Cycling Equipment · Public discussion

TGV

Started by Email address hidden · · Last activity · 75 posts · 3,760 views

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Cycling Equipment
Published
5 April 2007
Last activity
23 April 2007
Original author
Email address hidden
Posts
75
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
3,760
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 21–40 of 75
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. On Apr 5, 2:07 pm, Dan Connelly <d_j_c_o_n_n_e_l@y_a_h_o_o_._c_o_m>

    Quoted message said:
    Matt O'Toole said:

    If they can spend $15B to bury a freeway to ease traffic and improve
    aesthetics of a medium-sized city like Boston (pop. 600k, then it's
    certainly worth it to spend $9B+ to greatly improve the main
    transportation corridor for 36 million people in CA.

    The point of the "big dig" was to dig a hole and fill it in again,
    justifying a large transfer of funds from China to Boston.

    If anything, this should be an argument against trusting the
    government for infrastructure investment management.

    Everybody says Big Dig, Big Dig, oh what a mess,
    and it was, but you know what? Fifteen years later,
    nobody sensible misses the Embarcadero Freeway (or
    remembers that a significant number of people wanted
    to keep it), and it will be similar in Boston.
    The Central Artery was even more god-awful and it had
    to be gotten rid of sooner or later. Mismanagement
    of the Big Dig may be split evenly between Massachusetts
    and Bechtel Corp et al.

    Ben

  2. A Muzi said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    mark said:

    I've always said that every American should ride a TGV at least once
    to see how rail travel can (and should) be done.

    Quoted message said:

    Somehow the Germans and Japanese did not get the message about
    articulated trains. The TGV is a series of cars that share wheels to
    give greater stability and lower rolling losses as a bonus. Separate
    train cars have instabilities between cars as those of us who have
    walked from one car to the next on conventional trains have seen.

    ICE and Shinkansen Bullet-trains have separate cars that require
    extensive linkages and shock absorbers to stabilize these
    instabilities. Consider that the German ICE was designed after the
    first TGV's went into service. That has got to be great NIH that they
    went ahead with separate passenger cars. Even our 5-car freight
    container racks are articulated cars.

    I just watched the video. What happens when it hits the deer?

    The deer evaporates?

    Lou
    --
    Posted by news://news.nb.nu (http://www.nb.nu)

  3. A Muzi said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    mark said:

    I've always said that every American should ride a TGV at least once
    to see how rail travel can (and should) be done.

    Quoted message said:

    Somehow the Germans and Japanese did not get the message about
    articulated trains. The TGV is a series of cars that share wheels to
    give greater stability and lower rolling losses as a bonus. Separate
    train cars have instabilities between cars as those of us who have
    walked from one car to the next on conventional trains have seen.

    ICE and Shinkansen Bullet-trains have separate cars that require
    extensive linkages and shock absorbers to stabilize these
    instabilities. Consider that the German ICE was designed after the
    first TGV's went into service. That has got to be great NIH that they
    went ahead with separate passenger cars. Even our 5-car freight
    container racks are articulated cars.

    I just watched the video. What happens when it hits the deer?
    --
    Andrew Muzi
    www.yellowjersey.org
    Open every day since 1 April, 1971

    Hopefully they build a lot of underpasses and overpasses for both deer
    and people, and all sorts of other critters, assuming they still exist
    in those areas.

    We used to build subways to minimize annoyances to people. When that
    became too expensive we built elevated tracks above street level on
    continuous platforms held aloft by steel beams, still allowing
    unempeded street-level traffic underneath the roar of the passing
    trains. When that became too expensive we built tracks above street
    level on built up earthen "aquaducts", with underpasses every 2-4
    blocks. Next we built fenced in tracks directly at street level with
    crossing signals every 4-8 blocks, creating mass havoc and
    inconvenience to neighborhoods. To rectify that we now build trains
    that go 273 mph, and permanantly separate areas on either side of the
    thoroughfare, to make it convenient for wealthy people to run non-stop
    from their McMansion doorstep 120 miles to downtown, where a taxi
    whisks them to their office building. 224 mph (or whatever) was way
    too slow. Mayor Daley in Chicago became a local hero when he sent
    bulldozers in the middle of the night (after years of delaying court
    battles) to destroy the runways at lakefront Meigs field, and boy did
    the elite jet set tycoons get upset. I spent years on 1 hr each way
    trips on 50's era 30-50 mph "milk-run" trains that shook so badly that
    reading the newspaper was out of the question.

