what the heck is it with Dems and high speed trains?

[DrPizza]

Its cheaper only if you don't hire Union labor.

You're hiring people that you're already paying unemployment benefits to, durrrrr.

 

[werepossum]

I think that the only way we can even begin to solve our problems in the US is for people to understand:

-Not everyone is equal in the marketplace
-Not everyone deserves high pay
-Some people are failures
-Most people must work to earn and keep their lifestyles
-A strong work ethic, honesty, and character are vital traits
-Nothing is really free
-"Stuff" is not what's important in life
-Hard work should be rewarded; laziness should be punished
-Corruption should not be tolerated at any level and is a cancer on society

I think that if people start realizing these things, we'll be able to be competative again. Until then any large undertakings will be devestatingly inefficient to say the least.

Quoted for truth. It's going to be damned hard though, competing with Red China after we've given them all our technology and they now have a technological edge in most manufacturing as well as cheap, hard-working labor.

 

[SagaLore]

We should just build an armada of zeppelins, that never land and just periodically dock at really high towers from coast to coast.

 

[nonlnear]

We should just build an armada of zeppelins, that never land and just periodically dock at really high towers from coast to coast.

That's what the Empire State Building was planned for...

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Yet that style of Nationalism only seems to come out to support bad and ill conceived projects which are designed to create short term political gains but end up burning through tax payer monies by pushing on with a bad idea.

If CA is any measure to go off spending a proposed 4.3 billions dollars (who knows what the real cost will be in the end) to build a 58 mile "high speed" rail line from Merced to Fresno is a good example of how bad this idea is in the end.

My perspective: We have spent over 1/2 a trillion in Iraq. 8.6 billion (doubled the cost) spent here, employing Americans to create more infrastructure, strikes me as a god damned deal.

 

[bfdd]

These rails don't have to be expensive to build. We don't NEED to hire unions, we can start putting people who are on welfare to workfare. Hell if the money was right I'd even hop on board because I think that would be an awesome project to work on.

 

[ayabe]

This is great for commuters and will relieve the extreme traffic on I-4. As usual all of the grumbling is coming from people who know nothing about it and just want to rail against unions and the poors and how trains are unAmerican.

Hooray for commerce and fuck you Luddites.

 

[K1052]

This is great for commuters and will relieve the extreme traffic on I-4. As usual all of the grumbling is coming from people who know nothing about it and just want to rail against unions and the poors and how trains are unAmerican.

Hooray for commerce and fuck you Luddites.

The Orlando-Tampa route probably won't be built, at least not as envisioned.

I don't think the Federal grant can just be used for a MCO-Disneyworld segment which is what the new Republicans coming into office in Florida want.

It is probable that the $1.25B will be redirected to states with tangible support for such projects: Illinois, California, and those along the Northeast Corridor.

 

[theeedude]

I think the point of compromise on this is GOP agrees to fully fund high speed rail in exchange for Dems agreeing to contract it out to non-union labor.

 

[ElFenix]

Hell, we can't even build freaking power transmission lines over long distances to take advantage of renewable energy resources.

what if we build out the grid with the rail network? the trains need voltage :hmm:

 

[rudeguy]

what if we build out the grid with the rail network? the trains need voltage :hmm:

[public schools]
would that work?
[/public schools]

 

[rudder]

There are multiple advantages to High Speed Rail. Right now they have the added Bonus of creating Jobs and increasing Economic activity to build the systems. Other advantages are: Decreased need for Roads/Highways by moving large numbers of People rapidly, especially during Rush Hours; Decreasing Fuel consumption, especially Petroleum based fuels; Cutting pollution, especially in regards to GHGs, but many others as well.

I am late to the game... but damn... sure there are advantages to high speed rail. if money grew on trees sure... lets build them all over America. But money does not grow on trees and any high speed rail system built at this point will lose money (i.e., be taxpayer funded) for its lifetime of operation. This is on top of the taxpayer money spent that would only benefit a few people.

 

[BoberFett]

I am late to the game... but damn... sure there are advantages to high speed rail. if money grew on trees sure... lets build them all over America. But money does not grow on trees and any high speed rail system built at this point will lose money (i.e., be taxpayer funded) for its lifetime of operation. This is on top of the taxpayer money spent that would only benefit a few people.

I doubt that high speed rail is universally bad. There are probably instances where it makes sense. Likewise, saying it's universally good is a mistake. Why not let each region decide on their own?

Oh that's right. I forgot. The federal government is going to get involved, so it's one-size-fits-none as usual.

 

[ElFenix]

[public schools]
would that work?
[/public schools]

in the very least it'd reduce right of way costs compared to building two separate systems.

 

[K1052]

in the very least it'd reduce right of way costs compared to building two separate systems.

The grade requirements for HSR are a LOT more narrow than those for high tension power lines and once you get into major urban areas where ROE acquisition cost is highest the lines are already largely buried anyway.

