Interesting Maps

Paddico · 16-10-2020 1:27pm

Nexytus wrote: »

High speed railways in China. 2008 vs 2018.

That cant be right. I took several high speed trains back in 2002 all of which were as good as Japans bullet train.

Nexytus · 16-10-2020 1:42pm

Paddico wrote: »

That cant be right. I took several high speed trains back in 2002 all of which were as good as Japans bullet train.

Were those trains exceeding 200 kph?

The high speed system started in 2007. Trains on which travelled at speeds between 200 and 350 kph.

killbillvol2 · 16-10-2020 2:25pm

Paddico wrote: »

That cant be right. I took several high speed trains back in 2002 all of which were as good as Japans bullet train.

You didn't. They had nothing like Japan's bullet trains in 2002.

Paddico · 16-10-2020 7:12pm

The first train I took was HK to Beijing and I remember well it was 23 hours a distance of 1965 km.

That was the quality of the train at the time. Not quite 200km/h but I would still say its high speed, no?

Paddico · 16-10-2020 7:13pm

Just seen this on a travel site

The Beijing - Hong Kong through trains are a pair of overnight sleeper trains running between Beijing West Railway Station and Hong Kong Hung Hom Railway Station every other day. The whole journey, 2,475km (1,538 miles) long, takes about 24 hours, much longer than the high speed trains whose travel time is 9 hours.

Tell me how · 16-10-2020 7:13pm

Paddico wrote: »

The first train I took was HK to Beijing and I remember well it was 23 hours a distance of 1965 km.

That was the quality of the train at the time. Not quite 200km/h but I would still say its high speed, no?

85 kph is significantly less than 200kph to be fair.

killbillvol2 · 16-10-2020 7:54pm

Paddico wrote: »

The first train I took was HK to Beijing and I remember well it was 23 hours a distance of 1965 km.

That was the quality of the train at the time. Not quite 200km/h but I would still say its high speed, no?

85 km/h is the opposite of high speed. Sleeper trains actually run well below normal speeds for comfort.

Quantum Erasure · 16-10-2020 8:09pm

It's actually 2475 km by rail, that's an average speed of around 107.5 km/h

endainoz · 16-10-2020 8:31pm

Tell me how wrote: »

85 kph is significantly less than 200kph to be fair.

I got to visit China in the summer of 2018 and had the chance to take the bullet train from Shanghai to Beijing. It was a marvel of engineering to be fair, can't quite remember how long the journey was but I checked the speed at one point as can be seen from this low quality photo.

cdeb · 16-10-2020 8:33pm

Quantum Erasure wrote: »

It's actually 2475 km by rail, that's an average speed of around 107.5 km/h

Including stops I guess, which would really take the average speed down.

Still would mean a peak speed probably well below 200

Gloomtastic! · 16-10-2020 8:43pm

Anyone seen any good maps? :rolleyes:

killbillvol2 · 16-10-2020 8:48pm

endainoz wrote: »

I got to visit China in the summer of 2018 and had the chance to take the bullet train from Shanghai to Beijing. It was a marvel of engineering to be fair, can't quite remember how long the journey was but I checked the speed at one point as can be seen from this low quality photo.

I did Beijing to Guangzhou a couple of years ago. Over 2400 km in 8 hours. Only 5 stops. Just over €100 for first class.

Ted_YNWA · 16-10-2020 9:02pm

Mod

Before this thread completely de-rails, can we get back on topic.

KevRossi · 16-10-2020 10:26pm

Map of the proposed Berlin to Baghdad railway. It took 40 years to build, first train ran in 1940 and was one of the causes of WW1.

I've no idea how long it took, or its average speed. Sorry.

Tell me how · 16-10-2020 10:31pm

KevRossi wrote: »

Map of the proposed Berlin to Baghdad railway. It took 40 years to build, first train ran in 1940 and was one of the causes of WW1.

I've no idea how long it took, or its average speed. Sorry.

Umm.....What?

Quantum Erasure · 16-10-2020 10:56pm

Route of the Orient Express, originally from Paris to Vienna

BonnieSituation · 17-10-2020 1:39am

Tell me how wrote: »

Umm.....What?

It took 40 years to build. So Started ca. 1900 and the building of it was a contributing factor to WWI. So something happened between 1900 and 1914 that helped WWI to move along.

ablelocks · 17-10-2020 1:30pm

**** me, Japan is Big!

ablelocks · 17-10-2020 1:32pm

50% of Canadians live south of the red line

IAMAMORON · 17-10-2020 1:46pm

KevRossi wrote: »

Map of the proposed Berlin to Baghdad railway. It took 40 years to build, first train ran in 1940 and was one of the causes of WW1.

