METRORail North Line

[Spacecityroller]

Its a for profit venture so the market or a study of the market will decide weather or not its worth the extra expense. I'm sure they will study every possible way they can make a profit on the HSR line.

[RedScare]

Its a for profit venture so the market or a study of the market will decide weather or not its worth the extra expense. I'm sure they will study every possible way they can make a profit on the HSR line.

 

No doubt, and I already know the result.

[mfastx]

Faster technology?

Teleportation?

 

Explain how you would do it?  Please realize there are several communities that live on the way to Bush that could also utilize that line.

 

Well first off you have to understand that heavy rail technology usually has at least twice as fast average speeds as light rail.  The light rail trains we have in Houston aren't designed to go fast.  For example, completely grade separated heavy rail is going to be much faster than at grade light rail, even if there are the same amount of stops and they are the same distance apart. 

 

Let me reinforce that just one rail line from downtown to IAH won't generate much ridership, the issue is connecting people that might live in other areas of town to that line that goes to IAH. 

[msteele6]

We have to kill the automobile culture before it kills us.

[Ross]

We have to kill the automobile culture before it kills us.

 

Great, so the 80 percent of stuff I do that isn't on any current or potential transit line will just have to stop? I don't think so.

 

[TowerSpotter]

We have to kill the automobile culture before it kills us.

Seems like a lot of things need to be done before that can be made possible or new concepts of transpotation.

I would like to see a bunch of these around Houston.

 

[IronTiger]

Well, if we were to extend Red Line even further, an airport connection, while making sense on paper, really isn't all that practical for low speed systems like light rail (as opposed to places like DC's Metro) if you intend on having people catch flights that way. If it were up to me, I'd take the line up from Berry to Airline, which would intersect with Greenspoint area (offices).

[cloud713]

I dig your drawing.. I've always wanted the HSR to come down the hardy toll road and have a terminal at the hardy rail yards site, like you have sketched

[msteele6]

Great, so the 80 percent of stuff I do that isn't on any current or potential transit line will just have to stop? I don't think so.

 

 

Quite a few fallacies here. I'll try to address them one by one. First, "isn't on any...potential transit line"? How would we know that something isn't on ANY potential transit line? Second, ending our automobile culture wouldn't mean doing without automobiles completely (and certainly there would be uses that would REQUIRE automobiles) it would simply mean using them only when necessary, after all, do we really need a 4,000 lb car to transport a 150 lb woman around town while going 0-60 in 5 seconds? Thirdly, if the money used to support the automobile infrastructure were diverted to fund a transit system, 80 percent of the things that you now do would probably shrink to something like 25 percent (or some other small number). Finally, it doesn't really matter how we argue about this. if we continue on the path we are now on, none of us will be doing ANYTHING and so the whole argument will be moot.

[Montrose1100]

Here we go again...

 

Sometimes I think that maybe it's a good thing we don't have a rail system yet. Who knows? Maybe we'll get the next futuristic hover pods that will be the envy of the world with an elaborate belt system that will enable the pods to reach the burbs in 15 minutes. 

[IronTiger]

Quite a few fallacies here. I'll try to address them one by one. First, "isn't on any...potential transit line"? How would we know that something isn't on ANY potential transit line? Second, ending our automobile culture wouldn't mean doing without automobiles completely (and certainly there would be uses that would REQUIRE automobiles) it would simply mean using them only when necessary, after all, do we really need a 4,000 lb car to transport a 150 lb woman around town while going 0-60 in 5 seconds? Thirdly, if the money used to support the automobile infrastructure were diverted to fund a transit system, 80 percent of the things that you now do would probably shrink to something like 25 percent (or some other small number). Finally, it doesn't really matter how we argue about this. if we continue on the path we are now on, none of us will be doing ANYTHING and so the whole argument will be moot.

 

Um, if all the money to support automobile infrastructure was diverted to transit systems, then there's no way you'd be able to get anything close even close to 25% inaccessible places (and the infrastructure for everything else would be crumbling), and you've just wasted a ton of money. 

 

In fact, the term "automobile culture" is some made-up term to explain the current world's woes. 