    Bill Westphal

  4. mark said:
    Quoted message said:

    Jobst Brandt


    I've always said that every American should ride a TGV at least once to
    see how rail travel can (and should) be done.

    The cross-Channel Eurostar is a slightly smaller version of the TGV with
    adaptations to pick up power from the curious third-rail electrification
    on the British Southern Region. It still runs at 180mph on the French
    side, but IME it trundles along at about 40mph for much of the British
    side. The new Channel rail link is due to open soon to give high speed
    running in Britain too.

  5. mark said:

    I've always said that every American should ride a TGV at least once to
    see how rail travel can (and should) be done.


    the only reason i haven't is that i had a bike with full front &
    rear panniers to camp on alpe d'huez during the tour, and both
    Eurostar and TGV require bike bags of specified dimensions.

    next time i'm in france, it's with a set of jerseys, a set of
    street clothes, a bike with minimal panniers, a bike bag, and
    credit cards.

  6. Mike Jacoubowsky said:
    Quoted message said:

    I've always said that every American should ride a TGV at least once
    to see how rail travel can (and should) be done.

    That would be sitting across from a chain-smoking French couple? Been
    there, done that, back in 2002!

    Thankfully, such experiences are no longer required. Plenty of
    non-smoking cars, and France in general is finally making headway
    against smokers.

    AFAIK, all high speed trains in France are non smoking, have been for more
    than a year.
    I think the TER regional stuff is non smoking as well.

    French station buildings are non smoking (enclosed public space, so no
    smoking).

    You might find huddles of smokers just outside trains or station buildings.

    - Nigel

    --
    Nigel Cliffe,
    Webmaster at http://www.2mm.org.uk/

  7. Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Ben C said:

    On 2007-04-05, [email hidden] <[email hidden]> wrote:

    Quoted message said:

    >

    Quoted message said:

    Impressive. Makes maglevs look like boutique trains only suitable for
    trips to the coffee shop.

    Those levitation trains are faster, dont you think so? Look up MAGLEV
    trains.

    581kph for that maglev, which is the world record for any train, 573kph
    for the TGV the other day running on rails. So not much difference in
    speed, but surely easier and more practical to use rails.

    France has one of the most developed nuclear power programs, and I can
    therefore easily see French interests encouraging a bit of global
    warming politics to bump up air travel prices (while enjoying the usual
    dig at the US at the same time), and high-speed trains becoming the
    future of European travel. Could be worse.

  8. Quoted message said:

    It's not like the ICE in Germany where the tracks run unfenced
    past peoples back yards. These folks apparently have neither
    small children nor house pets.

    They do, but they haven't given up on common sense. It's a crowded
    place here, still the rate of accidents in that area is extremely
    low...

    --
    MfG/Best regards
    helmut springer

  9. Zog The Undeniable said:

    The cross-Channel Eurostar is a slightly smaller version of the TGV with
    adaptations to pick up power from the curious third-rail electrification
    on the British Southern Region. It still runs at 180mph on the French
    side, but IME it trundles along at about 40mph for much of the British
    side. The new Channel rail link is due to open soon to give high speed
    running in Britain too.

    I thought the British side had been upgraded, to allow fast(er) travel
    there too, cutting half an hour from the total trip time (London-Paris).

    Matt O.

  10. Matt O'Toole said:
    Zog The Undeniable said:

    The cross-Channel Eurostar is a slightly smaller version of the TGV
    with adaptations to pick up power from the curious third-rail
    electrification on the British Southern Region. It still runs at
    180mph on the French side, but IME it trundles along at about 40mph
    for much of the British side. The new Channel rail link is due to
    open soon to give high speed running in Britain too.

    I thought the British side had been upgraded, to allow fast(er) travel
    there too, cutting half an hour from the total trip time
    (London-Paris).

    Half done; its fast (TGV style line) through rural Kent, then drops the
    train onto slow south London commuter lines before arriving in Waterloo
    station.

