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

Stable 1.2 Gigabit/s Internet achieved in moving train in Switzerland

swisscom.ch

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 362 posts

Re: Stable 1.2 Gigabit/s Internet achieved in moving train in Switzerland

#331

Post by Retric »

dtwest wrote: post #322
Retric wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

US population density is hardly the issue for two reasons, first nobody wants high speed rail in Alaska. But secondly high speed rail is between cities not every little podunk town. Linking Richmond, DC, Baltimore, NYC, Boston is a single 550 mile high speed rail line, which connects over 10% of the entire Americana population.

I mentioned the Northeast Corridor because it is the most viable location to have passenger rail in the US. But even there presents some issues (which I may not have explained very well in my original post). I disagree with your assessment because American density is very different than European density. If you look at Google Earth, there is almost continuous suburban development along the entire Northeast route. In…

High speed rail needs a seed to start growing the network, but as soon as you have that adding other cities becomes increasingly viable. Initially you might build each of these city clusters: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northeast_megalopolis#/media/F... Afterwards, running/maintaining the high rail is more economically viable due to network effects.

Re: Stable 1.2 Gigabit/s Internet achieved in moving train in Switzerland

#332

Post by rootusrootus »

ashtonkem wrote: post #207
rootusrootus wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We could definitely have a beautiful, big, fast train network. But most people still wouldn't use it.

Evidence from Europe and Asia shows that this is probably wrong. People in those areas strongly prefer high speed rail for trips that are less than 3-4 hours long, and begin to switch over to airplanes beyond that.

We're right back to "remember how big and sparsely populated the US is." 150mph in three hours is good for inter-city transportation in the Northeast, but a lot of other places would have trouble justifying the cost.

And that's nothing compared with what a truly high speed train would cost to implement here.

Re: Stable 1.2 Gigabit/s Internet achieved in moving train in Switzerland

#333

Post by dtwest »

beaunative wrote: post #326
dtwest wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mentioned the Northeast Corridor because it is the most viable location to have passenger rail in the US. But even there presents some issues (which I may not have explained very well in my original post). I disagree with your assessment because American density is very different than European density. If you look at Google Earth, there is almost continuous suburban development along the entire Northeast route. In…

High speed rail is roughly double if not triple the speed of the car speed on a speedway, let alone car speed in city. More importantly, just don't think of city as static, inanimatable object. Many american cities are created because of the rails if you remember the history, High speed rail may not create new cities, but can definitely reshape parts of the city.

Acela's average speed is 82 mph between NYC and Boston. 66 mph between NYC and DC. When you add the time to get to/from the stations my point makes a lot of sense.

If you remember the history, many of the existing rail lines were built before the suburban explosion post WWII. To make Acela go faster, the route would need straighter track which would require buying a lot of expensive, already developed, land.

Re: Stable 1.2 Gigabit/s Internet achieved in moving train in Switzerland

#334

Post by thu2111 »

mschuster91 wrote: post #329
thu2111 wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's a report by the European rail freight industry: https://www.railfreightforward.eu/sites/default/files/userco... "Maintaining its current modal share of 18% will pose a challenge for the rail freight sector due to three main factors: an expected change of goods structure, general logistic trends and the high intensity of road innovation." Railways are poor at moving freight in Europe due to: a) Sharing tracks w…

There's more at play. 1) our train length is limited - see the parallel comment. UIC limits our trains to 750m top, we don't have the space required for train yards that can handle longer trains, and the signal blocks are too short apart to handle trains longer than that (basic railway safety, a train must always have enough free space in front so that it can brake from full speed to zero in case of crossing a red li…

How many private rail freight companies are there in Europe? The railfreight firms I know are all semi or fully state backed.

As for the innovation thing, the report I quoted literally says they can't keep up with road innovation. It doesn't say there are no new ideas in railways ever, but, who in SBB or DB is really going to go the extra mile to fight for some cool new idea? Truck firms are far smaller and there are way more of them, so people can conceivably get ahead by doing things differently (doesn't need to be tech innovation).