 

 

On topic, I really don't think that the Red line should be extended to the airport. I think would be cooler if there was some sort of high-speed system that encircled Beltway 8, that had stops at the airport and the other suburbs. It would be completely grade separated and be faster than the highway, if someone was to go from one of the peripheral suburbs to another.

 

[kylejack]

In fact, the term "automobile culture" is some made-up term to explain the current world's woes. 

 

Sure, just like many other terms. When a distracted driver hits and kills someone but isn't charged with a negligent homicide, that's car culture. When drivers park in the bike lane, that's car culture.

[citykid09]

It seems like technology should have decreased the cost of implementing heavy rail transit in a city like Houston by now. Why should it cost billions of dollars for a simple mostly above ground heavy rail system in Houston? How are other cities around the world building heavy rail systems and Houston can't? How can Dubai build one and Houston can't?

[msteele6]

Um, if all the money to support automobile infrastructure was diverted to transit systems, then there's no way you'd be able to get anything close even close to 25% inaccessible places (and the infrastructure for everything else would be crumbling), and you've just wasted a ton of money. 

 

In fact, the term "automobile culture" is some made-up term to explain the current world's woes. 

 

 

On topic, I really don't think that the Red line should be extended to the airport. I think would be cooler if there was some sort of high-speed system that encircled Beltway 8, that had stops at the airport and the other suburbs. It would be completely grade separated and be faster than the highway, if someone was to go from one of the peripheral suburbs to another.

 

Change is always seen as impossible until it happens, then it's seen as inevitable.

 

I'm old enough to remember when we didn't mow our lawns here in Houston in November.

[RedScare]

Quite a few fallacies here. I'll try to address them one by one. First, "isn't on any...potential transit line"? How would we know that something isn't on ANY potential transit line? Second, ending our automobile culture wouldn't mean doing without automobiles completely (and certainly there would be uses that would REQUIRE automobiles) it would simply mean using them only when necessary, after all, do we really need a 4,000 lb car to transport a 150 lb woman around town while going 0-60 in 5 seconds? Thirdly, if the money used to support the automobile infrastructure were diverted to fund a transit system, 80 percent of the things that you now do would probably shrink to something like 25 percent (or some other small number). Finally, it doesn't really matter how we argue about this. if we continue on the path we are now on, none of us will be doing ANYTHING and so the whole argument will be moot.

 

I would like to see some support for your arguments, especially the one highlighted. Frankly, I find this to be hyperbole, not fact.

 

 

 

BTW, I do not mow my lawn in November. hth

[msteele6]

You want me to prove something that will happen in the future?

 

That's quite a task.

[RedScare]

You want me to prove something that will happen in the future?

 

That's quite a task.

 

I want you to prove something you CLAIMED will happen in the future. Without proof, you come off as a liar or a fool. This is your chance to prove you are neither.

[Slick Vik]

It seems like technology should have decreased the cost of implementing heavy rail transit in a city like Houston by now. Why should it cost billions of dollars for a simple mostly above ground heavy rail system in Houston? How are other cities around the world building heavy rail systems and Houston can't? How can Dubai build one and Houston can't?

Real estate

[mkultra25]

do we really need a 4,000 lb car to transport a 150 lb woman around town while going 0-60 in 5 seconds?

"Do we really need X" is a question designed to appear reasonable, but usually winds up translating to "I don't like X, therefore we should ban it".

Personally, I'd be happy with a 2000 lb car that transports me around town while going 0-60 in 4 seconds, but if you're going to inveigh against oversized cars, take it up with the DOT. The amount of crap that's mandated in the name of safety now has made it all but impossible to build lightweight cars affordably. The same cars that weighed 2000-2200 lbs 15-20 years ago are lucky if they get within shouting distance of 3000 lbs now.

[crunchtastic]

duh, in the future only the poors will get around at ground level.

 

snark aside, I do think that all our rail discussions about transit are  attempting to solve  21st century problems with  19th century tools. it only makes sense that the denser  we build, the more we figure out how to use airspace for personal transit. When you're far enough behind the curve, as some believe we are in Houston, why bankrupt ourselves on yesterday's answers? face it, new urbanist thinking is middle- aged now, and pretty musty. How about some actual futurism?  walkability: yawn. molecular transportability: yay!

 

Here we go again...

