with acela, though it can handle those curvy old rails pretty well). also, they'll probably go much slower through/over/under the mountains. additionally, it'd probably be some sort of continuing service train, at least at first, meaning stops in various cities along the way (like trying to get from london to glasgow on what the british think are high speed trains). lastly, i very much doubt that the security disparity between trains and planes will exist that much longer. you'll at least go through bomb detection.

Trains pwn buses on capacity. If they stuck all the Metra/CTA riders here on buses they would gridlock the roads/expressways.

the main difference between trains and buses is that trains run on their own right of way. in houston we solved that by putting buses on their own right of way (walled-off HOV lanes that are accessible to cars depending upon occupancy). houston's next step? buses disguised as commuter rail (that run in their own right of way completely and are still cheaper than trains).

Acela is slow on some segments due to the age of some of the power supply infrastructure and the proximity of other rail lines. Express and multi stop trains could be easily run. Passing sidings would be built to accommodate this. Stops would also be limited to major cities alone the route.

For Huston that makes sense, you don't have to move the volume of people we do daily.

 

[Jeff7]

Originally posted by: Fenixgoon
watts = volts*current

Watts and Horsepower can measure the same thing.

HP = (Torque * rpm)/63000

W = (Torque * rpm)/9.55

Go to Google, and type this in:
25000 HP = ? watts

I bet it'll convert it for you.

Originally posted by: Rubycon
In DC yes. With AC and cycloconverter driven motors it's not that simple.

RMS voltage calculations make baby Jesus cry.

 

[andylawcc]

Originally posted by: Sinsear
The new standard for a quick retreat....

Originally posted by: Shortcut
the train set a new speed record because the engineers designed it to run away from the station

Originally posted by: compman25
If it's French I bet it's quicker leaving someplace than going there

zing! ! hehe

 

[Goosemaster]

Holy sh!t....almost mach 1 ...on the ground..outside...it a tube...andn while maintaing a smooth ride...

:shocked:


*stops badmouth le francasie immediately*