High Speed Rail NOW!

No thanks. It's not needed nor prudent to waste so much money for the eventual benefit of so few. I like trains as much as the next guy, but HSR is a bad idea, given the financial condition of our nation.

Euphod said:

No thanks. It's not needed nor prudent to waste so much money for the eventual benefit of so few. I like trains as much as the next guy, but HSR is a bad idea, given the financial condition of our nation.

Click to expand...

Well the build cost for HSR is expensive but well what isn't, the interstate system is a great example it took over 100 billion dollars 1960 value but it was still built so why not HSR. If people supported HSR then in due time it might come though your area but for now only in areas where ridership will be found. Northeast, California.

No... Just no... We do not necessarily need HSR. Granted it is more convenient than travelling down rickety roads, but still more people choose to go that way. And that is why congress will not support it because passenger rail is at an all-time low right now in America. What Obama is wanting to do is renovate every length of rail within our borders. What he doesn't realize is that most routes are incapable of HSR, let alone regular passenger service. That or they just flat out don't have stations on the line. Congress gave the state of Washington $800 million to renovate their Cascade service between Seattle and Portland. All the years and money dumped into that project got passengers to their destination a whopping 10 minutes earlier. Now that just shows you that we don't really need to pour all this money into HSR JUST YET, but when America actually has the funds, and the absolute necessary means for upgrading existing passenger lines.

I agree with Blake..

It's a bit like HS2 bieng pushed forward by the british government, when they could use that money to reopen/fix the current railway system. Oh, and happy easter.

I think you need to have a passenger base and work from that. The US is basically low density and that's doesn't work too well for Trains. It works best for big cities and frequency helps. In Canada we have Toronto, Montreal and Ottawa, all ideal distances for trains by the time you include the time getting through airport security, roughly 280 miles Ottawa Toronto takes just over four hours City center city center. London UK Glasgow 300 miles takes 4.5 hours not a lot of difference. London Liverpool 180 miles takes roughly 2 hours.

Find a city pair that works first then see if the traffic volume will justify electric locos, then take it slowly from there. I think Virgin managed to increase traffic by 400% on London Liverpool but here again they are allowed to use the same sort of fare structure as the airlines, sell the empty seats cheap and that justified running more trains so better frequency. In Canada the airlines blocked Via Rail from doing the same thing saying it was unfair competition.

Cheerio John

amtrak2041864 said:

Well the build cost for HSR is expensive but well what isn't, the interstate system is a great example it took over 100 billion dollars 1960 value but it was still built so why not HSR. If people supported HSR then in due time it might come though your area but for now only in areas where ridership will be found. Northeast, California.

Click to expand...

Yeah, that's how I handle my personal finances. I have a car, don't use it much but want to buy a new one anyway. I may as well buy a formula one car, even though it will be of very little use for me. I mean; it's expensive, but well what isn't?

BTW, the interstate highways were a whole different animal in terms of a publicly funded project (taxes). It opened up the country to new and more efficient industry, trade and shipping that allowed the nation to become an economic powerhouse. HSR will not have the same results, and is only a matter of "bragging rights" and little else.

You can install HS Rail all you want ... but the end product is: People need a: "rent a hoopdie", electric car, or hybrid car rental service, at each end terminus, or have them vallet ordred/delivered to stations all along the route ... as railways rarely come within 15 miles of a train riders destination, and mass transit connections are in most locations non-existant ... people are addicted to the convienience of an automobile, that can park within 15' of a bussiness, or their destination.

To add to this discussion:

Having people move quickly from point A to point B becomes more useless every day. We can do more and more of our work from home.
If you cant do your work at home, moving closer to your work will cost less then paying a high-speed train ticket every day.
For the slightly longer distances you have something called airplanes which with the current "lets not tax aviation fuel" system in place will beat the train in both price and travel time most if not all of the times.

HSR isn't new and it isn't O'bama's idea. This fraud has been kicking around for years, as far back as Clinton. You want to blame Congress for stopping this stupid idea since 2010 because that is when the House changed leadership but why didn't the Dems pass it when they controlled Congress for four years (2006 -2010)? Because the big railroads in this country don't want it, that's why. They know that the number of people willing to ride a train instead of a plane is tiny and unprofitable. As long as plane tickets are cheap no one but railfans will take the train.

The reason Democrats support this idea has nothing to do with trains or building a modern rail transportation system. They see this as a way of bringing lots of pork money back to their districts to help them get re-elected. They would support teaching pigs how to fly if it meant them keeping their jobs.

William

Euphod said:

Yeah, that's how I handle my personal finances. I have a car, don't use it much but want to buy a new one anyway. I may as well buy a formula one car, even though it will be of very little use for me. I mean; it's expensive, but well what isn't?

BTW, the interstate highways were a whole different animal in terms of a publicly funded project (taxes). It opened up the country to new and more efficient industry, trade and shipping that allowed the nation to become an economic powerhouse. HSR will not have the same results, and is only a matter of "bragging rights" and little else.

