daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Railways

Railways (Inter)national commuter and freight trains



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old December 5th, 2010, 01:10 PM   #481
spkg
Unregistered Alien
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Toronto
Posts: 14
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mika Montwald View Post
Pent_Up Economic Synergy released by China CRH Harmony Express is l
LOL, River Crab Express!!!
spkg no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old December 5th, 2010, 01:59 PM   #482
yaohua2000
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 453
Likes (Received): 7

Quote:
Originally Posted by spkg View Post
Anyways the CRH380A look good, but boy dose the CRH380C ever look sexy, i wonder if they're going to make a 380kph sleeper car, I'd love to be able to go to bed in Hong Kong and wake up in Beijing, and not wait my entire day flying.
At 380 km/h, Hong Kong–Beijing takes only 7 hours, not enough sleep. Better for Beijing–Urumqi.
yaohua2000 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 5th, 2010, 02:40 PM   #483
chornedsnorkack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,974
Likes (Received): 388

Quote:
Originally Posted by yaohua2000 View Post
At 380 km/h, Hong Kong–Beijing takes only 7 hours, not enough sleep. Better for Beijing–Urumqi.
Or Hong Kong-Harbin. Or what about Beijing-Haian.

In 2011, Beijing-Wuhan shall open, as shall Guangzhou-Shenzhen. The trip time Guangzhou-Wuhan is now 3:16. Wuhan-Beijing shall be longer, at about 1200 k. So, with 380 km/h Beijing-Wuhan and then limited to 350 km/h Wuhan-Shenzhen, what shall the trip time be?

On Moscow-St. Petersburg, overnight trains travel for about 7:55.
chornedsnorkack no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 5th, 2010, 03:51 PM   #484
spkg
Unregistered Alien
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Toronto
Posts: 14
Likes (Received): 0

I know i'll get pounded over this, but as do have a airline bias i fell compelled to state the following:

I simply don't see the advantage HSR should have over air travel, i think alot of the advantages that HSR currently enjoys over planes, are A. temporary, B. because of government policies, C. doesn't apply to many Chinese cities, let me elaborate:

In a pure competition between travel times, 3-4 hours HSR journeys seem to be the tipping point, but that assumes a few factors:

1. Checking luggage takes a long time, most traveler these days don't check luggage anyways, and with overhead storage being such a big issue nowadays, you can bet new planes will come with bigger bins for your carry ons.

2. It takes a long time to get to the airport from city centers, it is a factor when rail stations are at city centers like they are in Europe, but in China, most of the new Railway stations built for the HSR are actually way outside the city. The only fairly good one i can think of is Beijing South. I know Guangzhou South is almost an hour drive away, and Shanghai's HSR station is actually connected to the airport. (which i think is a fantastic idea, but why connect the HSR station why not connect instead to a station with more local or regional trains)

3. Air travel wastes time with security, but I think that might change when HSR, god forbid, starts to cross into the minds of terrorists. The whole reason planes were such a high value target was because how easy it was to cause harm to so many people at a time, but with 380kph trains, i have to assume that an explosion that causes a derailment wouldn't be very survivable for most of the passengers. How many terror threats do you think it would take for railway stations to be wand up just as tightly as airports.

So really, without that benefit of time saving, the advantages are just about reliability and comfort.

in terms of reliability, i really think government biases are at fault here. The railway is still completely state-own, but the airlines are pretty much running like they are private. The railway got billions to upgrade the singling and scheduling systems, while China's ATC system still uses 1970's technology. The CRH is also relatively small right now, and the pride of the system, thing might chance when they become just another train, all you have to do is looking back, reliability in Chinese railway wasn't exactly a shining star.

As for comfort, I know European HSR usually have pretty good seat areas, but the new CRH second class seats feel just like airplane seats to me, and for the few who think they've got a few more inches on the trains, just you wait to see what they do after losing money for a few years straight.

