Slashdot Mirror


China Debuts the World's Fastest Train

An anonymous reader writes "China unveiled their new high speed train that clocks in at an average of 217 mph. China's new rail service travels through 20 cities along its route, connecting central China and less developed regions to the larger and more industrial Pearl River Delhi. Seimens, Bombardier and Alstom worked together to design and build this feat of modern transportation, which topped out at a whopping 245mph (394km/h) during trial runs earlier in December."

73 of 491 comments (clear)

  1. Pearl River Delta?? by l2718 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Delhi is in India.

    1. Re:Pearl River Delta?? by eln · · Score: 5, Funny

      No no, they mean the Pearl River Deli. It's on the East Side, and their pastrami on rye is to die for. I don't know how they got a train to go there all the way from China, but it sounds like I'm going to have to start getting my lunch earlier to beat the rush!

    2. Re:Pearl River Delta?? by mcgrew · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think this thread is the one where "WOOSH!" is completely applicable!

      It seems a sad irony that Japan, a tiny country with little land mass has the world's fastest trains, while the US and its huge land mass seemingly has the world's slowest.

      Why do the Europeans* have better roads and faster trains than us? Maybe there's something to that "socialism" after all!

      *yes, I realise that Japan isn't in Europe, smartass.

    3. Re:Pearl River Delta?? by demonlapin · · Score: 2, Informative

      a sad irony that Japan, a tiny country with little land mass has the world's fastest trains, while the US and its huge land mass seemingly has the world's slowest.

      Think about what you just wrote. Carefully.

    4. Re:Pearl River Delta?? by vegiVamp · · Score: 2, Informative

      > *yes, I realise that Japan isn't in Europe, smartass.

      On the other hand, you do not seem to realise that Japan and China are quite distinct entities, smartass.

      --
      What a depressingly stupid machine.
    5. Re:Pearl River Delta?? by Ash+Vince · · Score: 3, Informative

      Now, I like decent mass transit, but come on, let's be realistic here. For intracity transit, you're not using high-speed rail anyway. People generally avoid it because, even during rush hour when an 11-mile trip takes 25-30 minutes by car, using the light rail system will be 50-60 minutes. (Actual numbers from an actual commute!). Only in places with truly miserable traffic does mass transit - even the most effective mass transit - begin to become competitive.

      Actually, for cities that are 100 - 300 miles apart the train is quicker.

      Flying that sort of distance might only take 45 minutes, but there is so much pissing about at either end it ends up taking loads longer. Over here you have to check in an hour early to go through security, then it takes them 30-40 minutes to get the bags out and send them round the conveyor when you land. That makes it close to 3 hours. As for driving, most places have speed limits of 70Mph so that averages to more like 60 and a 200 mile journey still takes close to 3 hours too.

      Every week I used to take a train 200 Miles on Friday and it it does city center to city center in just under 2 hours, with no pissing about at either end. I can buy the ticket on the web, carry all my bags on with me, then get off and go straight out of the station. This is a shit British train which can only go at about 125Mph, but it almost never hits traffic as it can be controlled centrally so actually stays close to that. Imagine how quick one of these Chinese bad boys could do the same journey?

      Once you get above 300 miles like some cities in the states then things are different but for a lot of journeys on the same coast trains could save a lot of time. Train is never going to replace the airplane for speed on longer journeys, but on short ones it can be loads quicker. It also saves having to do 4 hour drives which suck if you have been working 8 hours before hand.

      --
      I dont read /. to RTFA, I read /. to offend people in ignorance.
  2. Siemens, not Seimens... by the_g_cat · · Score: 5, Informative

    Siemens, not Seimens...

    1. Re:Siemens, not Seimens... by AP31R0N · · Score: 2, Funny

      Siemans not Semens.

      --
      Utilizing the synergization of benchmark e-solutions to pre-workaround action items!
    2. Re:Siemens, not Seimens... by GNUThomson · · Score: 4, Funny

      Siemens, not Seimens...

      It's Seimens alright. The cheap China fake one.

  3. 245mph max speed? Not so impressive by Viol8 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The french managed 357mph (yes three hundred) with a lightly modified TGV in 2007 (google it).

    1. Re:245mph max speed? Not so impressive by l2718 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yes, but the maximum speed is largely irrelevant. What matters to the travelling public is the average speed -- and this train is faster than the TGV in that regard.

    2. Re:245mph max speed? Not so impressive by DeadPixels · · Score: 2, Informative

      BBC article is here. Unfortunately, the article doesn't discuss whether or not this sort of train would actually be useful for passenger service or if the technology still needed some work. I would wager that the Chinese train is probably the fastest commercial (conventional rail) train.

    3. Re:245mph max speed? Not so impressive by WinPimp2K · · Score: 2, Funny

      But the real questions is:

      how fast will it run Ruby (on rails)?

      --

      You either believe in rational thought or you don't
  4. China A Developing Country? by XopherMV · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It seems to me that when China has some of the best developed infrastructure in the world, it really can't be considered a developing country any more. It is developed. Sure, maybe not all areas of China are fully developed, but you could state the same thing about any country, including the US.

