Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New York to London in an hour - by train

smartplanet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 146 posts

Re: New York to London in an hour - by train

#91

Post by melling »

mertd wrote: post #83
melling wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That'll cost 3x more than the bus, and it doesn't scale. http://www.nywaterway.com/hoboken14throute.aspx There are hundreds of thousands of people who cross the river every day. Thanks for taking 1 minute. Can anyone solve the real problem?

Monthly bike pass is surely cheaper or comparable to whatever he is paying for parking. I solved his problem.

You are responding to me, the person whose problem you think you solved. I take a bus that costs $98/month. The ferry is over $300 for a monthly pass. If I want to take the ferry tomorrow, with my bike, for example, it'll be about $20 for a daily round trip. My best option would be to taking a folding bike so I can take a train. That would work on nice days.

However, what I'm really asking for is to solve the problem for the millions of commuters. It's crazy that people waste so much time commuting.

Re: New York to London in an hour - by train

#92

Post by mukaiji »

if we can't get our shit together to connect SF to LA with what amounts to 40-years-old-bullet train technology, what makes this people think they can get this crazy stuff done between NY and LA?

sounds a lot like my research group meetings. Lots of fascinating stuff. Zero chance of ever making it out of the lab in the near future.

Re: New York to London in an hour - by train

#93

Post by evoxed »

citricsquid wrote: post #7
koenigdavidmj wrote: post #3

Link to the BBC article instead of the blogspam: http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20120601-high-speed-pipedrea... Also, easy terrorist target.

in this case the blogspam serves a purpose, accessing the bbc.com story: "We're sorry but this site is not accessible from the UK as it is part of our international service and is not funded by the licence fee."

Wait, what now? You're blocked from reading a story, from inside the UK?

Re: New York to London in an hour - by train

#94

Post by ChuckMcM »

arohner wrote: post #74
ChuckMcM wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is a great question, I wish I could reasonably answer it. I'm a big fan of rail, and while San Jose was celebrating their first 4 miles of light rail (in just 10 years from the start of the project!) I was looking that the marker in the Sacramento Rail museum (recommended) commemorating the laying of 10 miles of the Union Pacific rail line in one day . Part of it is that some folks really hate rail, so much so t…

Great response. >San Jose was celebrating their first 4 miles of light rail (in just 10 years from the start of the project!) > Actual work days might be 90 for a mile of track, but time actually passed is like a year So currently, San Jose can build 0.25 mi/year. Optimistically, with no lawsuits, their actual work days could increase to say, 225 days/year, which is 2.5x faster. So we're up to say, 0.66 mi/year, whic…

Well one of my political suggestions to 'even' the playing field was to create a certification date for a project after which no lawsuits could be brought against it. This would give the project planners a way to budget the years of litigation, and once they were certified they could start and continue until they were finished without interruption (except for the usuals, weather, labor disputes, and material shortages).

I've gotten some positive feedback for that but have yet to find someone willing to actually submit it in a bill.

Re: New York to London in an hour - by train

#96

Post by planetguy »

shmulkey18 wrote: post #85
abraham wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Slave labor and "slave" labor.

Slave labor was too expensive to use because you risked losing your valuable capital. Instead new immigrants were used such as Irish (East Coast) or Chinese (West Coast).

Slave labour was used sometimes, e.g. the Thailand-Burma railway.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burma_Railway

Five hundred men died for every mile of track laid, but hey, they had too many prisoners anyway!

Re: New York to London in an hour - by train

#97

Post by f0untain »

"The most ideal implementations would be between cities separated by dry, flat unpopulated terrain that doesn’t freeze, he notes, adding that China and India hold the most promise."

It doesn't make sense. terrain between China and India is completely opposite, Not Flat, Populated and Freeze (himalayas)

Re: New York to London in an hour - by train

#98

Post by paulsutter »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #51
Eliezer wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How the hell does light rail track cost $2.5M/mile? How did people build railroad tracks back in the days of horses and buggys?

That is a great question, I wish I could reasonably answer it. I'm a big fan of rail, and while San Jose was celebrating their first 4 miles of light rail (in just 10 years from the start of the project!) I was looking that the marker in the Sacramento Rail museum (recommended) commemorating the laying of 10 miles of the Union Pacific rail line in one day . Part of it is that some folks really hate rail, so much so t…

Haven't you just proven that your initial post above is irrelevant to an undersea rail system?

I'm not saying an undersea rail system is practical or smart. I'm just asking the relevance of your comparisons to US urban construction costs to begin with.

As a suggestion, a different tone might make your post seem more useful and less trollish. For example "An undersea tunnel will require serious construction breakthroughs to be practical. As a comparison, today's costs...". That would be a lot more constructive than attacking the people behind the article.

Post reply on HN