Why don't we have High Speed Trains?

[sdifox]

It doesn't require clearing thousands of miles of land for tracks, for starters.

Pretty sure there is enough rail land that is already cleared left. And they don't exactly require a 1 km wide strip do they?

 

[theevilsharpie]

Pretty sure there is enough rail land that is already cleared left.

Not necessarily, and any route changes would require new track. A route change in an airplane is as simple as turning the flight stick.

And they don't exactly require a 1 km wide strip do they?

Not really, although the environment impact of the use and transportation of the equipment needed to lay and maintain thousands of miles of track is certainly heavier than a 12 ft wide strip of track would suggest.

 

[GTaudiophile]

It is also worth noting that China is pouring record amounts of money into public transport. Case in point: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-54gBLwK3s

 

[ichy]

I love trains. I love Germany's rail network, but even in that country it is becoming the most expensive way to travel long distances. Discount airlines like EasyJet, RyanAir, etc. allows you to fly long distances within Europe for only a few Euro whereas a high speed ICE train in Germany from say Stuttgart to Berlin easily costs you around 100 Euro or more on a normally priced ticket.

For leisure travelers who have time and can book in advance flying may be cheaper in Europe, but if you're traveling for work then the train is almost always the way to go unless you're going very long distances. Plane tickets that're booked at the last minute aren't cheaper than train tickets, and for medium distances travel trains are MUCH more time efficient. Sure the actual flight may be shorter, but you need to get to the airport, go through security, wait around, etc. Major train stations are all in the center of town, and are much easier and faster to get to than airports.

 

[ichy]

Not necessarily, and any route changes would require new track.

To get the most out of high speed rail you need new, dedicated high speed lines, but Acela service on the NE Corridor could be a lot faster if they just upgraded the overhead power lines and signaling systems in a lot of places.

 

[sdifox]

Not necessarily, and any route changes would require new track. A route change in an airplane is as simple as turning the flight stick.



Not really, although the environment impact of the use and transportation of the equipment needed to lay and maintain thousands of miles of track is certainly heavier than a 12 ft wide strip of track would suggest.

we are talking fixed high speed links here, not talking tuning all train lines into high speed trains.

Last I checked, metropolitan cities don't move around. No route change needed.

 

[theevilsharpie]

Last I checked, metropolitan cities don't move around. No route change needed.

Yeah, because population centers never shift, and the track would never need to be upgraded to handle more capacity, right :awe:

 

[Genx87]

And lobbyists for auto companies, oil companies etc. It cannot be just coincidence that most European countries have drastically higher fuel prices but far more efficient rail networks.

They also have a much high population density and grown accustomed to their lower standard of living. It just isnt realistic in the United States except for a few select routes for rail to work. Our geography doesnt work well with rail.

 

[sdifox]

Yeah, because population centers never shift, and the track would never need to be upgraded to handle more capacity, right :awe:

not the same thing as what you are referring to though. Proper city planning is key to success, even for airports.

Take a look at these

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siemens_Velaro

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_380

 

[Genx87]

you are simply part of the problem.

argue against every major form of fast public trans just because it hasn't been implemented well here and therefore it must be bad.

ignorance. part of the problem.

Who is more ignorant? The person you realizes the real world issues of mass transit? Or the person who simply calls somebody ignorant for not continuing to stick the square peg in the round hole?

 

[Genx87]

Electric trains are a lot more environmentally friendly than airplanes.

and..

link

Are those the electric trains being powered by a coal powerplant?

 

[sdifox]

Are those the electric trains being powered by a coal powerplant?

why is there so little being done on the gasification front? That would solve most of the problem with coal no?

 

[theevilsharpie]

not the same thing as what you are referring to though. Proper city planning is key to success, even for airports.

Take a look at these

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siemens_Velaro

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_380

What do these links have to do with each other again?

 

[bignateyk]

If it were proportionally cheaper than flying, yes. i.e., if it takes me 4 hours to fly, and costs $800, I would ride a train if it took 8 hours and only cost $400.

 

[CPA]

21 hours from NY to LA? lol, yeah that will get a lot of ridership, when a plane will get you there in 3.5 hours.

Look the US is just not structured to have a high speed rail system criss-crossing the country. The major cities are too spread out and already have many road options, not to mention that most of America doesn't live in the top 10 big cities. You also hae the love affair between Americans and their vehicles - something Europe doesn't have.

 

[CPA]

If it were proportionally cheaper than flying, yes. i.e., if it takes me 4 hours to fly, and costs $800, I would ride a train if it took 8 hours and only cost $400.

Not me, thanks to my kids. let's see, 4 hours in a enclosed vehicle versus 8 hours in an enclosed vehicle with 4 young kids. I'll pay the extra $$$.

 

[bignateyk]

Not me, thanks to my kids. let's see, 4 hours in a enclosed vehicle versus 8 hours in an enclosed vehicle with 4 young kids. I'll pay the extra $$$.

Yeah. The problem is that even today with our slow as shit trains, they are usually more expensive than flying.

 

[Gibson486]

Fung Wah for $15. So, they may have safety issues.....but unlike Toyota, the keep on going

 

[Genx87]

why is there so little being done on the gasification front? That would solve most of the problem with coal no?

I think nuclear is a better option until we can utlize other sources like solar, wind, and tidal power. And by utilize I mean get the costs down so it doesnt bankrupt a middle class family to turn on the TV.

 

[sdifox]

What do these links have to do with each other again?

comparison in terms of power need, speed and capacity.

 

[Linflas]

Given the choice between dealing with the nonsense involved in getting on a plane these days if I needed to travel from DC to NY I would choose Amtrak every time. I don't have to arrive at Union Station an hour before my train departure time and it takes me right to the middle of Manhatten.

 

[sdifox]

I think nuclear is a better option until we can utlize other sources like solar, wind, and tidal power. And by utilize I mean get the costs down so it doesnt bankrupt a middle class family to turn on the TV.

well, I am not sure the US Treasury can print enough greenbacks for PR to change the perception of nuclear. Which is unfortunate.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

It makes sense in the north east. but I can't see it being worth while throug the south and mid west.

 

[ViviTheMage]

high speed = 200MPH +

I'd ride them, shame trains suck in the US.

 

[sdifox]

It makes sense in the north east. but I can't see it being worth while throug the south and mid west.

I am not saying deploy nation wide, just where it makes sense.