    The other half of the fast line opens in November this year, and will give
    high speed running into St Pancras station, and should cut the journey time
    further.

    (I'll also benefit from November with a much nearer station to join the
    train).

    - Nigel

    --
    Nigel Cliffe,
    Webmaster at http://www.2mm.org.uk/


  11. Quoted message said:

    We used to build subways to minimize annoyances to people. When that
    became too expensive we built elevated tracks above street level on
    continuous platforms held aloft by steel beams, still allowing
    unempeded street-level traffic underneath the roar of the passing
    trains. When that became too expensive we built tracks above street
    level on built up earthen "aquaducts", with underpasses every 2-4
    blocks.

    Why did these methods become too expensive?

  12. jobst.brandt said:

    mark <[email hidden]> writes:

    Quoted message said:

    I've always said that every American should ride a TGV at least once
    to see how rail travel can (and should) be done.

    Somehow the Germans and Japanese did not get the message about
    articulated trains. The TGV is a series of cars that share wheels to
    give greater stability and lower rolling losses as a bonus. Separate
    train cars have instabilities between cars as those of us who have
    walked from one car to the next on conventional trains have seen.

    You will know about the desaster in Eschede. It was speculated that a
    different design might have resulted in less severe consequences. But
    then also the TGV has it's issues. Nothing of this is related to
    cycling. And then these high speed trains do not welcome cyclists
    anyway.

    Günther

  13. In article
    <[email hidden]>,

    Quoted post said:

    On Apr 5, 2:07 pm, Dan Connelly <d_j_c_o_n_n_e_l@y_a_h_o_o_._c_o_m>

    Quoted message said:
    Matt O'Toole said:

    If they can spend $15B to bury a freeway to ease traffic and improve
    aesthetics of a medium-sized city like Boston (pop. 600k, then it's
    certainly worth it to spend $9B+ to greatly improve the main
    transportation corridor for 36 million people in CA.

    The point of the "big dig" was to dig a hole and fill it in again,
    justifying a large transfer of funds from China to Boston.

    If anything, this should be an argument against trusting the
    government for infrastructure investment management.

    Everybody says Big Dig, Big Dig, oh what a mess,
    and it was, but you know what? Fifteen years later,
    nobody sensible misses the Embarcadero Freeway (or
    remembers that a significant number of people wanted
    to keep it), and it will be similar in Boston.
    The Central Artery was even more god-awful and it had
    to be gotten rid of sooner or later. Mismanagement
    of the Big Dig may be split evenly between Massachusetts
    and Bechtel Corp et al.

    1. The traffic through Boston needed help decades ago.
    2. Anybody who ever lived there knew that vast quantities of
    money would simply disappear. Sank into the muck, probably.

  14. Nigel Cliffe said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    The cross-Channel Eurostar is a slightly smaller version of the
    TGV with adaptations to pick up power from the curious third-rail
    electrification on the British Southern Region. It still runs at
    180mph on the French side, but IME it trundles along at about
    40mph for much of the British side. The new Channel rail link is
    due to open soon to give high speed running in Britain too.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    I thought the British side had been upgraded, to allow fast(er)
    travel there too, cutting half an hour from the total trip time
    (London-Paris).

    Quoted message said:

    Half done; its fast (TGV style line) through rural Kent, then drops
    the train onto slow south London commuter lines before arriving in
    Waterloo station.

    Quoted message said:

    The other half of the fast line opens in November this year, and
    will give high speed running into St Pancras station, and should cut
    the journey time further.

    Not to be overlooked is this very condition that high speed rail can
    use conventional tracks and serve major rail centers without
    difficulty. Zurich (CH) is served by high speed trains although
    Switzerland has no high speed track neither in ZH or Genéve.

    Quoted message said:

    (I'll also benefit from November with a much nearer station to join
    the train).

    Good stuff, the HSR!

    Jobst Brandt

  15. Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    We used to build subways to minimize annoyances to people. When that
    became too expensive we built elevated tracks above street level on
    continuous platforms held aloft by steel beams, still allowing
    unempeded street-level traffic underneath the roar of the passing
    trains. When that became too expensive we built tracks above street
    level on built up earthen "aquaducts", with underpasses every 2-4
    blocks.

