NationStates

Vassenor wrote:

The New California Republic wrote:We'll see. Mallard still holds the record.

And PRR 5550 is still a decade away from being finished, assuming the money doesn't dry up.

I'd actually love a friendly contest between the UK and USA to design and build a totally new steam locomotive using modern materials and designs, and then to compete them in speed trials.

The New California Republic wrote:

Vassenor wrote:
And PRR 5550 is still a decade away from being finished, assuming the money doesn't dry up.

I'd actually love a friendly contest between the UK and USA to design and build a totally new steam locomotive using modern materials and designs, and then to compete them in speed trials.

Why limit it to those two countries?

Don't you want a Panzerdampf 3000! competing?

I like trains but Rail Baltica is a bad idea.

The Blaatschapen wrote:

The New California Republic wrote:I'd actually love a friendly contest between the UK and USA to design and build a totally new steam locomotive using modern materials and designs, and then to compete them in speed trials.

Why limit it to those two countries?

Don't you want a Panzerdampf 3000! competing?

it doesn't have to be limited to them, I just thought about it in those terms because of the comparison between PRR 5550 and Mallard. The more new steam locomotives the better.

The Two Jerseys wrote:I look forward to PRR 5550 taking the speed record for steam.

Farnhamia wrote:As much as I think we should revive them in the US, I don't see it happening. It costs as much to take the train long distance as it does to fly and people have been convinced that faster is better. Sometimes, it is, but sometimes taking your time is good, too. Passenger trains in the US died when the Post Office put the mail on airplanes and stopped subsidizing the trains. Sad.

Government was screwing the railroads over well before they pulled the mail contracts, the airlines weren't the ones paying to build airports and navigational beacons...

This is true, railroads had to pay extra taxes, to the feds, as well as pay local property taxes on their tracks (because airports are not owned by the airlines, they do not pay property tax on them.

Over taxing the railroads, unfunded regulatory mandates (although the safety regulations were not bad, the government did not provide the railroads any funding to implement them, and imposed them at a time the railroads were already struggling) and also the government refusing to allow most mergers (the railroads needed to consolidate but the government stopped most, causing many railroads to fail, only to bough up by the remaining ones, consolidation happened anyways, but in a much messier manner than needed).

Had the government not taxed the railroads extra, provided money to implement the safety regulations, and allowed consolidation in a orderly manner, things would have turned out better. But obviously that did not happen.

The New California Republic wrote:

Vassenor wrote:
And PRR 5550 is still a decade away from being finished, assuming the money doesn't dry up.

I'd actually love a friendly contest between the UK and USA to design and build a totally new steam locomotive using modern materials and designs, and then to compete them in speed trials.

argentina would win in a landslide in the strength department if mr. porta were still with us.

Broader Confederate States wrote:

IMO, diesels are boring. Which is fine, the oncoming oil crisis means they'll go the way of the penny farthing. And I don't think that electrification of the entire U.S. rail system is exactly possible due to stuff like transmission losses, so that leaves steam locomotives. Which is fine, modern-steam designs reduce maintenance by like 95% of the work and make them fuel efficient comparable to diesels, while burning more or less cleanly as possible.

Meanwhile back in China - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=baASHBjFZY4&t=0m15s

Rio Cana wrote:

Broader Confederate States wrote:

IMO, diesels are boring. Which is fine, the oncoming oil crisis means they'll go the way of the penny farthing. And I don't think that electrification of the entire U.S. rail system is exactly possible due to stuff like transmission losses, so that leaves steam locomotives. Which is fine, modern-steam designs reduce maintenance by like 95% of the work and make them fuel efficient comparable to diesels, while burning more or less cleanly as possible.

Meanwhile back in China - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=baASHBjFZY4&t=0m15s

yeah, becase they're designed for cost effectiveness. don't look to china for modern steam, look at argentina and the us and uk.

