http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-30067889

Train fans have experienced the speed of super-fast maglev trains, during test runs for members of the public in central Japan.

One hundred passengers whizzed along a 42.8km (27 mile) route between the cities of Uenohara and Fuefuki, reaching speeds of up to 500km/h (311mph).

The Central Japan Railway Company is running eight days of testing for the experimental maglev Shinkansen train on its test track in Yamanashi Prefecture.

The maglev trains are even faster than Japan’s famous bullet trains, which currently travel at about 320km/h (200mph).

They use magnetic levitation, hence the name, to “float” above the train tracks.

dv said:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-30067889

Train fans have experienced the speed of super-fast maglev trains, during test runs for members of the public in central Japan.

One hundred passengers whizzed along a 42.8km (27 mile) route between the cities of Uenohara and Fuefuki, reaching speeds of up to 500km/h (311mph).

The Central Japan Railway Company is running eight days of testing for the experimental maglev Shinkansen train on its test track in Yamanashi Prefecture.

The maglev trains are even faster than Japan’s famous bullet trains, which currently travel at about 320km/h (200mph).

They use magnetic levitation, hence the name, to “float” above the train tracks.

Pity our governments cannot do great things like that

Boring lot that are

Tony Abbott – the most Boring Destructive Prime Minister on Earth ever

CrazyNeutrino said:

dv said:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-30067889

Train fans have experienced the speed of super-fast maglev trains, during test runs for members of the public in central Japan.

One hundred passengers whizzed along a 42.8km (27 mile) route between the cities of Uenohara and Fuefuki, reaching speeds of up to 500km/h (311mph).

The Central Japan Railway Company is running eight days of testing for the experimental maglev Shinkansen train on its test track in Yamanashi Prefecture.

The maglev trains are even faster than Japan’s famous bullet trains, which currently travel at about 320km/h (200mph).

They use magnetic levitation, hence the name, to “float” above the train tracks.

Pity our governments cannot do great things like that

Boring lot that are

Tony Abbott – the most Boring Destructive Prime Minister on Earth ever

Yeah, I agree, it is completely Toned Abs fault that we don’t have a 500 km/h train or even a dinky 300 km/h train. The bastard.

sibeen said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

dv said:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-30067889

Train fans have experienced the speed of super-fast maglev trains, during test runs for members of the public in central Japan.

One hundred passengers whizzed along a 42.8km (27 mile) route between the cities of Uenohara and Fuefuki, reaching speeds of up to 500km/h (311mph).

The Central Japan Railway Company is running eight days of testing for the experimental maglev Shinkansen train on its test track in Yamanashi Prefecture.

The maglev trains are even faster than Japan’s famous bullet trains, which currently travel at about 320km/h (200mph).

They use magnetic levitation, hence the name, to “float” above the train tracks.

Pity our governments cannot do great things like that

Boring lot that are

Tony Abbott – the most Boring Destructive Prime Minister on Earth ever

Yeah, I agree, it is completely Toned Abs fault that we don’t have a 500 km/h train or even a dinky 300 km/h train. The bastard.

What we need is a 27 mile long track between our large cities

Dropbear said:

sibeen said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

Pity our governments cannot do great things like that

Boring lot that are

Tony Abbott – the most Boring Destructive Prime Minister on Earth ever

Yeah, I agree, it is completely Toned Abs fault that we don’t have a 500 km/h train or even a dinky 300 km/h train. The bastard.

What we need is a 27 mile long track between our large cities

That’s Abbotts fault as well.

sibeen said:

Dropbear said:

sibeen said:

Yeah, I agree, it is completely Toned Abs fault that we don’t have a 500 km/h train or even a dinky 300 km/h train. The bastard.

What we need is a 27 mile long track between our large cities

That’s Abbotts fault as well.

The cities were that close back when Whitlam was in power

east west and north south lines would be good. horrendously expensive though for those distances.

On some planets technology is so advanced that people can talk about fast trains without it becoming an Abs versus Whitler contest.

dv said:

On some planets technology is so advanced that people can talk about fast trains without it becoming an Abs versus Whitler contest.

I’m sorry what was the question?

sibeen said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

dv said:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-30067889

Train fans have experienced the speed of super-fast maglev trains, during test runs for members of the public in central Japan.

One hundred passengers whizzed along a 42.8km (27 mile) route between the cities of Uenohara and Fuefuki, reaching speeds of up to 500km/h (311mph).

The Central Japan Railway Company is running eight days of testing for the experimental maglev Shinkansen train on its test track in Yamanashi Prefecture.

The maglev trains are even faster than Japan’s famous bullet trains, which currently travel at about 320km/h (200mph).

They use magnetic levitation, hence the name, to “float” above the train tracks.

Pity our governments cannot do great things like that

Boring lot that are

Tony Abbott – the most Boring Destructive Prime Minister on Earth ever

Yeah, I agree, it is completely Toned Abs fault that we don’t have a 500 km/h train or even a dinky 300 km/h train. The bastard.

No, it was the carbon taxes fault…

500 kph..

Be messy if it happened to leave the track.

But I suppose it is inebitabre.

To summarise my views… I think a Melb to Syd conventional high speed rail line would be marginally viable, but given the drive to reduce emissions and likely increase in aviation fuel prices over the next thirty years, it could be considered prudent futureproofing. Not talking about this advanced maglev, or even ye olde maglev, just your standard off-the-shelf high speed rail of the kind they had in France 33 years ago.

Including lines to Adelaide and Brisbum would move it from marginal to definitely not commercially viable and would basically require central governments to put a chunk of change on something that they would never get back: probably impossible in this economic climate.

High speed rail to Perth from the East would be pointless. It couldn’t compete on either price or timing with air. Given that the WAlians would be paying for all this it they would need to get some as well, I dunno from Geraldton to Bunbury, so they wouldn’t secede. It’s the kind of thing you might fund out of a decent resources based sovereign wealth fund if we had one…

I’m a bit left of centre so I would probably prefer that some of the unexpected good fortune had been put towards modernising Australia’s infrastructure, but whether or not this should have included high speed rail is a moot point. There are cases for and against. The Syd-Melb would probably be a goer when viewed in the very long term. Would take some of the crush out of the Mascot airport for one thing.