    Why did these methods become too expensive?

    (whoops, I meant "viaducts".) By "too expensive" I mean changing
    priorities, specifically, per direction from GM, and those who could
    afford cars, to the single most expensive project undertaken by
    humankind: the US highway system. The cost of constructing a subway
    is, and always was astronomical. Building bridges over rail is
    prohibitively expensive. Or, even in the case of footbridges over
    highly trafficed roads on rails-to-trail creation the cost is a
    show-stopper. We intentionally design neighborhoods and cities in
    such a way to make effecient rail or other public transport
    impossible. In the case of neighborhoods, the primary motivator is
    racism. Obviously we (US) have second rate passenger rail service and
    consequently, very low ridership creating a vicious circle of lack of
    funding and public will. Also, we're such elitists I think we think
    we're too good and our time too valuable to be spent standing amidst
    the riff-raff on a train platform.

  16. Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    We used to build subways to minimize annoyances to people. When that
    became too expensive we built elevated tracks above street level on
    continuous platforms held aloft by steel beams, still allowing
    unempeded street-level traffic underneath the roar of the passing
    trains. When that became too expensive we built tracks above street
    level on built up earthen "aquaducts", with underpasses every 2-4
    blocks.


    Why did these methods become too expensive?

    Bill Westphal said:

    (whoops, I meant "viaducts".) By "too expensive" I mean changing
    priorities, specifically, per direction from GM, and those who could
    afford cars, to the single most expensive project undertaken by
    humankind: the US highway system. The cost of constructing a subway
    is, and always was astronomical. Building bridges over rail is
    prohibitively expensive. Or, even in the case of footbridges over
    highly trafficed roads on rails-to-trail creation the cost is a
    show-stopper. We intentionally design neighborhoods and cities in
    such a way to make effecient rail or other public transport
    impossible. In the case of neighborhoods, the primary motivator is
    racism. Obviously we (US) have second rate passenger rail service and
    consequently, very low ridership creating a vicious circle of lack of
    funding and public will. Also, we're such elitists I think we think
    we're too good and our time too valuable to be spent standing amidst
    the riff-raff on a train platform.

    I strenuously disagree with your bleating about 'racism'.

    I also disagree there's any conspiracy to dissuade from trains. People
    generally like cars. Worldwide, generally and in all cultures. Even at
    $3 gas (_much_ more outside US) most drive if they are able. We cyclists
    are not at all typical of humans.

    Once other non-automobile alternates become 'public', the customer is
    treated like the enemy, service disappears and anyone who doesn't have
    to use it won't. Sorta like health care where there is no market for
    most services. Everyone hates it. (contrast an ER with a Lasik outlet!)

    Name a 'public' system that isn't user-antagonistic. There's no
    motivation to treat customers as customers when you have the
    legislature ready and willing to lay the scourge of taxation on the
    non-using populace to pay for the thing. In a normal business the
    customer provides the revenue. In transit, the legislators are the
    'customers' and the riders are 'freight'. Staff 'gets it' and behaves
    accordingly.
    --
    Andrew Muzi
    www.yellowjersey.org
    Open every day since 1 April, 1971

  17. mark said:

    I've always said that every American should ride a TGV at least once to
    see how rail travel can (and should) be done.

    Mine was last August, and--other than my first stereotypical Parisian
    (in-car attendant) encounter (roundly rebuked for her attitude by the
    kindly French woman across from me!)--it was ... somewhere between
    incredible and mundane.

    It's mundane when you're reading the paper, not thinking about it,
    but ... then ... you glance out the window and ... the world is a Mach
    2 blur!

    Yeah. Sump'n like that in these ol United States would be cool.

    Sorry, Boeing. Start making rail cars ;-)

  18. A Muzi said:

    I also disagree there's any conspiracy to dissuade from trains. People
    generally like cars. Worldwide, generally and in all cultures. Even at
    $3 gas (_much_ more outside US) most drive if they are able. We cyclists
    are not at all typical of humans.

