Japanese Train Sets A Speed Record Of 581 kph

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Japanese Train Sets A Speed Record Of 581 kph

Posted by timothy on Tuesday December 2, 2003 @11:27PM from the son-do-you-know-how-fast-you-were-going dept.

Azuma writes "Last night, on December 2, a high-speed Japanese train set a new record of 581 kph, breaking its own previous record. The new Maglev high speed had real passengers on board this time. They proved that the distance between Osaka and Tokyo can be covered in one hour's time. However, we wouldn't see real trains for a while now since the cost is prohibitively expensive at this time. However, they expect that the cost would come down over the next 20 years. This seems to be the future of transportation, at least in Japan. Here is a detailed article from The Japan Times."

11 of 764 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Too bad the US doesn't invest in more trains by Maestro4k · 2003-12-02 23:34 · Score: 5, Insightful

The one thing I came to like the most when I visited Japan on vacation a few years ago was the train service. Not having a car truly didn't feel like a loss when you could easily hop on a train and be where you wanted faster than you could drive there. (Especially in Tokyo.)
I just wish the US would invest in more passenger trains. They don't have to be super fast (like the one in this article), but imagine how much fuel/electricity we could save if we could all easily commute by train. And hey, you can always sleep on the train on the way to work, something you can't do while driving. (Or rather, something you shouldn't do, I'm sure someone's tried it.)
1. Re:Too bad the US doesn't invest in more trains by dbleoslow · 2003-12-02 23:42 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  I live in Tokyo now and if there's one thing you can almost always count on, it's the train system. I know that if my commute is 30 minutes, it will always be 30 minutes, except for the rare exception, whether it's rush hour or late at night. I go back to the DC and I'm stuck on the Beltway during rush hour for 3 hours for what is normally a 30 minute drive.
  
  I don't think passenger trains will ever catch on in The States. The population is just too spread out right now. Japan is roughly the size of California but with half the population of the US (If I recall correctly.) You just can't fit all those people on the roads at 1 or 2 people per car. And besides, how will all the salarymen molest the school girls if they're in a car and not crammed into a train :)
2. Re:Too bad the US doesn't invest in more trains by fruey · 2003-12-02 23:45 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Too bad most places don't invest in more trains. However, investment usually implies a return, and most train companies lose money. The more captalistic a country is, the worse this becomes... note in the article " Central Japan Railway Co. (JR Tokai) and the government-affiliated Railway Technical Research Institute." that it's a state sponsored initiative getting these things going.
  The French TGV is one good example of a system that works, but it's not easy to replicate economically in a country like the UK where there is public outcry at any possible addition of rail links or something close to where they live (and population density is three times higher than France, so routing around people isn't as easy). The Eurostar now has high speed track for part of the link in the UK, shaving 20 minutes off total journey time, but the route is incredibly inefficient and could have been much more direct. Also, it was way off schedule!
  The US gave up on trains long ago. Flights and cars are all there is, Amtrak is a joke. Ironic that the rail revolution made the US what it is today, and it has to be the major economy that has turned its back on rail the most. High speed services coast to coast would undoubtedly be too expensive though. I think there must be a magic ratio between average distance travelled by passengers, total country size, train running cost and so on which the TGV manages to get close to. The TGV rocks.
  
  --
  Conversion Rate Optimisation French / English consultant
3. Re:Too bad the US doesn't invest in more trains by pubjames · 2003-12-02 23:53 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  I think the reason the US as a whole doesn't invest more in trains is the fact that the country is A. Pretty big and B. Pretty Empty.
  
  That actually sounds more like a reason why it would be sensible to have a rail system to me, rather than a reason it hasn't got one.
4. Re:Too bad the US doesn't invest in more trains by pdjohe · 2003-12-03 00:35 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  I think the reason the US doesn't have a better train system is...
  
  1. In the past, Ford wanted automobiles to be affordable enough so that every American family could own one.
  
  2. Gasoline is much cheaper in the US than in Europe and other parts of the world.
  
  3. In many parts of the US, it is impossible to get by without a car.
  
  4. Americans generally prefer privatization (own a car) over mass/public services.
Re:Ouch... by BiggerIsBetter · 2003-12-02 23:41 · Score: 5, Insightful
And much less hassle as well.
Train:
- Arrive 5 minutes before departure.
- Get on.
- Travel, with passport check on the way.
- Get off.
Airplane:
- Arrive 3 hours before departure.
- Check in.
- Passport check.
- Security screening.
- Departure lounge.
- Flight delayed.
- Get on.
- Travel.
- Get off.
- Baggage.
I, for one, welcome our new super-fast trains. I've used the 300kph trains (TGV,Eurostar,etc) and they are a really nice way to get around. For travelling within continents, these will a far better alternative than flying.
--
Forget thrust, drag, lift and weight. Airplanes fly because of money.
Re:Ouch... by SpaghettiPattern · 2003-12-03 00:00 · Score: 5, Insightful

You're forgetting that you can even take a comfortable night train and sleep while you travel. I do this with my family when we need to cover a "one night's distance". We loose less "wake time" and we arrive in a better shape.

--

I hadn't the slightest objection to his spending his time planning massacres for the bourgeoisie... (P.G. Wodehouse)
Re:Ouch... by penguin7of9 · 2003-12-03 00:26 · Score: 4, Insightful

I don't think so. There have been terrorist attacks on trains (e.g., Carlos the Jackal's bombing in 1983). They just haven't been very successful and haven't led to cumbersome security measures.

From a terrorist point of view, I suspect that a building is a better target than a train: easier to get to, easier to get away from, and more likely to kill lots of people.

In fact, even when it comes to airline security, Americans seem to be going from one extreme to another without ever getting it right: prior to 9/11, airlines just didn't want to inconvenience passengers even though even simple measures could have prevented 9/11. Post 9/11, US airlines seem to be working hard to make their passengers' lives as miserable as possible (without necessarily improving security much).
Re:Japan is linear by Bagels · 2003-12-03 00:32 · Score: 4, Insightful

Of course, there may be a sort of a "last mile" problem in the US too - once you arrive at your destination, it might take almost as long or longer to make the second half of the journey from train station to final destination (because of car rentals, traffic, etc.).

--
--- Bwah?
OK, lets privatize the roads then too by maynard · 2003-12-03 00:57 · Score: 5, Insightful

Seriously, if you're not willing to pay tax dollars for rail infrastsructure, why also pay for roads and bridges? And while you're at it, why not dismantle the education system and courts as well? When private enterprise performs all of these civic functions, will "freedom" have been expanded or will we simply have seen a net transfer of power away from voters into private hands? Just asking. --M
Re:361MPH by Anonymous Coward · 2003-12-03 01:31 · Score: 5, Insightful

Actually, 10 fingers is a base 11 system, not base 10 (because 0 is usually represented by not raising any fingers, and than you have 10 numbers left, 10 + 1 = 11)