A Vision for High Speed Rail

[The True Adonis]

Didn't he mention this being paid for by the 'recovery package'?

I guess you didn`t listen to the whole speech.  Public-Private endeavor.

FOCUS ON STATES, OBSTACLES

The administration's effort focuses on federal and state dollars but private investment could play a key role in accelerating projects, government and rail proponents say.

Obama envisions a network of short and longer-haul corridors of up to 600 miles plied by trains traveling up to 150 miles per hour. Acela service operated by Amtrak only reaches 150 mph over a short stretch in New England.

Freight railroads, which own much of the rail infrastructure outside the Northeast, would also play a key role in facilitating high-speed. The biggest freight lines include CSX Corp, Union Pacific Corp, Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corp, and Norfolk Southern Corp.

Other companies that could factor in new U.S. rail investment include steelmakers and construction firms as well as locomotive manufacturer and equipment supplier GE Transportation, a unit of General Electric Co; Canadian locomotive and train car manufacturer, Bombardier, and brake systems maker, Wabtec.

[The True Adonis]

In a study released to coincide with Obama's announcement, IBM said that it will take many different sources to overcome many obstacles.

The company, which provides technology for rail systems in Asia and Europe, said some $300 billion will be spent around the world over the next five years to build up high-speed rail.

[a_joker10]

Most high speed rail relies on using the same tracks.

Mag Lev although cool is not an option that many would push.

Modified TGV's would be a better option.
this would still take a large investment in the current rail system.

Also most of the trains would be run on an improved existing network.

By the way planes are cheaper. this is because of competition.

Europe is an example of this an average train ticket from Paris to Madrid
http://www.bookryanair.com/SkySales/FRSelect.aspx

Regular Fare Depart: Paris (Beauvais) 16:50 Arrive: Madrid 19:00 1   x   Adult   59.99   EUR Fare:    59.99   EUR Taxes / Fees:    23.12   EUR Total Price:    83.11   EUR http://www.raileurope.com/us/rail/point_to_point/portionresult.htm     *           o Trip 1           o From: Paris, France           o To: Madrid, Spain           o Date: 05/18/2009           o Time: 7:46PM           o Travelers: 1           o Price: $ 111.00 Your Total: $111.00 = 144.3 euro

[SAMSON123]

Samson i still dont get how you would think a plane would beat a train under 600miles? lets say optimistically you could get to the airport in under half and hour...which in my experience almost never happens, then for domestics you have to check in at least half an hour before...one hour gone and you havent gone anywhere. short haul domestic flights never get to 500mph before having to slow down again, so lets say hour and a half flight for the 600mile trip (again optimistic). then add at least half hour for bagge and getting out of the airport...its over three hours at least the same time as a 200mph train (fine if you dont think they'll go that fast but im being lenient on airport times here)I am not bashing you at all in saying that it is impossible to see that a train trip is shorter or as long as a plane trip. Through your example you have left out the hassle of getting yourself and your luggage to the train station. Train stations always exist in the downtown areas of a city. New York's Penn station sits on 34th street...a very crowded area, Philadelphia 30th street station sits in downtown Philadelphia, same with Baltimore, Boston, Washingto DC, LA, SanFransisco etc etc so factor in public transportation or a cab (which are expensive) getting you to the area, factor in haggling with luggage through the terminal to gates, checking in, making sure your luggage gets checked on board with you.. It is almost as much headache as a plane, so no real saving there. None the less I would definitely like to see train travel increase as I love the relaxed environment and much roomier space than a plane, but building a whole HSR infrastructure is costly and will result in high ticket prices until the bulk of the debt is paid off...nowif you were comparing a train to a car...hands down the train would win over a car

reformulate it and see how you could get a plane to win out, only domestic airport in the states that i know of that is easily accessible is Regan international in DC, most others are miles out (the one i used was Bradley CT, took nearly an hour to get to, the one i used in  in Ft Lauderdale also took at least 45mins)If time were not an issue...the plane wins. Most trainstation are in downtown areas and even though closer to ones home, they can be harder or more expensive to get to as the taxi meter would run incessantly as you sit in traffic jams trying to get to the station. It is probably easier to get to the airport than the downtown area in every city in america simply because of the congestion...airports tend to exist at the edge of the city if not the city's suburb

Samson i have lived in the USA and have used Acela, it does go 150 in two short stretches north of CT...could easily get it to 150mph south of NYC if you just upgraded the overhead powerlines (not that expensive) the problem is CT and metro north prohibiting tilt on the line, as well as a number of railroad crossings which require reduced speed...sort that out and Acela would be running a load faster. On top of that i knew loads of people in the US that used the train (ok only in the northeast), they preferred it to sitting in jams on the highway. Most of the infrastructure  south of New York is poorly maintained and frighteningly old. My last trip on Acela was from Boston to Washington DC (visiting relative in america)..it was a bang up ride all the way and a far cry from the smooth rides on France's TGV or Japan's Bullet...even the monorail at Disney World was a better ride and that thing traveled at a 60 MPH clip between teh Magic Kingdom and Epcot

plus from what I remember domestic plane tickets were pretty damn expensive...not saying trains werent either just that in terms of hurting your wallet not much difference at all. Domestic plane trips in america are pretty cheap everywhere now... which would be fierce competition for any train service.

[Bindare_Dundat]

Amtrak is not a high speed train.  To answer all of your concerns, you would have to examine Urban planning Demographics and the Impact of Updated and Technologically Advanced Rail Systems.

I can provide you links if you like, but I sense that you will not read them, so I may not bother.

Educate yourself a bit first on the demographics and then you will be able to see where this is going.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

I can't stop laughing.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

This board is great.

[SAMSON123]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

I can't stop laughing.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

This board is great.

I could not stop laughing either...

Can you imagine ADONIS trying to sound intelligent...whew...too much

[w8tlftr]

Not only does this beg the question of where is the money is coming from and who is going to pay for it....Why is it that when times are good no one thinks of maintaining bridges, tunnels, roadways etc...let alone building highspeed trains, but as soon as things turn financially for the worst all of a sudden there are these projects, ideas, investments that come out of all manner of woodwork???

Why would people settle for highspeed trains when air travel is fast and dirt cheap??

Why not focus on opening up a MANUFACTURING BASE IN AMERICA so that people can get back to work?

What purpose does this high speed train serve?  AmTrak has been in service for years and is a FAILURE...

Holy shit...

I agree with every word you posted.

[24KT]

Why is it that when times are good no one thinks of maintaining bridges, tunnels, roadways etc...let alone building highspeed trains, but as soon as things turn financially for the worst all of a sudden there are these projects, ideas, investments that come out of all manner of woodwork???

Canadians do