High Speed Rail in America

[amtk775]

I guess you're right...silly pipe dreams.
Well, considering the government already gave Amtrak about a trillion dollars for the repair of equipment, etc...

[mestevet]

High speed rail in the US already works. Amtrak service on the NEC between Washington and New York has the largest share of the travel market between those cities.
(here's just one article I searched up: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m.../ai_n25409504/)

If you live within a 20 minute drive of an NEC Amtrak station, like I do, you'd be nuts not to choose Amtrak over the airlines (note that I live about the same distance from Philly International Airport). My wife travels on the Acela for business to New York all the time, and regularly beats colleagues who foolishly choose the air travel option. Plus she can arrive 5 minutes prior to train time and still comfortably get on the train. Driving to NYC? Crazy, it would take way longer, be more stressful, and much less reliable (traffic).

Likewise, when we lived in LA, for travel to San Diego, we wouldn't consider any other option than the train, for the same reasons, and the Surfliners don't even qualify as "HSR".

Of course, these are only options for folks who live in those areas. Outside So Cal and the Northeast, the performance of Amtrak is laughable, perhaps with a few exceptions. But we can't say it won't work in the US because it already has, perhaps not on the scale seen elsewhere, but there IS a model for success.

Let's also not forget that STATE sponsored HSR (by the American definition of >90mph) is another place where there has been a success already: the "Keystone Corridor" between Philly and Harrisburg - electric trains regularly operate at speeds in excess of 90mph on the ex-PRR Mainline, and the ridership has grown sharply since the line was improved and electric service re-introduced in 2006.

We're highly unlikely to see success in HSR between NY - Los Angeles, that's where the airlines shine. But LA-SF? Milwaukee - Chicago - St. Louis? or other corridors where there are city sets within 500 miles? There are opportunities there to really make an impact.

I'm not certain any HSR initiative will be successful in the US without government sponsorship (either state or federal). It's hard for me to point to a single completely privately funded HSR initiative ANYWHERE. Let's just be real, private companies just don't have the capital or guts to undertake anything like that anymore. Long gone are the days of transportation mega-profits like in the early part of the 20th Century. So if you want it, you've got to accept that it's going to take a dose of "socialism" to get it; not unlike the success of airlines relying on government funded airports and air traffic control system, or trucking companies relying on government funded interstate highways. Yes, I know, everyone pays their fair share, but when was the last time you heard of a trucking company building an interstate? or an airline building an airport?

Steve

[amtk775]

It might be a little effective in SoCal, the fact that it connects San Diego with the Central Coast and Downtown L.A. and all. But, some of the densest areas are left in the dark, the West Side being one of them.

[beltontigers]

American passenger railroading died in 1971.

I don't care how much Washington D.C. says they want it, I don't care how much you people say you want it, it ain't going to happen. The Class I's won't let it happen.

Unless somebody builds their own track, Hi speed rail is a dead subject, because the Class I's will not share their rails with anybody if they can help it.

Another thing I have yet to see mentioned in this thread is this. SIZE. Please pull out your world maps and take a look at Europe. High speed rail excels in Europe due to the size of the area. It's relatively easy and quick to travel from country to country due to the small size of the countries.

Now take a look at the United States. Oh my, look at that, it's quite a bit bigger. Even a 190 MPH train would take quite a bit of time to go LA-NY. This country is just not set up for it.

Sorry for bursting bubbles, happy boxing day!

[PORU333]

Wait, I thought the Government stopped funding to Amtrak?

[maddog_2020]

Kyle, pretty much hit it on the head. UP is greedy. They didnt want to give B&NSF trackage rights after the merger, and they surely hates it when Amtrak is in the picture. This PTC mandate is gonna cost them out the rear. I seriously doubt any Class 1 would want to upgrade all of their crossings, and signals for 100mph plus operation. Its all a big dream, I think.

[kmanc21]

American passenger railroading died in 1971.

I don't care how much Washington D.C. says they want it, I don't care how much you people say you want it, it ain't going to happen. The Class I's won't let it happen.

Unless somebody builds their own track, Hi speed rail is a dead subject, because the Class I's will not share their rails with anybody if they can help it.

Another thing I have yet to see mentioned in this thread is this. SIZE. Please pull out your world maps and take a look at Europe. High speed rail excels in Europe due to the size of the area. It's relatively easy and quick to travel from country to country due to the small size of the countries.

Now take a look at the United States. Oh my, look at that, it's quite a bit bigger. Even a 190 MPH train would take quite a bit of time to go LA-NY. This country is just not set up for it.

Sorry for bursting bubbles, happy boxing day!

This pretty much sums up why high speed rail will not become a viable option in the U.S., regardless of how much money the government throws at it.

[BNSFfan]

Unless something like the USRA happens again.. :-/

[Keystoneaholic]

I would suggest that an important point is being missed here. The argument should not be about speed, but frequency and convenience. New York to Washington works for rail more because the frequency is hourly or better than because of the speeds involved. There are also local services which offer connections to intermediate and nearby points.

The same thing applies between LA and San Diego, frequent trains, good connections.

There ought to be an hourly service between Chicago and Milwaukee, with good connections with the Chicago commuter services at their outer termini. It also helps if you can buy one ticket to cover your entire journey, regardless of the operators. I realise that this has never been the US way, but if it works in other countries it could work in the US to make rail more convenient.

There is one other factor which could come into play.

If the US ever gets to the point of taking its use of energy seriously, rail will be in a far better position than it now is. I do, however, realise that this is not likely to happen any time soon.

Rob.

[jac_murphy]

American passenger railroading died in 1971.

I don't care how much Washington D.C. says they want it, I don't care how much you people say you want it, it ain't going to happen. The Class I's won't let it happen.

Unless somebody builds their own track, Hi speed rail is a dead subject, because the Class I's will not share their rails with anybody if they can help it.

Another thing I have yet to see mentioned in this thread is this. SIZE. Please pull out your world maps and take a look at Europe. High speed rail excels in Europe due to the size of the area. It's relatively easy and quick to travel from country to country due to the small size of the countries.

Now take a look at the United States. Oh my, look at that, it's quite a bit bigger. Even a 190 MPH train would take quite a bit of time to go LA-NY. This country is just not set up for it.

Sorry for bursting bubbles, happy boxing day!

I don't think there's a single high-speed rail advocate that isn't aware of the relative densities of the United States and Europe.

Not one single person is proposing to run a train between Chicago and Seattle, or LA and New York, any other similar route that crosses half (or all) the country. Nobody, and I don't understand why everybody arguing against it seems to get this notion in mind.

But you'll have trouble convincing me that high-speed rail (or yes, even just increased frequencies) between Milwaukee-Chicago-St. Louis/Kansas City or Dallas-Fort Worth/Houston/San Antonio or similar, relatively dense corridors wouldn't work. And yes, it should have a dedicated right-of-way.

-Jacques