Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A vactrain (or vacuum tube train) is a proposed design for very-high-speed rail transportation. It is a maglev (magnetic levitation) line using evacuated (air-less) or partly evacuated tubes or tunnels. The lack of air resistance could permit vactrains to travel at very high speeds—up to 4,000–5,000 mph (6,400–8,000 km/h), which is 5–6 times the speed of sound—using relatively little power.
which goes from the city to the forks.......lots of stops
but the fact is even it doesn't work for many...
I live on Long Island
when I lived in belmore I was walking distance from the LIRR and I worked in the city (manhattan) I used the train most times because it was quicker, and with parking costs in Manhattan it was cheaper
but
I live(central nassau) 12 miles from work(now in queens)...when there is no traffic (maybe 2am) it would take me 15 minutes.....but during rush hour it takes me almost 1 hr, I use a tank of gas (14 gallons) a week (at $3/gallon, that's $42 a week or 168 a month)....................to take mass transit I would have to DRIVE 3 miles to the trainstation, then wait for a train, to get to the terminal (jamiaca station) to pick up the subway (to flushing), then hop on a bus to get to work, and it would take me over 2.5 hours......and a monthly ticket for the long island railroad is over $375 a month...plus the subway and the bus
that's why many dont like mass transit....because the SYSTEM is just screwed up
the problem is efficiency...
which would you rather....... I live 12 miles from work...........
1) to drive when there is no traffic (maybe 2am) it would take me 15 minutes.....but during rush hour it takes me almost 1 hr, I use a tank of gas (14 gallons) a week (at $3/gallon, that's $42 a week or 168 a month)....................
.......
or..........
2)...to take mass transit I would have to DRIVE 3 miles to the train-station(bellmore), then wait for a train, to get to the terminal (jamaica station) to wait to get picked up the subway (to flushing), then hop on a bus to get to work, and it would take me over 2 and a half hours......and a monthly ticket for the long island railroad is over $375 a month...plus the subway and the bus
that is the problem with mass transit ( its at least twice the time and 4 times the cost) unless you live and work only blocks away...its actually cheaper, easier, and less time consuming(and time is money) to drive, especially since you need a car( so you will already have the 'startup' cost of a car anyhow) for the other things in life (other than the work commute) life going to the beach or out to wine country.
Thanks & respect for your thoughtful & detailed response to my post, I appreciate. From what I understand of how high speed rail systems work, the trains cannot run on the existing LIRR tracks so the concept would be to replace a dysfunctional system.
Also, from what I understand about the program discussed here, the scope of the entire project is huge! That's one of the reasons I asked for folks to consider the planning/development/implementation of a 'smaller piece' of the project as a pilot. If the smaller piece is plausible & is successful in reaching its objectives, it might make sense to consider expanding it to the rest of the Country, again by 'piloting' the project where one would get the most 'bang for one's buck.'
One of the reasons asked for folks to consider LI to pilot this program (besides living here) is the scope of LI's population:
Quote:
Long Island's population is greater than 38 of the 50 United States. If it were an independent nation, it would rank as the 96th most populated nation, falling between Sweden and Israel. Long Island - Fifth World Wiki
Let's face it, infrastructure improvements are sorely needed throughout the entire Country & many of the most crucial are in the area of transportation (don't get me started on the conditions of many of our bridges - a 'disaster waiting to happen' in some cases).
Again, Kansas isn't a income producer, they take in more than they receive, so they wouldn't be paying for HSR in California.
We will make this more simple for you, rush hour traffic in Jackson, MS means they want to add two new lanes to I-220, what benefit does that have to San Francisco, CA?
It benefits the people of California who work at the ports, the port authority, the brokerage office, the truck drivers, all who benefit when the freight is off-loaded, transloaded to a trailer, hooked up to a truck, and travels to Jackson, MS, where the freight is delivered to a distribution center, the people in that distribution center are paid to received the freight, to store the freight, to reload the freight on other trucks and then to deliver that freight to its final destination.
It benefits the people of California who work at the ports, the port authority, the brokerage office, the truck drivers, all who benefit when the freight is off-loaded, transloaded to a trailer, hooked up to a truck, and travels to Jackson, MS, where the freight is delivered to a distribution center, the people in that distribution center are paid to received the freight, to store the freight, to reload the freight on other trucks and then to deliver that freight to its final destination.
Fine, clearly you have an excuse for everything except HSR. I give up.
Fine, clearly you have an excuse for everything except HSR. I give up.
It's not an excuse.
You asked me a question, I gave you an answer.
I'm not against HSR. I think it's an expensive solution to problems that are regional in nature, and I think there might be better solutions. But if the regions in question want to pursue this solution, I support that from a philosophical point of view. Just not from a financial point of view. I fully recognize that such projects will get some federal support, so some of my dollars will end up supporting HSR projects. That's the tit-for-tat of the Congressional budget, my representatives will fight for dollars to come to my region, and the Northwest Pacific representatives will fight for dollars to come to their region, and the money will be spent. I can live with that. But whenever the issue is raised, about the NATION building a high speed rail network, I think the people who won't be serviced by that network have a right to point out that much of the nation would not be served, and that the benefits would be regional, not national.
I'm not against HSR. I think it's an expensive solution to problems that are regional in nature, and I think there might be better solutions. But if the regions in question want to pursue this solution, I support that from a philosophical point of view. Just not from a financial point of view. I fully recognize that such projects will get some federal support, so some of my dollars will end up supporting HSR projects. That's the tit-for-tat of the Congressional budget, my representatives will fight for dollars to come to my region, and the Northwest Pacific representatives will fight for dollars to come to their region, and the money will be spent. I can live with that. But whenever the issue is raised, about the NATION building a high speed rail network, I think the people who won't be serviced by that network have a right to point out that much of the nation would not be served, and that the benefits would be regional, not national.
Adding an interstate lane in Jackson, MS has no benefit to anyone in California...so yes, that was an excuse.
It will lose as much money as all the other rail systems.
Who cares? Everything government does is unprofitable, otherwise we wouldn't need a government to do it. Some things are worth doing even if they can't turn a profit (like roads and rails).
Adding an interstate lane in Jackson, MS has no benefit to anyone in California...so yes, that was an excuse.
Except it does. The interstate system doesn't just subsidize car traffic. The interstate system is fundamental to the transportation and distribution of goods in this country which benefits ALL Americans. More than that, the transportation and distribution of those goods represent several industries, and tens of millions of workers. Jackson, MS is actually a major distribution hub in this nation, and handles freight transported by truck, rail and water. While the benefit to a Californian may be indirect and minimal, there is a benefit. And that cannot be said of HSR between Seattle and Portland when we are talking exclusively of individual passenger traffic.
Except it does. The interstate system doesn't just subsidize car traffic. The interstate system is fundamental to the transportation and distribution of goods in this country which benefits ALL Americans. More than that, the transportation and distribution of those goods represent several industries, and tens of millions of workers. Jackson, MS is actually a major distribution hub in this nation, and handles freight transported by truck, rail and water. While the benefit to a Californian may be indirect and minimal, there is a benefit. And that cannot be said of HSR between Seattle and Portland when we are talking exclusively of individual passenger traffic.
Fine, you are gonna justify that it has some effect on another part of the country when it actually doesn't. Support what you want.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
