- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Can high speed rail work in the United States?
Posted on 4/15/24 at 12:09 pm to bad93ex
Posted on 4/15/24 at 12:09 pm to bad93ex
quote:
Every other year or so, people get this idea that we can be exactly like Europe and use high speed rail to reach other cities rather than driving a car. What does the O-T think of high speed rail being implemented stateside?
Between the Boston to DC eastern seaboard, maybe. Maybe the population centers along the Great Lakes, but I’m not sure there is enough population nor appetite for travel between those cities not how pedestrian friendly they are. Certainly not the south or through the Rockies. The west coast probably has the appetite but do they have the population to support it?
Maybe in the Texas loop touching on Houston, Dallas, San Antonio, and Austin?
But we are not populated like Europe is.
0
Posted on 4/15/24 at 12:10 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I'm just going to post this and let it explain itself
That's about as apples to oranges as you can get. The EU has major population centers pretty evenly spread out across the continent. The US has a whole lotta nothing in that area including basically Germany, France, Austria, Italy, and a bunch of those other small countries.
What is the obsession with high speed rail? What is about it that is so compelling? If it's just "climate change" you can frick off. But I can't think what else might be so great about it to justify the obscene amount of money required for it when air travel is so efficient.
This post was edited on 4/15/24 at 12:11 pm
Posted on 4/15/24 at 12:10 pm to poochie
I mean most airports have direct access to shuttles buses taxis.
No this rail won’t take you in front of your house, but it should take you to the middle of city, airport, conference center, sports stadium, etc which is good enough for majority of people
No this rail won’t take you in front of your house, but it should take you to the middle of city, airport, conference center, sports stadium, etc which is good enough for majority of people
Posted on 4/15/24 at 12:12 pm to poochie
The benefit is convenience. I had to make a trip from Boston to NYC for work and my coworker went via rail and I went via flight. His rail time was longer but he was more relaxed and able to bring food home meanwhile I was more limited in capacity and airport was more chaotic
Posted on 4/15/24 at 12:12 pm to Thracken13
quote:
we can't keep regular trains maintained correctly and keep them on the tracks, but lets put in trains on high speed tracks - yeah what could fricking go wrong there
The time, effort, and costs to put in high speed rail where it would be most used and beneficial makes my head hurt. Knowing those trains cannot use the same tracks and routes as regular train traffic it would all have to be new.
Posted on 4/15/24 at 12:12 pm to bad93ex
There is too much red tape in the US for the construction to be worth it IMO.
Sad, but true. Environmental, right of way, municipalities bitching about stop locations, people wanting palms greased, etc.
And the already mentioned issue of what do you do when you get where you're going. US isn't meant for trains everywhere.
I would be really fricking cool to take a train across the country in a private car though on a high speed rail. Not practical to build though.
Sad, but true. Environmental, right of way, municipalities bitching about stop locations, people wanting palms greased, etc.
And the already mentioned issue of what do you do when you get where you're going. US isn't meant for trains everywhere.
I would be really fricking cool to take a train across the country in a private car though on a high speed rail. Not practical to build though.
This post was edited on 4/15/24 at 12:17 pm
Posted on 4/15/24 at 12:14 pm to Chucktown_Badger
In limited amounts it would be great, it's just the expense would be enormous.
I think the other reality is that we'll never mimic the experience of zipping around Europe, so expectations have to be managed. Your experience of zipping from Vienna to Prague via city centers is just never going to be replicated via high speed rail from Houston to Nashville, for a lot of reasons.
I think the other reality is that we'll never mimic the experience of zipping around Europe, so expectations have to be managed. Your experience of zipping from Vienna to Prague via city centers is just never going to be replicated via high speed rail from Houston to Nashville, for a lot of reasons.
Posted on 4/15/24 at 12:14 pm to fareplay
quote:
His rail time was longer but he was more relaxed and able to bring food home meanwhile I was more limited in capacity and airport was more chaotic
Well in that case let's spend x trillion dollars and the next 30 years on it.
Posted on 4/15/24 at 12:14 pm to fareplay
Won't work ....Go to the Canadian rails system and see for yourself.
In Tokyo it works because you get off and walk a few blocks to your destination. The cost in the US? Rail ticket, get there and look for an Uber, ride 45 minutes to your destination .......Doesn't even work on the East Coast.
In Tokyo it works because you get off and walk a few blocks to your destination. The cost in the US? Rail ticket, get there and look for an Uber, ride 45 minutes to your destination .......Doesn't even work on the East Coast.
Posted on 4/15/24 at 12:16 pm to Chucktown_Badger
quote:
The time, effort, and costs to put in high speed rail where it would be most used and beneficial makes my head hurt. Knowing those trains cannot use the same tracks and routes as regular train traffic it would all have to be new.
This is the biggest hiccup.
That said, I'm pretty stoked that Amtrak is going to extended their Chicago-Indianapolis route down into Louisville. We haven't had passenger rail here since 2003. I'd be all about hoping on the train to ride up to Chicago for the weekend.
Posted on 4/15/24 at 12:16 pm to Pettifogger
quote:
Your experience of zipping from Vienna to Prague via city centers is just never going to be replicated via high speed rail from Houston to Nashville, for a lot of reasons.
Yup. There would have to be a bunch of stops in between to try and get more passengers, which then makes the overall trip many times longer than a 2 hour flight.