I just think if the Chinese Government gave aviation 1/5 of the money for infrastructure, tighten up on some of the policies, and subsidize the airlines as much as they did the HSR, and pump tens of billions into developing better indigenous planes, the big three airlines would actually have a fighting chance.

Last edited by spkg; December 5th, 2010 at 04:00 PM.
spkg no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 5th, 2010, 03:57 PM   #485
gramercy
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 4,823
Likes (Received): 799

you do realize they are building airports the size of CDG or FRA by the dozens right?
gramercy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 5th, 2010, 04:18 PM   #486
Fan Railer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 658
Likes (Received): 566

Quote:
Originally Posted by greenlion View Post
just found official datas from CSR website, CRH380A: 490 (but actually 494 in real service,interesting), CRH380AL 1027.

http://www.cqsf.com/portalEn/gsdcz/c...201index_1.htm
Very interesting link, but it also raises another question: It states that the Traction power of the 380A is 9600 kW, but according to the released specifications, it should only have 8800 kW, unless there was a design change that we were not aware about until now...
Fan Railer no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 5th, 2010, 04:32 PM   #487
chornedsnorkack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,974
Likes (Received): 388

Quote:
Originally Posted by spkg View Post

3. Air travel wastes time with security, but I think that might change when HSR, god forbid, starts to cross into the minds of terrorists. The whole reason planes were such a high value target was because how easy it was to cause harm to so many people at a time, but with 380kph trains, i have to assume that an explosion that causes a derailment wouldn't be very survivable for most of the passengers. How many terror threats do you think it would take for railway stations to be wand up just as tightly as airports.
Look at Spain. The Madrid explosions tried to aim at AVE, too. AVE is still expanding.
chornedsnorkack no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 5th, 2010, 05:59 PM   #488
foxmulder
Registered User
 
foxmulder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,135
Likes (Received): 381

Quote:
Originally Posted by spkg View Post
I know i'll get pounded over this, but as do have a airline bias i fell compelled to state the following:

I simply don't see the advantage HSR should have over air travel, i think alot of the advantages that HSR currently enjoys over planes, are A. temporary, B. because of government policies, C. doesn't apply to many Chinese cities, let me elaborate:

In a pure competition between travel times, 3-4 hours HSR journeys seem to be the tipping point, but that assumes a few factors:

1. Checking luggage takes a long time, most traveler these days don't check luggage anyways, and with overhead storage being such a big issue nowadays, you can bet new planes will come with bigger bins for your carry ons.

2. It takes a long time to get to the airport from city centers, it is a factor when rail stations are at city centers like they are in Europe, but in China, most of the new Railway stations built for the HSR are actually way outside the city. The only fairly good one i can think of is Beijing South. I know Guangzhou South is almost an hour drive away, and Shanghai's HSR station is actually connected to the airport. (which i think is a fantastic idea, but why connect the HSR station why not connect instead to a station with more local or regional trains)

3. Air travel wastes time with security, but I think that might change when HSR, god forbid, starts to cross into the minds of terrorists. The whole reason planes were such a high value target was because how easy it was to cause harm to so many people at a time, but with 380kph trains, i have to assume that an explosion that causes a derailment wouldn't be very survivable for most of the passengers. How many terror threats do you think it would take for railway stations to be wand up just as tightly as airports.

So really, without that benefit of time saving, the advantages are just about reliability and comfort.

in terms of reliability, i really think government biases are at fault here. The railway is still completely state-own, but the airlines are pretty much running like they are private. The railway got billions to upgrade the singling and scheduling systems, while China's ATC system still uses 1970's technology. The CRH is also relatively small right now, and the pride of the system, thing might chance when they become just another train, all you have to do is looking back, reliability in Chinese railway wasn't exactly a shining star.

As for comfort, I know European HSR usually have pretty good seat areas, but the new CRH second class seats feel just like airplane seats to me, and for the few who think they've got a few more inches on the trains, just you wait to see what they do after losing money for a few years straight.