    1. Re:China A Developing Country? by khallow · · Score: 3, Insightful

      OTOH, most countries have some part, perhaps a very small one, that has technology, local infrastructure, and such equivalent or better than the average in the developed world. Should we call every country "developed" as a result?

    2. Re:China A Developing Country? by Jeian · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But if they give up their "developing country" status, they can't play that card in demanding concessions from developed countries any more.

    3. Re:China A Developing Country? by FooMasterZero · · Score: 2, Informative

      Isn't Africa technically a continent not a country?

    4. Re:China A Developing Country? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Uh, 90%+ of their population are dirt farmers. Have you ever been to China? In a vast majority of the country it's literally like stepping back in time to the dark ages.

    5. Re:China A Developing Country? by Gerafix · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yeah, sorry. I don't have maps and my education such as like South Africa and the Iraq has not build up yet.

    6. Re:China A Developing Country? by vlm · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It seems to me that when China has some of the best developed infrastructure in the world, it really can't be considered a developing country any more. It is developed. Sure, maybe not all areas of China are fully developed, but you could state the same thing about any country, including the US.

      The opposite of a developing nation, like China, is not developed, as in film, but a decaying nation, like the USA.

      Once China has a couple unmaintained bridge collapses, maybe a few regional power failures, some abandoned cities like Detroit, then they will no longer be a developing nation.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    7. Re:China A Developing Country? by Hurricane78 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It is, but I think the point here was to show how big the gradient is.

      In the mountain areas of China it’s still pretty close to caveman land.
      Just as in the US. ;))

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    8. Re:China A Developing Country? by prefec2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No you cannot. For example in Western-Europe especially in France, Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland or Austria the countries are very well "developed". In Germany you can get to a highway (Autobahn) in a 50 km radius. Also most towns are accessible by train. And every big city is connected to others on an hourly schedule (with fast trains) and additional local trains.

    9. Re:China A Developing Country? by wisty · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's nowhere near 90%. Maybe 60%. I think you are thinking of Laos...

      Anyway, even in the cities, where people live pretty well, the median income (not mean, but median) is still about 500 to 1000 RMB / month (location dependent). 4k to 7k a year.

      You can live OK on that, but middle class people don't aspire to own Mercedes, and make do with a Toyota sedan. They aspire to own a QQ car (a $5,000 Chinese compact), and make do with a scooter.

  5. Nice by Red+Flayer · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Averaging 217 mph over a distance of 663 miles, supposedly connecting 20 cities... according to TFA, a trip of under three hours...

    Just how much time are they allowing for deceleration and acceleration between stops? Or is it pretty much end-to-end with multiple stops near the origin and destination?

    Anyway, there's little doubt in my mind that this is overkill, more a demonstration of technical capability and will to spend than anything else. But damn, I'd like to have a network of these in the US to replace our aging and slow rail passenger rail system. At the very least, they are much more energy efficient than air travel.

    One picky point with TFA... it suggests that the fast travel times of a high-speed rail network would not come with the security overhead of air travel. I'm not so sure about that.

    --
    "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    1. Re:Nice by jimbobborg · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's China, they just throw the people off the train as they pass their station.

    2. Re:Nice by Rakishi · · Score: 4, Informative

      Or they use this amazing concept known as express and local trains. The express train stops in only a few places which you use the much slower local train to get to.

    3. Re:Nice by GooberToo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Everytime I read something like this I ask myself, "Why not in the US."

      It has come up many, many times before but each time the airline lobbies kill it dead. Its really amazing just how powerful this collection of interests has proved to be over time. Generally speaking, they almost always get everything they want.

      The general rule of thumb is, if the airline lobbies want something, its almost a sure thing to be bad for you, me, and Joe consumer.

    4. Re:Nice by ShakaUVM · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It has come up many, many times before but each time the airline lobbies kill it dead. Its really amazing just how powerful this collection of interests has proved to be over time. Generally speaking, they almost always get everything they want.

      The general rule of thumb is, if the airline lobbies want something, its almost a sure thing to be bad for you, me, and Joe consumer.

      Right, because we saw so many airline ads attacking Prop 1A.

      Sometimes a conspiracy theory is just a theory, dude.

      I'm all for high speed rail (I voted for 1A), but if you run the numbers, it's just really hard to compete against airlines in both cost effectiveness and speed. There's sort of a sweet spot for high speed rail at medium distances around 200 to 500 miles... shorter than that and it's usually easier to drive, and longer than that the hassle of going through security at the airport gets made up by the faster speeds of the planes.

      San Francisco to San Diego by car is around 8 hours, 10 hours if there's traffic in LA.
      San Francisco to San Diego by high speed rail (200MPH and own right of way) is going to be around 3 to 3.5 hours, counting stops and showing up early to the station.
      San Francisco to San Diego by plane takes around 2.5 to 3 hours, counting showing up early, 75 minutes in flight, and waiting for your baggage.

      With numbers like that, I'd take the high speed rail, just to avoid the lines at the airport, and assuming the price is cost competitive. Any longer than that (high speed rail would take 12 hours to get to DC, versus less than half that by air) and air wins.

  6. Re:How hard is it to have something like this in U by BearRanger · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's not hard, just expensive. Unlike the Chinese we actually have to pay market rates to compensate people for the right of way for the rails. Seizing private property and forcing the owners to accept a pittance in return just won't work in the U.S.

