Thoughts on High Speed Railroad in the U.S.?

polaris_x

Jason P wrote:

China has cheap and plentiful labor, a lack of labor and safety regulations, and an iron fist. The U.S. has expensive labor, tons of regulations, and a bunch of pussies running the show that like to stonewall and delay progress.

It would be nice to have it. We need to make cuts to the budget to justify the $100B allotment though. The cuts would have to be on top of the cuts proposed in the so-called "ten year plan". Otherwise we will never dig ourselves out of the debt-hole.

So what do we cut to afford a high-speed rail? Defense? Social Security? Education? Panetta is already crying about proposed military cuts. Unions will defend Education. AARP will defend Social Security. We can't even figure out how to make budget cuts. Does adding another $100B to the debt make sense?

But it would be cool.

germany probably has more regulation and labour is likely more expensive and they have it ...

i would say the first thing to do is to eliminate the subsidies for things that ultimately only provide mass profits for corporations and limited benefit to the public ...

BinauralJam

I believe there should be Two, one from Bangor Maine to Orlando Florida and one From northern California to Orlando Florida, that would be perfect!

brianlux

cincybearcat wrote:

Our suburbs make it difficult. Would have been nice if it was included in urban/city planning a long time ago.

I totally agree. It's very frustrating to look back and think- why didn't we start building high speed when we could afford it, when it was becoming the norm in places like Europe?

Maybe we still can afford high speed rail in places like New England or all of the eastern seaboard where there is a higher population density. For the rest of the country it seems to make more sense to refurbish existing lines. According to The National Association of Railroad Passengers, we have many rail cars and engines that need some work but are still quite useful. If these systems were fixed and cleaned up we could expand rail service in the US and reduce our dependence on oil. Gimmesometruth27 pointed out that we don't want to give up our driving freedom and lower ourselves to using mass transit. That is the way most American's think but I also think it is possible for us to change our thinking. If rail service were made pleasurable (personally, I think it mostly is but it could be much better) and people learned to appreciate the extra time maybe it would catch on. Good food service, a well run and stocked lounge car, comfortable seating, free internet service on board, clean bathrooms, PJ radio, frequent rail miles- all kinds of things could be used an incentives to ride the rails. Think of all the posts you could make here while sipping on your favorite beverage, and glancing up at the scenery once in a while!

gimmesometruth27

people said the transcontinental railroad and it was. people said the interstate highway system would never be built and it was built.

we can do it if the people want to do it.

but i stand by my opinion that people don't want to do it for 2 reasons...one, they like to drive and will not lower themselves to mass transit, and 2 people don't want to pay the taxes they pay now and nobody is willing to cut spending on anything...

tybird

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

cincybearcat wrote:

polaris_x wrote:

in theory - it makes a lot of sense ... but in reality - it's just not going to happen in the US ... at least not for a while ... why? ... because it makes too much sense ... haha

No, it's because we have a bit more land to try and cover.

what about china? they have a huge country and high speed rail.

if people demanded it, it would be done. but we are fine with driving our couple of hundred million cars because "we have the freedom" to not lower ourselves enough to use mass transit...

The additional population in China makes it more feasible for them...the country is bigger than most in Europe, but it is still smaller than the U.S. I love the idea and the possibilities that high-speed rail offer, but there are many hurdles...cost is the main one....and remember that the distance between many of our cities in regions in areas outside of the Northeast corridor is the excuse that Pearl Jam used for not touring those regions. :P

polaris_x

thing is ... it would make sense to start in the northeast corridor ... and then expand accordingly ... using existing rail lines ...

Thorns2010

tybird wrote:

The additional population in China makes it more feasible for them...the country is bigger than most in Europe, but it is still smaller than the U.S. I love the idea and the possibilities that high-speed rail offer, but there are many hurdles...cost is the main one....and remember that the distance between many of our cities in regions in areas outside of the Northeast corridor is the excuse that Pearl Jam used for not touring those regions. :P

According to wikipedia, the US and China are essentially tied for 3rd largest countries in the world. And if you were to take away Alaska, the US would drop below Brazil to be number 5.

tybird

Thorns2010 wrote:

tybird wrote:

The additional population in China makes it more feasible for them...the country is bigger than most in Europe, but it is still smaller than the U.S. I love the idea and the possibilities that high-speed rail offer, but there are many hurdles...cost is the main one....and remember that the distance between many of our cities in regions in areas outside of the Northeast corridor is the excuse that Pearl Jam used for not touring those regions. :P

According to wikipedia, the US and China are essentially tied for 3rd largest countries in the world. And if you were to take away Alaska, the US would drop below Brazil to be number 5.

