Why can't America have high-speed trains?

Last edited:
Hey Guys ---

@ Ben -- I can see the benefits of a monorail system from our area to Orlando, but the problem also extends to the lack of transportation in Orlando.... You need a car, because without a car, forget it, it'll take you decades from one block to another! Wife and I always plan two big trips to Orlando each year -- This year we're staying at a Disney 4-star hotel (hint - sign up and get great deals via mail offer - hotel price for us $439 for a 4-star hotel, 3 days:hehe:), and we're not going close to any of the super expensive parks, however, we're stuck in traffic jams with everyone else!

@ ALL

The real problem is change, and there's not enough money to make these changes, regardless of what system you have planned ... monorail, HST, etc .... Let's face it, Americans do not like change unless something horrible changes. Example, when 9/11 happened the airline industries took a hit, while the rail companies saw sky high profits rise in decades, but as time went on people return to flying, and even with the high cost of flying, with no food, no blanket unless you paid for it, the airlines began seeing high profits, generally for the big carries, who decided to merge to lower their cost, but yet, increase our ticket sells.

I think before jumping into any HST system, the focus should be inner city transportation, and then expand outwards! -- People complain about gas prices rising, etc (at least we're getting a break here in Florida, for now), but if you put on a ballot, "Do you want to appropriate funds for a transpiration system" it will get shut down by the public. Let's face it, people do not like paying for anything, but yet, everyone wants a smooth ride in life! That's just reality!

Here, every time some important issue comes up they put it to a vote, and I do express my vote -- A few years back this same issue I mentioned above, about putting aside public funds for a transportation system came up on the ballot, and it got shut down by the public ... I voted yes, because it's a nightmare the traffic jam in such a small area compare to NYC, etc! -- Yet, years later traffic has gotten worse!

Ish
 
Most things have already been discussed, just wanted to add that many of our (Netherlands) local passenger trains reach speeds of 140km (or ~87miles) per hour between stations (and distances are short).
If the U.S. can't even get close to that, any discussion about high speed feels like a waste of time. Get your local infrastructure at a decent level and take it from there.
 
oknotsen said:
Most things have already been discussed, just wanted to add that many of our (Netherlands) local passenger trains reach speeds of 140km (or ~87miles) per hour between stations (and distances are short).
If the U.S. can't even get close to that, any discussion about high speed feels like a waste of time. Get your local infrastructure at a decent level and take it from there.
Click to expand...


On some of our commuter lines, we see close to that on the outer edges, however, on the closer inner-city areas such as the Reading to Boston section of the Haverhill line where I live, it's impossible to get up to speed. The stations really are close together between Reading and Wyoming Hills. I've actually bicycled between them and it was a matter of only a few blocks between them. This line surely should have been a pure tram or third-rail transit route.

On the outer lines, such as those that utilize the NEC such as the commuter line to Attleboro or Providence, the trains are going at least 140km or faster. The same with the Boston to Worcester line and even the Franklin line, after Readville, but the Lowell and Haverhill are impossible except for the farthest points out and even then there's not much room to really go fast.

I'm saying this about my area because I have no experience with the trains in and around the Baltimore/Washington or New York/New Haven segments of the system.

Here's a "T" map to give you an idea what I'm talking about.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:MBTA_Commuter_Rail_Map.svg

@Ish --- Spot on as always... We have the same horrific traffic up here, and more than once plans have been shutdown because people don't want to spend the money. There are also other reasons too which are lame but true. When the MBTA was expanding the Red line from Harvard Square west to Fresh Pond Parkway, their original plan was to go all the way to the Hanscom Field Airport out in Bedford, MA. This tightly packed corridor had an old commuter line, but due to poor tracks, the line was ripped up and the ROW rail banked. The plan was to push the Boston subway line out there to relieve some of the traffic, which they thought was bad back in the 1970s and it's even worse now! Nope, it never happened. The racist Yuppies in Arlington, along with the snots in Lexington and Bedford, turned out in huge masses to protest the service. Their reason was they didn't want the inner-city riff-raff coming out to their towns. Due to threats of lawsuits, the plan was scrapped and now there's a bike trail. Traffic-wise this is still one of the worst areas to drive, and also one of the unsafest because of the congestion and really bad drivers. I know because I worked out that way for over 11 years and used to cringe every day on my way to work.

John
 
Actually, high-speed trains are on their way, such as from Washington, D.C. to Boston.