  7. Re:China debuts human rights abuses by wickerprints · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well, if you want someone to blame, blame US corporations for sending jobs to China and the US government for allowing trillions of dollars of trade deficit with China, that enables their government to be the economic powerhouse it is. The biggest abusers of human rights in the world is not China--it is the multinational corporations, many of them headquartered in the US, that exploits people in developing countries for cheap labor and props up dictatorial regimes so long as they make it easy and profitable for them to do business. And if you want to find out how these corporations got so powerful, all you need to do is go look to the Americans whose insatiable desire for cheap mass-produced goods has fed their gluttony with their hard-earned dollars.

    You want this high-speed rail technology in the US? Stop running up all that credit card debt. Stop turning over your livelihood and savings to buy your own little slice of the American McDream(tm).

  8. Re:How hard is it to have something like this in U by Trepidity · · Score: 2, Informative

    How "hard" is it is mainly a matter of spending money and ramming through the environmental permits, eminent domain seizures, and other such hurdles. China spent $20 billion on this, probably more like $30 billion at purchasing-power parity, and they also have a much larger supply of cheap labor (even cheap semi-skilled labor), and when the central government wants something done, bureaucratic hassles magically disappear.

    Although they did also put it mainly on flat land. Some of our most promising city pairs with high traffic and strong local support for such a project are unfortunately in or separated by mountainous areas: LA-SF, Seattle-Portland, Atlanta-DC, etc.

    We do have flat areas, like Chicago-Detroit and Chicago-StLouis, but they don't have quite that volume of travel, and no strong push.

    Texas is occasionally actually seen as the best bet, with Dallas-Houston-Austin-San Antonio all fairly close (distances where rail is competitive over air) and separated by fairly flat land. However, Southwest has spent a lot of lobbying effort killing any attempts to put something like that in, since they do a lot of short-hop business out of their original Dallas hub.

  9. 56 trains a day by Animats · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here's a better version of the story. This is a big deal. They're running 56 trains a day on that route. They're also the longest high speed trains running. So this is a high-volume people mover. Plans call for another 11,000 Km of high speed rail by 2012. That's only two years away.

    Some of this is a consequence of the financial troubles and low interest rates in the US. The government of China had been putting excess cash into U.S. Treasury bills, but about a year ago they stopped buying more US debt and started spending on infrastructure and resources. China has been buying up mines and farms around the world to secure supplies of raw materials and food, while beefing up their infrastructure at home.

  10. Re:China debuts human rights abuses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Stop turning over your livelihood and savings to buy your own little slice of the American McDream(tm).

    You're very proud of that little bon mot, aren't you?

  11. Re:How hard is it to have something like this in U by jcr · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Seizing private property and forcing the owners to accept a pittance in return just won't work in the U.S.

    I wish you were correct, but since Kelo v. New London, I have to disagree.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  12. Big Picture: this is no surprise at all by blind+biker · · Score: 2, Funny

    The US and the whole western world have almost completely outsourced their whole production and with it, the technology, to China. When I visited the various Smithsonian museums, just for shits and giggles I asked at the souvenir shops if they had a single item that wasn't made in China. I repeated this little game in various museums. Try as they may, the shopkeepers weren't able to find a single fucking item that wasn't Made in China. Not one. This just to illustrate you the magnitude of production in China, and the magnitude of how much the west has given up. The Chinese aren't idiots; they learn and are about to surpass the west in many technological areas.

    --
    "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    1. Re:Big Picture: this is no surprise at all by Eevee · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Don't kid yourself. People used to say the same thing about Japan.

    2. Re:Big Picture: this is no surprise at all by Guppy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Don't kid yourself. People used to say the same thing about Japan.

      And increasingly are saying similar things about South Korea and Taiwan as well.

      In China's case though, the country will likely straddle both high and low end segments. The richer coastal regions will continue to climb the value lander, while low-end manufacturing probably will be pushed into the poorer interior, where labor will remain cheap enough to sustain it for some time.

    3. Re:Big Picture: this is no surprise at all by LostInTaiwan · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In our pursuit of ever cheaper crap most of us forgot that freedom is not free. . . . C'mon people. . . wake up!

      China is not Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, or even Singapore. It's not a free and democratic country and the last 10 years proved that we don't have a snowball chance in hell of either luring China toward democracy or contain China's brand of authoritarian capitalism. Combine our insatiable desire for imports and China's currency manipulation and we created our current financial meltdown. Sadly, the extraordinary efforts we made to save our economy ultimately benefited our biggest creditor, China. More bullet trains for China.

      So here we are facing a downward financial and technological spiral and instead of looking to Germany or Japan for inspiration, our politicians want to frame every single political debate around religion or what they think the bible says. . . sad. . damn sad. .

  13. Re:China debuts human rights abuses by uradu · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Not just the US, mind you, but the entire western world that is more than eager to offload manufacturing to China. We're all guilty of turning two blind eyes to save a buck, but I guess as long as we occasionally get to protest China's abuses in a public forum or some magazine opinion piece, all's well.

  14. Re:How hard is it to have something like this in U by arunkv · · Score: 4, Informative

    Yes, it's not SF to LA via Sacramento. It's two branches from Fresno to SF and Sacramento. You can see the proposed map here.