I like rail travel, and did it extensively while living in Europe. In the US however I haven’t had the opportunity.

The New California Republic wrote:

Broader Confederate States wrote:IMO, diesels are boring. Which is fine, the oncoming oil crisis means they'll go the way of the penny farthing.

Nope. In several countries there are ongoing projects to convert them to biodiesel, so they'll more than likely survive the decline of real diesel. Sorry.

Or we would be more likely to convert coal into diesel than burn it directly anyways.
Because you can turn pretty much any carbon based substance into oil, we cannot really “run out” of oil, even if fossil oil is not readily available.

Although you can of course power a steam engine with any heat source, you could power steam engine with diesel fuel burning. Hell you could even use an electric boiler to power a steam engine. The question would be why?

Unless we go nuclear, there is really no likelihood of using steam for practical reasons. A nuclear train is technically a steam train. But not likely.

Saralonia wrote:I love them, I also love their cousin subways, I love public transportation in general, it just makes life easier anywhere, trains are an experience I hope I can have soon but subways I've to and they are ok

The Metro is a quick way of getting around in a city. Problems are when you get a power outage which results in trains getting stuck in-between stations. Or during major floods in which the tunnels get flooded unless they have a very good pumping system.

Broader Confederate States wrote:

Rio Cana wrote:
Meanwhile back in China - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=baASHBjFZY4&t=0m15s

yeah, becase they're designed for cost effectiveness. don't look to china for modern steam, look at argentina and the us and uk.

In reality, that train video is of a coal train from Northern China. They tend to burn the lowest quality coal which has no market value which explains all the flying cinders.

They pay me over 100K a year to run freight trains across America... so I like them.

Useful for creating transit spines along megalopolises like the European Blue Banana or US Northeast Megalopolis or connecting widely separated cities, but not as economical (currently) for someone who is leaving a town or city for a destination somewhere in rural nowhere.

In areas without them though, it'd be expensive, controversial, and time-consuming to tear out infrastructure to build them.

Basically, great transportation useful for a lot of situations but not some, although the attempted LA-SF bullet train route here in California was either terribly implemented or a terrible idea to begin with.

The Two Jerseys wrote:I look forward to PRR 5550 taking the speed record for steam.

Farnhamia wrote:As much as I think we should revive them in the US, I don't see it happening. It costs as much to take the train long distance as it does to fly and people have been convinced that faster is better. Sometimes, it is, but sometimes taking your time is good, too. Passenger trains in the US died when the Post Office put the mail on airplanes and stopped subsidizing the trains. Sad.

Government was screwing the railroads over well before they pulled the mail contracts, the airlines weren't the ones paying to build airports and navigational beacons...

I don't think its about screwing rail. Politicians are just frequent flyers

I love trains. I see the railways as a crucial part of national infrastructure, and as cultural icons as well. I also believe that they will be key to the future of how we travel as the world seeks alternatives to fight climate change.

Stellar Colonies wrote:Basically, great transportation useful for a lot of situations but not some, although the attempted LA-SF bullet train route here in California was either terribly implemented or a terrible idea to begin with.

It was terribly implemented. Too many cost overruns and other issues mainly associated with money. Though it is a great idea since it makes sense to link both cities and their urban areas with each other with high-speed rail.

There use to be trains here but highway infrastructure building put them out of business. Decades later they did build an elevated Metro in the Capital city which has been losing money since it was built.

Monsone wrote:

Stellar Colonies wrote:Basically, great transportation useful for a lot of situations but not some, although the attempted LA-SF bullet train route here in California was either terribly implemented or a terrible idea to begin with.

It was terribly implemented. Too many cost overruns and other issues mainly associated with money. Though it is a great idea since it makes sense to link both cities and their urban areas with each other with high-speed rail.

Yeah.

