Hi Jed, I saw the CNN news article earlier today. It's a great use of the old "iron horse" technology refurbished with the latest enhancements. One would assume that the amount of energy consumed traveling by rail is significantly less than what is consumed doing the same distance by air.
I live in Madison, Wisconsin. There has been on the table for quite some time now an ambitious plan to bring back a commuter line between Madison and Milwaukee. I think there has also been a plan to add a line down to the Chicago outskirts. It has produced considerable debate from both sides of the issue, one I suspect that has yet to be resolved. I suspect one of the major complaints (regardless of whether it is justified or not) is a fear that it would never develop a sufficient customer base to make it profitable. State legislators fear it would turn into yet another state government boondoggle. Traveling at 60 - 70 MPH by rail is by most standards a fast commute. Traveling at speeds in far excess of 300 MPH is downright...well I don't know WHAT it is! Maybe it's best not to look out the window. Guess I'd get used to it. Commuting regularly at such speeds would seem to open up far more employment opportunities all around. Working in Chicago, but living in Madison (150 miles away) could turn out to be an affordable, practical, and idyllic life style, especially when the commute would take no longer than what it takes for a typical Madisonian to commute from one side of the city to the other. Even in our small town intercity commutes can consume 30 - 40 minutes in the midst of rush hour traffic. Despite these inconveniences we like our little town! Madison had been rated as one of the best cities in the U.S. to live in. I think that little French train can. I think it can. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com > > The French V150 railroad just broke the world speed record for > conventional railroad trains. I just realized that if railroad trains > could routinely travel at that speed in the lower 48 states, nonstop > trains would be effectively as fast as airplanes are today. This is > because of the hub and spoke air transportation system and because > there are so many delays getting to the airport and waiting after you > get on board. Check it out: > > V150 railroad locomotive with two cars: > > 357.2 mph = 575 km/h > 25,000 HP engine = 18 MW > > Boeing 747 > > Cruise speed: 565 mph = 910 km/h > Engines at cruise speed: 60 MW (I think) > > Distance and time to New York, NY to San Francisco, CA > > By road: 2,905 mi, V150 8:08 travel time > By air: 2,582 mi, Delta airlines (no direct direct flight): 7:49 > travel time with one stop > > Distance and time to New York, NY to Atlanta, GA > > By road: 883 miles, V150 2:28 travel time > By air: 749 miles, Delta airlines: 2:15 travel time nonstop > > I, for one, would much prefer to take a train for 8 hours to get to > the west coast, rather than schlep around in airports. > > - Jed > >
