Everyday occurences/technology that should have been updated long ago

[2faded]

Cars have improved but still stay in the same paradigms. I was watching this show "Future Cars" on discovery channel which had alot of new changes to the way cars were built. No examples cuase i have bad memory but maybe someone else saw it.

[RichC.]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is about as close to a perfect argument for why we need something like a Bullet Train in the US. If you could put your car on there and take it with you, the system would be damn near perfect IMO. I really am a big fan of having a high speed train system in the States.

Bullet train>>>>>>>>>Flying.

[/ QUOTE ]
If you could travel with your car for roughly the same price as an airline ticket this would be huge.

[/ QUOTE ]

That would be the hard part about getting Americans on-board with having a high speed rail system since we love our cars, as I stated in an earlier post in this thread. I would imagine there would be an extra price tacked on for taking your car, first class seating and stuff like that. The US is about the only major world power without a high speed rail system. I know of at least 6 countries that have an extensive rail network.

[Patrick del Poker Grande]

[ QUOTE ]
Cars have improved but still stay in the same paradigms. I was watching this show "Future Cars" on discovery channel which had alot of new changes to the way cars were built. No examples cuase i have bad memory but maybe someone else saw it.

[/ QUOTE ]
Probably something about electric cars with the "skateboard" design where you just have a base chassis with all the drivetrain and everything on it and you can just put whatever kind of car you want on top of it. Then, they're interchangeable so if you want an SUV instead of a sedan, you just go buy a new shell.

[guids]

which world powers are you talking about though? I think the sheer size of the US has a lot to do with this.

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]
which world powers are you talking about though? I think the sheer size of the US has a lot to do with this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I think that has to be it. I've been impressed with the sort of European model of trains going everywhere but I think the population densities are generally consistently higher than in the U.S, so it's more viable.

[Borodog]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The highways (in Cali @ least), should be roughly 6 lanes minimum at all times, at some points they can be 8 or 9 lanes.

[/ QUOTE ]
There really is a point at which there isn't much benefit to adding more lanes, especially when you figure in the huge cost of constructing such mega wide highways. Believe it or not, you can actually reduce the efficiency by just running around adding lanes everywhere.

[/ QUOTE ]

Patrick,

Some thoughts I had on private roads seem relevent. Specifically the 2nd from the last large paragraph at the bottom, where I talk about increasing traffic flux.

[Patrick del Poker Grande]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The highways (in Cali @ least), should be roughly 6 lanes minimum at all times, at some points they can be 8 or 9 lanes.

[/ QUOTE ]
There really is a point at which there isn't much benefit to adding more lanes, especially when you figure in the huge cost of constructing such mega wide highways. Believe it or not, you can actually reduce the efficiency by just running around adding lanes everywhere.

[/ QUOTE ]

Patrick,

Some thoughts I had on private roads seem relevent. Specifically the 2nd from the last large paragraph at the bottom, where I talk about increasing traffic flux.

[/ QUOTE ]
Private roads are definitely an interesting solution to the current problems. Wasn't there a state, I'm thinking it was something like Ohio or Indiana, that recently sold the operating rights of their highways/tollways to a private company? It might've even been a foreign company.

[Borodog]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The highways (in Cali @ least), should be roughly 6 lanes minimum at all times, at some points they can be 8 or 9 lanes.

[/ QUOTE ]
There really is a point at which there isn't much benefit to adding more lanes, especially when you figure in the huge cost of constructing such mega wide highways. Believe it or not, you can actually reduce the efficiency by just running around adding lanes everywhere.

[/ QUOTE ]

Patrick,

Some thoughts I had on private roads seem relevent. Specifically the 2nd from the last large paragraph at the bottom, where I talk about increasing traffic flux.

[/ QUOTE ]
Private roads are definitely an interesting solution to the current problems. Wasn't there a state, I'm thinking it was something like Ohio or Indiana, that recently sold the operating rights of their highways/tollways to a private company? It might've even been a foreign company.

[/ QUOTE ]

I haven't heard of it. I do know that there have been a few private highways licensed; the problem is that state governments have stacked the tables against them by loading them up with so much regulation that the per-mile costs to the consumer are pretty high (this is of course done on purpose; the state DOTs really don't want this kind of competition to succeed).

[Patrick del Poker Grande]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The highways (in Cali @ least), should be roughly 6 lanes minimum at all times, at some points they can be 8 or 9 lanes.

[/ QUOTE ]
There really is a point at which there isn't much benefit to adding more lanes, especially when you figure in the huge cost of constructing such mega wide highways. Believe it or not, you can actually reduce the efficiency by just running around adding lanes everywhere.

[/ QUOTE ]

Patrick,

Some thoughts I had on private roads seem relevent. Specifically the 2nd from the last large paragraph at the bottom, where I talk about increasing traffic flux.

[/ QUOTE ]
Private roads are definitely an interesting solution to the current problems. Wasn't there a state, I'm thinking it was something like Ohio or Indiana, that recently sold the operating rights of their highways/tollways to a private company? It might've even been a foreign company.

[/ QUOTE ]

I haven't heard of it. I do know that there have been a few private highways licensed; the problem is that state governments have stacked the tables against them by loading them up with so much regulation that the per-mile costs to the consumer are pretty high (this is of course done on purpose; the state DOTs really don't want this kind of competition to succeed).

[/ QUOTE ]
Maybe it never actually made it past the proposal and into actual practice. I definitely do remember something like this being seriously discussed something like 5-10 years ago, though.

[gusmahler]

[ QUOTE ]
Bullet train>>>>>>>>>Flying.

With the right marketing, how many more people would ride the train? A lot if you ask me. This might cripple the airline industry a bit, but then again, the airlines have already cut back on services that used to be very standard only 5 years ago. For the same price as a flight, you can travel cross country, or where ever, on a 200mph train and ride fairly comfortable. All you need is a hub in every major city and very few stops in between. The system works too, just look at Japan for a perfect example.

[/ QUOTE ]

The US is MUCH bigger than Japan. A 200 mph might be fine for short trips (Boston/NY, SF/LA). But NY/LA would be 12+ hours. I'd much rather ride a plane for those types of trips.