- 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 2:21 pm to poochie
Posted on 4/15/24 at 2:21 pm to poochie
quote:
Americans are inherently independent and want to drive themselves. We don’t want to be packed into a train and go where everyone else is going. The rest of the world has that engrained into their being, they generally don’t have the independence trait we do.
So even if the US had a high speed rail network and a, let’s call it “Last Mile” network, Americans would still rather drive.
I take it you've never been in an airport in your life?
1
Posted on 4/15/24 at 2:22 pm to poochie
quote:
Tell me one institution the American middle class uses
The country is overrun with poors, by design. Theyre importing them by the millions.
It will never work here for that reason.
Posted on 4/15/24 at 2:23 pm to greenbean
quote:
This may be true for larger stations like NYC, but catching the train in Boston or DC isn't nearly as inconvenient as a major Airport.
Penn Station is the most complicated train station I've been in the US and would take that everyday of the week over any airport in a large US city.
I've taken the Acela from Baltimore to NYC. walked in front door of Penn Station Baltimore 10 mins before departure, checked my watch and was sitting in my seat 2 minutes after walking the door. In NYC was at my destination in mid-town 15 mins after stepping of the train including a short subway trip,
Train travel blows away flying for ease of use and convenience.
Posted on 4/15/24 at 2:25 pm to everytrueson
quote:
How many could we have built with the Ukraine money?
about 3 miles of rail in CA....
Posted on 4/15/24 at 2:31 pm to bad93ex
people like this say that and then dont realize that the UK can fit inside Michigan but has a higher population than any state.
This works in certain areas. Like florida.
This works in certain areas. Like florida.
This post was edited on 4/15/24 at 2:32 pm
Posted on 4/15/24 at 2:34 pm to LegendInMyMind
quote:
aking a train ride is fine and good, but not if you have potholes large enough to lose a Volkswagen in, traffic getting worse by the day, and fifty thousand bridges across the country that have been deemed structurally deficient. The untold billions of dollars a commuter rail system will undoubtedly cost can be put to much better use elsewhere.
I agree with you somewhat. But the traffic issue in the US is more about land use and sprawl than not having enough roads. We know this because in many places congestion is higher in the suburbs than in city centers.
I agree 100% on maintenance and repair....look up how much money we spend (local, state and federal) on new roads, as opposed to fixing broken roads and bridges.
If 90% of places in the US stopped all road expansion/new road construction projects (and stopped permitting new development in areas with subpar infrastructure) for 3 years and spent all of that money fixing existing roads and bridges we would all be better off, and safer.
Posted on 4/15/24 at 2:36 pm to bad93ex
The Boston, NY, Philly, DC and Richmond corridor is a prime prospect. It is already faster to take the train from NY to DC than it is to fly.
Posted on 4/15/24 at 2:39 pm to LSUtoBOOT
quote:
They’re great at stealing money from taxpayers.
AMTRAK charges $12 for burgers that they spent $80 to make with union assistance.
Posted on 4/15/24 at 2:41 pm to bad93ex
The HSR bullshite here in Texas has gone nowhere. Taking land through eminent domain is wrong just so a small segment of society can travel quicker between Houston and Dallas.
Posted on 4/15/24 at 2:42 pm to fareplay
quote:
but it should take you to the middle of city, airport, conference center, sports stadium, etc which is good enough for majority of people
The overwhelming majority of Americans do not live in a location where public transportation is an option.
This would be a very specific solution for areas that already have rail infrastructure (which is limited to the coasts and very limited areas in between).
Under no circumstance would it be good enough for the "majority" of Americans. A majority of Americans who work in big law, finance, or politics in the nation's 10 largest cities? Maybe.
Posted on 4/15/24 at 2:51 pm to bad93ex
No . Too many at grade level highway crossings.
Imagine a passenger train traveling at 200 mph hitting a semi trailer fully loaded with Mountain Dew.
Imagine a passenger train traveling at 200 mph hitting a semi trailer fully loaded with Mountain Dew.
Posted on 4/15/24 at 2:56 pm to SantaFe
quote:
Imagine a passenger train traveling at 200 mph hitting a semi trailer fully loaded with Mountain Dew.
Beyond that, how many deer and other wildlife will be annihilated by a bullet train?
Posted on 4/15/24 at 2:59 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I'm just going to post this and let it explain itself
Posted on 4/15/24 at 3:03 pm to bad93ex
quote:
Beyond that, how many deer and other wildlife will be annihilated by a bullet train?
The ones they will have in the ne cant even go that fast because of turns, tunnels and old bridges. So they will have high spd trains that cant average the high speed.
quote:
Amtrak will soon get 28 high-speed rail cars. But they won't operate at high speeds because Amtrak tracks are outdated
quote:
The first U.S.-made high-speed "bullet" trains will start running as early as 2024 between Boston, New York and Washington, with the promise of cutting transportation emissions by attracting new rail passengers who now drive or fly.
But Amtrak’s plan to run high-speed rail service on its Northeast Corridor faces a major obstacle — the 450-mile route does not have modern tracks that can handle the speed.
This post was edited on 4/15/24 at 3:04 pm
Posted on 4/15/24 at 3:04 pm to kingbob
quote:
In most parts of the U.S., it cannot work because populations are too spread out and cities too far apart. This makes car and air travel better in most places. However, there are some locations where, given significant reform to rail industries and massively expensive improvements to rail infrastructure, high speed rail could be a more efficient way to travel:
Texas Triangle
San Diego to San Francisco
Northeast corridor
Maybe some of the largest cities in the midwest
I think you can also add the Piedmont/I-85 corridor from Atlanta, Greenville/Spartanburg, Charlotte as well.
Posted on 4/15/24 at 3:05 pm to mmmmmbeeer
quote:
I take it you've never been in an airport in your life?
What are you talking about?
This is a rail vs automobile argument. Of course air travel is the best.
Posted on 4/15/24 at 3:07 pm to Hateradedrink
quote:
Birmingham and Atlanta are not pedestrian friendly because they were not designed to be pedestrian friendly. It could take a pedestrian 1 hour to walk a distance that is 200 yards “as the crow flies” because of the highways and obstacles to walk around in order to get to a pedestrian crossing.
Their city centers are pedestrian friendly, but the sprawl-burbs...not so much. Basically a disaster that can't be easily fixed.
Posted on 4/15/24 at 3:09 pm to UGATiger26
quote:
Put it this way...if you were a foreigner vacationing in Florida, do you really think it would be feasible to fly into Miami and then train to Orlando and Tampa without eventually needing your own car?
There is a high speed train from Miami to Orlando Brightline.com
This post was edited on 4/15/24 at 3:16 pm
Posted on 4/15/24 at 3:09 pm to fareplay
quote:
Idk I think it can bring smaller cities to life by making it a service zone. Like small town OK pitstop for food/ rest / mechanical servicing etc.
Think about what you just posted. They’re going from Chicago to NY in 2.5 hours. You’re not stopping in podunk Ohio for a pit stop.
This post was edited on 4/15/24 at 3:10 pm
Posted on 4/15/24 at 3:14 pm to bad93ex
Yes it could! But our government is owned by large corporations that own airlines and build planes. It’s not gonna happen because we are a croupt government.
Page 6 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News