Re: Stable 1.2 Gigabit/s Internet achieved in moving train in Switzerland

#335

Post by twblalock »

martinald wrote: post #297
twblalock wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why I'm against increasing taxes in the USA. Europeans get more per tax dollar than we do. In the USA, we just waste the money. Europeans pay a bit more than we do, but they get a lot more back in terms of transit, health care, social safety net, etc. If our government can't use the money more efficiently, it shouldn't get even more. Last time I rode on Amtrak it was absolutely depressing. Same with Caltrain…

This isn't as true as you think it is. Social security is often a lot, lot better in the US than Europe. Take the UK: UK unemployment 'benefits' are around $100/week regardless of previous salary (so low compared to housing costs in many areas that it is almost pointless). US state unemployment benefits tend to be a lot higher than that. UK pensions are low - around $10,000/yr, again regardless of salary. US Social S…

However, the UK government will give pensioners somewhere to live, for free. In the US they can become homeless if they do not have family to rely on.

Re: Stable 1.2 Gigabit/s Internet achieved in moving train in Switzerland

#337

Post by 908B64B197 »

smnrchrds wrote: post #240
cmdshiftf4 wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>so, so foreign as a Canadian Canada, as a whole, is an absolute rip-off. There is virtually nothing you can point to in the country and remark that it's a good deal when compared to the prices offered in America or most areas of Europe. High food costs, high booze costs, high communications costs, high transport costs, high taxes etc., combined with low salaries, is incredibly bleak.

> There is virtually nothing you can point to in the country and remark that it's a good deal when compared to the prices offered in America or most areas of Europe. America, I understand. But aren't prices in Canada generally lower than Europe when you include taxes? Sales taxes are 5-15% in Canada. They are generally 20% or higher in EU. Car insurance is perhaps more expensive in Canada, but vehicle registration/ta…

For some reasons some politicians really want to keep the CAD as low as possible?

I recall a pitch to Amazon for their headquarters that they could get away outsourcing for cheaper over there.

Re: Stable 1.2 Gigabit/s Internet achieved in moving train in Switzerland

#338

Post by 908B64B197 »

dbetteridge wrote: post #78
bleepblorp wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Canada's population density figure is deceptively low because most of Canada's landmass is completely uninhabited. Most of the Canadian far north has an even lower population density than the Sahara desert. Canada's population is tightly clustered into a small number of urban areas that have population densities comparable to places like Philadelphia or Vienna. Despite this, Canada's population centers have nowhere n…

This is all accurate, but people still expect reception and speed when travelling between those dense population centres by road or rail. Much like Australia, this means providers build the infrastructure to supply those areas but then the cost is recovered from the dense population areas. Theres also some capatilism nonsense oligopolies thrown in there, but that's the core issue.

Isn't more than half the population something like I've always wondered why no big international player tried to enter that market, it's ripe for disruption, and the local operators sound like they are far behind.

Re: Stable 1.2 Gigabit/s Internet achieved in moving train in Switzerland

#339

Post by [deleted] »

dtwest wrote: post #333
beaunative wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

High speed rail is roughly double if not triple the speed of the car speed on a speedway, let alone car speed in city. More importantly, just don't think of city as static, inanimatable object. Many american cities are created because of the rails if you remember the history, High speed rail may not create new cities, but can definitely reshape parts of the city.

Acela's average speed is 82 mph between NYC and Boston. 66 mph between NYC and DC. When you add the time to get to/from the stations my point makes a lot of sense. If you remember the history, many of the existing rail lines were built before the suburban explosion post WWII. To make Acela go faster, the route would need straighter track which would require buying a lot of expensive, already developed, land.

[deleted]

Re: Stable 1.2 Gigabit/s Internet achieved in moving train in Switzerland

#340

Post by Retric »

dtwest wrote: post #333
beaunative wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

High speed rail is roughly double if not triple the speed of the car speed on a speedway, let alone car speed in city. More importantly, just don't think of city as static, inanimatable object. Many american cities are created because of the rails if you remember the history, High speed rail may not create new cities, but can definitely reshape parts of the city.

Acela's average speed is 82 mph between NYC and Boston. 66 mph between NYC and DC. When you add the time to get to/from the stations my point makes a lot of sense. If you remember the history, many of the existing rail lines were built before the suburban explosion post WWII. To make Acela go faster, the route would need straighter track which would require buying a lot of expensive, already developed, land.

That’s the basic assumption for any HSR plan. You can’t mingle 160+MPH passenger trains with freight, so you need to buy a lot of land anyway. However, getting out of the urban center at 80+MPH isn’t a major issue and that let’s you avoid buying the most expensive inner city land. Getting off in the center of a city like Penn Station vs Laguardia Airport more than makes up for a few miles of slower speeds especially as these trains take a while to accelerate.
Post reply on HN