One of the big problems that I see is that urban sprawl has taken the most likely train passenger to the suburbs farther away from the train station. Who wants to hop off the train at midnight in the middle of the worst crime-infested area of the city? Sadly, the infrastructure of U.S. rail is not keeping up with the times. When they drop you off in the middle of your favorite up-scale shopping mall, then we can say we're getting somewhere...;)
 
Hi Joe:

I've suddenly decided I'm totally against HSR if it will let my daughter go from upscale shopping mall to up scale shopping mall at 300 MPH with my credit card.:eek:

Seriously though that's a very good point. HSR might get you from point A to point B at 300 MPH but you certainly won't be able to initially get to or from points A and B at 300 MPH. Probably take longer then the actual HSR trip and how will you get there, where will you park your car, will it be there when you return, and what's the cost of parking?

With a very few exceptions HSR in the USA is a pipedream.

Ben
 
Here's a question, how many of us believe that existing rail line's speeds and services for fright or passenger services is acquitt for the next generation needs?. Are the rail commuter and fright services of today, meeting today's demands . If it's your opinion that it is, is it your opinion that futrue investment be put toward air, road instead.

1 That no more public funding go toward any rail projects in the US. Would this be a realistic outlook ?
2 Or to only back privet investment of ether ? ( Fright or Passenger )
3 Would your opinion be the same if privately funded of ether
 
I don't care what they do as long as its privately funded. Hands out of my wallet but that's not the way they want to do it. They want public money to finance a private enterprise with all the profits (if any) going to them and risk free. How many of these pie-in-the-sky projects would actually get built if they had to finance them and take all the risk? (How many different ways are there to say zero)?:hehe:

The local power company says they MAY need to build one or two more nuclear reactors sometime within the next 20 years. They want to immediately start collecting a few bucks per monthly bill towards that project but admit they are not sure if they will ever actually build them. ABSOULTE INSANITY! yet the powers that be seem to think its ok.

This kind of thinking has to stop.

Ben
 
bendorsey said:
I don't care what they do as long as its privately funded. Hands out of my wallet but that's not the way they want to do it. They want public money to finance a private enterprise with all the profits (if any) going to them and risk free. How many of these pie-in-the-sky projects would actually get built if they had to finance them and take all the risk? (How many different ways are there to say zero)?:hehe:

The local power company says they MAY need to build one or two more nuclear reactors sometime within the next 20 years. They want to immediately start collecting a few bucks per monthly bill towards that project but admit they are not sure if they will ever actually build them. ABSOULTE INSANITY! yet the powers that be seem to think its ok.

This kind of thinking has to stop.

Ben
Click to expand...

Duke Energy, Ben, collected a fee (I forgot the county's name, but it borders us), for a nuclear plant site, in which, they decided not to go forward, but yet, the money wasn't return to the residents, and they kept it, 200 million dollars in total if my memory serve me right! Secondly, true that public money should NOT be use to fund private projects .... Look what happened down in Miami with the baseball stadium a few years back-- City built the park, and after one year of signing great players the owner decided to scratch the team, and they have been loosing every season while a Billion cash in the profits from TV and food services, etc ... Now, I feel public money should be collected for a transportation system, as long as, the city owns the project, and keep cost down for the commuters!

Ish
 
bendorsey said:
...The local power company says they MAY need to build one or two more nuclear reactors sometime within the next 20 years. They want to immediately start collecting a few bucks per monthly bill towards that project but admit they are not sure if they will ever actually build them. ABSOULTE INSANITY! yet the powers that be seem to think its ok....
Click to expand...
But this isn't public money is it? This would be privately funded, even if it is extorted out of you via a monthly surcharge. The same would be true of a homeowners association assessing a fee to upgrade community grounds (private money, not public). Public funding is defined as "Money that is generated by the government to provide goods and services to the general public."

Believe me, there is enough public funding of rail transportation. Amtrak just received an $8 Billion tax-payer funded payout in March!

The problem with private funding is...well, private investors expect a positive return on investment. Public funding covers hopelessly lossy projects, of which rail will ever tend to be, at least in the U.S.
 
Last edited:
bendorsey, OK I see your point,:hehe: but that didn't answer my question . But I for one can't see the public funding going toward privately owed professional team stratum s, this in not only done, But has been demanded by owner, or they move there teams. With I might add to the same concerns and issuesto cost stated here before.

1 Do you believe our rail service are going to be a befit, or defeatist to the future. The privately owed Rail Co. of the US have been portrayed as not taking tax dollars to due upgrade or maintenance . This in many if not all states just isn't true, and in many cases counted on. And in one case that I'm vary familiar with between CSX and DE took years in court to have them pay there share of the bill. Costing the state millions . That CSX insisted the State pay for no other reason it was the state's privilege to have them use the state the service .

