Why The US Has No High-Speed Rail

[SIGSEGV]

Originally Posted by hauntedheadnc

Oh, my... what an unfortunate acronym. I bet frustrated drivers there (and probably also in Iowa) have a blast with that one...

It's not so bad... the time derivative of I!

[uaarkson]

The only way HSR gets built in the US is through massive federal subsidy and force of eminent domain. Our development pattern for the last 70 years just can't support it.

With that said, car traffic is going to get so bad in the next 20 or 30 years that the benefits of rail transit will hopefully come to the forefront of political dialogue. Until then, grab your tablet and popcorn.

[Obadno]

The reason there is no high speed rail in the USA is because there is no need for high speed rail.

Oil is relatively cheap, as are cars, we have very good road infrastructure, our densities outside of a few cities is low so even public transit is hard as public transit lines dont service nearly as many people as it would in denser Asian and European cities.

Relative to its size the USA has a small and weak federal government that can at best subsidize local transport efforts.

A large top down program to link a bunch of cities with super fast trains at this time is a total waste of money as planes are cheaper and in many cases faster over long distances.

You want high speed trains? Wait like 90 years. Certain regions are getting denser and will build public transit to fit those needs, those transit networks will eventually expand and connect creating a need for high speed trains between them.

I dont know why people seem to think High Speed Rail is something you build before the need is around, that isnt how it works, high speed rail is built once the need exists.

And before you point out that some autocratic states lik China and Morocco are building trans-national HSR that isnt an argument for effective transit, thats just wishing you could be a god and demand an unnecessary train be built.

[M II A II R II K]

The Boston to Washington corridor would work, not to ride the entire length but to provide the option for high speed rail that's actually high speed between stops along it, with dedicated trackage of course. Especially if it cancels out wasteful flights like from NYC to Boston where the plane has to fly 100 miles just to get to the right altitude.

[uaarkson]

The US does not have 'very good' road infrastructure. It ranges from decent to falling apart, and the needle will continue to tip toward falling apart as long as our funding and development patterns continue to build new low-density homes and roads at the expense of existing maintenance. Sooner or later, something is going to give, and people are going to get sick of sitting in cars for hours a day on crumbling roads as they commute into increasingly concentrated job centers.

With that said, true HSR is the very last step of a long, incremental process (in democratic countries anyway). Most of us will not see it here during our lifetimes.

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by uaarkson

The US does not have 'very good' road infrastructure. It ranges from decent to falling apart, and the needle will continue to tip toward falling apart as long as our funding and development patterns continue to build new low-density homes and roads at the expense of existing maintenance. Sooner or later, something is going to give, and people are going to get sick of sitting in cars for hours a day on crumbling roads as they commute into increasingly concentrated job centers.

With that said, true HSR is the very last step of a long, incremental process (in democratic countries anyway). Most of us will not see it here during our lifetimes.

Don't confuse your local potholes with our interstate highway infrastructure which is incredibly comprehensive.

Like everything the actual day to day function of government occurs at the city and state level (something most people seem incapable of understanding).

[JManc]

Originally Posted by uaarkson

The US does not have 'very good' road infrastructure. It ranges from decent to falling apart, and the needle will continue to tip toward falling apart as long as our funding and development patterns continue to build new low-density homes and roads at the expense of existing maintenance. Sooner or later, something is going to give, and people are going to get sick of sitting in cars for hours a day on crumbling roads as they commute into increasingly concentrated job centers.

With that said, true HSR is the very last step of a long, incremental process (in democratic countries anyway). Most of us will not see it here during our lifetimes.

The Interstate System is in fairly decent shape but everything else...yeah...not so much.

[SIGSEGV]

Originally Posted by Obadno

The reason there is no high speed rail in the USA is because there is no need for high speed rail.

Oil is relatively cheap, as are cars, we have very good road infrastructure, our densities outside of a few cities is low so even public transit is hard as public transit lines dont service nearly as many people as it would in denser Asian and European cities.

Relative to its size the USA has a small and weak federal government that can at best subsidize local transport efforts.

A large top down program to link a bunch of cities with super fast trains at this time is a total waste of money as planes are cheaper and in many cases faster over long distances.

You want high speed trains? Wait like 90 years. Certain regions are getting denser and will build public transit to fit those needs, those transit networks will eventually expand and connect creating a need for high speed trains between them.

I dont know why people seem to think High Speed Rail is something you build before the need is around, that isnt how it works, high speed rail is built once the need exists.

And before you point out that some autocratic states lik China and Morocco are building trans-national HSR that isnt an argument for effective transit, thats just wishing you could be a god and demand an unnecessary train be built.

Take any flight that's an hour or shorter. That would usually be better as HSR.

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by SIGSEGV

Take any flight that's an hour or shorter. That would usually be better as HSR.

There is no way HSR from Phoenix to Las Vegas or San Diego would be better than flying.