Currently the mean speed of the passenger rail from Syd-Melb is 96 km/h: kind of not much point in even improving that if it is not going to be at least 270 km/h. There’s a big gap of “why bother” on the graph.

dv said:

But I suppose it is inebitabre.

To summarise my views… I think a Melb to Syd conventional high speed rail line would be marginally viable, but given the drive to reduce emissions and likely increase in aviation fuel prices over the next thirty years, it could be considered prudent futureproofing. Not talking about this advanced maglev, or even ye olde maglev, just your standard off-the-shelf high speed rail of the kind they had in France 33 years ago.

Including lines to Adelaide and Brisbum would move it from marginal to definitely not commercially viable and would basically require central governments to put a chunk of change on something that they would never get back: probably impossible in this economic climate.

High speed rail to Perth from the East would be pointless. It couldn’t compete on either price or timing with air. Given that the WAlians would be paying for all this it they would need to get some as well, I dunno from Geraldton to Bunbury, so they wouldn’t secede. It’s the kind of thing you might fund out of a decent resources based sovereign wealth fund if we had one…

I’m a bit left of centre so I would probably prefer that some of the unexpected good fortune had been put towards modernising Australia’s infrastructure, but whether or not this should have included high speed rail is a moot point. There are cases for and against. The Syd-Melb would probably be a goer when viewed in the very long term. Would take some of the crush out of the Mascot airport for one thing.

Currently the mean speed of the passenger rail from Syd-Melb is 96 km/h: kind of not much point in even improving that if it is not going to be at least 270 km/h. There’s a big gap of “why bother” on the graph.

I like the middle road, upgrade the present tracks and tilt train technology, seeing as the high speed seems to be in a political and cost impasse. Once rail is viable against air the case for a further upgrade will be greater.

the east west was just that i reckon it’d be a buzz crossing the nullabor at 500km/h

JudgeMental said:

the east west was just that i reckon it’d be a buzz crossing the nullabor at 500km/h

i’ll wave as you go by…

The problem as I see it is it will be a government private partnership and there is no real incentive for private investors. We don’t have a culture of business train travel and that will need to change to make the investment attractive. Especially as air travel is so cheap. I think that is unlikely to change in the investment period as airtravel is getting cheaper as they find more efficiencies and there is no real foreseeable shortage of fuel. The investment will be in other airports and trainhubs to those airports.

IMHO.

AwesomeO said:

The problem as I see it is it will be a government private partnership and there is no real incentive for private investors. We don’t have a culture of business train travel and that will need to change to make the investment attractive. Especially as air travel is so cheap. I think that is unlikely to change in the investment period as airtravel is getting cheaper as they find more efficiencies and there is no real foreseeable shortage of fuel. The investment will be in other airports and trainhubs to those airports.

IMHO.

There’s no appetite for it from either party anyway so it is probably a purely hypothetical argument. It’s the kind of thing that would need bipartisan support: otherwise one party would start building it and then the next party would rip up the tracks just to make the point. Australia’s political climate is poisonous to long term planning and that’s not just Tony’s fault.

Dropbear said:

What we need is a 27 mile long track between our large cities

That is genius! 27 miles to any city? Revolutionary…..

dv said:

Australia’s political climate is poisonous to long term planning and that’s not just Tony’s fault.

Unless your long term plan is to work till your 70 giving as much as you are able to the government and then to retire and die quietly without costing the tax-payer further……..

Ian said:

500 kph..

Be messy if it happened to leave the track.

We traveled from Beijing to Shanghai on the 300km high-speed train and were chuffed at having done so. Later we hopped into a van and drove along the freeway from the station to Pudong Airport. Doing around 100km/h, we were hit by a shockwave which made me jump from my seat (this was easy to do as there were no seatbelts fitted). I realised that we were being overtaken by a train right beside us in the middle of the freeway. Our guide explained that this was the high-speed train (we thought the other one was!) and that it is capable of 501km/h, has an operational speed of 430km/h, but usually travels slower than this. The top operational speed is only reached one or two times per week at scheduled times.

Yes, even at 300km/h if something goes wrong it’ll make a big mess. These railway tracks are not generally built on the ground though. The tracks are elevated high above the ground. With a population as small as ours, it’s an infrastructure project that we’d be unlikely to ever see in between cities. Shorter distances, like Sydney City to Sydney Airport wouldn’t even allow the trains to reach good speeds.

“train and were chuffed “

BOOMTISH

I thought the Japanese test Maglev track and trains have been running for a decade or more now?

party_pants said:

I thought the Japanese test Maglev track and trains have been running for a decade or more now?

They have, and indeed they have had maglev in regular passenger service.

However, this represents new equipment being tested at record-breaking speeds. Maglev is not a new technology, but 501 km/h on a service with passengers is news.

party_pants said:

I thought the Japanese test Maglev track and trains have been running for a decade or more now?

FWIW I’ve been on the Shanghai Maglev, the one that runs between the airport and part of the city.
Got up to 431 km/h.

dv said:

party_pants said:

. Maglev is not a new technology, but 501 km/h on a service with passengers is news.

ok, I guess it is.

I thought the record speed was about 580 km/h, but I guess that was under test conditions and not with Joe Public on board.

“These railway tracks are not generally built on the ground though. The tracks are elevated high above the ground.”

Or in tunnels, yes.

“ With a population as small as ours, it’s an infrastructure project that we’d be unlikely to ever see in between cities”

Like I reckons … from Syd-Melb, it is borderline. The population along the Syd-Melb corridor is similar to say that the along the Paris to Marseilles corridor, which is of similar length. The fact that France as a whole has a higher population doesn’t matter much for the analysis of this line: 11 million people along a 750 km rail corridor can be viable. It would really depend on how popular it proved to be. Air transport is kind of a pain in the arse: the appeal of being able to go from CBD to CBD without showing ID or having your balls x-rayed three times might be appealing enough to get another passengers to cover it.

