Possibly the start of the end of aviation?

D

Dextraneous

Joined
23 Jun 2013
Messages
2,617
Reaction score
380
Location
Manchester
Country
United Kingdom
Sponsored Links
For many routes to be practical you have to stop at multiple points, you might have trains on that route that won't stop at as many stations, but they are on the same track. This means you can't throw 300mph trains onto that track, as they have to organise all the trains around each other.

Hence HS2, if you want fast rail, you need separate rail lines for it, and look at all the butthurt that is causing!

As for existing high speed rail networks, people choose not to use them for a number of reasons. I don't think speed is at the top of the reasons they go elsewhere.
 
HS2 is a bit of a fiddle anyway. In the cost-benefit analysis, I'm pretty sure that they had to ignore the fact that WiFi allows commuters to work on the train anyway (negating the benefit of getting to the destination quicker).
 
My work is mostly computer based, but no way could I write reports on a train, far to impracticable.

So I think the WiFi argument is also a fiddle.

But I haven't the slightest idea how you would honestly provide an analysis, fiddle fiddle fiddle.
 
Sponsored Links
I think flights for the masses are on the way out anyway. I used to love flying in fact the holiday started the second I would get on the plane. But these days I can't think of anything more stressful (apart from a golfing weekend with nosey lol).

Stripping off at the airport, combined with delays, cancellations and the general contempt that the airline companies have for their customers makes it all too boring. Then there's the Japanese student who insists on having her seat fully reclined for the whole seven hour journey. The airlines have been treating their customers like sh*t for years. Even after the connection with DVT they are still cramming more seats onto their aircraft. The airports are no better: An hour and a half in baggage reclaim because no BA staff bothered to turn up for work.

Anything that can relieve airlines of our hard-earned cash has to be a good thing IMO. I can't see much use for it in the UK but great for travellers abroad.
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: JBR
AronSearle said:
My work is mostly computer based, but no way could I write reports on a train, far to impracticable.

So I think the WiFi argument is also a fiddle.

But I haven't the slightest idea how you would honestly provide an analysis, fiddle fiddle fiddle.
Click to expand...


You can't manage it, therefore it's b o l l o x.

Ahhhh - now I get it......
 
300mph,that wont get me in one.

hs2,you might get there half hour early,, then get stuck in traffic
 
My wife often has to travel to London as part of her work. In her experience and at certain times, flying can be cheaper than getting the train. On the other hand, when you factor in check-ins, luggage collection, security checks, etc, the train can work out quicker.

It occurs to me that they are now back to front: rail should be cheaper and flying should be quicker, but I suppose the muslim terrorist threat has accounted for much longer journey times by air. In that respect, they have been quite successful.
 
The rail network is the most vulnerable of all travel systems to terrorism.

One chuncky G-Cramp on the rail will take any train off the line in any direction the terrorist chooses. They can crash them into bridges or tunnel entrances, or inside a tunnel or off a bridge. HS2 will never be built for that reason.
I'm surprised there hasn't been a bomb on Eurotunnel before now. Nasty things in tunnels are bombs.
 
JBR said:
, but I suppose the muslim terrorist threat has accounted for much longer journey times by air. In that respect, they have been quite successful.
Click to expand...

Before some ROP nut job crashed a 4X4 into the front doors of Glasgow airport, Bristol airport used to have a drop off area right outside the terminal doors for passengers. Since the terror attack, we now have to drive round the back, through barriers and into the short stay car park. Then drag your cases all the way back to the terminal doors. Stopping vehicles anywhere near the entrance or approach roads is forbidden and coppers with machine guns now patrol this area.

Yet more advantages of the multicultural society for us all. :rolleyes:
 
If the chunnel was bombed would it flood?

Lets say a ton of semtex exploded in the middle.
Would the sides rupture outwards or would everything inside the tunnel just be expelled like a giant bazooka?

I could see it being every bit as devastating as the attack on the twin towers.
 
Norcon said:
If the chunnel was bombed would it flood?

Lets say a ton of semtex exploded in the middle.
Would the sides rupture outwards or would everything inside the tunnel just be expelled like a giant bazooka?
Click to expand...

I would go for the bazooka option.
 
If it was bombed by radical islamists what countries should we bomb and devastate in retaliation "shock and awe" style?

Or should we just continue with appeasement?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Sponsored Links
Back
Top