  15. Re:How hard is it to have something like this in U by Lord+Byron+II · · Score: 3, Informative

    Amtrak has the problem that it leases the use of many of the rails it uses. As a result, passenger trains have to yield to the trains of the owners of the rail - usually slow, long freight trains. Even worse, the freight trains aren't a fixed schedule, so Amtrak can't schedule around the delays.

    One fix would be to install new (standard speed0 rails alongside the existing ones. It would be fairly cheap (as compared to high speed rail) and would allow Amtrak to travel at high speeds for more of their routes.

    Of course, even better would be a nationwide network of high speed rail, but I don't believe that there's enough pressure from airline-fed-up consumers and environmentalists yet to encourage the politicians to do anything.

  16. Re:How hard is it to have something like this in U by amRadioHed · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Kelo v. New London was about the government being able to use eminent domain to free up propety for commercial development. As far as I've seen it had nothing to do with the amount of compensation given to people for their property, and in Kelo v. New London the plaintiffs were given market value for their property.

    --
    We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
  17. Re:How hard is it to have something like this in U by amRadioHed · · Score: 4, Insightful

    as for long distance rail, Amtrak is already unreliable. there is no reason to think that a new high speed train will be reliable and there is no benefit over flying.

    I think there is some reason to think high-speed rail would be more reliable. One of Amtrak's major problems right now is that they don't own the rails they use, they share them with freight companies. A new high-speed rail line, however, would be built specifically for passenger service and would not have this problem.

    --
    We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
  18. Fuel efficiency of this train vs airplane? by walterbyrd · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If trains can travel that fast safely. Then it seems we could cut down air traffic considerably. NYC to Atalanta is only about 800 miles, if I could get there by train in four hours, a airplane would offer no time advantage.

    If the difference in fuel efficiency is considerable, then maybe the US should consider building something like that?

    1. Re:Fuel efficiency of this train vs airplane? by TheEvilOverlord · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The trouble is a project of that size usually requires some level of state/federal organisation or funding to secure the necessary investment from private funding and the power to buy the land. Which in the USA seems to cause foaming at the mouth and long rants about the evils of communism.

      (I'm assuming here a new high speed railway would require a new less bendy track than already exists)

    2. Re:Fuel efficiency of this train vs airplane? by NoOneInParticular · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If a train with stops can get you to atlanta in less time than with a plane, the train is faster. Non-stop.

    3. Re:Fuel efficiency of this train vs airplane? by SixAndFiftyThree · · Score: 2, Informative

      Brad Templeton says it better than I can: http://www.templetons.com/brad/transit-myth.html

      I'm no more into knocking mass transit than he ... was ... but I can no more help manipulating numbers than I can help breathing, and the numbers show that mass transit works well where you have heavy population density, which most of the USA does not. It works even better when you have low to moderate income and low car ownership, which most of China still has.

      And since you don't ask, no, I'm not hoping to impoverish the USA so that mass transit becomes the optimal choice. It'll happen anyway.

  19. Re:China debuts human rights abuses by rickb928 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    No, it's saying that if you stop shopping at Wal-Mart, you'll stop buying stuff made in China, and so stop financing their human-rights abuses.

    Wwhich is wrong twice:

    1. China was committing human rights abuses long before prosperity, even before Mao. Cutting off the money will NOT make things better.

    2. You cannot avoid buying stuff made in China, unless you pay very close attention to what you buy and where. And even then, you will be buying some stuff made in China, and made with stuff gotten from China.

    We need to lose the 'don't buy Chinese stuff' mentality, and stop discouraging industries from making stuff here in the U.S.

    We could be buying stuff made in Japan and South Korea, and Taiwan, but even those industries are beholden to China too often.

    This will take decades to fix.

    --
    deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
  20. Re:China debuts human rights abuses by spun · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I see how this works: it's too hard to do what's right, so let's not bother to try. And: they were doing it anyway, so why should we have to give up cheap goods?

    --
    - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
  21. Re:China debuts human rights abuses by Aeros · · Score: 2, Funny

    I know..I give up..why bother

  22. China's Achievements by argmanah · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If you look at China's achievements, they are mainly construction achievements. They build massive skyscrapers (Shanghai for example, already has a 100 story building, and is in the middle of constructing a 128 story one). Any Chinese citizen living in a major city in China will brag about their city's skyscrapers, bridges, tunnels, subways, railways, etc. And, having visited a lot of those cities, I will admit they are really impressive.

    The primary reason for this though, is that China is taking the massive amount of money flowing into the country and they're choosing to spend it on improving the economy through public works projects. Building skyscrapers, subways, etc. require lots of unskilled manpower, something that China has in abundance. Any problem, like digging a hole, laying pipe, or other manual labor tasks, that can be accomplished in greater scale by simply throwing raw manpower at it.... well, China is unsurpassed in its ability to throw raw manpower at something.

    Why can infrastructure like this not be built in the U.S.? Because we don't have 300 million unskilled laborers who will work their ass off for a few bucks a day. We don't have a government that has the authority to just displace hundreds of people in order to build a subway station without going through a lot of red tape. In order to keep up with China in this area, we'd have to give up a lot of the values we treasure for the sake of progress, which is something most of us here on ./. wouldn't do.