I just think if the Chinese Government gave aviation 1/5 of the money for infrastructure, tighten up on some of the policies, and subsidize the airlines as much as they did the HSR, and pump tens of billions into developing better indigenous planes, the big three airlines would actually have a fighting chance.

You should take another look to pictures of 2nd class seats. I would say leg room is like twice what is offered in airliners (probably more). So, train is definitely more comfortable.

For me, as long as I am not crossing the whole country in hurry (like Beijing-HK) I would choose trains anytime over planes.
foxmulder no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 5th, 2010, 06:59 PM   #489
Nozumi 300
Registered User
 
Nozumi 300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 222
Likes (Received): 6

Quote:
Originally Posted by spkg View Post
Anyways, back to trains, where did Alstom go all of a sudden? why isn't there a CRH380D?
They got themseleves banned from the mainland in HSR for the next century or so due to a comment in the past
Nozumi 300 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 5th, 2010, 08:52 PM   #490
daddylonglegs
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: La Crosse, WI
Posts: 10
Likes (Received): 0

SPKG-

Oil is peaking as we speak and air travel will only be for the rich in 10 to 20 years. Trains are powered electrically, planes are not. Sure we'll try ripping apart as much as Canada as we can to take, i mean buy, your tar sands oil, but production rates can't ramp up fast enough. China is making a good future move by taking this route. The US is not in a good position as oil supplies dwindle.
daddylonglegs no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 5th, 2010, 09:14 PM   #491
dumbfword
Habitual Line Stepper
 
dumbfword's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 293
Likes (Received): 563

Quote:
Originally Posted by daddylonglegs View Post
SPKG-

Oil is peaking as we speak and air travel will only be for the rich in 10 to 20 years. Trains are powered electrically, planes are not. Sure we'll try ripping apart as much as Canada as we can to take, i mean buy, your tar sands oil, but production rates can't ramp up fast enough. China is making a good future move by taking this route. The US is not in a good position as oil supplies dwindle.
China is the second largest consumer of oil and it's growing every month.
__________________
"I am the color red in a world full of black and white"
dumbfword no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 5th, 2010, 09:41 PM   #492
highway35
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 33
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by dumbfword View Post
China is the second largest consumer of oil and it's growing every month.
Which makes it even more important to develop an alternative mode of transportation that is less dependent on oil.
highway35 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 5th, 2010, 10:26 PM   #493
Mika Montwald
Improving Earth
 
Mika Montwald's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Planet EARTH
Posts: 111
Likes (Received): 3

Quote:
Originally Posted by spkg View Post
.... ....

1. Checking luggage takes a long time, most traveler these days don't check luggage anyways, and with overhead storage being such a big issue nowadays, you can bet new planes will come with bigger bins for your carry ons.

2. It takes a long time to get to the airport from city centers, it is a factor when rail stations are at city centers like they are in Europe, but in China, most of the new Railway stations built for the HSR are actually way outside the city. The only fairly good one i can think of is Beijing South. I know Guangzhou South is almost an hour drive away, and Shanghai's HSR station is actually connected to the airport. (which i think is a fantastic idea, but why connect the HSR station why not connect instead to a station with more local or regional trains)

3. Air travel wastes time with security, but I think that might change when HSR, god forbid, starts to cross into the minds of terrorists. The whole reason planes were such a high value target was because how easy it was to cause harm to so many people at a time, but with 380kph trains, i have to assume that an explosion that causes a derailment wouldn't be very survivable for most of the passengers. How many terror threats do you think it would take for railway stations to be wand up just as tightly as airports.

So really, without that benefit of time saving, the advantages are just about reliability and comfort.

in terms of reliability, i really think government biases are at fault here. The railway is still completely state-own, but the airlines are pretty much running like they are private. The railway got billions to upgrade the singling and scheduling systems, while China's ATC system still uses 1970's technology. The CRH is also relatively small right now, and the pride of the system, thing might chance when they become just another train, all you have to do is looking back, reliability in Chinese railway wasn't exactly a shining star.