I’m not married to the idea: probably under current air transport costs you would call it “not quite commercially viable”. It probably depends on how much commodity prices change and how choked up Mascot gets.

dv said:

I’m not married to the idea: probably under current air transport costs you would call it “not quite commercially viable”. It probably depends on how much commodity prices change and how choked up Mascot gets.

Factor in the additional travel time to/from the respective airports, the waiting time for the (often late) flights, etc.
On some of the flights I used to do in Europe, we’d drop the plane off in Frankfurt and have to go to Amsterdam. It was more pleasant and took about the same time to do it by the high-speed train than to fly.

I think the real transformational technology would be in building the tracks quickly and more cheaply, using somenew method. But I have no idea how to build a conventional one, let alone an unconventional one.

party_pants said:

dv said:

party_pants said:

. Maglev is not a new technology, but 501 km/h on a service with passengers is news.

ok, I guess it is.

I thought the record speed was about 580 km/h, but I guess that was under test conditions and not with Joe Public on board.

Yes, doing a quick search it seems you’re right. I thought it was faster.

I did find this interesting video about crash testing before they used dummies. John Stapp reached a speed of 1017 km/h in a rocket powered rail sled.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4tuvOer_GI

Spiny Norman said:

dv said:

I’m not married to the idea: probably under current air transport costs you would call it “not quite commercially viable”. It probably depends on how much commodity prices change and how choked up Mascot gets.

Factor in the additional travel time to/from the respective airports, the waiting time for the (often late) flights, etc.
On some of the flights I used to do in Europe, we’d drop the plane off in Frankfurt and have to go to Amsterdam. It was more pleasant and took about the same time to do it by the high-speed train than to fly.

ROFL

how about a maglev between the airport and city?

melb and syd

Speedy said:

party_pants said:

dv said:

party_pants said:

. Maglev is not a new technology, but 501 km/h on a service with passengers is news.

ok, I guess it is.

I thought the record speed was about 580 km/h, but I guess that was under test conditions and not with Joe Public on board.

Yes, doing a quick search it seems you’re right. I thought it was faster.

I did find this interesting video about crash testing before they used dummies. John Stapp reached a speed of 1017 km/h in a rocket powered rail sled.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4tuvOer_GI

John
wat r u doin
John
Stapp

Bugger me, in Melbourne we can’t even get a train between the airport and the CBD. Let’s do baby steps first :)

Spiny Norman said:

dv said:

I’m not married to the idea: probably under current air transport costs you would call it “not quite commercially viable”. It probably depends on how much commodity prices change and how choked up Mascot gets.

Factor in the additional travel time to/from the respective airports, the waiting time for the (often late) flights, etc.
On some of the flights I used to do in Europe, we’d drop the plane off in Frankfurt and have to go to Amsterdam. It was more pleasant and took about the same time to do it by the high-speed train than to fly.

youmake some good points…

But you’re no Laurence Shears…

CrazyNeutrino said:

how about a maglev between the airport and city?

melb and syd

(shrugs)

ATCF, Mascot is like 8 km from the CBD. One of these maglevs wouldn’t even get out of first gear.

party_pants said:

I think the real transformational technology would be in building the tracks quickly and more cheaply, using somenew method. But I have no idea how to build a conventional one, let alone an unconventional one.

I think the way to go is by submarine

http://www.popsci.com.au/tech/military/chinas-future-submarine-could-go-the-speed-of-sound,391524

CrazyNeutrino said:

how about a maglev between the airport and city?

melb and syd

What’s the distance airport to city? The Chinese one in Shanghai is about 30 km. Which gives it enough run-up to get up to 430 km/h. It only runs at top speed about a minute before it starts to decelerate.

Almost the same, at 2 Trg Gp we found it easier but about the same travel time to drive from Canberra to Sydney than to fly.

be nice if there was a train link from tulla to the cbd.

Canberra – Sydney would be a good start to a high speed rail network, if only Canberra had a population about 3 or 4 times larger.

Proposals in January 2013 to improve the bus service to the airport involving turning emergency lanes into bus lanes on the freeway and the Bolte Bridge and putting SkyBus on a myki fare, were challenged by CityLink operator Transurban, because it would limit its toll revenue, and by Melbourne Airport, because it would reduce its car parking profits. Similar objections would apply to a rail link.

——

JFC how are you meant to get anything done …

party_pants said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

how about a maglev between the airport and city?

melb and syd

What’s the distance airport to city? The Chinese one in Shanghai is about 30 km. Which gives it enough run-up to get up to 430 km/h. It only runs at top speed about a minute before it starts to decelerate.

23km

dv said:

John
wat r u doin
John
Stapp

Did you see those crash-test stickers on the side of his face? :)

Bleeding eyes is not a good look.

dv said:

Proposals in January 2013 to improve the bus service to the airport involving turning emergency lanes into bus lanes on the freeway and the Bolte Bridge and putting SkyBus on a myki fare, were challenged by CityLink operator Transurban, because it would limit its toll revenue, and by Melbourne Airport, because it would reduce its car parking profits. Similar objections would apply to a rail link.

——

JFC how are you meant to get anything done …

Interesting.

They’re talking about spending $2 billion a new rail link to Perth airport. I guess they’ll object too, parking fees are far king ridiculous. Cost me $8 the other night, for only about half an hour, maybe 40 minutes.

DGMW, I’m not anticapitalist, I know people have to make a living, but at some level administrators have to remember that the main purpose of transport is to move people and things from one place to another, not just to extort money.

• They’re talking about spending $2 billion a new rail link to Perth airport.