    You can like or hate the policies in China all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that their massive overpopulation of unskilled labor is getting employed and their infrastructure is developing extremely fast.

    --
    Overrated Moderation: This posts sucks... because.
    1. Re:China's Achievements by haruchai · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Americans used to value hard work for an honest day's pay. And you have millions who don't work at all.
      I agree that China's authoritarian government and a large population has its advantages but it also has
      downsides, which the US doesn't have.

      It's time for Americans to stop bitching and whining - stand up, think for yourselves and tape your assholes
      shut so the moneyed interests can stop blowing smoke up them.

      It's not too late to reverse the slide of the American Dream - but the clock is ticking and time is fast running out.

      --
      Pain is merely failure leaving the body
  23. That is not entirely accurate by WindBourne · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The reason is because China has MORE trade barriers than back in 1995, AND have their money tied to the dollar. Per the agreement with Clinton to get Permanent MFN AND to get into WTO, they were to drop their trade barriers to reasonable levels (something like 5% tariffs) and was to free their money. Instead, they declared that it was in a basket to be managed against multiple moneys. Right now, the Yuan/RMB trades at 7 to a dollar. A number of economists have said that if China frees their money, then the Yuan/RMB will trade at 2 to 1 or possibly even 1 to 1. That means that goods coming from CHina are currently 1/3 to 1/7 of the real price. In fact, if you check the news, you will see that China is fighting against doing what they are LEGALLY required to do. HOPEFULLY, WTO gets into this and says enough is enough. But the west needs to do the right thing and say enough.

    To make matters worse, China has a MAJOR bubble forming. One that will make America's real estate bubble look positively MINOR. It will even make Japan's real estate bubble look minor (which was bigger than America's, but their economy was small enough and float freely that they did not take out the global economy). If it goes AND they keep their money tied to the dollar, it will bring us ALL LOWER THAN 1930's depression.

    So, while the companies, esp. American companies, deserve their fair share of blame for this, the majority lies with China.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  24. Re:How hard is it to have something like this in U by Red+Flayer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    as for long distance rail, Amtrak is already unreliable. there is no reason to think that a new high speed train will be reliable and there is no benefit over flying. airports already have the infrastructure like rent a cars and public transportation that will have to be duplicated at a new high speed rail station.

    Let's subsidize rail transport at the same rate we subsidize road and air transport, and then we can compare reliability figures.

    NJ is probably a poor example, since we have the highest road density in the country, but we spend BILLIONS annually on road transport, and less than 1% of that on rail transport (though the building of the new tunnel across the Hudson will bridge some of the funding gap, pardon the pun).

    And as for rental cars, public transportation at airports... that is easily solvable. You can run light rail from the high-speed rail stations to the airports (which would make a lot of sense anyway, to connect all your transport systems). You can even place your high-speed rail station adjacent to your airports.

    i also know someone that used to take the Acela from NYC to Boston for work years ago and it took like 3 hours each way. The Delta Shuttle was 1 hour. 90 minutes if you count getting to the airport early. back when we bought a competitor we used to fly to Boston in the morning and come back for dinner. if we took the train it would mean extra expenses in staying at a hotel

    Poor example. The Acela is not a high-speed train (maybe in comparison to regular commuter rail service -- but nothing like what is possible if we were willing to build the infrastructure -- a real high-speed train from NY to Boston would be about 60 minutes tops). And NY-to-Boston is not a 90-min trip time via plane (how long to get to the airport instead of getting to Penn Station via mass transit? Do you still plan on arriving only 30 mins before departure time? Good luck in today's airports... 30 mins is almost never enough time when flying out of any of NYC's three major airports.

    I don't know why you use old examples for flight times, and examples of existing rail (instead of the high-speed rail being discussed) to make your anecdotal analysis. But I think your blanket negativity on rail transport needs a good looking-over... you might be surprised.

    --
    "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
  25. Many bothans died to bring us this transformation by admiralex · · Score: 2

    Before we start lauding the Chinese for bringing this technological marvel to the world and criticizing the "west" for falling behind, perhaps we should be mindful of the fact that the only reason this is possible is because the Chinese government can walk up to your house, tell you it's no longer yours, and you have no recourse. No concern for the environmental impact, human impact, long term impact, etc. The Soviet Union's great technological leaps looked mind blowing at the time as well, and look where they are today.

  26. Why not in the US? by nsayer · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The most likely prospect for a bullet train in the United States is the vaunted California high speed rail project. And even that is going to be a tough row to hoe.

    Federal rail regulations being what they are, the only prospect for high speed rail is if the entire system is grade separated - that is, there are no at-grade crossings. Existing rights-of-way can be used, but every where out in the middle of Modesto or Coalinga where a gravel road crosses the tracks the road will either need to be cut or a bridge or tunnel built. Next, the route between Bakersfield and Los Angeles, as well as the route between Modesto and San Jose will need to be redone, because existing ROWs are not flat or straight enough for high speeds. Even existing ROWs elsewhere, such as the Caltrain ROW up the San Francisco Peninsula, may be inadequate. Caltrain runs enough trains up and down that the extra headway for high speed trains may make it necessary to quad-track that entire route - which may mean bulldozing houses and/or businesses along the line in some spots.