As for comfort, I know European HSR usually have pretty good seat areas, but the new CRH second class seats feel just like airplane seats to me, and for the few who think they've got a few more inches on the trains, just you wait to see what they do after losing money for a few years straight.

... ...
Here comes the pounding ... ...

1) Airplane is NOT a GREEN tech at this moment, since Airplane does not run on electricity.
Airplane Carbon footprint per person is way too high.
(HST + UHST) are the way to go for non-mountainous continental traveling.
Airplane is useful only for crossing the ocean or traveling to hard to reach spots (Mountains, Islands).


2) China cities are growing so fast that the city suburb of today will soon become the city center of tomorrow.
At this moment, major China cities center are way, way, too crowded beyond belief.
Thus, proper city planning requires China to build their new HST station 1 hour away (minimum) from the city center.
Since the lifespan of new HST station is exceeding 60 years, then after 15 years, the HST station will become the city center.


-------------------------------------------------

3) RE: Terrorist attacking HST system

I personally hope 100% of China Central and Local Leadership are absolutely aware that certain leading nation
has been continuously grooming certain terrors group to attack and sabotage China. (Hint: Rebiya Kadeer)


The anti terrorists solution is the implementation of this technology IOT -- M2M2H2M below.

The next Tech -- Revolution ... ...

IOT -- M2M2H2M = Internet 3.0 & beyond
= ( Internet of Things -- Machine to Machine to Human to Machine Automatic Communication Tech )

IOT -- M2M2H2M will automatically keep track of everything that relate to China CRH HST system
-- from all the tiny little parts on the Train (each Bogie wheel) and the Track (each slab) to the passenger ID background and history.

Each part can automatically communicate with all the other parts.

-------------------------------------------------

IOT -- M2M2H2M will allow each little tiny part to immediately alert everybody (Machine and Human)
if there is some unusual or some unauthorized activity occurring.

For example: some terrorist (Rebiya Kadeer) is planting a bomb on the CRH track.


China has been treating all Uighur, Tibetans and all other minorities very well since the founding of PRC nation, thus I personally
hope majority of Uighur and Tibetans will REFUSE to be brainwashed easily by the certain leading western nation.

-------------------------------------------------

China has setup the budget to spend 2 Trillion RMB for IOT -- M2M2H2M -- R&D until year 2015.
I believe some of the new IOT -- M2M2H2M tech has been implemented on the CRH system (Tracks, Trains, Stations).
I am certain that someone somewhere are accusing China of stealing this tech too,
even though the IOT tech has not been invented yet by the west.


-------------------------------------------------

4) China Ministry of Railways will not squeeze more seats into a CRH train
(reducing comfort) in order to generate more income because of the philosophy below.


China Central Leadership (non-democratic government ) is so visionary that
they are always thinking long term explosive and sustainable economic development.

Thus, losing money on the CRH system is tolerable, because the CRH HST will function as the catalyst for
explosive and sustainable economic growth along the HST corridors for so many years to come
by increasing and MULTIPLYING the productivity of everyone who are using the CRH HST multiple folds.


This explosive and sustainable economic growth will generate so much Return on Investment (ROI)
that DWARF the cost of building and maintaining CRH HST system.

It always baffles me -- why so many western economists and government leaders (democratically elected BTW)
on the western nations have been overlooking or unable to see the above (8+8 = 88) Economic Synergy formula.
---
__________________
HUGE DENSE FOREST Covering Cities


Are you studying the Basic Traditional Proper CIVILIZED BEHAVIORS <弟子规> ??

Last edited by Mika Montwald; December 6th, 2010 at 01:41 AM.
Mika Montwald no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 5th, 2010, 10:45 PM   #494
spkg
Unregistered Alien
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Toronto
Posts: 14
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by gramercy View Post
you do realize they are building airports the size of CDG or FRA by the dozens right?
I don't think airports are the bottle necks in the system right now, the main issue has got to be ATC (air traffic control).