2 Is our privet rail carrier's meeting today's demand. In my onion no, and are not even keep pace.
 
You guys are missing the point on this, especially those overseas guys ... so, I'll rest my hat on this!

We have an entity call Lobbyists ... and powerful contingents ... for private enterprises to success they need public approval, which is government oversight committees, etc ... depending if it's controlled by Republicans / Democrats ... Then, gonna jump over a bunch of obstacles, like the environment lobbyists, and climate lobbies groups, etc etc etc ... yes, let's jump ahead... if you ever get public approval then comes planning .... with planning comes ... well, do I want it through my neighborhood....? And here in the big catch... goes back to the contingents, their voices, which equals voters, etc and donations!

Not even gonna mention the bank loans, and creditors ... etc

Or, don't forget Warren Buffett, who owns Burlington Northern and vast networks rail corridors ... good luck using his rails without a heafty fee! ---

US system is very complicated, and you want to push a HST through the country ... it's a pipe dream!

All in all, John, Ben, RR, and I said it all ...

HST is NOT the future .... Inner city railing should be, tho!

I'm out ---:wave:
Ish
 
Last edited:
Ish:
Its Florida Power & Light Co down here. To me a power company is supposed to be a benevolent monopoly. You can't really have competing systems in the same area (by that I mean block to block). Trouble is they are anything but benevolent. Monopolies yes - benevolent no. They have you by the short and curly's and there is nothing you can do about it in todays electrified/electronic world.

Cressjl:
You are correct - it isn't public money or not in the purest sense (keep in mind that benevolent monopoly concept) but it is a publically regulated entity (or its supposed to be - remember those lobbyists). I agree with you 100% about keeping public money out of any project that can not and never at least break even.

Yup - private investors expect to not only get their money back but to make a profit. Who can blame them from turning up their collective noses at projects guaranteed to lose money.

Public (government sponsored or financed) projects are all about votes. Have you ever noticed politicians almost never allocate money to repair or replace and existing bridge but will finance a new one at the drop of a hat. Reason is simple - fixing an old one doesn't generate anywhere near as many votes as building a new one no matter how un-necessary.

Rails in the future:
About 100 years ago we opted for private/personal transportation in the form of the automobile over public/mass transportation in the form of trolleys, streetcars, and so on. The infrastructure to support the latter simply no longer exists and could only be out back at gargantuan expense after decades and decades of legal wrangling so my sad vote is until the automobile disappears we are stuck with them and the local streetcar is going to remain a memory.
Long distance passenger rail is not long for this world unless something changes to make it a viable alternative.
Freight service is a different matter. It is and quite possibly will always be a necessity.

Ya know - this has been an interesting and fun discussion. Later guys,

Ben
 
Or, don't forget Warren Buffett, who owns Burlington Northern and vast networks rail corridors ... good luck using his rails without a heafty fee! ---

US system is very complicated, and you want to push a HST through the country ... it's a pipe dream!
Click to expand...

Which is why it would have to run on a purpose built all new electrified infrastructure, independent of any existing track system (and which is what would render the cost out of all proportion to the benefit).
 
ish6 said:
Duke Energy, Ben, collected a fee (I forgot the county's name, but it borders us), for a nuclear plant site, in which, they decided not to go forward, but yet, the money wasn't return to the residents, and they kept it, 200 million dollars in total if my memory serve me right! Secondly, true that public money should NOT be use to fund private projects .... Look what happened down in Miami with the baseball stadium a few years back-- City built the park, and after one year of signing great players the owner decided to scratch the team, and they have been loosing every season while a Billion cash in the profits from TV and food services, etc ... Now, I feel public money should be collected for a transportation system, as long as, the city owns the project, and keep cost down for the commuters!

Ish
Click to expand...

It was for the Crystal River nuclear plant in Citrus County. It was shut down for repairs, they botched the repairs, and it had to be abandoned as unrepairable. I was just in Crystal River this afternoon, as a matter of fact!
 
Most railroad lines are built on a narrow swath of land purchased in the late 1800's, which restricts the radius of a curve being widened, with superelevation of roadbed.

Multiple grade crossings, if not tens of thousands exist on major rail corridors, which would incur automobile/truck collisions with HSR trains.

Many sections of straight track have a 100 mph speedboard, followed up by a way too tight of a curve, designed in the early 1900's, that have a 45 mph speed zone.

