Where Is America’s Vision?
- Thread starter Dusty Ayres
- Start date
J
Jetfire
Guest
America has the tech & ability...but greed & short-sightedness are the problems.
[edit] Plus mass transit on the ground isn't sexy...We(Americans) wanna take to the skies!!!
[edit] Plus mass transit on the ground isn't sexy...We(Americans) wanna take to the skies!!!
Dusty Ayres
Commodore
America has the tech & ability...but greed & short-sightedness are the problems.
[edit] Plus mass transit on the ground isn't sexy...We(Americans) wanna take to the skies!!!
So does Canada, where this tech would be greatly needed. But you know what North Americans are like.
J
Jetfire
Guest
The bigger vision is sub-orbital/orbital(???) craft that can go up and minutes later come down at a location...not mass transit but if a lot of them can do this...the sexier it is.
Re: Where Is America’s Vision?
Where's America's vision?! Hey! Who needs new energy devices or feats of egineering?
We've got a phone with an awesome interactive touch interface!
Where's America's vision?! Hey! Who needs new energy devices or feats of egineering?
We've got a phone with an awesome interactive touch interface!
Maybe Los Vegas should be funding that mega deluxe transportation system instead of people from places like Phoenix, Salt Lake City and Albuquerque who will still be riding a regional jet and paying a separate fee for their baggage.
As expensive as current Mag-Lev technology is, a less sophisticated train similar to Acela would cost a small fraction of what a Mag-lev system would cost. Efforts to reduce the track costs of Mag-Lev, with the coils in the train instead of in the track, have been plagued by vibration problems.
As expensive as current Mag-Lev technology is, a less sophisticated train similar to Acela would cost a small fraction of what a Mag-lev system would cost. Efforts to reduce the track costs of Mag-Lev, with the coils in the train instead of in the track, have been plagued by vibration problems.
Dusty Ayres
Commodore
Except that the DesertXpress Acela doesn't really work, and here's why:
That's why a Anaheim to Vegas maglev train would work better than a DesertXpress HSR.
Instead of investing in a crappy fighter jet that won't even be needed, American should be investing in this Anaheim-Vegas maglev train, and more like it.
Funny how much freight is brought ashore at the Los Angeles/Long Beach port and moved inland over freight lines without the abrasiveness of desert sand being a problem. The current Mag-Lev beam technology is so expensive per mile you could probably that extra rolling stock maintenance cost longer than it would take for the seats, floors air conditioners and doors of a Mag-Lev train to wear out.
Right, because if it wasn't being spent on the F-35, the money certainly would have been spent on something worthwhile like this, and not something useless like farm and oil subsidies, or the personal pet pork project of senior congressmen and senators.
It's also possible they are using this tactic to shift attention from gross technological stagnation.
'Uh shiny new gadget' type of situation, and poof, the attention of the general public shifts to the new shiny object.
Like children.
:
^Or, developing a touch screen UI costs several orders of magnitude less than a large capital expenditure project, that has to be publicly financed, are therefore at the mercy of a government designed for inaction.
Really, people, have some ######n common sense here. Cellphones aren't THAT expensive to develop. They're usually a few million dollars to develop, a billion or two if you want something revolutionary. This is well within the means of a corporation, and even a wealthy individual. Nationwide networks of ANYTHING are vastly more expensive, require you coordinate between multiple governments, agencies AND corporations and may rely on multiple new technologies, each as complicated as an embedded OS and a phone twice over. Let's also not forget that there are groups that have vested interests against this project.
This is hard #### to pull off. You know what the kicker is? There is no guarantee that it will make enough money to pay for running itself, never mind the investment, and forget about a profit. Extremely high risk, extreme project management challenges, political maneuvering is required, and uncertain success.