Quote:
Originally Posted by chornedsnorkack View Post
Look at Spain. The Madrid explosions tried to aim at AVE, too. AVE is still expanding.
that bombing was targeted at commuter train and of the slow speeds, it never caused a derailment, the Spanish government, holding more treat the source not the symptom approach pulled out of Iraq, I don't think a hard liner country like the China or US would take that approach.

Quote:
Originally Posted by foxmulder View Post
You should take another look to pictures of 2nd class seats. I would say leg room is like twice what is offered in airliners (probably more). So, train is definitely more comfortable.

For me, as long as I am not crossing the whole country in hurry (like Beijing-HK) I would choose trains anytime over planes.
Maybe its because i'm not a very tall person so i don't feel to much of a difference, in terms of numbers, I know seat pitch on Economy class for a typical plane in China is 32 inches, or 818mm, i remember seeing somewhere 900 and something for second class in CRH, but i can't find the link, dose anyone have any links technical data?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nozumi 300 View Post
They got themseleves banned from the mainland in HSR for the next century or so due to a comment in the past
is this actually fact or just rumor?

Quote:
Originally Posted by daddylonglegs View Post
SPKG-

Oil is peaking as we speak and air travel will only be for the rich in 10 to 20 years. Trains are powered electrically, planes are not. Sure we'll try ripping apart as much as Canada as we can to take, i mean buy, your tar sands oil, but production rates can't ramp up fast enough. China is making a good future move by taking this route. The US is not in a good position as oil supplies dwindle.
trains that run on electricity means they run on coal in China, hardly better then oil wouldn't you say. Besides if you've got a few billion to spend, tens of thousands of engineers, and a mind for long term planning beyond just 4 years at a time. why not come up with alternative energy for planes, staring with prop planes at first and move up.

electric motors powering props are much lighter then the current turbo props, and hydrogen fuel has better energy to weight ratio then kerosene, also planes don't have to worry about the same problems as cars with hydrogen. If you hit something with a plane you're dead anyways, so don't have to worry about hydrogen tank exploding on impact, and gas station isn't too much of a problem because all they have to do is install them in airports.

And that's just one method amongst many.
spkg no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 5th, 2010, 11:02 PM   #495
dumbfword
Habitual Line Stepper
 
dumbfword's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 293
Likes (Received): 563

CRH5 comes from Alstom.
__________________
"I am the color red in a world full of black and white"
dumbfword no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 5th, 2010, 11:06 PM   #496
spkg
Unregistered Alien
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Toronto
Posts: 14
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mika Montwald View Post
1) Airplane Carbon footprint per person is way too high.
most studies either assume full capacity or the same capacity factor between planes and trains, but typical load factors on planes are 80% and climbing, with HSR in China is hover at around 50%, when you take that into account the different isn't all that much any more. And trains that run on electricity generated by coal isn't a whole lot better than burning kerosene.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mika Montwald View Post
2) Since the lifespan of new HST station is exceeding 60 years, then after 15 years, the HST station will become the city center.
So won't airports become part of the city centers as well?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mika Montwald View Post
3) The anti terrorists solution is the implementation of this technology IOT -- M2M2H2M
Once again, why can't that be used for making air travel safer?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mika Montwald View Post
4) China Ministry of Railways will not squeeze more seats...losing money on the CRH system is tolerable
That's sort of my whole point, if the government is willing to subsidize air travel as much as they done for rail, than chinese planes would have comfortable seats as well, amongst other improvements.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mika Montwald View Post
western nations have been overlooking or unable to see the above (8+8 = 88) Economic Synergy formula.
---
I totally agree transport systems have huge economical externalities, but while the extra benefits of HSR are taken into the calculation, ones for air travel are sort of being tossed aside.
spkg no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 5th, 2010, 11:10 PM   #497
chornedsnorkack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,974
Likes (Received): 388