 

Sometimes I think that maybe it's a good thing we don't have a rail system yet. Who knows? Maybe we'll get the next futuristic hover pods that will be the envy of the world with an elaborate belt system that will enable the pods to reach the burbs in 15 minutes. 

 

[RedScare]

I've actually owned a slew of cars under 3,000 pounds...

 

1984 Toyota Celica - 2449 lbs

1990 Alfa Romeo Spider - 2469 lbs

1999 Porsche Boxster - 2822 lbs

2013 MINI Countryman S - 2954 lbs

 

Admittedly, they have been gaining weight for nearly 30 years...just like me...but they are still sub-3k and loads of fun. And, no, I am not giving them up for the train.

[Ross]

The ultimate solution to transit is Puppeteer stepping disks.

[Montrose1100]

How can Dubai build one and Houston can't?

Come on citykid... Really?? Does this question need to be asked?

You have to have a better example than simdesert. And don't say any city in China. Use a similar government as a comparison.

[livincinco]

Why stop at heavy rail?  Dubai has man made islands, indoor ski slopes and a 2,700 ft skyscraper.  Houston should be able to have all of those too!

[Naviguessor]

Dubai also has "government" santioned rape...just like Missouri.  I think I'd take what Houston hasn't got rather than what Dubai has.  There is no comparison.

[mkultra25]

duh, in the future only the poors will get around at ground level.

 

snark aside, I do think that all our rail discussions about transit are  attempting to solve  21st century problems with  19th century tools. it only makes sense that the denser  we build, the more we figure out how to use airspace for personal transit. When you're far enough behind the curve, as some believe we are in Houston, why bankrupt ourselves on yesterday's answers? face it, new urbanist thinking is middle- aged now, and pretty musty. How about some actual futurism?  walkability: yawn. molecular transportability: yay!

 

 

Yearly reminder: unless you're over 60, you weren't promised flying cars. You were promised an oppressive cyberpunk dystopia. Here you go.

 

https://twitter.com/Moochava/status/354986725388468224

[mkultra25]

I've actually owned a slew of cars under 3,000 pounds...

 

1984 Toyota Celica - 2449 lbs

1990 Alfa Romeo Spider - 2469 lbs

1999 Porsche Boxster - 2822 lbs

2013 MINI Countryman S - 2954 lbs

 

Admittedly, they have been gaining weight for nearly 30 years...just like me...but they are still sub-3k and loads of fun. And, no, I am not giving them up for the train.

 

So you traded Italian passion for German reliability? As a former owner of an Alfa GTV6, I can certainly sympathize. 

[RedScare]

[musicman]

Well first off you have to understand that heavy rail technology usually has at least twice as fast average speeds as light rail.  The light rail trains we have in Houston aren't designed to go fast.  For example, completely grade separated heavy rail is going to be much faster than at grade light rail, even if there are the same amount of stops and they are the same distance apart.

heavy rail takes longer to start and stop. to say that it is much faster than light rail even if there are the same amount of stops is an outright lie.

[msteele6]

I would like to see some support for your arguments, especially the one highlighted. Frankly, I find this to be hyperbole, not fact.

 

 

 

BTW, I do not mow my lawn in November. hth

 

So many things wrong with this post on so many levels.

 

It appears that the poster is an aspiring (frustrated?) radio talk show host. That can be deduced from his method of argument . You must PROVE every assertion you make while they must be "taken in context", they are "only joking" and so forth. With people of this kind, argument is fruitless because they don't accept facts nor recognize logic. Therefore, the only possible response would be to quote Bible verses to them. I have doubt that there are numerous candidates for the task in the book of Revelation that would be adequate to PROVE my assertion, however, I will leave that exercise to the readers.

 

I am also quite certain that I will not have the last word on this issue given Mr. Scare's nearly 14,000 posts and therefore won't make the attempt, but I will say this, in ten years the climate change deniers will be as extinct as the Dodo bird, and for the same reason.

 

Finally, I note that Mr. Scare says that he doesn't mow his yard in November, that statement can mean only one of two things either he uses undocumented labor for the task or he lives in a trailer park and therefore has no need. In view of his previous comments (and their prodigious quantity, if not quality) I favor the latter possibility.