Discussion: High Speed Rail

[StorminNorman]

A guy who serves on the board of Californians For High Speed Rail is advocating to not terminate California high speed rail?

Interesting.

 

[redfirebird2008]

I wish we had bullet trains in Texas. It's such a big state and my parents live on the other side of it, but I don't like flying.

 

[StorminNorman]

I have grown quite fond of trains since moving to DC. I would totally use high-speed rail (if it was affordable compared to airlines).

I just don't want people who don't use it to be required to pay for it.

 

[redfirebird2008]

I just don't want people who don't use it to be required to pay for it.

I completely agree.

 

[chaseter]

I just don't want people who don't use it to be required to pay for it.

I agree. Which means no federal funding. But, state taxes will go to it like they already do for roads.

 

[redfirebird2008]

Isn't the airline industry subsidized by the government? Maybe if the government didn't prop up the airline industry, demand for high speed rail would go up. The price difference would be pretty large in a free market competition between the two.

 

[StorminNorman]

I don't think, and I could be wrong, that the airline industry is "subsidized" in a way that most people use the word, but they government does provide them with services such as airports, air trafffic control, etc.

 

[chaseter]

Isn't the airline industry subsidized by the government? Maybe if the government didn't prop up the airline industry, demand for high speed rail would go up. The price difference would be pretty large in a free market competition between the two.

I have no idea if they are subsidized. The government subsidizes so many things I wouldn't be shocked.

High speed rail will never win against planes. Ticket prices won't be that different and it will still take longer for a train ride than a plane ride. The only way high speed rail will become huge is if it is between two huge cities that aren't that far apart with no stops.

The problem with rail is that for the ticket prices to decrease, there has to be more stops and that will make the ride longer. There will never be a non stop high speed rail line between NYC and Los Angeles for example. There would have to be 5-10 stops in between for the trip to even be affordable and so that the train company makes a profit. So a 13 hour train ride with no stops becomes 16 hours while a flight is 6 hours with no stops or 8 with one stop. I would easily pay an extra $100 for a ticket that got me there in half the time.

 

[redfirebird2008]

I have no idea if they are subsidized. The government subsidizes so many things I wouldn't be shocked.

High speed rail will never win against planes. Ticket prices won't be that different and it will still take longer for a train ride than a plane ride. The only way high speed rail will become huge is if it is between two huge cities that aren't that far apart with no stops.

The problem with rail is that for the ticket prices to decrease, there has to be more stops and that will make the ride longer. There will never be a non stop high speed rail line between NYC and Los Angeles for example. There would have to be 5-10 stops in between for the trip to even be affordable and so that the train company makes a profit. So a 13 hour train ride becomes 16 hours while a flight is 6 hours with no stops.

I think it could work in Texas. Seems like the flights between Midland/Dallas or Midland/Houston are always packed. I'm OK with a train ride taking longer than a plane. I've used high speed rail in Italy and it was pretty cool. It feels safer than a plane even if it isn't, and you have much better scenery during the trip. And it beats the hell out of driving 9 hours.

 

[chaseter]

I have never flown out of Midland. A plane trip from Lubbock to Dallas is 45 minutes and tickets are about $75 one way. A train ride would take about 100 minutes and I don't see tickets much lower than the plane ticket.

High speed rail would certainly gain footing if oil sky rockets but I don't see that in the foreseeable future. Maybe in 20 or so years the demand for high speed rail will pickup but I just don't see it as a viable option any time soon. Plus with us being in a recession, now is not the time to be throwing money at trains.

 

[redfirebird2008]

I have never flown out of Midland. A plane trip from Lubbock to Dallas is 45 minutes and tickets are about $75 one way. A train ride would take about 100 minutes and I don't see tickets much lower than the plane ticket.

One of the issues at the moment is that we are way behind Asia in researching and developing it. AmTrak from NYC to DC only goes around 70 mph on average, whereas the Japanese and Chinese have trains running 200+ mph. They've tested trains at 350 mph, which is similar to the speed of a Southwest flight in Texas. I think that's eventually where the world is headed, but it's many years away. The U.S. is so far behind and has so many other problems going on that we can forget about it for all intents and purposes.

 

[8wid]

Sports complex developer has eye on site sought by DesertXpress

 

[8wid]

DesertXpress: Is this train ever going to leave the station?

 

[8wid]

Train from Las Vegas to Calif. gets environment OK

Construction on America's first bullet train begins in Fall 2011.

 

[Marx]

UPDATE: REJECTED FLORIDA RAIL MONEY SENT TO NORTHEAST CORRIDOR
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/23/florida-high-speed-rail-money_n_934217.html

 

[StorminNorman]

Still my favorite Rick Scott move so far

 

[hippie_hunter]

UPDATE: REJECTED FLORIDA RAIL MONEY SENT TO NORTHEAST CORRIDOR
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/23/florida-high-speed-rail-money_n_934217.html

At least the money is going to a rail system that actually makes money as opposed to that stupid ass Florida rail system

 

[8wid]

DesertXpress Right-Of-Way From Vegas To SoCal Approved

 

[Ultra Lantern]

I believe that the High Speed Rail will be profitable.

 

[Paradoxium]

The slow speed rail project (Cali) went from 9 billion in 2008 to 98 billion. That's awesomely profitable, as long as you are the butt clown forking the bill.

 

[8wid]

I know I've been supporting the DesertXpress project to Las Vegas, but I think I have to now become skeptical. It's not because of the cost, but because why build another rail line in the Mohave Desert just for this project to get into service, I don't know if it'll even be profitable. We need to privatize Amtrak, and passenger rail service in the US in general, reduce the freight monopolies that ATSF, Union Pacific and others have on their own railroad lines, reduce demand for consumer freight in general and not worry about this project. For the amount of interest that they have in DesertXpress, the planning of the bullet train between San Francisco and Los Angeles could have been made profitable by a private company, even the much needed line between LA and San Diego too could have been much more logical than this Vegas project. The problem is government mismanagement of the passenger rail system in this country and corporate greed of the railroads.

 

[Marx]

UPDATE: CALIFORNIA STATE SENATE APPROVES HIGH SPEED RAIL
http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/06/travel/california-high-speed-rail/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

 

[Kelly]

California is on the road of panic....or I guess in this case, on the tracks of panic.

Another municipality about to file for bankruptcy....I have a feeling we will be hearing of more bankruptcies in California over the next year....

 

[Malice]

I cannot believe the stupidity of building this train in California.

The US public will hardly ride it. Why take an 8 hour train ride, when you can fly in 1.5 hours?

 

[8wid]

^While Sacremento is pushing that unsustainable plan towards fruition, this one just got improved.