Re: fast trains

[james_ccj@my-deja.com]

In article <38C8285F.5ECD2ACC@primus.com.au>,
  Richard <richard_snook@primus.com.au> wrote:
>
>
> james_ccj@my-deja.com wrote:
> >
> > 160 kph is "NOT VERY FAST" by Euro standard
>
> Thats what prompted me to enquire originaly...the bar for "fast" has
risen
> considerably in recent years!!  160kph (the good ol' magic "ton") is
really
> just getting out of the starting blocks these days.
Some of the European suburban trains/metro can easily reach this speed.


> if "Very Fast" seems to indicate speeds of over 300kph..then I would
have
> thought 200kph  appropriate for "Fast"...so I was just wondering what
> equipment they were going to employ to go "fast".
> Still none matters much if the infrustructure is not up to it!!.
That's what I was concering the other day. Apart from rail track upgrade
you really need some safety measurements. Unlike the other states
Victorian railways rarely fenced, some railway crossing needed attension
etc.



> Its amazing really whenyouconsider the barriers to progress these
days...when
> we have the technology and equipment to hand...even a "muffled"
desire..thatwe
> struggle to ven partially emulate what the pioneering fathers created
many
> years ago.   They built infrastructure where there was NONE!!   and
now ,
> today, we get in a tiz straightening out a few lines....ridiculous
really.
>
> Can we borrow some NIKE managemant for a few year sto sort out our
railways!!
> <VBG>  :-))))

How about Qantas:-)


> cheers >:~)) Richard
>

--
Cheers

James


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.