Hee hee...even I can make a slight error :oops: :oops: :shock: I still suspect that the difference in population makes a huge difference in the cost and utilization of high-speed rail when comparing the US to China...few years back I read that China had more than a million people who basically lived in transit between jobs. I NOT arguing against high-speed rail in the US....there are issues that need to be over come before we see it.

keeponrockin

polaris_x wrote:

keeponrockin wrote:

Speaking as a Canadian, I would LOVE a high speed rail corridor from say Windsor to QC. If these trains go as fast as they do, I could get to Toronto from Ottawa in 90 minutes. Hell, it takes me an hour to get downtown Ottawa by bus (I live in the burbs), I would do this in a heartbeat.

for sure ... windsor --> london --> kw --> guelph --> mississauga --> toronto --> oshawa --> kingston --> ottawa --> cornwall --> montreal --> trois rivieres -- quebec city ...

If I could get to Toronto in even under 2 hours, I'd be there a lot more often.

Hell, if the trip to Montreal was cheaper now I'd be there more often now, too much of a hassle to drive it some times (and plus, part of Montreal is enjoying a few beverages on a patio).

brianlux

keeponrockin wrote:

polaris_x wrote:

keeponrockin wrote:

Speaking as a Canadian, I would LOVE a high speed rail corridor from say Windsor to QC. If these trains go as fast as they do, I could get to Toronto from Ottawa in 90 minutes. Hell, it takes me an hour to get downtown Ottawa by bus (I live in the burbs), I would do this in a heartbeat.

for sure ... windsor --> london --> kw --> guelph --> mississauga --> toronto --> oshawa --> kingston --> ottawa --> cornwall --> montreal --> trois rivieres -- quebec city ...

If I could get to Toronto in even under 2 hours, I'd be there a lot more often.

Hell, if the trip to Montreal was cheaper now I'd be there more often now, too much of a hassle to drive it some times (and plus, part of Montreal is enjoying a few beverages on a patio).

This is the other thing I keep thinking about- places I'd visit more often if we had high-speed rail. I don't fly so it's either drive, take the train or dream (usually dream).

The other thing I wonder about is this: One of the things I love about rail travel is taking in the view. I've never been on high-speed rail though so I wonder- does the fast rate of speed make the view go by too quickly and make it less interesting?

Kel Varnsen

keeponrockin wrote:

polaris_x wrote:

keeponrockin wrote:

Speaking as a Canadian, I would LOVE a high speed rail corridor from say Windsor to QC. If these trains go as fast as they do, I could get to Toronto from Ottawa in 90 minutes. Hell, it takes me an hour to get downtown Ottawa by bus (I live in the burbs), I would do this in a heartbeat.

for sure ... windsor --> london --> kw --> guelph --> mississauga --> toronto --> oshawa --> kingston --> ottawa --> cornwall --> montreal --> trois rivieres -- quebec city ...

If I could get to Toronto in even under 2 hours, I'd be there a lot more often.

Hell, if the trip to Montreal was cheaper now I'd be there more often now, too much of a hassle to drive it some times (and plus, part of Montreal is enjoying a few beverages on a patio).

That would be awesome but I can totally see it never happening. I mean we only have 2 national airlines, and I bet business travellers from Montreal and Ottawa travelling to Toronto is a ton of at least Air Canada's business. If a high speed rail system were to be proposed I can totally see how Air Canada would just come out and say how if it was built it would kill their Montreal-Ottawa-Toronto routes to the point where they might go out of business and leave a ton of Canadians, especially in small towns, without access to air travel. And I can totally see the government, any government faling for that threat.

Plus the city of Ottawa can't even get their shit together enough to figure out municipal commuter rail. I can't imagine how long it would take to get a project like this, potentially across two provinces and probably something under federal jurisdiction figured out.

catefrances

i was in chicago thursday and saw a poster advertising a high speed train from chicago to st louis. and they said itd be a reality in 2014 or something. dont know why itd be between those 2 cities other than theyre in neighbouring states and thatd perhaps make it simpler, logistically speaking.

oh and as someone who just criss crossed your country 4 times... im all for high speed train travel.

lukin2006

polaris_x wrote:

keeponrockin wrote:

Speaking as a Canadian, I would LOVE a high speed rail corridor from say Windsor to QC. If these trains go as fast as they do, I could get to Toronto from Ottawa in 90 minutes. Hell, it takes me an hour to get downtown Ottawa by bus (I live in the burbs), I would do this in a heartbeat.

for sure ... windsor --> london --> kw --> guelph --> mississauga --> toronto --> oshawa --> kingston --> ottawa --> cornwall --> montreal --> trois rivieres -- quebec city ...

the latest study has excluded south of Toronto from high speed rail.

http://www.windsorstar.com/sports/Mayor ... story.html

I do think most studies do support it...but looks to be a fight to get it.

polaris_x

Kel Varnsen wrote:

That would be awesome but I can totally see it never happening. I mean we only have 2 national airlines, and I bet business travellers from Montreal and Ottawa travelling to Toronto is a ton of at least Air Canada's business. If a high speed rail system were to be proposed I can totally see how Air Canada would just come out and say how if it was built it would kill their Montreal-Ottawa-Toronto routes to the point where they might go out of business and leave a ton of Canadians, especially in small towns, without access to air travel. And I can totally see the government, any government faling for that threat.