 

[rudeguy]

The grade requirements for HSR are a LOT more narrow than those for high tension power lines and once you get into major urban areas where ROE acquisition cost is highest the lines are already largely buried anyway.

But most major cities already have some type of rail system, right? Would it be possible to integrate the old with the new?

If there was a way to do that and improve the grid at the same time, it doesn't seem like a bad idea.

But then again that would be a huge target for anyone wanting to harm the US. Take out the grid and a large number of people at the same time.

Interesting idea though...

 

[alphatarget1]

1,000km = 621 Miles...
Lol...I fail to see how a high speed rail service would be more effective than a $59 ticket from Southwest.
Baltimore to Indianapolis is 573 miles...

Also, can this high speed rail service permanently pay for itself or will it always be seeking a bailout like Amtrak?
I know the Washington DC Metro system is pretty successful. Amtrak however is not.

When I lived in Europe, Lufthansa would sell specials for 100 euros + tax for flights to many destinations. I opted to fly from Hamburg to Vienna because... well, the train ride was something like 14 hours and a flight was 1 1/2. I'm not sure if the train is a lot faster, either.

Likewise, Munich to Hamburg was 1 hour by plane, and 5-6 hours on ICE (InterCity Express).

 

[K1052]

But most major cities already have some type of rail system, right? Would it be possible to integrate the old with the new?

If there was a way to do that and improve the grid at the same time, it doesn't seem like a bad idea.

But then again that would be a huge target for anyone wanting to harm the US. Take out the grid and a large number of people at the same time.

Interesting idea though...

Yes, however anything we put on the existing heavy rail network has to meet FRA crash worthiness standards. Meeting these requirements increases the weight of the train-sets substantially and there are no off the shelf HSR designs that account for this, thus they would have to be custom built. Also the freight railroads who own those rail lines would now allow the installation of the overhead electrical lines that 200+ mph rail would require.

 

[irishScott]

Long distances flying is faster and cheaper. Short distances, light rail is a better option especially if there's a lot of traffic. High-speed rail would cover the medium distances where you're limited by the freeway/highway speed limit.

Yeah, just hope they find a way to make it affordable. Depending on your definition of "medium distance" driving is usually cheaper than Amtrack. Let alone something more costly and advanced than Amtrack.

 

[K1052]

When I lived in Europe, Lufthansa would sell specials for 100 euros + tax for flights to many destinations. I opted to fly from Hamburg to Vienna because... well, the train ride was something like 14 hours and a flight was 1 1/2. I'm not sure if the train is a lot faster, either.

Likewise, Munich to Hamburg was 1 hour by plane, and 5-6 hours on ICE (InterCity Express).

The chief problem with the ICE (compared to the French TGV, Spanish AGV, and other HSR systems) is that it runs on an existing rail network that in sections has seen limited upgrades which restricts speeds to well below the capability of the modern rolling stock. The other systems were purpose built to allow maximum speed and major trip time reductions.

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

These rails don't have to be expensive to build. We don't NEED to hire unions, we can start putting people who are on welfare to workfare. Hell if the money was right I'd even hop on board because I think that would be an awesome project to work on.

One mile of new track costs about $2-$3 million to lay.

 

[ElFenix]

The grade requirements for HSR are a LOT more narrow than those for high tension power lines and once you get into major urban areas where ROE acquisition cost is highest the lines are already largely buried anyway.

so right of way would be essentially free out in the boonies. that's still doing better than wholly separate systems. my point is made! :ninja:

But most major cities already have some type of rail system, right? Would it be possible to integrate the old with the new?

If there was a way to do that and improve the grid at the same time, it doesn't seem like a bad idea.

the rail right of way in cities is the slowest part. new right of way that is straight needs to be acquired so it'd likely be very difficult to integrate old and new. especially since a high speed high voltage railway system needs complete grade separation from regular roadways.

of course there would probably be sound restrictions that might keep it slow anyway.


if there were a train that could get me from downtown houston to the superdome in 3-4 hours at a competitive price with southwest i'd be on it at least once a month. especially if i can bring my own drinks on.

 

[K1052]

Probably once you reach a certain density in an urban area tunnels make more sense from a grade, noise, and speed perspective.

 

[ElFenix]

Probably once you reach a certain density in an urban area tunnels make more sense from a grade, noise, and speed perspective.

unfortunately tunnels don't really work in houston, this whole city is built on mud.

there is one car tunnel but i think it's a waterproof tube sitting in a trench on the ship channel bottom.

 

[K1052]

unfortunately tunnels don't really work in houston, this whole city is built on mud.

there is one car tunnel but i think it's a waterproof tube sitting in a trench on the ship channel bottom.

Houston probably doesn't have a density where finding an appropriate surface ROW will be a big problem. Places like NJ, NY, Chicago, LA, SF, etc will be where at least partial tunnels are required.