I heard that they weren’t going to be able to put the destination station on the airport property so it going to have to stop up the road. If so, what’s the point?

party_pants said:

dv said:

Proposals in January 2013 to improve the bus service to the airport involving turning emergency lanes into bus lanes on the freeway and the Bolte Bridge and putting SkyBus on a myki fare, were challenged by CityLink operator Transurban, because it would limit its toll revenue, and by Melbourne Airport, because it would reduce its car parking profits. Similar objections would apply to a rail link.

——

JFC how are you meant to get anything done …

Interesting.

They’re talking about spending $2 billion a new rail link to Perth airport. I guess they’ll object too, parking fees are far king ridiculous. Cost me $8 the other night, for only about half an hour, maybe 40 minutes.

Sussed out some parking at Melbourne where they drive you to the airport via a little bus I guess. 79 bucks for a week which I think is reasonable.

i park at BUs place in perth when i go east. cost = $0, plus i get a bed, company and a lift to and from the airport.

dv said:

DGMW, I’m not anticapitalist, I know people have to make a living, but at some level administrators have to remember that the main purpose of transport is to move people and things from one place to another, not just to extort money.

ever heard of the French revolution?

JudgeMental said:

i park at BUs place in perth when i go east. cost = $0, plus i get a bed, company and a lift to and from the airport.

Ah…

So that’s how he got those photos………

• ever heard of the French revolution?

So that is how they got their fast trains?

furious said:

• They’re talking about spending $2 billion a new rail link to Perth airport.

I heard that they weren’t going to be able to put the destination station on the airport property so it going to have to stop up the road. If so, what’s the point?

I thought that was plan before the election. The new plan is to build it underground, with underground railway stations.

dv said:

DGMW, I’m not anticapitalist, I know people have to make a living, but at some level administrators have to remember that the main purpose of transport is to move people and things from one place to another, not just to extort money.

+1

But maybe we shouldn’t be investing too heavily in high speed transport infrastructure. I was expecting that by now we’d have a decent nation-wide high speed, high capacity internet that could replace a lot of business travel with high quality teleconferencing and other forms of digital information exchange.

I guess there will always be a need for some face-to-face interaction in business, especially in top-level negotiations, but I hope that kids that have grown up in an online world will be more amenable to conducting business online.

furious said:

• ever heard of the French revolution?

So that is how they got their fast trains?

no the French revolution was started by massive taxing of the roads/ transport systems

anyway I wouldn’t worry about it , we’re fucked now

the previous government blew a hole into the system, the liberals are just making things worse.

if we only have a two party system with brilliant minds like Gillard or abbot at the helm we might as switch the lights off now

I was expecting that by now we’d have a decent nation-wide high speed, high capacity internet that could replace a lot of business travel with high quality teleconferencing and other forms of digital information exchange.
—

Yes but they aren’t going to build that either, no doubt because airports are concerned they’ll lose parking revenue.

I was expecting that by now we’d have a decent nation-wide high speed, high capacity internet …

http://sortius.net.au/all-is-lost-in-the-land-of-the-nbn/

Change of train station location on airport rail link angers Redcliffe residents

“But the proposed location has now been changed, taking the station off airport land and shifting it further from the current domestic terminal and closer to homes.”

…

“She also questioned how passengers would get from the new train station to the current domestic terminal, which is expected to continue operating for about another decade.”

Should have previewed that. Try again:

Change of train station location on airport rail link angers Redcliffe residents

“But the proposed location has now been changed, taking the station off airport land and shifting it further from the current domestic terminal and closer to homes.”

…

“She also questioned how passengers would get from the new train station to the current domestic terminal, which is expected to continue operating for about another decade.”

On a slightly different note – would there be more of a market in Australia for medium speed (say around 200-250 km/h) service between Melbourne and Sydney that allowed people to carry cars, a bit like the Eurotunnel shuttles, where you drive in on your car? Would this be more attractive than a fast passenger only point-to-point service? It would take 4-5 hours, but when you got there you are in your own car. it’s a service that the airlines certainly can’t match.

party_pants said:

On a slightly different note – would there be more of a market in Australia for medium speed (say around 200-250 km/h) service between Melbourne and Sydney that allowed people to carry cars, a bit like the Eurotunnel shuttles, where you drive in on your car? Would this be more attractive than a fast passenger only point-to-point service? It would take 4-5 hours, but when you got there you are in your own car. it’s a service that the airlines certainly can’t match.

A struggle I reckon, it would only save four hours over driving and that is assuming the process of driving Into melbourne and booking in the car is speedy and efficient. Otherwise you could hop in your car and be there on one tank load, one maccas stop, a bit later and a lot cheaper. If you have to get there an hour early and wait an hour to unload then too much of a bother, especially if you are in apart of Victoria or Sydney where you don’t need to struggle through City traffic to get to a highway then to the freeway.

party_pants said:

On a slightly different note – would there be more of a market in Australia for medium speed (say around 200-250 km/h) service between Melbourne and Sydney that allowed people to carry cars, a bit like the Eurotunnel shuttles, where you drive in on your car? Would this be more attractive than a fast passenger only point-to-point service? It would take 4-5 hours, but when you got there you are in your own car. it’s a service that the airlines certainly can’t match.

it would be great

you can already load your car but its expensive – you need to make it cheaper.

personally I’d moved away from public transport

just build some decent motorways and have a top speed of 200km for the right cars and the right drivers ie you hold a licence without serious points and have been trained to drive at high speed – the exam is conducted in English and theres no computers, you either know the answer to a question in 5 seconds or less or you fail your licence.

if you could build a decent electric vehicle and have topping up points along the motorway you could get to any major city in less time

you keep animals off the road by fencing off the road properly and creating bridges to allow animals to cross under the road – no more kangaroo carcasses

dv said:

I was expecting that by now we’d have a decent nation-wide high speed, high capacity internet that could replace a lot of business travel with high quality teleconferencing and other forms of digital information exchange.
—

Yes but they aren’t going to build that either, no doubt because airports are concerned they’ll lose parking revenue.