    All of that is bad enough, but before you can even begin thinking about turning over dirt, you need not only to write EIRs, but then have them stand up to Luddite court challenges. And then, whatever land you wind up using for the new ROW needs to be acquired - meaning that whoever owns it now needs to be paid fair market value for it (see also, 5th amendment). The Chinese government has a big advantage here - If anyone actually asks about the environmental impact of a train route, they get reeducated.

    All of this is mainly because we want high speed rail to go between places where there is demand. If you read TFA, this line is being constructed at least partially to create demand - that is, they are taking trips to nowhere in order for nowhere to wind up being a desirable destination. It's a bit like the transcontinental railroad was in the middle of the 19th century here. Nobody really wanted to go to any of the whistle stops between Sacramento and Chicago, but since the train went there, communities sprung up. But when the railroad was built, there was nothing there. Nowadays, building high speed rail from San Francisco to San Diego is a gigantic pain in the ass because the destinations are already filled in.

  27. Re:How hard is it to have something like this in U by wizardforce · · Score: 4, Informative

    The problem with Kelo was that private property was taken for the benefit of developers. The decision flew in the face of the takings clause of the 5th amendment.

    --
    Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
  28. cool by r00t · · Score: 2, Funny

    Very easy, as long as it is not in my back yard!

    We routed it through your front yard. At that point it's elevated 9 feet, leaving a 6-foot gap underneath so you can get your car into the garage.

  29. Re:China debuts human rights abuses by shentino · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Let's just admit it.

    China has got our economy by the balls and we can't do much without getting neutered.

  30. Re:Gads, I wish that I had my mod points by Red+Flayer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Now, what country does NOT have ANY major dealings with these criminal nations? America. There are a few companies still in involved with Iran, but only on very small scale.

    That's a crock. Those nations are "criminal" nations because we do not do business with them. It's intellectually easy to paint those nations as criminals and enemies, when we have contributed to their situation. You think they'd view America as an enemy if we weren't busy fucking around with their governments over the past 50-60+ years?

    If you want to fucking grip about a nation, at least have your GD facts right.

    If you want to gripe about a nation, at least have your GD definitions right. What you consider a "criminal" nation is not fact, it is your opinion (that lacks substantiation). What laws are those nations violating that make them criminals? What crime have they committed and been convicted of? By many countries' standards, the US is a "criminal" nation... hell, we imprison far more of our citizens than anyone else, for something that is not a crime in some countries.

    --
    "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
  31. Re:China debuts human rights abuses by DaveGod · · Score: 2, Interesting

    After a brief googling I couldn't find a decent study comparing the likes of human rights (or at least press freedom), and GDP (or at least economic freedom).

    Anecdotally (from just browsing the individual indexes) however there appears to be a strong correlation - with various exceptions, some of which can be accounted for by e.g. natural resources. There are plenty studies showing strong correlation between economic freedom and GDP (even between US states), but that's not much of a substitute for human rights and freedoms.

    Of course, correlation is not causation, although intuitively it makes a lot of sense - wealthier people seem to consider themselves more important, demand more power, education, have better communications...

    My assumption is that the better a country's economy, the better the human rights. Anyone have a good study?

  32. Not seeing it. by MyFirstNameIsPaul · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I work with a Chinese factory that is a leader in its niche.

    We are seeing unusual trends in our primary raw material that makes up 50-80% of the manufacturing cost. Normally it is more expensive than on the worldwide market because of the high import tariffs in China intended to protect the local producers. However, since last summer the cost of the raw material has been less than the worldwide market. Demand in our niche has been constant for us since it's a staple product for many third-world and developing countries, and to a certain extent, first-world nations. The web page I use to check the prices, which I have been doing every day for the last four years, also shows prices on other raw materials and I have observed the trend to be the same. IMHO, this evidence is in contrast to any reports I've read about a bubble in China - the bubble is in the rest of the world. I think what is more likely to happen is China and OPEC will decide to start trading in some other currency, and the Chinese will instantly become more wealthy, and the U.S. more poor.

    China's largest trade 'partner' is the EU, and the U.S. makes up less than 18% of its export business. China can manufacture most of everything it consumes, so increasing prices for the U.S. does not directly equate to increasing prices for the Chinese, and the reduction in trade with the U.S. would hurt the U.S. more than it would hurt China.

    --

    I once took an excursion to Reddit, and later HN. Unlimited up/down voting sucks when dealing with a hive-mind.

    1. Re:Not seeing it. by WindBourne · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you do not mind my asking, what is the raw material? If it is rare earth, than the reason is because China is playing with the markets in a HUGE way. That is because they have been buying up various mines and then redirecting the output to CHina. Thankfully, Australia just denied China the rights to 2 companies, as to America to one of ours. In addition, China has their sights on several other important minerals and are playing the markets very quietly.

      With all that said, the bubble is about real estate. Economists say that it is massively overvalued. Far more than America or Japan was. And real estate is very distinct from Raw Materials.