Locally can HSR work between LA and San Diego? NYC and Boston or Philly? Yes but those are some of the few places. and California elected to try to start its HSR between two moderately sized farming cities in the Central Valley

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Obadno

There is no way HSR from Phoenix to Las Vegas or San Diego would be better than flying.

Locally can HSR work between LA and San Diego? NYC and Boston or Philly? Yes but those are some of the few places. and California elected to try to start its HSR between two moderately sized farming cities in the Central Valley

LA to Las Vegas would be 100x better with HSR. So would LA to SD.

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

LA to Las Vegas would be 100x better with HSR. So would LA to SD.

How so? What are you going to do once you get to SD or Vegas without a car?

Furthermore lets consider how much money it takes to build the HSR in the first place vs two existing runway's.

As it would have to be state run to function the prices could be force lower but they'd still be comparable to a plane ride.

[SIGSEGV]

Originally Posted by Obadno

How so? What are you going to do once you get to SD or Vegas without a car?

Furthermore lets consider how much money it takes to build the HSR in the first place vs two existing runway's.

As it would have to be state run to function the prices could be force lower but they'd still be comparable to a plane ride.

I dunno, same thing you do when you get off a plane?

[JManc]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

LA to Las Vegas would be 100x better with HSR. So would LA to SD.

Stopping and eating at the Panda Express in Victorville is half the fun. And the LA to SD is a beautiful drive. Well, most of it.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Obadno

How so? What are you going to do once you get to SD or Vegas without a car?

Furthermore lets consider how much money it takes to build the HSR in the first place vs two existing runway's.

As it would have to be state run to function the prices could be force lower but they'd still be comparable to a plane ride.

What do people do when they fly to these places? I dunno about you, but I have never needed a car in Vegas.

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

What do people do when they fly to these places? I dunno about you, but I have never needed a car in Vegas.

Are we talking about tourists here or commuters for buisness/living.

I am under the impression that HSR caters to daily travelers between these locations, the kind of people that would likely Drive rather than fly.

Airports are serviced by multiple ancillary transpiration services because they are hubs of arrivals and departures, a HSR line between LA and San Diego or LA and Vegas is just one market to another market. Despite the size of those Markets it will never have the kind of traffic or draw for a Taxi/rental service that airports do as it will never have that kind of traffic both in and outbound.

Dont get me wrong Im sure you'll be able to get a cab or whatever but its inevitable that the train would be relegated to a secondary transpiration option like Greyhound buses for people that are unwilling or incapable of flying or driving for whatever reason. Esentially you are using a massive multi-billionaire dollar effort to steal a small backwater market share from Greyhound when Greyhound buses can do it for a fraction of the cost.

Now when we discuss something like the Eastern seaboard and its nearly 100 million people an HSR system in this area makes much more sense as there is enough people in a small area all traveling too and fro constantly to various cities up and down the densely populated costal plain.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Obadno

Are we talking about tourists here or commuters for buisness/living.

I am under the impression that HSR caters to daily travelers between these locations, the kind of people that would likely Drive rather than fly.

Airports are serviced by multiple ancillary transpiration services because they are hubs of arrivals and departures, a HSR line between LA and San Diego or LA and Vegas is just one market to another market. Despite the size of those Markets it will never have the kind of traffic or draw for a Taxi/rental service that airports do as it will never have that kind of traffic both in and outbound.

Dont get me wrong Im sure you'll be able to get a cab or whatever but its inevitable that the train would be relegated to a secondary transpiration option like Greyhound buses for people that are unwilling or incapable of flying or driving for whatever reason. Esentially you are using a massive multi-billionaire dollar effort to steal a small backwater market share from Greyhound when Greyhound buses can do it for a fraction of the cost.

Now when we discuss something like the Eastern seaboard and its nearly 100 million people an HSR system in this area makes much more sense as there is enough people in a small area all traveling too and fro constantly to various cities up and down the densely populated costal plain.

Sounds like you should do a little research on HSR. A bus is not an alternative to HSR.

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Sounds like you should do a little research on HSR. A bus is not an alternative to HSR.

From LA to Vegas it would be.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Obadno

From LA to Vegas it would be.

It would cut a four to five hour drive to less than 1.5 hours on a train. Do you really think that's comparable?

[Buckeye Native 001]

Originally Posted by JManc

And the LA to SD is a beautiful drive. Well, most of it.

Beautiful, sure, but aggravating because it can take upwards of three hours to drive 90 miles depending on the time of day...

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

It would cut a four to five hour drive to less than 1.5 hours on a train. Do you really think that's comparable?

Or a 1 hour plane ride for the same price (at best)

Yes absolutely, how are you marketing trains? "As expensive but slower than a plane!" "Ten times the price of a bus ticket but shorter!" or "three times the cost to drive personally and without the freedom of your own car"