:)

On a related note, an effective NBN would undermine traditional media in many ways, and unsurprisingly, the NBN has been heavily criticised by traditional media.

AwesomeO said:

party_pants said:

On a slightly different note – would there be more of a market in Australia for medium speed (say around 200-250 km/h) service between Melbourne and Sydney that allowed people to carry cars, a bit like the Eurotunnel shuttles, where you drive in on your car? Would this be more attractive than a fast passenger only point-to-point service? It would take 4-5 hours, but when you got there you are in your own car. it’s a service that the airlines certainly can’t match.

A struggle I reckon, it would only save four hours over driving and that is assuming the process of driving Into melbourne and booking in the car is speedy and efficient. Otherwise you could hop in your car and be there on one tank load, one maccas stop, a bit later and a lot cheaper. If you have to get there an hour early and wait an hour to unload then too much of a bother, especially if you are in apart of Victoria or Sydney where you don’t need to struggle through City traffic to get to a highway then to the freeway.

Ok thanks. I’m just floating an idea and workshopping it.

I’m trying to come with a service only rail could offer. I was thinking more about the family holiday market than the business traveller. Having your own car means a more generous baggage limit, and also not having to drive. 4-5 hours sitting reading or watching a film might be easier for families than a full day on the road with a car load of kids going: “are we there yet?”. Might appeal to some.

as I’ve mentioned before here, the various industries in Australia are trying to put each other out of business so they can chase the subsidies and also have more political clout

you want to knock out an unrelated industry to put people out of work so the few people left work in your industry under your control

every time a major industry falls over you celebrate because the government has less room to manoeuvre , if they don’t submit to your will you sack a thousand people and ask them again. if you are the only effective employer the ATO becomes your plaything and taxes on the plebs becomes enormous as you shirk your tax responsibilities as you’ve got a gun to the governments head

nice idea but its going to happen elsewhere – we just dig holes here

looking at the chunnel by car. 35min trip. be there 1/2 hr before departure. 44 quid return.

Something like this:

party_pants said:

AwesomeO said:

party_pants said:

On a slightly different note – would there be more of a market in Australia for medium speed (say around 200-250 km/h) service between Melbourne and Sydney that allowed people to carry cars, a bit like the Eurotunnel shuttles, where you drive in on your car? Would this be more attractive than a fast passenger only point-to-point service? It would take 4-5 hours, but when you got there you are in your own car. it’s a service that the airlines certainly can’t match.

A struggle I reckon, it would only save four hours over driving and that is assuming the process of driving Into melbourne and booking in the car is speedy and efficient. Otherwise you could hop in your car and be there on one tank load, one maccas stop, a bit later and a lot cheaper. If you have to get there an hour early and wait an hour to unload then too much of a bother, especially if you are in apart of Victoria or Sydney where you don’t need to struggle through City traffic to get to a highway then to the freeway.

Ok thanks. I’m just floating an idea and workshopping it.

I’m trying to come with a service only rail could offer. I was thinking more about the family holiday market than the business traveller. Having your own car means a more generous baggage limit, and also not having to drive. 4-5 hours sitting reading or watching a film might be easier for families than a full day on the road with a car load of kids going: “are we there yet?”. Might appeal to some.

travelling at 200kmph and you get somewhere quick, you can stop more often and travel further distance

JudgeMental said:

looking at the chunnel by car. 35min trip. be there 1/2 hr before departure. 44 quid return.

too many fumes

wookiemeister said:

just build some decent motorways and have a top speed of 200km for the right cars and the right drivers ie you hold a licence without serious points and have been trained to drive at high speed – the exam is conducted in English and theres no computers, you either know the answer to a question in 5 seconds or less or you fail your licence.

if you could build a decent electric vehicle and have topping up points along the motorway you could get to any major city in less time

you keep animals off the road by fencing off the road properly and creating bridges to allow animals to cross under the road – no more kangaroo carcasses

It’s dangerous having fast cars and slower cars on the freeway.

What’s that feature where a car senses whether it’s about to crash into something it is approaching and slows/stops?

Allowing only these cars onto a freeway (perhaps between certain times every day) could allow for an increased speed limit in the future.

party_pants said:

Something like this:

Yeah I get that, but if you have to drive Into the city and it takes an hour to shackle up the trainload of cars and get everyone booked in, everyone north of Melbourne is 2 hours ahead just by getting onto a highway, and if it takes another say half an hour at Sydney to unload and get out of the nightmare that is Sydney traffic it will be a hard sell. Especially with any modern car giving a nice drive and being able to do it it in one fuel stop.

as I’ve mentioned before – you could meld the train system with the power system

use the same infrastructure to carry power and goods to all points on the track

personally roads are more practical, everyone can use them and you don’t need to spend millions of man hours inspecting tracks and wheels in the same way as roads

you don’t need a whole system of controls and checks for roads like railways

the fact is that speed limits are too slow for the distances

Speedy said:

wookiemeister said:

just build some decent motorways and have a top speed of 200km for the right cars and the right drivers ie you hold a licence without serious points and have been trained to drive at high speed – the exam is conducted in English and theres no computers, you either know the answer to a question in 5 seconds or less or you fail your licence.

if you could build a decent electric vehicle and have topping up points along the motorway you could get to any major city in less time

you keep animals off the road by fencing off the road properly and creating bridges to allow animals to cross under the road – no more kangaroo carcasses

It’s dangerous having fast cars and slower cars on the freeway.

What’s that feature where a car senses whether it’s about to crash into something it is approaching and slows/stops?

Allowing only these cars onto a freeway (perhaps between certain times every day) could allow for an increased speed limit in the future.

wookiemeister said:

Speedy said:

wookiemeister said:

just build some decent motorways and have a top speed of 200km for the right cars and the right drivers ie you hold a licence without serious points and have been trained to drive at high speed – the exam is conducted in English and theres no computers, you either know the answer to a question in 5 seconds or less or you fail your licence.

if you could build a decent electric vehicle and have topping up points along the motorway you could get to any major city in less time

you keep animals off the road by fencing off the road properly and creating bridges to allow animals to cross under the road – no more kangaroo carcasses

It’s dangerous having fast cars and slower cars on the freeway.