      Finally, my guess is that if China pulls a fast one on America (which I expect), then I think that EU leaders will realize that they are also being set-up for massive falls. As it is, western leaders are finally starting to gripe out loud. I believe that WTO will shortly be asked to do something about it.
      If China frees slowy, then all nations will be Ok (including CHina).
      OTH, if China plays games, then we are 18% of their exports and that is around 4% of their GDP. That is major hit in any economy. Likewise, if they do decide to plat this game, then you can likely count on the majority of the western nations likely deciding to find other places to work with. That would hit them more than 10%.

      And as to them switching away from the greenbuck, I wish that they would. OPEC is already quietly doing so. They are considering either the Euro (not likely), or Iran's idea of a gold coin (which I think is a great idea). Would this make us poor relative to other nations? Yup. Would it destroy America? Nope. Just like EU, America is capable of standing on its own (barring resources being blocked). And yes, we would quickly get back our manufacturing.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  33. Re:China debuts human rights abuses by rickb928 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm not saying 'give up'. Far from it. Do something productive:

    - Re-establish onshore manufacturing. As in stop penalizing offshoring with tax, immigration, and other policies.

    - Educate ourselves. A local newspaper ad claims that in Arizona, if you eat at a chain restaraunt, $17 of every $100 of your bill stays in the local economy, while if you eat at a locally-owned restaraunt, $47 of every $100 stays. I dunno or care about the exact numbers. Buying goods made in foreign countries can't be as productive or profitable to our economy as buying them made here. And yet, I wonder how that works with automobiles....

    - Change the attitude. Maybe we can't make crap in the U.S. that is competitively priced with foreign crap. Ok, at least lets focus on the right products. Perhaps flat-panel displays, consumer electronics, and clothing?

    - Also, understand the reality (point 2 revisited). Why do Nike etc. assemble sneakers in Vietnam? Besides cheap labor, they avoid problems with regulatory agencies regarding working conditions such as hours, lighting, pollution. Just the adhesives used are often either banned or conditions controlled so that it is much cheaper to manufacture overseas and avoid the protections. How can we convince Vietnam to raise their standards so that we can effectively take back that business? Not likely. So perhaps we need to work with manufacturers to create products and processes that are economically viable in the U.S. Or deal with it and see if a sneaker maker exists in the U.S. And one does. New Balance.

    It is hard to find stuff NOT made in China. I hate buying shoes, because no matter the brand, they all seem to be made in China. I treasure the shirts I have made in India, Bangladesh, even Brunei, though of course some of these countries are not models of freedom and tolerance. But lately, anything but China has been my goal. It's been a while since I coudl find any made in the U.S., even Brazil or Puerto Rico, where the plants in my former home state went to. It ain't easy.

    But give up? Nope.

    --
    deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
  34. A few details by henrypijames · · Score: 5, Informative

    Someone in my family works for Siemens as a senior member of the China High-Speed Rail project (not to be confused with the China Maglev project, for which Siemens is also a partner). We've talked about it quite often - and fairly extensively yesterday. Here are a few details:

    The technologies of all four major high-speed rail system in the world - Germany's ICE, Japan's Sinkansen, France's TGV and Canada's Bombardier (in order of overall technological advancement) - have come together in China, though rather reluctantly. When the Chinese started the project years ago, they did something very clever: Instead of picking one of the four systems (which is what people normally do), they gave all four a pilot contract each. The one showing the best result in its pilot would then be chosen as the main partner, they said, making all four competing like crazy - routinely investing more resources than they've originally planed. The Chinese are not concerned about significant waste due to incompatibility between the pilot products, since all four are building to the specs written by the Chinese.

    Now, years later, the Canadians and the French are practically washed out, even though some of their technologies have contributed to the new Chinese system. The Germans and the Japanese remain - as initially expected - the main competitors - or, reluctant partners for the Chinese. The vast majority of heavy lifting on the technological front is done by the Germans (which was also expected, since even the Japanese system was originally based on German designs), but the Japanese have the advantage that their pilot has started earlier (the Chinese intentionally delayed the German pilot in order to ransom a below-value price).

    The record speed, for example, was achieved using two joined trains - of four sections each - built by Siemens in Germany and put together in China. Those are the only two German trains current available for this route. All the other trains are Japanese, and they're what people see on most new footages. But the top speed the Japanese trains (on the same route) can reach are significantly lower - about 350 km/h, or >10% less than the German record. Plus, while the German rains got to 395 km/h in standard configuration - with two tracking (active) and two tracked (passive) sections in each train - the Japanese had to cheat - using three tracking and only one tracked section in each train - in order to reach their 350 km/h.

    As someone has mentioned above, there exist a TGV speed record that's much higher still, but that's a record nobody in the industry takes seriously, because it was achieved with a totally crazy, not nearly practical configuration of train sections. It's a fake number, period.

    The bottom line is, for the original cost of one project, China has managed to get more than twice the amount worth of know-how (all legally via proper technology transfer contracts), and is now itself among the leading players of the industry. For the upcoming US high-speed rail system, the Chinese has offered a bid with a price tag 1/3 lower than anybody else...

    1. Re:A few details by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative
      "One of the most densely operated"?

      The Chinese are planning to run 56 trains a day. In comparison, Shinkansen's Tokaido line has 305 trains per day. Moreover, according to JR Tokai's presentation (it's in Japanese but you should be able to make out the figures on p.19), they already had 60 trains per day when they started operating in 1964. (It should be said that the Chinese have a more difficult task than the original Shinkansen since the trains are traveling much faster, but then again, Shinkansen is 45 years old.)

