vfx

So we have this to look forward to on the train?

__________________
.
.
.
.
.
.
The world loves to be deceived.

TEG

dpeilow

Italy's elite powers full steam ahead on a fantastic journey - Times Online

bobw

The first thing is that you have to be carefull when comparing Europe to the USA. Conditions are different. We are much more spread out.

For example, Europeans often wonder why US companies bother with CDMA when TDMA is so superior. The wider coverage per cell tower makes a CDMA network much cheaper here, where we have much more territory to cover.

Irrelevant. Nobody's proposed to use that money to build high speed rail in Texas instead of a new runway and terminal at Heathrow. It says nothing about the relative costs in the USA.

You don't actually know that. Travel between the major cities is Southwest's bread-and-butter in Texas. The service from other towns feeds into those routes.

An aircraft's greatest fuel consumption is during takeoff and landing. The airline can't get paid until they've done one of each for a passenger. In Texas the distances between major towns limit the number of times the airline can get paid per aircraft per day.

You are messing with people's lives, their livelihoods, here. The rail proposals would subsidize competition against the airlines. The airports may have been built with public money originally, but user fees pay to run and maintain them.

If the HSR proposals weren't asking for public financing, plus eminent domain to acquire the right-of-way, I'd say good luck and godspeed. They do, so I don't.

They didn't do that analysis here.

dpeilow

Certain parts are / certain parts aren't. A quick look at population density maps suggests that at least east Texas is pretty similar to France in terms of population and distance between cities. People think Europe is densely populated, but when you get out of the main cities in France and Spain, they are quite sparse. It's an ideal scenario for high speed rail.


OK, let's not give the DoE money to Tesla for fear of messing with peoples' lives in Detroit. Or let's not put any public money into any disruptive technology. Let's not have the government try to change anything and let big industry keep its status quo.

I don't believe any of the proposals are asking for operational subsidies and it's not that uncommon for public money to be spent on establishing the infrastructure, even in the US.

Can you explain to me how this is different from the $41.2bn subsidy - sorry investment - that the federal highway program made last year alone? Or the Essential Air Service Program (which exists even in Texas)?


You implied that these systems get built in Europe because they are cool or because the neighbours have them. I was pointing out that is not the case.

bobw

Did I? I didn't mean to. I apologize for my clumsy writing. I need more practice.

What I meant to say is that too many in the USA take the European example uncritically. They look at all the cool things Europeans do and want to do them here, whether they fit or not. There's a joke.

Even the Americans aren't stupid enough to buy bottled water.

We'll tell them it's French.

Then there are the Europeans who assume that European solutions will all work in the USA. That was the point of the cell telephone example.

Then there are the idiots in the USA who think American ways will work everywhere.

People can be so parochial.

By the way, the CIA factbook estimates the population of France to be 62,150,775 in 2009.

In 2008 Texas had 24,178,180.

dpeilow

Ironically, of course, the newest 3G systems use W-CDMA and the French are driving the adoption of the system at 900MHz precisely so that they can get the coverage in their wide open spaces...


I know - that's why I specifically said east Texas West Texas is a different story altogether - no one is going to build a 500-mile spur to El Paso.

Brent

Cost of highways in America

One problem with rail here is that most Americans haven't had a chance to experience it as an integral part of life. Many Americans travel, of course, and a good number of them might take the train for a bit -- from London to Paris, say -- but so often they then board a bus for the rest of their "seven capitals of Europe" tour. The rail part of the trip might have been pleasant, even revealing, but it was much like a Disneyland ride. The "real business" of touring took place -- where else? -- in a bus.

I've been fortunate enough to take the train in many countries -- through much of Europe, parts of China, Japan, India, etc. -- but it wasn't until I rolled out of bed one day with half an hour before departure from Paris, took the subway to Gare de Lyon, and then in three hours found myself 400 miles south in Marseilles, that the business use of rail really made sense. A similar trip from L.A. to S.F. usually means a bleary-eyed morning, dealing with all the hassles of air travel, renting a car at the other end, and hoping to get into the city on time for whatever appointment I have.

There's really no comparison.

Brent

I'm not sure we're that much more spread out. From what I understand, Europe has a land mass roughly equivalent to the U.S., and the distance from top to bottom is substantial (Kirkenes, Norway to Algeciras, Spain is about 2,500 miles). The East-West distance seems to change daily as Europe's borders keep expanding, but it's fairly long as well.

By the way, I'm not sure the CDMA vs GSM-TDMA example is apt. The big advantage of CDMA is actually capacity per tower, not distance, which I understand is more a function of frequency. This advantage would be more useful to the Europeans than us, as their population density is generally higher. AT&T and T-Mobile decided that CDMA's advantages were outweighed by GSM's economies of scale and cooler phones. With Verizon and Sprint going with CDMA, we ended up with a polyglot split, and the jury is still out whether we benefit.

bobw

Isn't that the point? A government intervention to install high speed rail between the population centers may have undesirable side effects on the rest of the state.

I'm starting to feel that way.

Governments do things for reasons other than economic. That's the point of government. It's dangerous when government plays in the game against private enterprise. It cheats. Let's restrict the government to its proper role as umpire.