What’s that feature where a car senses whether it’s about to crash into something it is approaching and slows/stops?

Allowing only these cars onto a freeway (perhaps between certain times every day) could allow for an increased speed limit in the future.

the germans seem to do alright

100 kmph is too slow, you fall asleep

at 200 kmph you are alert and make rapid progress, you cover more distance faster meaning for the same distance you aren’t on the road for as long

a journey that used to take an hour is cut in half

you make the lanes wide

The other thing is it would be nice if any Australian city had a modern, comprehensive public transport system…

AwesomeO said:

party_pants said:

Something like this:

Yeah I get that, but if you have to drive Into the city and it takes an hour to shackle up the trainload of cars and get everyone booked in, everyone north of Melbourne is 2 hours ahead just by getting onto a highway, and if it takes another say half an hour at Sydney to unload and get out of the nightmare that is Sydney traffic it will be a hard sell. Especially with any modern car giving a nice drive and being able to do it it in one fuel stop.

very much so

too much buggerising around

roads are better

AwesomeO said:

Yeah I get that, but if you have to drive Into the city and it takes an hour to shackle up the trainload of cars and get everyone booked in, everyone north of Melbourne is 2 hours ahead just by getting onto a highway, and if it takes another say half an hour at Sydney to unload and get out of the nightmare that is Sydney traffic it will be a hard sell. Especially with any modern car giving a nice drive and being able to do it it in one fuel stop.

For the family reunion / holiday market, you wouldn’t need to have the station in the city centre. City centre to city centre is probably more the business market. It could work with stations being located in a middle/outer suburb but with good connections to the major road network. Perhaps even two or three major stations in each of Sydney and Melbourne spread around the metro area.

but all these stations need staff to run them, consume power, time , effort, money

an off ramp from a motorway doesn’t need a fraction of the effort

build the roads and the cars will come

party_pants said:

AwesomeO said:

Yeah I get that, but if you have to drive Into the city and it takes an hour to shackle up the trainload of cars and get everyone booked in, everyone north of Melbourne is 2 hours ahead just by getting onto a highway, and if it takes another say half an hour at Sydney to unload and get out of the nightmare that is Sydney traffic it will be a hard sell. Especially with any modern car giving a nice drive and being able to do it it in one fuel stop.

For the family reunion / holiday market, you wouldn’t need to have the station in the city centre. City centre to city centre is probably more the business market. It could work with stations being located in a middle/outer suburb but with good connections to the major road network. Perhaps even two or three major stations in each of Sydney and Melbourne spread around the metro area.

To me, it is too short, Melbourne to Sydney is a day’s travel by car, taking the car by train seems to me a lot of buggering around, unlikely to be cheaper and the hours saved, if there are any, unlikely to be much of a selling point. And it is still a days travel.

if you could use some of this mine spoil to act as a thick road base it would be great

you could have more experienced drivers to go up to 300 kmph assuming they have the experience and the money

if you built the right roads computer controlled, driverless trucks could be used in the “slow” lane

fast cars and good roads would put the airlines out of business

in Australia it would be wiser to just sell off the train tracks to private industry and let them use the tracks for what they were built for

- shifting coal and minerals around

AwesomeO said:

party_pants said:

AwesomeO said:

Yeah I get that, but if you have to drive Into the city and it takes an hour to shackle up the trainload of cars and get everyone booked in, everyone north of Melbourne is 2 hours ahead just by getting onto a highway, and if it takes another say half an hour at Sydney to unload and get out of the nightmare that is Sydney traffic it will be a hard sell. Especially with any modern car giving a nice drive and being able to do it it in one fuel stop.

For the family reunion / holiday market, you wouldn’t need to have the station in the city centre. City centre to city centre is probably more the business market. It could work with stations being located in a middle/outer suburb but with good connections to the major road network. Perhaps even two or three major stations in each of Sydney and Melbourne spread around the metro area.

To me, it is too short, Melbourne to Sydney is a day’s travel by car, taking the car by train seems to me a lot of buggering around, unlikely to be cheaper and the hours saved, if there are any, unlikely to be much of a selling point. And it is still a days travel.

The safety factor should come into it, no idiots competing for space. No fully loaded hot mix tankers rolling over.

wookiemeister said:

in Australia it would be wiser to just sell off the train tracks to private industry and let them use the tracks for what they were built for

- shifting coal and minerals around

and shipping containers.

I think train networks are good for the old technology but the fact is that as cars , trucks become more efficient it will be easier to use infrastructure that’s very simple rather than complicated, you need to maintain high speed track to a good level

computer controlled trucks could run 24 hours a day in the slow lane at the optimum speed for efficiency

the trucks could then have human operators for the short distance to the destination – that’s the cheap option

AwesomeO said:

party_pants said:

AwesomeO said:

Yeah I get that, but if you have to drive Into the city and it takes an hour to shackle up the trainload of cars and get everyone booked in, everyone north of Melbourne is 2 hours ahead just by getting onto a highway, and if it takes another say half an hour at Sydney to unload and get out of the nightmare that is Sydney traffic it will be a hard sell. Especially with any modern car giving a nice drive and being able to do it it in one fuel stop.

For the family reunion / holiday market, you wouldn’t need to have the station in the city centre. City centre to city centre is probably more the business market. It could work with stations being located in a middle/outer suburb but with good connections to the major road network. Perhaps even two or three major stations in each of Sydney and Melbourne spread around the metro area.

To me, it is too short, Melbourne to Sydney is a day’s travel by car, taking the car by train seems to me a lot of buggering around, unlikely to be cheaper and the hours saved, if there are any, unlikely to be much of a selling point. And it is still a days travel.

