A More Realistic Proposal for High Speed Rail

552 shares, 837 points

+1184 – A More Realistic Proposal for High Speed Rail

2022-06-23 18:31:40

[+1184] |

Like it? Share with your friends!

552 shares, 837 points


Your email address will not be published.

  1. I’m just thinking about the union-pacific railroad and what a huge deal that was back in the day. We never seem to have awesome infrastructure projects like that anymore.

  2. I love the texas one, but I think it could be a triangle,
    Dallas to Austin to San Antonio to Houston and back to Dallas. That would be perfect

  3. A few days ago, someone posted a graphic detailing a country wide HSR network. While I would personally love to see that, it’s incredibly unrealistic due to the loss of viability of HSR over distances/population centers that are better served by airplane.

    This map shows a more realistic approach that focuses on lines that might actually have the ridership to be profitable or sustainable. I.e. Texas triangle(beginning with Texas Central which might not happen), north east corridor(served by Acela Express), Florida(currently served by Brightline with future expansion into Tampa) and the infamous California HSR, among other propositions in the Midwest.

    Lets hope and vote for more trains in the future!

  4. All I ever think of when I see these HSR ideas in the US is the monorail episode of the Simpsons. There’s too much of the country that’s just not populated to make the cost of building and maintaining such a large system practical. In Europe and Japan it makes sense because of the population density.

  5. Connect Atlanta/Memphis to Dallas and Pheonix to Fort Worth and that makes sense. Long term obviously. Regional networks like this would still be really nice.

  6. Balkanization of rail systems would give us another sweet wedge issue to fight about like Pumpkin Spice Lattes. /s

    I agree with the trouble putting a line through the Rockies. The mountains would be snowpiercer difficulty.

  7. When it comes to HSR, your main customer base will be business passengers, just like with domestic airlines. Business passengers prioritize time and scheduling above all else, and will pay exorbitantly for travel which can be scheduled last minute, and is fast.

    Most of these city pairs make sense, the blue line is within 1-2 hours travel time of local flights, and because trains arrive in the middle of the city, they avoid the need for travel to and from an airport. These make sense and can realistically compete against flights. The Texas line makes sense for the same reason, as does the Florida end of the purple line, The north side of the same line, and the entire green one too. as well as the California line and ESPECIALLY the LA-Phoenix link.

    This is actually very well thought out, most city pairs here can realistically compete against air travel, and while there would be no profitable customer base from say, Washington DC to Miami, as flights would be multiple hours faster, there are plenty opportunities along the line for realistic travel.

    I support this, but after the coming recession because we need to reduce government spending to curb inflation.

  8. It shouldn’t be unrealistic to extend the southeast line to Birmingham then Montgomery then towards the gulf to New Orleans then fully connect it up with the isolated Texas HSR am I wrong?

  9. There will be no HSR going through a Red state. GOP is vehemently against any public transport.

  10. Will never happen with multiple states involved and fossil fuel industry lobbyists keen on cars being necessary.

  11. Lol! because fuck Omaha, Kansas City, Denver, OKC, the quad cities, Des Moines, salt lake, Albuquerque, New Orleans. and the giant pile of other places. Thank god you can go to Virginia Beach and Buffalo.

  12. America being car-centric in urban areas and suburban areas is what is going to kill the planet and ruins livability for most places, we need to develop a better train and bike culture, but that can’t be done without massive government focus and replanning every city and town.

  13. The federal government chose trains as the winner, then changed and chose personal cars as the winner. (At the persistent insistence of General Motors) Until the pendulum swings back in favor of rail, it’ll never happen. Even then it will take generations to achieve.

  14. I think this misses the Mountain West/SW a little bit. I know you can’t solve it all but an extension to El Paso, and then up to Albuquerque/Santa Fe, and then to CO Springs/Denver/Boulder/even Cheyenne or Fort Collins would be very efficient and I imagine not too difficult to establish given the population density between some of these cities.

    CO is already trying to work on establishing a front range rail network and NM actually has an existing rail system (the rail runner) that links Albuquerque/Santa Fe and other nearby cities.

  15. ITT: People who think the government should spend trillions of dollars so they can entertain the thought of riding a train from their part of bumfuck nowhere to another part of bumfuck nowhere once a year maybe