Plus the city of Ottawa can't even get their shit together enough to figure out municipal commuter rail. I can't imagine how long it would take to get a project like this, potentially across two provinces and probably something under federal jurisdiction figured out.

firstly ... i would like to say fuck air canada ... they've been treating customers like shit there for too long ... secondly ... i'm pretty sure that someone will pick up the routes ... if air canada goes out of business - they are gonna have to sell them planes to someone ...

polaris_x

brianlux wrote:

This is the other thing I keep thinking about- places I'd visit more often if we had high-speed rail. I don't fly so it's either drive, take the train or dream (usually dream).

The other thing I wonder about is this: One of the things I love about rail travel is taking in the view. I've never been on high-speed rail though so I wonder- does the fast rate of speed make the view go by too quickly and make it less interesting?

my only experience with high speed rail is in germany ... i can't say it honestly feels much different except you know you are going slow some some rail lines ... but at the same time - i don't think you are missing too much ... trains slow down near some towns ...

brianlux

polaris_x wrote:

brianlux wrote:

This is the other thing I keep thinking about- places I'd visit more often if we had high-speed rail. I don't fly so it's either drive, take the train or dream (usually dream).

The other thing I wonder about is this: One of the things I love about rail travel is taking in the view. I've never been on high-speed rail though so I wonder- does the fast rate of speed make the view go by too quickly and make it less interesting?

my only experience with high speed rail is in germany ... i can't say it honestly feels much different except you know you are going slow some some rail lines ... but at the same time - i don't think you are missing too much ... trains slow down near some towns ...

If I ever make it back to Europe, that's the way I'll travel!

Kel Varnsen

polaris_x wrote:

Kel Varnsen wrote:

That would be awesome but I can totally see it never happening. I mean we only have 2 national airlines, and I bet business travellers from Montreal and Ottawa travelling to Toronto is a ton of at least Air Canada's business. If a high speed rail system were to be proposed I can totally see how Air Canada would just come out and say how if it was built it would kill their Montreal-Ottawa-Toronto routes to the point where they might go out of business and leave a ton of Canadians, especially in small towns, without access to air travel. And I can totally see the government, any government faling for that threat.

Plus the city of Ottawa can't even get their shit together enough to figure out municipal commuter rail. I can't imagine how long it would take to get a project like this, potentially across two provinces and probably something under federal jurisdiction figured out.

firstly ... i would like to say fuck air canada ... they've been treating customers like shit there for too long ... secondly ... i'm pretty sure that someone will pick up the routes ... if air canada goes out of business - they are gonna have to sell them planes to someone ...

I agree fuck air canada. But I can easily see a situation where if the government says they will be funding a high speed rail line even from Montreal to Toronto. Air Canada could easily say that in order to recoup the money they are going to lose on those highly profitable routes (seriously everytime I have flown Ottawa to Toronto it has always been full) they will be just straight cutting some less profitbale routes. So no more flights to Labrador, or Whitehorse or Northern BC or a bunch of other places that Westjet doesn't fly (because they are not money makers). And once that happens I can see a lot of pissed off people who live in those places calling their MP's and telling them how pissed off they are (and the MPs not voting for funding), or the MPs not even wanting to risk it.

polaris_x

Kel Varnsen wrote:

I agree fuck air canada. But I can easily see a situation where if the government says they will be funding a high speed rail line even from Montreal to Toronto. Air Canada could easily say that in order to recoup the money they are going to lose on those highly profitable routes (seriously everytime I have flown Ottawa to Toronto it has always been full) they will be just straight cutting some less profitbale routes. So no more flights to Labrador, or Whitehorse or Northern BC or a bunch of other places that Westjet doesn't fly (because they are not money makers). And once that happens I can see a lot of pissed off people who live in those places calling their MP's and telling them how pissed off they are (and the MPs not voting for funding), or the MPs not even wanting to risk it.

i agree ... there are many routes that are unprofitable but part of the reason why westjet doesn't fly there is because air canada does ... void of any competitor - i suspect that someone should be able to make it work ...

obviously, there are also political ramifications but it works on many levels ...

know1

As a replacement or alternative to the airline industry for travel, I could see it. But it would take an incredible amount of work to build it up to that.

Dirtie_Frank

I agree about having a high speed rail, but Europe had a chance to rebuild the rail infrastructure after WW2 where our infrastructure is from the mid 1800s.