The train would have toilets and hot food outlets and room to walk up and down the carriage to stretch your legs. I could see a marketing campaign based on a young family arriving refreshed and relaxed, with as much luggage as they could stuff in the car boot.

I think train networks are good for the old technology but the fact is that as cars , trucks become more efficient it will be easier to use infrastructure that’s very simple rather than complicated, you need to maintain high speed track to a good level
—

The thing is, cars and trucks are very slow and produce more GHG emissions than high speed rail. Despite your optimism, it is never going to be the case that Australians generally will be safe to control a car at plus 200 km/h speeds. I hardly trust any of them at 120.

Toyota to launch hydrogen-powered car
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/asia-pacific/2014/11/toyota-launch-hydrogen-powered-car-2014111843546567116.html

and the great thing about roads is that they can adapt to most technologies

dv said:

I think train networks are good for the old technology but the fact is that as cars , trucks become more efficient it will be easier to use infrastructure that’s very simple rather than complicated, you need to maintain high speed track to a good level
—

The thing is, cars and trucks are very slow and produce more GHG emissions than high speed rail. Despite your optimism, it is never going to be the case that Australians generally will be safe to control a car at plus 200 km/h speeds. I hardly trust any of them at 120.

I can quite safely control a vehicle at 200kmph but I drive to the conditions

a flat relatively straight road built properly could see higher speeds

but you must keep animals off the roads and not allow “roadworks” to slow the traffic for any reason (build more lanes)

party_pants said:

AwesomeO said:

party_pants said:

For the family reunion / holiday market, you wouldn’t need to have the station in the city centre. City centre to city centre is probably more the business market. It could work with stations being located in a middle/outer suburb but with good connections to the major road network. Perhaps even two or three major stations in each of Sydney and Melbourne spread around the metro area.

To me, it is too short, Melbourne to Sydney is a day’s travel by car, taking the car by train seems to me a lot of buggering around, unlikely to be cheaper and the hours saved, if there are any, unlikely to be much of a selling point. And it is still a days travel.

The train would have toilets and hot food outlets and room to walk up and down the carriage to stretch your legs. I could see a marketing campaign based on a young family arriving refreshed and relaxed, with as much luggage as they could stuff in the car boot.

Sorry not investing. On the sort of family trip Sydney to Melbourne you write off the first day anyway, your idea still writes off the day but adds expense and complexity. Kiddies can happily sit in the back playing the entertainment systems, cars are air conditioned and comfortable. It is not the ordeal of a HR Holden in summer up the Hume anymore.

in the future with bigger faster roads you might see the rise of bigger vehicles

wider wheels, spoilers coming back

basically stuff for the track is lifted straight on to normal vehicles

AwesomeO said:

party_pants said:

AwesomeO said:

To me, it is too short, Melbourne to Sydney is a day’s travel by car, taking the car by train seems to me a lot of buggering around, unlikely to be cheaper and the hours saved, if there are any, unlikely to be much of a selling point. And it is still a days travel.

The train would have toilets and hot food outlets and room to walk up and down the carriage to stretch your legs. I could see a marketing campaign based on a young family arriving refreshed and relaxed, with as much luggage as they could stuff in the car boot.

Sorry not investing. On the sort of family trip Sydney to Melbourne you write off the first day anyway, your idea still writes off the day but adds expense and complexity. Kiddies can happily sit in the back playing the entertainment systems, cars are air conditioned and comfortable. It is not the ordeal of a HR Holden in summer up the Hume anymore.

Ok, I get your point.

It offers something above flying, but nothing much extra above driving the whole way. Apart from speed, and for the holiday family that doesn’t really matter too much.

Back to the drawing board.

party_pants said:

AwesomeO said:

party_pants said:

The train would have toilets and hot food outlets and room to walk up and down the carriage to stretch your legs. I could see a marketing campaign based on a young family arriving refreshed and relaxed, with as much luggage as they could stuff in the car boot.

Sorry not investing. On the sort of family trip Sydney to Melbourne you write off the first day anyway, your idea still writes off the day but adds expense and complexity. Kiddies can happily sit in the back playing the entertainment systems, cars are air conditioned and comfortable. It is not the ordeal of a HR Holden in summer up the Hume anymore.

Ok, I get your point.

It offers something above flying, but nothing much extra above driving the whole way. Apart from speed, and for the holiday family that doesn’t really matter too much.

Back to the drawing board.

Hey, don’t let me kill the dream. Tis just my perspective on the idea. I may be wrong. I have been before.

I’ve killed the dream then just wiped my damp hands on a dry rag

AwesomeO said:

party_pants said:

AwesomeO said:

Sorry not investing. On the sort of family trip Sydney to Melbourne you write off the first day anyway, your idea still writes off the day but adds expense and complexity. Kiddies can happily sit in the back playing the entertainment systems, cars are air conditioned and comfortable. It is not the ordeal of a HR Holden in summer up the Hume anymore.

Ok, I get your point.

It offers something above flying, but nothing much extra above driving the whole way. Apart from speed, and for the holiday family that doesn’t really matter too much.

Back to the drawing board.

Hey, don’t let me kill the dream. Tis just my perspective on the idea. I may be wrong. I have been before.

I think you raise a valid point, for which I can’t find an immediate counter-argument. Unlike many people on internet forums I’m not inclined to dig my heels in and continue to argue for the sake of arguing.

wookiemeister said:

I’ve killed the dream then just wiped my damp hands on a dry rag

Sorry, I’ve only been reading AwesomeO’s replies on the matter.

party_pants said:

wookiemeister said:

I’ve killed the dream then just wiped my damp hands on a dry rag

Sorry, I’ve only been reading AwesomeO’s replies on the matter.

Hah… burned.

yeah, me too. all wookies post links are unlooked at.

one of the biggest hurdles is lack of population. look at how many people would cross the channel every day for business and trips. there are up tp 4 car trains an hour. both ways.

