Pragmatism and politics just don’t mix. If a project doesn’t add the promised value and consistently misses deadlines, a profitable business will abandon it.
@INTERVENTOR: “US freight lines are high speed and efficient compared with their European counterparts” — HAHAHAHA! Is that the best you can do?
The average passenger train in Europe is FAR more efficient, timely, and quick. I can take the Eurostar from London to Paris and be there in 2 hours and 16 minutes – and it is far more comfortable and civilized than a plane. Note that a plane FLIES from London to Paris in about an hour and a half, but that doesn’t count security, getting into and out of town, etc.
While I am not entirely convinced California is the best place for high-speed rail, Boston-New York-Washington would be ideal. Unfortunately, we need room for the high-speed track required. Acela is nice, but nowhere near the speed possible with a TGV, say. It takes roughly 3:45 to go from Boston to New York, but a TGV could do it in less than an hour (201 mph). That would be significantly faster than taking a plane, which totals 2.5-3 hours when you include a trip to and from the airport, security, etc. — remember, trains go from downtown to downtown.
I’d never take a shuttle again if we had a train on that route.
Motive, he did say freight trains, not passenger trains. Of course, his comment is off topic because the train in question is a passenger train, not a freight train.
And time magazine agrees with him (at least as of 2012). Europe wins by a mile in passenger trains, as you say.
But there are reasons for the difference in European and US freight trains. Available railyard space makes a difference as any model railroader knows ;^)More reasons here.
If the “railroads”, now oil companies, had maintained the lines and upgraded like the deal that gave them millions of acres, where they kept the split estate minerals, and shut down rail service, we’d have had high speed, efficient rail service passenger and freight many decades ago, about the same time as Japan and Europe. Our energy consumption from oil would also be a LOT LESS!
Frankfreak about 7 years ago
But the third can be reality.
superposition about 7 years ago
Pragmatism and politics just don’t mix. If a project doesn’t add the promised value and consistently misses deadlines, a profitable business will abandon it.
Radish the wordsmith about 7 years ago
The high speed trains Ayn Rand espoused are fictional too.
Mr. Blawt about 7 years ago
high speed rail will continue to be stymied by those who don’t understand why the poor don’t just take their helicopters to work.
BubbleTape Premium Member about 7 years ago
HIGH SPEED TRAINS?!?!?! what future fantasy world do you live in? it isn’t like they have them in Japan or Europe.
Motivemagus about 7 years ago
@INTERVENTOR: “US freight lines are high speed and efficient compared with their European counterparts” — HAHAHAHA! Is that the best you can do?
The average passenger train in Europe is FAR more efficient, timely, and quick. I can take the Eurostar from London to Paris and be there in 2 hours and 16 minutes – and it is far more comfortable and civilized than a plane. Note that a plane FLIES from London to Paris in about an hour and a half, but that doesn’t count security, getting into and out of town, etc.
While I am not entirely convinced California is the best place for high-speed rail, Boston-New York-Washington would be ideal. Unfortunately, we need room for the high-speed track required. Acela is nice, but nowhere near the speed possible with a TGV, say. It takes roughly 3:45 to go from Boston to New York, but a TGV could do it in less than an hour (201 mph). That would be significantly faster than taking a plane, which totals 2.5-3 hours when you include a trip to and from the airport, security, etc. — remember, trains go from downtown to downtown.
I’d never take a shuttle again if we had a train on that route.
Baslim the Beggar Premium Member about 7 years ago
Motive, he did say freight trains, not passenger trains. Of course, his comment is off topic because the train in question is a passenger train, not a freight train.
And time magazine agrees with him (at least as of 2012). Europe wins by a mile in passenger trains, as you say.
http://business.time.com/2012/07/09/us-freight-railroads/
But there are reasons for the difference in European and US freight trains. Available railyard space makes a difference as any model railroader knows ;^)More reasons here.
https://www.quora.com/How-do-American-and-European-freight-trains-differ#
Dtroutma about 7 years ago
If the “railroads”, now oil companies, had maintained the lines and upgraded like the deal that gave them millions of acres, where they kept the split estate minerals, and shut down rail service, we’d have had high speed, efficient rail service passenger and freight many decades ago, about the same time as Japan and Europe. Our energy consumption from oil would also be a LOT LESS!