High speed rail in the US

[applecorped]

But, but, but........HIGH SPEED RAIL!!!!!!

 

[WildCat]

Thank you for clarifying that. However, my original claim was to only use high-speed rails to connect populated areas and normal rail lines to connect to the high-speed rail lines: cheaper, more efficient, and easier. Again I see no reason why a pragmatic approach like this could not work.

Wouldn't it be far cheaper just to have a bus line making runs to the HSR station?

 

[BenBurch]

Analysts predict record gasoline prices next year;

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-gas-prices-20111108,0,2392493.story

<SNIP>

West Texas Intermediate crude "will be in the $110-a-barrel range next year," said Van der Valk, an independent fuel consultant.

"We started high on gasoline prices this year and we stayed high, and we are going to go higher next year," Van der Valk said. "We could be as high as $4.50 a gallon in California by Easter. The rest of the country will be above $4 a gallon by then."

The primary reason for the stubbornly high prices is growing demand in Latin and South America, which is driving record U.S. exports of fuel to those parts of the world, particularly in the form of diesel. U.S. refiners are also making more diesel at the expense of gasoline production, Kloza said.

<SNIP>

And if you think it stops there, you're nuts.

You can prattle on about how much you love the freedom of your car, but it will very soon be the case that the car will be used only for the most essential trips.

When that happens, and we don't have any systems in place to deal with it, you can bet that I am going to be pointing out, as are my friends in radio and television going to be pointing out, that certain people digging in their heels when presented with the evidence is the reason the listeners are now walking to the market.

 

[L.Y.S.]

Wouldn't it be far cheaper just to have a bus line making runs to the HSR station?

Hell whatever, just have options that get people from point A to point B is my point.

 

[theprestige]

Hell whatever, just have options that get people from point A to point B is my point.

• Horse-drawn carriage
• Zeppelin
• Palanquin
• Telecommute
• Monorail
• Rickshaw
• Spaceplane
• Helicopter limousine
• Carpool
• Vanpool
• Buspool
• Limousine with a swimming pool
• Relay race
• Marathon
• etc.
• etc.
• etc.

Options, right?

Yeah, not so much, I bet. Don't you mean that High Speed Rail is a good option, that people need?

 

[L.Y.S.]

• Horse-drawn carriage
• Zeppelin
• Palanquin
• Telecommute
• Monorail
• Rickshaw
• Spaceplane
• Helicopter limousine
• Carpool
• Vanpool
• Buspool
• Limousine with a swimming pool
• Relay race
• Marathon
• etc.
• etc.
• etc.

Options, right?

Yeah, not so much, I bet. Don't you mean that High Speed Rail is a good option, that people need?

How ever you interpret it

 

[BenBurch]

Wouldn't it be far cheaper just to have a bus line making runs to the HSR station?

In fact, if you architect the HSR properly, there already exist mass transit solutions going right to the station.

You co-locate HSR with airports.

And you ticket HSR as though it were an airliner, including checking through luggage.

And you design the profile of the car body to accept standard airline cargo pallets without major waste of space, then you can have cargo-only trains to carry mail and high-priority goods. (In France there are postal TGVs)

You avoid what Amtrak tries to sell as an advantage, city center service, because driving a new rail line into a major city is hellishly expensive, and even if HSR can use the same track that goes there now, speeds are restricted severely as trains wind their way into a major city.

 

[theprestige]

How ever you interpret it

I interpret it as you having no idea whether or not HSR is a better option than a rickshaw, and no supporting argument for why people need it.

You said people should have more transportation options, and then you picked HSR from your list of options. Why? What else was on your list of options? Why didn't you pick something else?

Why do you think HSR is a better, more necessary option than zeppelins?

 

[theprestige]

In fact, if you architect the HSR properly, there already exist mass transit solutions going right to the station.

You co-locate HSR with airports.

And you ticket HSR as though it were an airliner, including checking through luggage.

And you design the profile of the car body to accept standard airline cargo pallets without major waste of space, then you can have cargo-only trains to carry mail and high-priority goods. (In France there are postal TGVs)

You avoid what Amtrak tries to sell as an advantage, city center service, because driving a new rail line into a major city is hellishly expensive, and even if HSR can use the same track that goes there now, speeds are restricted severely as trains wind their way into a major city.

It's a good thing for California's HSR project that the major airports for San Francisco, Oakland, San Jose, Los Angeles, and San Diego are all located outside of the heavily urbanized areas of those cities... oh, wait. That's not true at all.

 

[mortimer]

It's a good thing for California's HSR project that the major airports for San Francisco, Oakland, San Jose, Los Angeles, and San Diego are all located outside of the heavily urbanized areas of those cities... oh, wait. That's not true at all.

What's wrong with having a Davis-Livermore-Santa Clarita-Escondido HSR line, with buses/light rail serving Sacramento, San Francisco, Oakland, San Jose, LA, and San Diego? Great success!

 

[IchabodPlain]

In fact, if you architect the HSR properly, there already exist mass transit solutions going right to the station.

You co-locate HSR with airports.

Doesn't make sense. If I fly, the majority of my traveling is probably done. Once I've landed, I need to get from the airport into the city where I'm staying, and then to the places in the city. I wouldn't fly to Chicago and then take a HSR line to Milwaukee - I'd just fly directly to Milwaukee.

Cities like Chicago, Boston, NYC, DC - who all have great light rail systems - already do what you propose. And it makes much more sense given that the commutes after the flight are shorter and will probably involve traveling through high-density neighborhoods.

 

[IchabodPlain]

After taking the train a year or two ago, I'll never drive to Chicago again. But you're right, it only makes sense on the coasts.

Why? I can drive to St. Louis in 4.5 hours, Amtrak takes 5.5. And if I took the train there I'd be pretty much confined to the city center, unless I want to rent a car. And if I have a passenger it's cheaper to drive also.

It's very possible that rail is the best option for Upchurch and driving is better for Wildcat. The L in Chicago has four times the lines and nearly four times as many stations with shorter intervals between trains at each stop than St. Louis' Metrolink. So, Upchurch finds it much easier to navigate Chicago via public transportation than Wildcat does in STL.

 

[L.Y.S.]

I interpret it as you having no idea whether or not HSR is a better option than a rickshaw, and no supporting argument for why people need it.

You said people should have more transportation options, and then you picked HSR from your list of options. Why? What else was on your list of options? Why didn't you pick something else?

Why do you think HSR is a better, more necessary option than zeppelins?

Never did the above. I've only said that HSR was a viable option amongst many and that properly put into the system it could be used effectively with other options. Like everything else, there is never one solution but many.

However, the current drawback of rail (period) is the higher cost it would take to get from Point A to Point B. If it could become cheaper than a flight, then rail may actually have some serious support. But I doubt the possibility of that.