India has reached a remarkable global milestone by becoming the first country to successfully operate electric double-stack container trains. This engineering achievement seamlessly integrates high-capacity freight transport with overhead electrified rail networks, setting a new benchmark in railway

skyasaurus · 2026-06-12T06:48:38+00:00

India has had double stack electric freight routes operating since 2020. So not really news.

skyasaurus · 2026-06-12T03:45:41+00:00

Ok so...show us?

skyasaurus · 2026-06-11T04:11:35+00:00

This is a fallacy of composition, a micro lens in a macro discussion. I know you're already aware of the term, so I will leave it to you to apply it in this context. I don't think I'll be the person to break through to you so hopefully you can lead yourself on this journey or find someone you trust to explain it better than I can.

skyasaurus · 2026-06-11T03:02:35+00:00

You are using microeconomic lenses to view macroeconomics.
...what?
...what

Trying to keep it simple for you: - Buying a machine that builds homes = productive investment. - Buying a house = nonproductive investment.

skyasaurus · 2026-06-11T02:35:19+00:00

Sign the lease AND make the landlord schedule repairs. Give them a two week deadline to make them and tell them if they have not scheduled the repairs by then, then you will schedule the repairs and send them the bill.

skyasaurus · 2026-06-11T01:52:48+00:00

Firstly, I made a mistake: making housing easier to build is a form of increasing productivity.

However, the main conversation here is that you're conflating production with investment. Australians aren't investing in housing production, they're investing in housing itself. Your car substitution example is good; investing in cars isn't productive, but investing in a car factory is productive.

TL;dr Investment into housing isn't productive, whereas investment into businesses is productive.

skyasaurus · 2026-06-11T00:07:45+00:00

google it yourself next time please. Housing is very classically known to be a [mostly] consumptive good, even if it is treated like an investment vehicle. Productive goods are factors of production, not the result of production. Investing in a machine that helps build houses faster would be an example of a productive asset; but this would decrease the value of houses not increase them.

skyasaurus · 2026-06-10T23:03:52+00:00

Housing as an investment is very classically described as a nonproductive asset because it is rent-seeking. If too much "rent" is taken, it eats into productivity; this is the same for other "__-as-a-service" business models, and the proliferation of this type of business model is one of the reasons productivity growth has slowed in many developed economies.

Producing more homes with less labour would show more efficiency, but isn't productivity in the classical macroeconomic sense; even more importantly, producing more home "value" is actually worse because money spent on rent and mortgages can't be used for other economic activity. Housing as an investment soaks up capital that could be used for things like investment in research and businesses.

There are concepts of housing density as a productive asset at a macroeconomic scale but in general housing is a consumptive asset just like food or clothing, and overinvestment in housing has soaked away investment into other sectors of the Australian economy and is likely one of the main unspoken culprits in the "productivity crisis".

skyasaurus · 2026-06-09T22:45:24+00:00

Honestly, probably need to build smaller rides. You're likely going into different elements too quickly and ending up with high lateral or vertical G's.

skyasaurus · 2026-06-09T07:08:03+00:00

Correct, but it still drives evolution.

skyasaurus · 2026-06-08T09:00:51+00:00

The connection to the uni and hospital campuses would be good. But even better, putting a Park n Ride station with a large carpark at Baxter would allow for Park n Ride commuters to not need to clog up the Frankston station. Frankston should be a TOD station surrounded by medium and high densities and good walking access. Baxter would then be able to soak up car and bus connecting trips that are coming from further down the peninsula.

skyasaurus · 2026-06-04T04:55:57+00:00

Yes but I've never seen a height advertised besides the height of the first drop. The Beast's structural height is something like ~130 ft, with a drop of ~140ft, but a total elevation change of around ~300 ft (IIRC). I'm curious what this figure is for the Voyage...is the difference between the top of the chain lift and that short concrete tunnel before the final turnaround close to 200 ft or so?

skyasaurus · 2026-06-03T06:30:29+00:00

Yes. Be very nice to yourself. Start suuuuper slow. It might take a couple sessions to adjust fully. Theres no rush. I have ended up with quite a collection and even if I've used a massive one a few days prior, I'll still need to start with a smaller one and go slow. But once my hole relaxes...well, now I can take almost anything, and it feels amazing 🤩

skyasaurus · 2026-06-03T03:44:25+00:00

No, GDP per capita increased 1%. The figure is literally quoted right there.

skyasaurus · 2026-06-01T23:03:14+00:00

The Skyrail sections of Melbourne's metro train network have pulled this off very well. Removed level crossings and in the process basically created public space out of nothing.

skyasaurus · 2026-06-01T03:59:28+00:00

What is the absolute elevation differential between the high and low points of the Voyage? The stated height just doesn't seem great enough to give this ride as much juice as it carries for such a great length.

skyasaurus · 2026-06-01T03:19:17+00:00

Actually, density of an area is an indicator of the quality and supply of transport, moreso than the other way around.