Really, people, have some ######n common sense here. Cellphones aren't THAT expensive to develop. They're usually a few million dollars to develop, a billion or two if you want something revolutionary. This is well within the means of a corporation, and even a wealthy individual. Nationwide networks of ANYTHING are vastly more expensive, require you coordinate between multiple governments, agencies AND corporations and may rely on multiple new technologies, each as complicated as an embedded OS and a phone twice over. Let's also not forget that there are groups that have vested interests against this project.
This is hard #### to pull off. You know what the kicker is? There is no guarantee that it will make enough money to pay for running itself, never mind the investment, and forget about a profit. Extremely high risk, extreme project management challenges, political maneuvering is required, and uncertain success.
Of course, this gets into the "grand conspiracy" arena of the government controlling the creation of said shiny new gadgets.
No ... merely that they are milking old technologies as much as possible and releasing revisions with minor improvements after a smaller period of time.
The real jump in tech for example would be new sources of fuels, energy sources, flying cars and whatnot.
However, most companies would shoot themselves in the foot from an economic point of view if they tried introducing those technologies when they should have been introduced.
The real jump in tech for example would be new sources of fuels, energy sources, flying cars and whatnot.
However, most companies would shoot themselves in the foot from an economic point of view if they tried introducing those technologies when they should have been introduced.
Yes, because "they" control Apple, IBM, Microsoft, Sony, GM, Ford, etc...
<waits for the 100mpg carburetor to be brought up>
No ... but most companies have a similar agenda in mind and what will cost less to produce and sell for the premium price.
Apple is a good example of this because they sell hardware that is in 1 place overpowered and in another underpowered (coupled with it being last generation) and with a premium price tag on it.
Or even Intel that introduced a new architecture of their cpu's for example which proved to be about 20% (if not less) in terms of speed compared to the older generation.
Nvidia is the cream of the crop when it comes to rebadging old products as well.
And these are just a few examples
Apple is a good example of this because they sell hardware that is in 1 place overpowered and in another underpowered (coupled with it being last generation) and with a premium price tag on it.
Or even Intel that introduced a new architecture of their cpu's for example which proved to be about 20% (if not less) in terms of speed compared to the older generation.
Nvidia is the cream of the crop when it comes to rebadging old products as well.
And these are just a few examples
Examples of individual companies making decisions on what products to bring to market. There is no "they" directing the companies to hold back certain technologies and to release others to give us "shiny toys" to distract us from technological stagnation.
The fact that we even have the widely known "Moore's Law" works against your argument.
The fact that we even have the widely known "Moore's Law" works against your argument.
Exactly right - maglev is pure and simple gagdetbahn, too expensive and unnecessary. I'm not sure where this specter of "wind-blown sand" is coming from either - it's not like the train is going through the Sahara. The Mojave desert isn't a giant field of sand dunes, it's rocks and bushes. High-speed rail seems to work splendidly in Spain, a country with similar climate and population density to California.
The other major benefit of Desert Xpress (and downside of Maglev) is its interoperability with other systems. It will allow one-seat rides from LA, Fresno, San Jose, and San Francisco (and eventually San Diego and Sacramento in phase 2) once they connect with California HSR in Palmdale. The maglev people also don't talk about how they will get the right of way through Cajon Pass (the reason why Desert Xpress is terminating in Victorville). There are already four existing rail lines plus I-15, and not much room for more. Sure, maglev can handle a little higher grades than the 3-4% of steel-wheel HSR but it would likely require hugely expensive tunneling.
Because that stuff is just so easy! If only electronics companies would stop investing in cellphone development, we'd have flying cars.
Aside from the difference in developmental costs that STR pointed out, it's not like this is some sort of zero sum game with some overall control. Individual companies compete in specific areas with the intent of turning a profit. The fact that some companies invest in cellphones has literally nothing to do with other companies that invested in things like energy development. They're two completely different industries!
It's sort of like telling a kid to eat his vegetables because people are starving in Africa. The vegetables are already on the plate, not eating them doesn't give food to someone else. The original comment which spawned this sideline was I hope just a failed attempt at comedy because the assertion that the existence of one technological development is hindering a completely different area of development is totally and utterly wrong.