See: Frankford Junction Phila, PA: http://forums.auran.com/trainz/show...Train-Crashes-In-Philly&p=1395161#post1395161
 
Yeah, the PRR had wanted to straighten out that dangerous curve in the 1860's, but local opposition prevented it. Had it been built, it would have provided the PRR pretty much a straight shot into Zoo interlocking.
 
cascaderailroad said:
Most railroad lines are built on a narrow swath of land purchased in the late 1800's, which restricts the radius of a curve being widened, with superelevation of roadbed...
Click to expand...
These are good points about U.S. right-of-way issues. I wonder how the impact of invasion as late as WWII might have opened up European redesign of rail lines in certain key areas. This would not have been the case, obviously, in the U.S. Of course, they would not have anticipated HST, necessarily, but they might have increased right-of-ways and improved grade crossing that would make such development more possible.

Just wondering...
 
The PRR wanted HSR, and had plans for Harrisburg to Pittsburgh, but the cost was way too much, and they canned the entire idea, as a pipe dream. Too many tunnels, too many daylighted tunnels, and too many curve realignments.

Altoona had plans for a huge multitrack station ... then WW2 ended, and all RR's went into total decline and decay
 
Last edited:
Hi everybody.
cressjl said:
snip~ I wonder how the impact of invasion as late as WWII might have opened up European redesign of rail lines in certain key areas.
Just wondering~snip
Click to expand...

Cressj, the United States played a huge part in the construction of the rail network we see in Western Europe today but the explanation is not simple.

At the end of the Second World War a program was introduced by the US in Western Europe which became known as “US Marshall Aid Programme”. Thought up General George C Marshall and approved by President Roosevelt before his death it was a plan to reconstruct both physically and financially countries that had been devastated by war and occupation for almost 6 years prior to 1945.

The United States was determined that both victors and vanquished where to receive huge sums of money freely given so that towns, cities and their infrastructure devastated by fighting and bombing could be rebuilt. In carrying out the foregoing a huge amount of employment was created which avoided the recession and depression which came about at the end of the First World War.

Germany, Italy, northern and eastern France, Greece, Belgium and Holland where the main benefactors of the Marshall aid programme which completely rebuilt many of their cities and in the process rebuilt those countries railways as we see them today.

Following the D-Day landings the British and American air forces very much concentrated on attacking railways and their marshalling yards so as to deny their use to the enemy as a means of moving supplies to their armed forces. In doing so the railway infrastructure of the above countries where completely destroyed.

In the utter turmoil of Europe which followed the collapse of Germany and its surrender, America stepped in to immediately organise the settlement and homing of the millions of displaced persons and gave them jobs which enabled them to support themselves. In the overall construction programme many hundreds of thousands went to work in rebuilding the railways which lay at the very heart of George Marshall’s plans.

The railways were rebuilt along much of the pre-war routes, but with so much devastation surrounding the routes which had to be cleared it was simple enough to take out tight curves and road crossings etc when relaying the track. When it came to what should be used as locomotives and rolling stock Marshall directed that diesel and electric should be the primary power source which was very much forward thinking for the time.

With so much manpower and resources at hand by the early 1950s Western Europe was very much on its way to possessing the most modern railway system in the world. Those railways became the heart of the transport infrastructure which brought forward large-scale trade between countries who had formally been enemies. The foregoing led to the introduction of the European Common Market and then the European Union as we see it today.

Britain was not part of the Marshall aid programme, but like many Britons I believe that in bringing forward the above regime the United States demonstrated a foresight and generosity that was unseen at the end of any previous conflict. In being magnanimous towards her former enemies and continuing her friendship to her wartime allies the United States introduced what is now over 70 years of peace in Western Europe along with the great railway system still in its possession.

I believe not enough has been written and spoken on the achievements of the United States in Europe following the Second World War. However, I for one as a Brit who grew up in that era would like to say a very big thank you, as I feel too few have said those words on this side of the Atlantic.

Bill
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
Speed Limits
Replies
11
Views
514
JCitron
J
D
CPR Slocan Lake Branch rail operations interaction with the CPR Lake Route Sternwheelers and Rail barges circa 1902
Replies
3
Views
367
JCitron
J
J
Mattapan-Ashmont (Boston) in 360 - A ride on a 1936 PCC trolley.
Replies
2
Views
454
JCitron
J
L
Journey on the KTX - My Trip from Seoul to Busan
Replies
3
Views
213
trainjoe
T
J
Boston and Maine in film
Replies
9
Views
235
JCitron
J
Back
Top