I've no idea how long it took, or its average speed. Sorry.

Tell me how wrote: »

Umm.....What?

Kevo, not trying to be a smartass, but is that a typo or was the route planned prior to 1914 and are you insinuating that it was a cause of international tension prior to the escalation of the war and the assassination of the Archduke Ferdinand?

chooseusername · 17-10-2020 1:59pm

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Kevo, not trying to be a smartass, but is that a typo or was the route planned prior to 1914 and are you insinuating that it was a cause of international tension prior to the escalation of the war and the assassination of the Archduke Ferdinand?

https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a138432.pdf

Will take a while to load, but interesting.

mikhail · 17-10-2020 4:06pm

For the curious, the wikipedia page on the Berlin-Baghdad railway does a decent job of explaining it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin–Baghdad_railway

To keep the maps coming lest the mods step in, here's Louis P. Bénézet's map of "Europe As It Should Be" (1918), depicting imagined nations based on ethnic and linguistic criteria. He basically was trying to solve the kinds of ethnic tensions he blamed as a leading cause of WWI.

Wales incorporating SW England is a new one to me. It also gives the Basques their independence, but not the Catalonians. The Ukranians might object too. There's a Yugoslavia of sorts, and we saw how well that turned out. The Greeks get part of the Turkish coast, which would have been quite the war!

cdeb · 17-10-2020 4:12pm

All that, and you left out the North!

mzungu · 17-10-2020 4:29pm

The 7000 rivers that feed into the Mississippi.

map-of-rivers-that-feed-into-the-mississippi-river.jpg?w=800&h=445

Gregor Samsa · 17-10-2020 5:23pm

mikhail wrote: »

Wales incorporating SW England is a new one to me. It also gives the Basques their independence, but not the Catalonians. The Ukranians might object too. There's a Yugoslavia of sorts, and we saw how well that turned out. The Greeks get part of the Turkish coast, which would have been quite the war!

Maybe he’s lumping the Welsh and the Cornish in together as some kind of Brythonic unit, but that map does look as if it would start as many wars as it would prevent.

KevRossi · 17-10-2020 5:42pm

BonnieSituation wrote: »

It took 40 years to build. So Started ca. 1900 and the building of it was a contributing factor to WWI. So something happened between 1900 and 1914 that helped WWI to move along.

They had issues getting through the Taurus mountains, then they had efficteively no money, power or influence for most of the 1920's and early 1930's.

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Kevo, not trying to be a smartass, but is that a typo or was the route planned prior to 1914 and are you insinuating that it was a cause of international tension prior to the escalation of the war and the assassination of the Archduke Ferdinand?

British were worried that a line to Baghdad and on to Basra would give the Germans too much leverage when it came to India. If the Germans controlled that line, they could get from Berlin to Bombay by train and boat quicker than the British from London by sea.

It would have given them an increasing sphere of influence in the Arabian peninsula (they had plans for lines from Damascus to Aden as well as down the east to Muscat. Thus having full control over the peninsula and possible control over the Red Sea and Arabian Sea.

It was one of the reasons why they went so hard against them in Versailles. Same situation applied to German colonies in Africa.

Ironically, if there had been no WW1, the Germans would have been sitting on the oil wells when they were discovered in the 1920's. Instead the US and British got there first and the rest is history.

mikhail · 17-10-2020 6:42pm

cdeb wrote: »

All that, and you left out the North!

I can comprehend the thinking, so I didn't comment. Obviously, it's of local interest.

Gregor Samsa wrote: »

Maybe he’s lumping the Welsh and the Cornish in together as some kind of Brythonic unit, but that map does look as if it would start as many wars as it would prevent.

I guess so, but I can't say I have any sense of there being a Cornish identity as late as that. In 1918, Cornish was already long extinct as a first language.

Capt'n Midnight · 17-10-2020 7:12pm

KevRossi wrote: »

Ironically, if there had been no WW1, the Germans would have been sitting on the oil wells when they were discovered in the 1920's. Instead the US and British got there first and the rest is history.

Italy invaded the Turkish province of Libya in 1911. So a slightly different timeline would have left Turkey with a huge chunk of the world's oil.

English desire for a secure oil supply lead to a coup in Persia in 1921 and invasion and occupation in 1941 -1946 and another coup in 1953 and then there was the revolution in 1979

Capt'n Midnight · 17-10-2020 10:41pm

Seth Brundle · 18-10-2020 10:22am

https://twitter.com/GeoForTheFuture/status/1316096063720296451?s=19

Interesting Maps

Comments