    This is absolutely true. A case in point is LA's streetcar system,
    supposedly dismantled by a cabal of GM, Firestone, and Standard Oil, in a
    plot to sell more cars and gasoline. The real story is that these
    companies kept the streetcars running through more than a decade of
    near-zero ridership. The final blow was not from big auto and big oil,
    but a citizens movement to get the streetcars out of the way because they
    were blocking traffic. People wanted to be able to drive their own cars,
    unimpeded.

    They still do, which is why they still move to suburban environments that
    at least give the impression of unimpeded personal motor vehicle travel.

    A billion Chinese want this too.

    Quoted message said:

    Once other non-automobile alternates become 'public', the customer is
    treated like the enemy, service disappears and anyone who doesn't have
    to use it won't. Sorta like health care where there is no market for
    most services. Everyone hates it. (contrast an ER with a Lasik outlet!)

    Name a 'public' system that isn't user-antagonistic.

    London, Paris, Sydney, Vancouver... etc. I hear Germany and Scandanavia
    are even better.

    I spent my teenage years in Sydney, and made good use of public transit
    there. It was awesome, being able to get almost anywhere I needed to go
    without being chauffered, like American kids have to be. I rode my bike a
    lot but almost no one else did, probably because they didn't have to.

    Quoted message said:

    There's no
    motivation to treat customers as customers when you have the
    legislature ready and willing to lay the scourge of taxation on the
    non-using populace to pay for the thing. In a normal business the
    customer provides the revenue. In transit, the legislators are the
    'customers' and the riders are 'freight'. Staff 'gets it' and behaves
    accordingly.

    I disagree. I've enjoyed using transit systems in many different cities.
    The good ones are wonderfully user-friendly.

    A lot of American bus systems are hard to use because there are ads
    instead of maps on the walls of the bus stop shelters. You can't just
    walk up to a bus stop and figure out how to get to where you're going.

    As far as surly staff go, that's a product of management. Unfortunately,
    unions can be pretty good at protecting bad workers too. Fear of losing
    one's job can be good motivation to be cheerful and helpful. It may not
    be the most best management technique, but it works for chain restaurants
    and Wal-Mart.

    Matt O.

  19. Quoted message said:
    mark said:

    I've always said that every American should ride a TGV at least once to
    see how rail travel can (and should) be done.

    Quoted message said:

    Mine was last August, and--other than my first stereotypical Parisian
    (in-car attendant) encounter (roundly rebuked for her attitude by the
    kindly French woman across from me!)--it was ... somewhere between
    incredible and mundane.
    It's mundane when you're reading the paper, not thinking about it,
    but ... then ... you glance out the window and ... the world is a Mach
    2 blur!
    Yeah. Sump'n like that in these ol United States would be cool.
    Sorry, Boeing. Start making rail cars ;-)

    Closer to Mach 0.5 I believe

    If there were any incentive , Boeing is certainly competent I'm sure.

    Every transit system here loses a LOT of money on operations, the
    capital and interest being lost at the inception. NYC is closest with
    uniquely useful service and highest use rates but still a sinkhole for
    tax dollars. Newer systems lose on the order of $10~$12 per rider on
    operations. That's after writing off the capital.

    Cool? Sure, just not a simple question.
    --
    Andrew Muzi
    www.yellowjersey.org
    Open every day since 1 April, 1971

  20. In article <[email hidden]>,

    A Muzi said:

    Name a 'public' system that isn't user-antagonistic. There's no
    motivation to treat customers as customers when you have the
    legislature ready and willing to lay the scourge of taxation on the
    non-using populace to pay for the thing. In a normal business the
    customer provides the revenue. In transit, the legislators are the
    'customers' and the riders are 'freight'. Staff 'gets it' and behaves
    accordingly.

    Be sure to try the public transport system if you are ever in Zurich,
    Switzerland. Buses and streetcars run every 6--12 minutes, trains run
    every 30--60 minutes. It's not in the least uncommon for the driver to
    with you a pleasant day as you get off the bus. In fact the *voters* are
    the customers, and the politicians react accordingly. The center-left
    parties fight building any further roads at all ("more roads just bring
    more traffic jams"😉, and even the right wing can't afford to ignore
    public transport.
    Many (most?) of my friends, at least those without children, don't have
    cars even though they could afford one.

    Ned
    (children grown, now carless in Zurich)

    --
    Ned Mantei
    Zurich, Switzerland

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.