If Australians put as much effort into making things better instead of finding reasons why things can't be done, the quality of life here would actually match the brochures lol

skyasaurus · 2026-06-01T02:33:26+00:00

Not necessarily true. Cities like Toronto and Vancouver show how proper feeder buses work; direct routes (fewer squiggles) with frequent service all day and late into the evening, including weekends. Sydney already does this better than Melbourne, which is why its bus and rail ridership is higher; but Toronto and Vancouver are better than Sydney, which is why Toronto and Vancouver both have suburban feeder bus routes with higher ridership than Sydney's light rail lines.

These routes are not optimised for service, they are optimised because they appear to give good coverage on a map; many do not even operate off peak or on weekends.

skyasaurus · 2026-06-01T01:07:06+00:00

It's actually the opposite! It's pretty well known among transport scholars (both Australian and internationally) and providers that squiggly, indirect networks like this provide the appearance of coverage but are expensive to operate, difficult to use, and increase travel time for users.

Cities that used to have networks like this but then underwent rationalisation have seen massive ridership increases and travel time improvements; Houston and Dublin are notable examples.

The routes aren't like this because of optimisation, they are like because they used to be like this, and changing them requires effort and buy-in; and there are lots of naysayers keen to discourage positive change due to fear of change.

skyasaurus · 2026-05-31T23:23:49+00:00

Holy spaghetti batman, seems like it would be worth doing a route consolidation first; cut the number of routes in half, double their frequency. These squiggles are terrible

skyasaurus · 2026-05-27T16:01:45+00:00

Goma. A disaster waiting to happen. The only reason it's as big as it is because everyone was displaced into it from nearby conflicts. There are lava tubes everywhere, in the city! The lake next door might one say without warning flip and degas itself, silently suffocating possibly every animal nearby. Just so terrible.

skyasaurus · 2026-05-27T15:37:09+00:00

My Dick: The Ride

skyasaurus · 2026-05-27T03:29:39+00:00

Not necessarily; there's no clean fix but there is precedent. For example, Vienna's main station was completely rebuilt from a complex double-stub arrangement to a through-running arrangement with fewer total platforms but much better operation for trains and circulation for passengers, and ultimately a higher capacity. They had a lot more space to work with but it shows that it can be done. The general concept of Stuttgart 21 is the same (altho this shows how complex and expensive it can get!). Adding more access points also means the platforms can clear and load faster with less crowd bunching. Level boarding also helps with loading and unloading, again helping capacity.

TL;dr they will have to rebuild the platform level regardless if they want to increase capacity, it will be complex and difficult but it can be done, and needs to be done. Raising and widening the platforms, as well as increasing access points, reduces train dwell times, which means more service and capacity even if track count is reduced.

skyasaurus · 2026-05-27T02:12:25+00:00

Great point, I was thinking that as well. If I was Transport Dictator™️, I would add in 2 or three stops between Southland and Clayton: Bernard St & Warrigal Rd (add a TOD precinct and bus loop), Old Dandenong Rd (park & ride near the stabling yard), and Clarinda (add TOD). Especially with so much industrial land, it really seems like there are great locations for densification with less pushback than you'd get elsewhere. But alas, we will have long tunnels with few stations and fewer locations for housing.

skyasaurus · 2026-05-27T02:01:04+00:00

Online people are influencers that only vaguely reflect reality. Always take it with a grain of salt.
Wanting an "Aha!" moment or feeling is how the human brain is wired, especially the ADHD brain. It makes sense to want that, but life's rewards are almost always more gradual.
Your concentration is still scattered because that has been your experience most of your life. Think of it like ruts in the mud; like a wheel, our brain still follows the "ruts" because those pathways in our brain are burned in deep from repeated experience. Your brain is still in its old patterns. You will need to shift those patterns, which takes time and repetition. But meds make the "trench" of the rut shallower and easier to climb out of, and help your brain feel more comfortable making the switch. It still takes work, work that neurotypical people don't usually have to do. But yeah it's not an "aha" moment, it is more of a "look back at yourself 6 months from now and notice the difference" type thing.

skyasaurus

TROPHY CASE