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

Railway lines once connected the Middle East

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 130 posts

Re: Railway lines once connected the Middle East

#71

Post by MichaelMoser123 »

fmajid wrote: post #57
solatic wrote: post #19

At least in Israel, many of the old lines, even if they still operated today, would have been long obsolete. A daily train leaving Haifa at 8:30 and reaching Jaffa by lunch? Three, four hours? The same line today makes the journey in an hour, and there are plans on the table to build additional tracks to cut that down to a half hour. People commute from Haifa to Tel Aviv, with three (soon four) tracks passing through…

It’s quite amazing there wasn’t a proper rail line connecting Tel Aviv and Jerusalem until very recently. Certainly the very mountainous terrain around Jerusalem makes it difficult but the Swiss have managed.

All the traffic between Jerusalem and Tel Aviv was via highway one, for quite some time. I was once told, that the rail network was neglected, out of fear that it would be vulnerable to terrorist attacks.

Re: Railway lines once connected the Middle East

#72

Post by mr_toad »

beebeepka wrote: post #43

What a sad, sad read. Kind of makes my blood boil, too. We've barely started but half the comments are already grey. As a side note: anyone else wonder why the English speaking world refers to the region as "the middle East"? To me it is the near East. Not just because of proximity but I've never heard or read about a near East from anglo sources. What is the rationale?

The ‘near’ east used to refer to the eastern reaches of the (former) Roman Empire: Syria, Palestine and Egypt. It is a little bit obsolete.

Re: Railway lines once connected the Middle East

#73

Post by throw0101a »

0x0nyandesu wrote: post #33
foxes wrote: post #5

We really need to eliminate car dependence in our cities.

Speak for yourself. The last thing I want during covid is to be stuck in a metal box with 100 strangers uncomfortably wearing masks instead of in my own car blasting music with the window down.

> The last thing I want during covid is to be stuck in a metal box with 100 strangers uncomfortably wearing masks instead of in my own car blasting music with the window down.

Or you could walk or take a bicycle (e.g., Amsterdam/Netherlands).

Re: Railway lines once connected the Middle East

#74

Post by pm215 »

solatic wrote: post #19

At least in Israel, many of the old lines, even if they still operated today, would have been long obsolete. A daily train leaving Haifa at 8:30 and reaching Jaffa by lunch? Three, four hours? The same line today makes the journey in an hour, and there are plans on the table to build additional tracks to cut that down to a half hour. People commute from Haifa to Tel Aviv, with three (soon four) tracks passing through…

True, but I think it's easier economically and politically to get from "aging 19th century network" to "modern network" because you can upgrade it piecemeal tackling the worst bits first, compared to starting from "basically no network".

Re: Railway lines once connected the Middle East

#75

Post by mrsuprawsm »

0x0nyandesu wrote: post #33
foxes wrote: post #5

We really need to eliminate car dependence in our cities.

Speak for yourself. The last thing I want during covid is to be stuck in a metal box with 100 strangers uncomfortably wearing masks instead of in my own car blasting music with the window down.

There are other modes of transport than trains/cars. For example: bicycles.

Re: Railway lines once connected the Middle East

#76

Post by mrsuprawsm »

dr_dshiv wrote: post #39
0x0nyandesu wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Speak for yourself. The last thing I want during covid is to be stuck in a metal box with 100 strangers uncomfortably wearing masks instead of in my own car blasting music with the window down.

Avoiding car dependence in cities doesn't mean they will take away your car. It just means that I don't need to use a car to live there.

It also means that, often, it will be slower and/or more inconvenient to use the car.

For example, in my city, for distances inside the urban core, bicycle is usually the fastest mode of transport, public transport is about 1.5x - 2x the bicycle (fine if you are feeling lazy), and car is 1.5x - 3x the bicycle depending on time of day and associated traffic levels.

Sure, if the weather is horrible and I am feeling lazy, I might use my car instead of jumping on the bike, but often after reaching my destination I'll realize that it wasn't really worth taking the car.

Re: Railway lines once connected the Middle East

#77

Post by mrsuprawsm »

pjmlp wrote: post #69
dr_dshiv wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>electric wheelchairs are only practicable in sunny weather. In the Netherlands, at least, electric wheelchairs are out in all weather.

Yes, some people enjoy arriving all wet to the workplace.

This comment is clearly silly, since in the Netherlands - a rather rainy country - approximately 25% of people commute to work by bicycle.

You can wear a coat and rain trousers if you feel like it.

Re: Railway lines once connected the Middle East

#78

Post by pirate787 »

rendall wrote: post #20

This article made me think about how the presence of trains indicate peace. Trains are so vulnerable to attack. Their existence depends on everyone with access to the tracks to trust and agree with their purpose. I suspect if we're mourning these trains, we also mourn the loss of peace and stability in the region. As an aside, TIL that there are actually two Tripolis, one in Libya and the other in Lebanon. I have hea…

To the contrary, the strategic importance of trains specifically caused the Great War, and basically plunged Europe into 40 years of total war conflict.

https://medium.com/war-is-boring/massive-rail-networks-made-...

Re: Railway lines once connected the Middle East

#79

Post by dkarp »

fredley wrote: post #58
rendall wrote: post #20

This article made me think about how the presence of trains indicate peace. Trains are so vulnerable to attack. Their existence depends on everyone with access to the tracks to trust and agree with their purpose. I suspect if we're mourning these trains, we also mourn the loss of peace and stability in the region. As an aside, TIL that there are actually two Tripolis, one in Libya and the other in Lebanon. I have hea…

There are trains between Moscow / Beijing and Pyongyang, which is interesting I think.

I've ridden this trainline from Pyongyang to Beijing, although it was necessary to change trains after crossing the Yalu river and entering China at Dandong

Re: Railway lines once connected the Middle East

#80

Post by yob28 »

dredmorbius wrote: post #61
rendall wrote: post #20

This article made me think about how the presence of trains indicate peace. Trains are so vulnerable to attack. Their existence depends on everyone with access to the tracks to trust and agree with their purpose. I suspect if we're mourning these trains, we also mourn the loss of peace and stability in the region. As an aside, TIL that there are actually two Tripolis, one in Libya and the other in Lebanon. I have hea…

This is similarly true of aircraft, which are immensely vulnerable to attack, and which typically don't overfly regions of conflict, as well as sea traffic, which is somewhat less vulnerable, but may be subject to closed access to specific routes, usually by way of canals. These differ from rail in that the routes are not typically quite so constrained. But as a general rule, commerce and trade rely on good relations…

No post body was provided.
Post reply on HN