JudgeMental said:

one of the biggest hurdles is lack of population. look at how many people would cross the channel every day for business and trips. there are up tp 4 car trains an hour. both ways.

Plus the channel train was a better alternative to getting on a ferry, with no other alternatives. the process was much the same, cars had to be shackled up, people boarded etc. And no sea sickness on the train. It had tangible and definate advantages.

and it is only a 35min trip, faster than the ferry.

party_pants said:

wookiemeister said:

I’ve killed the dream then just wiped my damp hands on a dry rag

Sorry, I’ve only been reading AwesomeO’s replies on the matter.

good thing too

wookiemeister said:

party_pants said:

wookiemeister said:

I’ve killed the dream then just wiped my damp hands on a dry rag

Sorry, I’ve only been reading AwesomeO’s replies on the matter.

good thing too

most of posts are just bouncing a ball off a brick wall

In reality is anyone taking note of anything here – no

are things still going to be run in the same way – yes

I would like to say there will never be a high speed rail link but given that governments shake billions of dollars into unsustainable things – its possible

JudgeMental said:

and it is only a 35min trip, faster than the ferry.

Seems like all of the car-shuttle trains in operation around the world are similar. The others are those running through mountain tunnels, where there is no alternative direct road route, apart from a very long around the mountain which adds several hours travel time.

I guess if it was viable they’d already been running them on a commercially successful basis between say London/Edinborough.

party_pants said:

JudgeMental said:

and it is only a 35min trip, faster than the ferry.

Seems like all of the car-shuttle trains in operation around the world are similar. The others are those running through mountain tunnels, where there is no alternative direct road route, apart from a very long around the mountain which adds several hours travel time.

I guess if it was viable they’d already been running them on a commercially successful basis between say London/Edinborough.

You used to be able to put your car on a flatbed on the old Trans. Dunno about the new one.

jjjust moi said:

party_pants said:

JudgeMental said:

and it is only a 35min trip, faster than the ferry.

Seems like all of the car-shuttle trains in operation around the world are similar. The others are those running through mountain tunnels, where there is no alternative direct road route, apart from a very long around the mountain which adds several hours travel time.

I guess if it was viable they’d already been running them on a commercially successful basis between say London/Edinborough.

You used to be able to put your car on a flatbed on the old Trans. Dunno about the new one.

Yeah, but you couldn’t sit in it for the journey. That’s what I was getting at.

We need this in Australia. We have further to travel between cities, and the airplane route between Melbourne and Sydney is already one of the busiest airplane routes in the world.

mollwollfumble said:

We need this in Australia. We have further to travel between cities, and the airplane route between Melbourne and Sydney is already one of the busiest airplane routes in the world.

I wouldn’t hold your breath.

It will never happen, and for quite good reasons.

mollwollfumble said:

We need this in Australia. We have further to travel between cities, and the airplane route between Melbourne and Sydney is already one of the busiest airplane routes in the world.

The standard rule of thumb for conventional high speed trains is journeys of up to about 500 km the train beats air travel. Sydney – Melbourne is a shade under 1000 km. A maglev training going at 500 km/h might rewrite that rule, but the problem is that the construction costs for the special track it needs are likely to be much more costly than conventional rail. So it’s probably going to be uneconomic to operate such a long line.

sibeen said:

mollwollfumble said:

We need this in Australia. We have further to travel between cities, and the airplane route between Melbourne and Sydney is already one of the busiest airplane routes in the world.

I wouldn’t hold your breath.

It will never happen, and for quite good reasons.

If Campbell Newman ends up PM he’ll run tunnels with maglev trains everywhere……

Ian said:

500 kph..

Be messy if it happened to leave the track.

Being a MagLev it is meant to leave the track…

Train lines are for shifting around coal and minerals in Australia . They shouldn’t waste any money on high speed trains here the country’s finances are ruined, buying more debt to finance a new train system would be a waste of money.

at the time of sale QR was 3 billion in debt, it’s still in debt and that debt has got worse since privatisation

For what it’s worth it could be better to invest in only two methods of transport – roads and aircraft , trains are a third wheel that benefit only the mining industry which pay their own way.

wookiemeister said:

Train lines are for shifting around coal and minerals in Australia . They shouldn’t waste any money on high speed trains here the country’s finances are ruined, buying more debt to finance a new train system would be a waste of money.

at the time of sale QR was 3 billion in debt, it’s still in debt and that debt has got worse since privatisation

For what it’s worth it could be better to invest in only two methods of transport – roads and aircraft , trains are a third wheel that benefit only the mining industry which pay their own way.

Your understanding of the transport infrastructure in Australia is somewhere south of zero.

jjjust moi said:

wookiemeister said:

Train lines are for shifting around coal and minerals in Australia . They shouldn’t waste any money on high speed trains here the country’s finances are ruined, buying more debt to finance a new train system would be a waste of money.

at the time of sale QR was 3 billion in debt, it’s still in debt and that debt has got worse since privatisation

For what it’s worth it could be better to invest in only two methods of transport – roads and aircraft , trains are a third wheel that benefit only the mining industry which pay their own way.

Your understanding of the transport infrastructure in Australia is somewhere south of zero.

And three billon dollars less than the debt of Queensland rail who would presumably know more than me about transportation, trains and its networks.

If you want to know how effective the train network just ask the financial lenders

I drive past an entire train that derailed for months a few years back

The railway tracks were boned

And that’s the thing , the system can’t be maintained at the moment

The only moment that should be used for a rail network is really suburban systems and ideally underground systems . They don’t use valuable space above

One idea I’ve had is to basically knock down swathes of buildings and build a ground level rail system in a tunnel constructed of residential / business blocks

The residential block above pays for the construction of the railine

You could have futuristic maglev trains but only in cities , it’s where they’ll get used more AND you don’t have the problem of trying to maintain the track in inhospitable territory and climes. In a city labour , experience and money are abundant.

Drove