Trains are great for connecting population centers and busses are great for intra-city/town transport, although the way society is structured in the US (and possibly other places, not sure), having a car is necessary for many situations. And Americans tend to prefer planes, since they're faster for crossing a continent-wide country with two widely separated population centers like it (one day to get to the West/East Coast instead of a few in a train). The only way that the US would really move more towards just trains and buses instead of planes, cars, and some bussing is hard necessity.

Stellar Colonies wrote:Yeah.

Trains are great for connecting population centers and busses are great for intra-city/town transport, although the way society is structured in the US (and possibly other places, not sure), having a car is necessary for many situations. And Americans tend to prefer planes, since they're faster for crossing a continent-wide country with two widely separated population centers like it (one day to get to the West/East Coast instead of a few in a train). The only way that the US would really move more towards just trains and buses instead of planes, cars, and some bussing is hard necessity.

Exactly the case. I've taken long-distance trains in the US, and I have got to agree that flying is more convenient. I'd rather spend the five hours in a plane versus the several days on a train. Also, I don't think the US is going to kill cars off. It'll just replace them with electric cars and do some rail improvements because car culture is too deeply ingrained in the American psyche.

Stellar Colonies wrote:

Monsone wrote:
It was terribly implemented. Too many cost overruns and other issues mainly associated with money. Though it is a great idea since it makes sense to link both cities and their urban areas with each other with high-speed rail.

Yeah.

Trains are great for connecting population centers and busses are great for intra-city/town transport, although the way society is structured in the US (and possibly other places, not sure), having a car is necessary for many situations. And Americans tend to prefer planes, since they're faster for crossing a continent-wide country with two widely separated population centers like it (one day to get to the West/East Coast instead of a few in a train). The only way that the US would really move more towards just trains and buses instead of planes, cars, and some bussing is hard necessity.

Why would we need just trains though? Multiple transportation systems can coexist and might compliment each other.
For example many of the MARC commuter train stations are basically big parking garages. People drive to the train.
Multimodal transport is better suited for the US.

But the real problem is how will commuter trains survive when most people are not commuting anymore?

Novus America wrote:

Stellar Colonies wrote:Yeah.

Trains are great for connecting population centers and busses are great for intra-city/town transport, although the way society is structured in the US (and possibly other places, not sure), having a car is necessary for many situations. And Americans tend to prefer planes, since they're faster for crossing a continent-wide country with two widely separated population centers like it (one day to get to the West/East Coast instead of a few in a train). The only way that the US would really move more towards just trains and buses instead of planes, cars, and some bussing is hard necessity.

Why would we need just trains though? Multiple transportation systems can coexist and might compliment each other.
For example many of the MARC commuter train stations are basically big parking garages. People drive to the train.
Multimodal transport is better suited for the US.

But the real problem is how will commuter trains survive when most people are not commuting anymore?

When I was in Manila, the commuter train experience was dependent on which line and/or what time you took it. Prior to The Coof, MRT-3 was Sardine City unless you took the first or the last few trains of the day. In LRT-2, on the other hand, the line was mercifully relaxing at any time of the day. When compared to a bus in Metro Manila traffic, however, they were a collective mercy.

Turns out the only efficient rapid transport yet invented is... the first one invented. Funny that.

Rio Cana wrote:

Broader Confederate States wrote:

IMO, diesels are boring. Which is fine, the oncoming oil crisis means they'll go the way of the penny farthing. And I don't think that electrification of the entire U.S. rail system is exactly possible due to stuff like transmission losses, so that leaves steam locomotives. Which is fine, modern-steam designs reduce maintenance by like 95% of the work and make them fuel efficient comparable to diesels, while burning more or less cleanly as possible.

Meanwhile back in China - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=baASHBjFZY4&t=0m15s

Rule of Cool.

For freight? Sure, great idea! For people, not so much. I’ll never give up the freedom of my car, and I resent being taxed to pay for “light rail” boondoggles. The “elites” that think they know better than me how to run my life me sick. Authoritarianism sucks!