Passenger Trains > Amtrak vs Chinese Bullet Trains

On MSN.com this afternoon...

Here's how America's Amtrak compares to China's bullet trains:
http://www.msn.com/en-us/travel/news/heres-how-americas-amtrak-compares-to-chinas-bullet-trains/ss-BBByQ83?li=BBnbklE&ocid=iehp#image=18

Interesting read...now let's compare China's human rights record with the US's.

Posted from Android

Comparing China it to Europe/Japan would be more interesting and fair.

Hard to make a real comparison. Two totally different cultures. China is a country where the only way to get around for many people is by train. It's also a country where the government doesn't really care about people and human rights. If the government wants to build a railroad through your living room, you end up with a railroad through your living room. Amtrak would love to be able to straighten out the NEC but paying a fair price for property makes it pretty much out of the question.

Comparing China to Japan or Europe would be the better model.

John

What does "human rights" have to do with our pitiful rail service when compared to other rail services in the industrial world, most of which are democracies? Just another distraction from the issue. BTW, most if not all those counties also have universal health care.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/26/17 23:39 by railwaybaron.

NYC4096 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> On MSN.com this afternoon...
>
> Here's how America's Amtrak compares to China's
> bullet trains:

http://www.msn.com/en-us/travel/news/heres-how-americas-amtrak-compares-to-chinas-bullet-trains/

Might be a good idea to test your link first before posting. (I truncated your link which starts at the end, slide #18 of 18) Might not make any difference, since some of the comments above sounds like no one followed the link!

If taken face value, the comparison slides + description text isn't that controversial. Acela = 150 mph and Chinese trains = 186 mph is already well known by most TO members, except for those who fell for China's political motive to run it faster than design speed (220 mph) which they no longer do.

Really, nothing to see here. Our Train Mediocrity has little do with China, so don't create a troll when there isn't any.

Distance is also a factor. Acela has a top end of 150, but an average of 70 mph, IIRC. Lots of stops and lower limits.

The Chinese have a lot of tangent track for their 186, with 150 miles between stops. Works wonders for averages.

Posted from Android

Just for some context, here are some pics I took in 2012.

---

---

---

any way you slice it...whether china, japan or europe...USA trains are last place.

because we fly

> because we fly

So do the Chinese. 2 of the 15 busiest in the world (by aircraft movements) are in China, and the trend is up. They continue to buy aircraft from Boeing and Airbus. The main problem is that the Chinese military, so far, has reserved most of the nation's airspace for itself. This leads to a capacity crunch along the east coast cities.

dan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> because we fly
More to the point, because we have the "freedom" to drive.
AA

Stanford White
Carmel Valley, CA

ctillnc Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > because we fly
>
> So do the Chinese. 2 of the 15 busiest in the
> world (by aircraft movements) are in China, and
> the trend is up. They continue to buy aircraft
> from Boeing and Airbus. The main problem is that
> the Chinese military, so far, has reserved most of
> the nation's airspace for itself. This leads to a
> capacity crunch along the east coast cities.

true but Chinese are not flying intraborder but more international ...

> true but Chinese are not flying intraborder but
> more international ...

You must be kidding. Have you been there? I've been on ten domestic China flights in the last 2 years.

Out_Of_Service Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ctillnc Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > > because we fly
> >
> > So do the Chinese. 2 of the 15 busiest in the
> > world (by aircraft movements) are in China, and
> > the trend is up. They continue to buy aircraft
> > from Boeing and Airbus. The main problem is
> that
> > the Chinese military, so far, has reserved most
> of
> > the nation's airspace for itself. This leads to
> a
> > capacity crunch along the east coast cities.
>
> true but Chinese are not flying intraborder but
> more international ...

Not at all true. They have lots of domestic flights. They have big trunk carriers and low-cost ones. Remember, not everyplace is served by high speed rail.

The main key here guys is our government likes to put pennies to Amtrak and spend an arm and a leg with the other modes, go figure why the rest of the planet keeps making us look bad! Like I told a lady yesterday when I shot 611 leaving for Lyunchburg, we don't really need HSR all over the place, but it be nice to have a interconnected rails system that works and money being funded instead of these budget deals (especially when a Republican President is in office) that tries to prove to people that passenger trains are worthless and they're not, in fact riding No. 4 and N0. 30 to get here to Roanoke both trains were packed!

Americans abandoned rail service in the 1950's and 60's when the product was good, roads where still under development and air line service was regulated and limited.  It is hard to make a case for large scale development of a passenger network.

I love the posts about the Oil/Highway Lobby that are so all powerful.  I work for a Fortune 500 corporation that lobbies for road construction all the time.  I have been involved in it myself.  Truth of the mater is we rarely find a customer at the edge of a factory gate.  Roads that serve our needs also serve the needs of other corporations, commuters and other automobile traffic.

I like trains and try to take Amtrak every chance I get.  Still, reality plays a role at some point.