      The Chinese will eventually approach this sort of density, I'm sure, but right now their traffic density is nowhere near world class.

    2. Re:A few details by __Reason__ · · Score: 3, Informative

      BTW, in day-to-day operations, German's ICE and Japan's Sinkansen often go beyond 300 km/h. Frace's TGV never does, and Canada's Bombaardier doesn't even work well above 200 km/h.

      France's LGV Est (this is the line that the 574km/h world speed record was set) has a standard operating speed of 320 km/h. There is no line in Germany capable of speeds over 300km/h (but German ICE trains do operate on LGV Est at 320km/h).

      Also, Bombardier isn't the name of a train network in the sense of ICE, TGV, or Shinkansen. Bombardier is a train manufacturing company like Alstom, Siemens, or Hitachi. Canada's passenger rail network is known as VIA and for the most part it isn't regarded as high-speed, though they do use tilting train technology on the densely populated "corridor" between Windsor, ON and Quebec City, QC. This corridor line does boast higher average speeds than on any current passenger rail line in the US.

  35. Re:How hard is it to have something like this in U by jcr · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The decision flew in the face of the takings clause of the 5th amendment.

    Not only that, it flew in the face of the purpose of government in the first place, which is to secure our life, liberty, and property. By acting as the agent of the thieves, the local government in New London violated the homeowner's rights, and by permitting them to do it, the Supreme Court of the United States added one example to their list of failures to uphold their duty.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  36. Re:Everything is made there anyways... by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Plus anyone who delays the project quickly became an involuntary organ donor.

    That's the kicker, isn't it? Over here in the Netherlands, we have finally come to a decision, I think, perhaps, to go ahead and extend the A4 around Delft to connect to the A20 at Rotterdam. This concerns building a few miles of road for which the grade already has been laid (if you check Google maps). This is a decision that has taken 40 years, and I really wish I was kidding... Most infrastructure projects are decided upon a lot quicker but most will still take years, and when construction finally gets underway, it will be put on hold again for any crappy rare-ass beetle that turns up at the site. (Of course if the construction guys find the beetle first, it means the immediate extinction of said beetle). Somehow I suspect you don't get a lot of that in China

    --
    If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
  37. Re:China allready got worlds fastest train... by jrothwell97 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That doesn't really count: (a) Transrapid is a German company, and (b) these are maglev trains. These require specialised (and very expensive) rails, and "normal" wheel-on-rail rolling stock can't use maglev rails.

    --
    Those using pirated Tinysoft signatures(TM) are a real threat to society and should all be thrown in jail.
  38. Re:China debuts human rights abuses by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Of course, correlation is not causation, although intuitively it makes a lot of sense - wealthier people seem to consider themselves more important, demand more power, education, have better communications

    It could be argued the other way around - free people are more productive (e.g. consider the productivity of slaves vs hired workers), and therefore more freedom leads to better economy.

    Which one it is in reality is very much unclear. For all we know, it could be that both modern democracy (including the concept of inherent human rights), and the economic prosperity of the First World both stem from something more fundamental in its culture, and hence the correlation, while not exactly coincidental, doesn't imply any direct relationship here. Or it could be just a historical accident (someone had to be the first one to get lucky, and Europeans just did, and then used the advantage thus gained to pwn everyone else).

    It's also worth noting that some authoritarian societies not rooted in Western culture seem to do rather well in terms of economics (e.g. Singapore).

  39. Those studies were a bit lacking by Nicolas+MONNET · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I don't know if we're talking about the same thing, but if that's the study that was quoted in the WSJ, it was definitely lacking. It was comparing the environmental cost of building rail tracks plus fuel consumption of the trains, but only the fuel consumption of the planes but not the environmental cost of building the airports -- and those things take up a LOT of space, esp. if you take into account the amount of real estate that gets depreciated because of the noise.

    In any case, you can power trains by nuclear power, but also wind mills or solar -- can't do that with planes. Also trains can do regenerative breaking, and inject back power when decelerating.

  40. Re:Good for China ! by multiplexo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Why is the US government wasting the tax money on the Africans, the Moslems, and so on?

    Plus there are all of those worthless Jews in Israel that we keep shoveling money at, oh, and the worthless Egyptians who we give money to so they won't kill the worthless Jews. Then there's all of the money we spend defending the worthless Japanese and South Koreans against China, and the money we spend on NATO, a complete waste since the Soviet Union collapsed and the current Russian army can't even manage to invade and subdue Chechnya or Georgia. Oh, and all of the billions we spent invading Iraq because dumbfucks like Dick Cheney thought that Osama Bin Laden was BFF with Saddam Hussein, and the billions we're going to spend in Afghanistan so that President Obama can cover his ass and look tough. Yeah, if we stopped pissing our money away defending a bunch of useless countries who do nothing for us and building high-tech weapons systems that never come in on time or budget and don't work when they finally do come in we'd probably be able to reduce our deficit and build some bitchin new high speed rail projects. Who am I kidding though, that will never happen.

    --
    cheap labor conservatives - they want to keep you hungry enough to be thankful for minimum wage.