Click to expand...

But we as citizens didn't build the interstate the government did. Most interstates are heavily subsidized also airports. We don't pay a dime to build or maintain them, all we do is use them. Airlines don't build their own airports and if they did expect that train ticket to look like a great deal, also applies to cars. If you really paid the actual price to use the roadways of today, train prices will look real pretty. And even people hate what they don't have or understand, given the chance you would refuse to knowledge what real meaning it really can have. Which you are doing, if HSR came through your town you would say no to using it because you would feel it was a waste of money, ridiculous. We only have one life to live and driving to work everyday stuck in traffic for hours at time is not I want to spend wasting it!

Take a look at this

No, to HSR first the cost. I am not talking about building it. Accela HSR, Philly to NYC is $300.00 round trip. $1500.00 a week? I will buy a car the payments are cheaper. Second If you go by California, it was on the news last week there HSR runs at 1/3 capacity. that means almost empty. and we the taxpayers pay for the empty seats. great bargain!!!!

Hi Hi everybody.
The arguments regarding high-speed rail in the United States have been the subject of many threads on this forum with the opposing views expressed time and time again. However, I was reading an article in British press this morning which advised that the biggest investors worldwide in high-speed rail is now the Chinese government. This is the world's most successful country that has its economy expanding at double-digit rates every year and is America's biggest competitor now and into the future. It is a vast country that sees its future transport based around railways with high-speed trains being at the centre of public transportation.

Therefore perhaps the question is not whether America can afford high-speed rail, but rather whether America can afford not to have high-speed rail.

Bill

wholbr said:

Hi Hi everybody.
The arguments regarding high-speed rail in the United States have been the subject of many threads on this forum with the opposing views expressed time and time again. However, I was reading an article in British press this morning which advised that the biggest investors worldwide in high-speed rail is now the Chinese government. This is the world's most successful country that has its economy expanding at double-digit rates every year and is America's biggest competitor now and into the future. It is a vast country that sees its future transport based around railways with high-speed trains being at the centre of public transportation.

Therefore perhaps the question is not whether America can afford high-speed rail, but rather whether America can afford not to have high-speed rail.

Bill

Click to expand...

Great Point, America was build on the railroad, in a few years america will lose its status as Superpower because it is not making the investments in Its future. And it is very sad because I love the fact that the US is a superpower and that will also be taken away from the Chinese.

I don't mean to make people mad but I don't actually support Obama

Highways are overburdened and falling apart. Bridges have to be replaced to meet the needs of today's heavier cars and trucks. (Hybrid cars with 2+ tons of batteries, esp.) Highway widening destroys homes and businesses.

Airports have been constricted by airport-driven commercial development. Building new airports farther from downtowns is expensive and impractical, especially considering many modern international airports are 20+ miles away from downtowns.

A seven-car Amtrak train can carry 422 passengers, or 4/5 of a Boeing 777 in a Ryanair all-economy configuration, in comfort with a cafe car and business class.
A seven-car Amtrak train does not have to share facilities with international flights, nor does it have to wait for limited landing slots, and therefore can be run fifteen or more times a day.
A seven-car Amtrak train does not overburden existing infrastructure: how light is an Amfleet compared with a 70-foot heavyweight car of days past?

Highway widening, especially in urban areas, can be extremely costly. We're talking billions to widen 10-20 miles of highway near cities. (and still billions to widen highways in rural areas, since the distances are longer) Maintenance costs are through the roof: we have to repave at minimum once every 5 years for an asphalt highway. (Concrete will last 50 or more years, but that's more expensive up-front and therefore is a waste of taxpayer money, am I right guys?)

Meanwhile, Amtrak is running Northeast Corridor trains at 160mph on 150 lb rail laid by the Pennsylvania Railroad in the thirties.

It costs $10 million per year to run a train from Lynchburg to Washington, twice a day, for a year. This is a distance of 152 miles.

Imagine, for a moment, that you run six trains a day, for a total one-way capacity of 2532 passengers/day. That's 2532 cars off the road each day; that's billions saved on widening 152 miles of highway. Even assuming running six trains a day costs literally six times more ($60 million), and the highway widening costs only $2 billion for 152 miles (unlikely, given the mountains being there), that's about 100 years to break-even, discounting maintenance.


We're in a fiscal crisis. Let's take the cheaper option, and invest in interstate passenger rail now.

He's also requested funds for vacation and golf and gotten that. Priorities?

We need more conventional rail first, building HSR is like a house without a foundation. Lets get our passenger rail system to where it was in the 50's then lets talk about HSR.

nikos1 said:

We need more conventional rail first, building HSR is like a house without a foundation. Lets get our passenger rail system to where it was in the 50's then lets talk about HSR.

Click to expand...

Yeah. This.