Remember when high speed rail was Obama's pet boondoggle? How much taxpayer money did he spend on it and what did we get out of it? (THANKS OBAMA)
This post was edited on 4/15/24 at 12:17 pm
Posted on 4/15/24 at 12:16 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I'm just going to post this and let it explain itself
quote:
Population of the US: 333.3 Million
Population of Europe: 746 Million (2018)
Posted on 4/15/24 at 12:16 pm to Chucktown_Badger
Idk with population growth, more airports may also be a thing so it’s just transitioning to diversified method of transport and adding jobs to middle America
Posted on 4/15/24 at 12:18 pm to bad93ex
No.
This is due to a multitude of reasons, but here are a few:
1. The progressive wing would make anything economically infeasible based off the supposed environmental impact alone. Could you imagine how many groups would lose their shite over each snail or bush species possibly impacted?
2. Our government (at every level) is incapable of building this in a way that would be economically feasible. We have lost the ability, as a society, to perform projects like this.
3. The length of time to build this would probably be 20 years. How long does it take to build one mile of interstate? California broke ground on theirs in 2015. They have no projected completion date for phase 1, let alone phase 2.
In summation, our society and governmental structure is broken to the point where public works projects are economically infeasible and, when started, will never be completed due to the administrative and bureaucratic nightmare that is the USA.
That doesn’t even touch on the fact that rail stations are so far removed from city centers that it wouldn’t make sense without adding additional tram lines or transportation that would likely cost billions more and add timelines that would also never be completed.
This is due to a multitude of reasons, but here are a few:
1. The progressive wing would make anything economically infeasible based off the supposed environmental impact alone. Could you imagine how many groups would lose their shite over each snail or bush species possibly impacted?
2. Our government (at every level) is incapable of building this in a way that would be economically feasible. We have lost the ability, as a society, to perform projects like this.
3. The length of time to build this would probably be 20 years. How long does it take to build one mile of interstate? California broke ground on theirs in 2015. They have no projected completion date for phase 1, let alone phase 2.
In summation, our society and governmental structure is broken to the point where public works projects are economically infeasible and, when started, will never be completed due to the administrative and bureaucratic nightmare that is the USA.
That doesn’t even touch on the fact that rail stations are so far removed from city centers that it wouldn’t make sense without adding additional tram lines or transportation that would likely cost billions more and add timelines that would also never be completed.
This post was edited on 4/15/24 at 12:23 pm
Posted on 4/15/24 at 12:18 pm to fareplay
quote:
Idk with population growth, more airports may also be a thing so it’s just transitioning to diversified method of transport and adding jobs to middle America
Logic and common sense don't seem to be your thing.
Posted on 4/15/24 at 12:20 pm to Scruffy
In addition to everything else, the experience is going to be like any other experience involving the general public in the US
It's going to suck after a while.
So while I think it would work, within reason and limits, the idea of adoption by everyone is going to be pretty dependent/contingent and could very well end up skewing for certain demographics, regions, etc. Existing train travel in the US already does.
It's going to suck after a while.
So while I think it would work, within reason and limits, the idea of adoption by everyone is going to be pretty dependent/contingent and could very well end up skewing for certain demographics, regions, etc. Existing train travel in the US already does.
Posted on 4/15/24 at 12:20 pm to Chucktown_Badger
And not adding value to the discussion seems you be yours
Posted on 4/15/24 at 12:22 pm to Pettifogger
the Texas rail grift looks to be continuing to grift
quote:
- President Joe Biden is seeking to revive interest in a plan to build the first high-speed rail in the U. S. using Japanese bullet trains, with sources saying he is likely to discuss the project with Japan's prime minister in Washington this week.
The leaders may publicly voice support for the multi-billion-dollar Texas project after Wednesday's talks, which have been partly overshadowed by U.S. opposition to another Japanese investment, Nippon Steel's planned purchase of U.S. Steel.
quote:
Support from the leaders could unlock new cash from the Federal Railroad Administration and other Department of Transportation funds.
But the project, estimated to cost between $25 billion and $30 billion, still faces potential hurdles in Texas and the U.S. Congress.
Biden's Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg has voiced support for the plan.
"We believe in this," he said in an interview with NBC 5 on Sunday. "Obviously it has to turn into a more specific design and vision but everything I've seen makes me very excited."
Posted on 4/15/24 at 12:24 pm to fareplay
quote:
And not adding value to the discussion seems you be yours
Check out my previous posts in this thread. Yours was too dumb to deserve a response that took any time to craft.
Posted on 4/15/24 at 12:24 pm to bad93ex
No.
Too many stops needed between A and B locations.
Infrastructure too costly to build.
Flying is the way to go less infrastructure to build and faster transit times.
Just need to improve the TSA checkpoints. MSY can be a zoo in the morning even at 4 am.
Even light rail has its limitations with equipment and transportation needs.
The latest trend is to build transit systems with dedicated buses on managed or dedicated lanes for travel. Ironically Rob the Road Guy did a video on it on YouTube.
I saw in the Advocate that MSY is looking for a light rail project to connect the 2 airports and eventually connect to a rail station on the main railroads south of the airport. Instead of a train, why not build a busway instead, that way if a train is broken the whole system is not down, you just run a replacement bus on the line.
Too many stops needed between A and B locations.
Infrastructure too costly to build.
Flying is the way to go less infrastructure to build and faster transit times.
Just need to improve the TSA checkpoints. MSY can be a zoo in the morning even at 4 am.
Even light rail has its limitations with equipment and transportation needs.
The latest trend is to build transit systems with dedicated buses on managed or dedicated lanes for travel. Ironically Rob the Road Guy did a video on it on YouTube.
I saw in the Advocate that MSY is looking for a light rail project to connect the 2 airports and eventually connect to a rail station on the main railroads south of the airport. Instead of a train, why not build a busway instead, that way if a train is broken the whole system is not down, you just run a replacement bus on the line.
Page 3 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News