Quote:
Originally Posted by spkg View Post
that bombing was targeted at commuter train and of the slow speeds, it never caused a derailment,
A bomb was found on AVE tracks, too, but it did not explode.
Quote:
Originally Posted by spkg View Post
trains that run on electricity means they run on coal in China, hardly better then oil wouldn't you say.
A lot better. There is much more coal than oil in ground, and China has a lot of it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by spkg View Post
electric motors powering props are much lighter then the current turbo props,
Are they?
Quote:
Originally Posted by spkg View Post
and hydrogen fuel has better energy to weight ratio then kerosene, also planes don't have to worry about the same problems as cars with hydrogen.
Except what do you produce hydrogen from?
chornedsnorkack no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 5th, 2010, 11:32 PM   #498
33Hz
Registered User
 
33Hz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 436
Likes (Received): 47

^ right, hydrogen is an energy carrier, not a fuel.

China also just did a deal to buy 1000 Westinghouse nuclear reactors.
33Hz no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 5th, 2010, 11:53 PM   #499
spkg
Unregistered Alien
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Toronto
Posts: 14
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by chornedsnorkack View Post
A bomb was found on AVE tracks, too, but it did not explode.
what do you think the situation would have been if it did explode, and sad to say but things are a lot worse now then that were in 2004, if the same thing god forbid happens on the Acela Express, even if the attack fails, you can get you as$ you're going to get some genital groping every time you board a train as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chornedsnorkack View Post
A lot better. There is much more coal than oil in ground, and China has a lot of it.
its not like China's completely dry of oil, and yes i do think coal is just as bad, certainly in terms of pollution, and oil doesn't creates obnoxious uneducated coal mine owners, who got rich over night, running the world's tourist spots soiling the imagine of the Chinese people.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chornedsnorkack View Post
Are they?
since there no prototypes of electric motors for aviation yet, i can only compare internal combustion engine in cars with electric counter-parts, and yes they are lighter.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chornedsnorkack View Post
Except what do you produce hydrogen from?
well, hopefully by the time hydrogen technology is widely implemented, China will generate most of its electricity from nuclear, hydro, or other alternatives.

And no i'm not saying planes are better than HSR, i just think we should give up on it just because its got a few downsides. The law of diminishing return sates that every additional dollar spent on HSR will be less effective then the last. so instead of building a HSR route from Xi'an to Lanzhou that no one will ever ride, why not spent it on aviation instead.
spkg no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 6th, 2010, 12:00 AM   #500
Mika Montwald
Improving Earth
 
Mika Montwald's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Planet EARTH
Posts: 111
Likes (Received): 3

Quote:
Originally Posted by spkg View Post
... ... And trains that run on electricity generated by coal isn't a whole lot better than burning kerosene.

... ...
1) At this moment, China is investing another 2 Trillions RMB until year 2015
(From Total Budget of 10 Trillions RMB) to do R&D and install Green Power Tech such as (Solar, Nuclear Fission, Nuclear Fusion, and Wind).


So when China made the breakthrough in Nuclear Fusion tech,
Usage of Coal & Oil can be dramatically reduced to almost zero.


The Solar power has been implemented on some of the new CRH HST stations roof (Shanghai & Wuhan).

When you have time -- please read the thread below (Page 4 -- Post #71):
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showth...1270459&page=4



2) China is also doing R&D on Electric Airplane, but this field can not be the major focus
-- since China is sitting on huge stretch of continent.
China population is approaching 1.4 Billions, thus electric Airplane can not function as the major transportation backbone.


3) (8+8 = 88) Economic Synergy formula
In terms of maximum bang for the buck -- CRH HST will beat Airplane hands down
-- in order to function as as the CATALYST for explosive and sustainable economic growth along the travel corridors from major city A to major city B.

Airplane can not make the IN & OUT STOP as easy and as fast as the CRH HST.
__________________
HUGE DENSE FOREST Covering Cities


Are you studying the Basic Traditional Proper CIVILIZED BEHAVIORS <弟子规> ??

Last edited by Mika Montwald; December 6th, 2010 at 12:13 AM.
Mika Montwald no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
china

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 02:32 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium