Together in Electric Dreams

[st4]

[mention=55851]FTBBCVoodoo[/mention] - you just being inappropriate now... !
I was very impressed with Chinese trains, but that is because public transport is suitable for communist country.. it just fits the culture there and the way it is managed there is correct for the purpose. Trains there are to provide public service and not to make profit. First class "bullet train" from Shanghai to Beijing (800miles) costs £56 and the price never changes, again because they not trying to make profit. Bloody wagon between London to Edinburgh (400 miles) from 18th century cost £300 and doesn't even have air conditioning... and takes twice as long to travel half a distance .... what are you kidding?!
The best example is when bus or train from London to the airport cost more then the flight 1000 miles away to another country... I mean explain that!
That is sort of seat you get in China, including slippers and dinner, coffee, tea, cakes and beer:

Acid, knife and jihadist attack hasn’t spread to China, or Japan.

Travelling on the bus, train, tube in Europe is a complete gamble. Car is the only way to travel distance in Europe if you ask me and that’s for your own safety as well as comfort and well being


Sent from my Iphone using Tapatalk

[Linas.P]

Yes.. or plane... 

Plane is still public transport, but when it is done correctly I don't have issue with it. I agree with your point that issue in public transport is the public.. that applies even to the planes - glorious high tech machines flying high in the sky, filled with stinking farting meat balls... Still you can hardly match them unless you are uber rich and can afford to fly your private plane. I think private flying eventually going to get more affordable, but for now airlines provides very reasonable service for reasonable cost.

Problem with British public transport is that it is run for profit and it is monopoly...

Acid, knife and jihadists are joke... In UK 143000 people die every year, 38% from cancer (that is 54000), from knife attacks maybe 100 (that is 0.06%), from jihadists on average 1 person per year in last 50 years (or 0.0006%). So it is more likely you going to slip on the platform and fall under the train, then it is for jihadist to blow himself-up in front of you. Terrorism risk is almost non-existent and it is more of Media/Government buggy men to scare everyone off the daily pressing issue with life and fixating focus on non-existent threat. 

Funny fact - because in UK we don't have proper infrastructure i.e. barriers on the platforms (except very few lines) the train companies have to pay additional insurance, which then they include in the price of our tickets... So basically we pay for the dangerous infrastructure insurance when we use it?! 

[st4]

I don’t like to fly. Flying (short range) is incapable impatient people who are unable to drive themselves. I can drive Geneva to Glasgow in a day, and night. That’s quick enough. I don’t need to sit in a can with a big fat smelly person because I’m incapable of driving myself or need to do it within a few hours.


Sent from my Iphone using Tapatalk

[MNMJ]

15 hours ago, Linas.P said:

from jihadists on average 1 person per year in last 50 years (or 0.0006%)

Conveniently forgetting the 1000s of people who died in the UK through Irish Republican and Ulster Loyalist terrorism

[st4]

Conveniently forgetting the 1000s of people who died in the UK through Irish Republican and Ulster Loyalist terrorism

 They’re not blowing anyone up right now. The threat right now to our safety comes in a more eastern flavour

 

In western societies walking out of a bus, train etc is a lottery imho. Jihadists, acid attackers etc then the more normal risk of smelly beer fuelled football fans, being squished next to a fat person, sitting next to someone loaded with the cold, mums with noisy children.

 

No wonder people are sticking to their cars.

 

 

You’d only take public transport if you were unable to drive imho

 

 

Sent from my Iphone using Tapatalk

 

 

[dutchie01]

All major manufacturers are investing literally billions of dollars to develop and build  EVś and it is a race who will bring out mainstream cars like the golf first. From next year these are expected to hit the market which means EV driving will move from trendsetters to general public. Issue is the lack of charging points mainly in cities so local governments will rapidly roll out new systems, here final testing underway with using lampposts as charging point. Next step will be a driving ban in innercities for combustion engines, some european cities already have this in place. Personally i think EV will rapidly be embraced by the majority and opposition will mainly come from old school motoring enthusiast, The moment that EV is cheaper to run, charging is possible in every street aplenty and resale value is stable it will have the majority. Car manufacturers seem to bet on exactly this.   

[dutchie01]

5 minutes ago, st4 said:

 They’re not blowing anyone up right now. The threat right now to our safety comes in a more eastern flavour

 

In western societies walking out of a bus, train etc is a lottery imho. Jihadists, acid attackers etc then the more normal risk of smelly beer fuelled football fans, being squished next to a fat person, sitting next to someone loaded with the cold, mums with noisy children.

 

No wonder people are sticking to their cars.

 

 

You’d only take public transport if you were unable to drive imho

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

people are taking the plane more frequent than ever. I do not know anyone that drives distances over 1000 kms as a EasyRyan flight is cheaper and faster. Innercity transport is different i would rather walk than depend on public transport, have not used a bus/metro/tram since i had my drivers licence and will never do so. I fanatically hate public transport and am prepared to pay for a taxi to prevent the traumatic experience of beeing transported in a way i do not wish. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[st4]

people are taking the plane more frequent than ever. I do not know anyone that drives distances over 1000 kms as a EasyRyan flight is cheaper and faster. Innercity transport is different i would rather walk than depend on public transport, have not used a bus/metro/tram since i had my drivers licence and will never do so. I fanatically hate public transport and am prepared to pay for a taxi to prevent the traumatic experience of beeing transported in a way i do not wish. 
 
 
 
 
 
 

I drive over to Europe covering hundreds if not over a thousand miles plus in my car. I know of a few who regularly drive to mainland Europe from UK

I really don’t like flying and will drive. I have the time and ability to do it.

Agree re the rest of your post totally but the pressure, justified or not, is coming to reduce emissions and fossil fuel usage. That will come to aviation too - a 747 uses a life time of one persons road fuel in a flight from NYC to London.

Sadly the climate change lot have a huge sway in political and economic circles and flying will soon become the preserve of the very rich.

There’s no reason to fly within the US or Europe. You can train or drive.


Sent from my Iphone using Tapatalk

[st4]

All major manufacturers are investing literally billions of dollars to develop and build  EVś and it is a race who will bring out mainstream cars like the golf first. From next year these are expected to hit the market which means EV driving will move from trendsetters to general public. Issue is the lack of charging points mainly in cities so local governments will rapidly roll out new systems, here final testing underway with using lampposts as charging point. Next step will be a driving ban in innercities for combustion engines, some european cities already have this in place. Personally i think EV will rapidly be embraced by the majority and opposition will mainly come from old school motoring enthusiast, The moment that EV is cheaper to run, charging is possible in every street aplenty and resale value is stable it will have the majority. Car manufacturers seem to bet on exactly this.   

Exactly but personal transportation will always be wanted. No one who has the money will willingly inflict travelling by bus or train on themselves if they can avoid it - particularly in cities like London where violent crime and terrorism is on the rise.


Sent from my Iphone using Tapatalk

[Martin F]

4 hours ago, st4 said:

There’s no reason to fly within the US or Europe. You can train or drive.
 

 

Unless of course you want to save time 

[st4]

1 hour ago, Martin F said:

Unless of course you want to save time 

 

I find a day and night perfectly fast to get between Arrochar (nr Glasgow) and Chamonix - a journey I will be doing next weekend.

[Martin F]

50 minutes ago, st4 said:

 

I find a day and night perfectly fast to get between Arrochar (nr Glasgow) and Chamonix - a journey I will be doing next weekend.

You may, but hundreds if not thousands will find that unacceptable time for such a journey in the 21st century. 

[st4]

3 minutes ago, Martin F said:

You may, but hundreds if not thousands will find that unacceptable time for such a journey in the 21st century. 

Once the eco weenies start going after aviation fuel the way cars are vilified I suspect they'll have to get used to a slightly slower speed of getting places.

[dutchie01]

Dont see that happening in the foreseeable future. Airtravel will remain as is, a form of transport for the masses.

i remember the old days when only the happy few could afford it. Classical music in the plane and champagne aplenty

glad those days are gone.

[st4]

5 minutes ago, dutchie01 said:

Dont see that happening in the foreseeable future. Airtravel will remain as is, a form of transport for the masses.

i remember the old days when only the happy few could afford it. Classical music in the plane and champagne aplenty

glad those days are gone.

Maybe - it keeps the oi peloy off the DFDS routes to France. I am not a chunnel fan either. Once the Mum with 5 different looking kids brigade can no longer fly and have to drive the drive abroad won't be nearly so pleasant.

 

Why they cannot just a build a bridge over to France (its only 40 miles so around 35 mins drive) and a bridge to Iceland and onwards to via Greenland to Canada beats me then I could go anywhere without flying.

 

Or just rip up the train tracks and lay a road down to France.

[dutchie01]

You can. As long a you take a boat every now and then?

[dutchie01]

7 hours ago, st4 said:

 

 That will come to aviation too - a 747 uses a life time of one persons road fuel in a flight from NYC to London.

 

 

Not sure if that is correct. Yes the plane itself uses a lot of fuel but you will have to divide this by the 450 or so passengers on board. If my memory is still there i remember a plane to be more efficient than a car?

 

[doog442]

A nightmare road trip today from Dorset to London (me driving due to a SW train strike)

The stress only resolved itself when I parked in a station car park for £2 and then effortlessly made my way around the capital by tube / public transport. 

 

I had to sit next to a stranger - not sure how I coped with that😉...oh hang on the same happened on my recent flight to Dubai

 

[st4]

 
Not sure if that is correct. Yes the plane itself uses a lot of fuel but you will have to divide this by the 450 or so passengers on board. If my memory is still there i remember a plane to be more efficient than a car?
 

Yes - it works out at around 37mpg per person.

But the amount of CO2 emitted and other pollutants in the upper atmosphere cannot be good.


Sent from my Iphone using Tapatalk

[Guest]

oh yes very efficient at 37mpg -  If you'd normally drive 5000k in one day.

 

[doog442]

On 8/31/2018 at 7:03 PM, st4 said:

The US - the most productive country in the world has the right approach. Less public transport more driving.

 

Of course but not every country has the capacity to invade a foreign power to ensure its future fuel supply. 

 

[Guest]

right approach depends on the goal. Making money while you suffocate could be argued to be folly.

[doog442]

On 8/31/2018 at 8:21 PM, Linas.P said:

Terrorism risk is almost non-existent and it is more of Media/Government buggy men to scare everyone off the daily pressing issue with life and fixating focus on non-existent threat. 

 

and what exactly is the 'daily pressing issue with life' that comes before mass murder of innocent men, women and children  Linas .. your need to get you and your old shed from A to B as quickly as possible per chance ?

 

 

[Linas.P]

Just now, doog442 said:

and what exactly is the 'daily pressing issue with life' that comes before mass murder of innocent men, women and children  Linas .. your need to get you and your old shed from A to B as quickly as possible per chance ?

Based on Risk impact assessment any pressing issue in life can be categorised by Probability vs. Impact. Terrorism is high impact but unbelievably low probability occurrence - it is more likely to become a US president (obviously if you american) then it is to die in terrorist attack. Some daily issues like earning enough to pay bills  are very high probability (where it is almost guaranteed to occur), but very low impact.. and something like cancer is massive risk, because it is very likely to occur (Probability) and very likely to kill you (Impact).

Obviously, I do not support terrorism but at least in UK it is far from "mass murder of innocent", more people die on public transport in London every year... Should we say then that our public transport is "mass murdering innocent people?". That would actually be more accurate description e.g. during your recent trip to London where you were glad to exchange some bodily gases with strangers on tube... at any given moment you were more likely to die from "passenger incident" then from terrorist attacks.

Terrorism risks are pretty much hoax.. issue massively overblown from it's proportions. Even the terrorists themselves understand and exploits it - their goal is not to kill people, but to scare! On flip side - next time we might need to think twice before invading muslim country and killing tens of thousands innocent people there.

@Comedian - obviously we need to consider that fuel efficiency and pollution are two very different things e.g. long haul flights might be much more fuel efficient then personal vehicles, but jet air-planes inherently are heavy polluters because of the way engines works. Still when is comes to travelling anything more then 500 miles plane becomes very reasonable solution and for anything over 1000 miles that is pretty much necessity (bar few exceptions). 

[doog442]

You sound a few cans short of a six pack.

That has to be the most bizarre post I've read on the internet. You are comparing accidental death to homicide ..and arguing that because one exceeds the other on London public transport  terrorism should be treated as a non entity.

Lets declare a war against ladders shall we as those bad boys kill more people than terrorists.

You've won the internet mate in what must be one of the most least confrontational places I know..

I'm out and if this thread was locked it would save the world from your inane drivel....here's hoping.