There should be a train that stretches from Bergen Norway to

No.

∞

File: 1408214614400.png (311KB, 587x489px) Image search: [Google]

311KB, 587x489px

>norway investing in infrastructure outside their own country

>>66663829
No.

>>66663829
doesn't norway have famously bad public transport?

>>66663829
>takes a few hours
dude the transsib takes 144h through Russia, Bergen-Singapore would be over a week

>>66665431
It would only take 45 hours at 300 km/h

>>66665757
that would mean 14000km of prototype grade highspeed trainline. Also probably plus 3h for stops in total

>>66663829
>what are planes

>>66667607
I thought Germans loved trains.

>>66667607
Less efficient

>>66667481
14000? I got it to 13,500 with a relatively reasonable track with stops in major capitals and 11,000 just going straight through mountains and shit. If you're being that ambitious though you might as well build a bridge between Stockholm and Åbo as well wich would further cut down the amount of tracks needed.

Secondly you don't need hyper modern ultra cutting edge tracks for 300 km/h. The French are doing experimental 550+ trials on pretty much regular tracks and many trains already reach 200 km/h on the regular railroad network.

>>66667824
but there are not currently operational trains at 300 they are all around 260, so 300 is still cutting edge of what is economical feasible. 135000 is the straightest route on google, so it's 14000 at least

>>66668034
>but there are not currently operational trains at 300
Yes there are. 3 in Germany as a matter of fact and 3 more planned/under construction.

File: BNkM7sXCMAEPrGY[1].jpg (49KB, 599x421px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 599x421px

>>66663829
I can do ya one better, a train track that takes one whole year to make a circuit


>celebrating bastille day
>while your ass is in florida

>>66668143
The ICE doesn't go over 250 because of the safety regulations

>>66668355
>because of the safety regulations
But that's just German autism. The point is that it's perfectly doable with current tech.

>>66668383
It can be done, but when you move something with over 300km/h on the ground there can happen a lot of shit, at some point moving through air is just smarter

>>66668465
Sure, but the point wasn't if it's more efficient or not. Just whether or not it could be done, which it can. Of course planes and boats are more efficient. Not only that, but you avoid having to go through countries that are not always on good terms with each other.

File: resizedimage600203-4e[1].jpg (17KB, 600x203px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 600x203px

>>66668383
Im glad people like you arnt the ones who are in charge of transportation
doable is not a standard, doable is not something you should be ok with when peoples lives are at stake

>>66668629
Again, the point of the discussion was whether or not it was doable, which we have concluded it is. Whether it's the best option or even viable, is another discussion entirely.

>>66663829
>There should be a train that stretches from Bergen Norway to Singapore, stopping at every major city along the way and takes a few hours to get between both.
>Could we do it?


>stopping at every major city along the way
>and takes a few hours
no, not even remotely possible, unless you make an asinine route that doesnt hit a single city, which would defeat the whole purpose of having a train

but this post is bait, and I'm biting

>>66668562
it's not about efficiency more about things the train can crash into imo

File: IMG_9670.jpg (24KB, 200x303px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 200x303px

>>66665204
>Norway investing in infrastructure