American High Speed Rail--challenges and prospects

[klamedia]

All of the videos are just great! Along with the passage of Measure R $40-60 billion worth of transportation money for LA, this is a great time to be living in California!(even if the state is near bankrupt).

[hoosier]

Originally Posted by Robert Stark

as much as they can be a problem cars=freedom.

No they don't. More like cars= coercion by government to make you use them to get around everywhere.

[Ichiban]

Originally Posted by hoosier

No they don't. More like cars= coercion by government to make you use them to get around everywhere.

Can you elaborate on this as I have no clue what you're talking about

[Arist]

I think the USA is to large for High Speed Rail. The Airlines are what you need to get across the country. High speed rail only works if their is 100 miles or less between your major stops, which is why Amtraks Acela Express Works operating between Washington, D.C. and Boston via Baltimore, Philadelphia, and New York along the Northeast Corridor. These Corridors are the only way it can work in my opinion.

Other places it would work....
The Texas Triangle
Houston, San Antonio, Dallas/Fort Worth with stop in Austin and Waco, and make it a circuit.

What I call the Pacific Shot
From San Diego to LA, stopping at Huntington Beach and Ocean side (all this along the coast) then up into Bakersfield, Fresno, then to San Jose, San Francisco, Oakland and turning around in Sacramento, all at 120 mph.

those are the only places I think High Speed Rail could work in the USA, anyone else have any ideas?

[klamedia]

So create HSR networks that connect regions like California, the Northeastern Seaboard perhaps the Midwest Corridor w/ Chicago as its focal point. We don't need to create a national HSR network but I'm sure you had critics saying that the US was too big to create a national highway system when that was proposed.

[Arist]

A national highway system makes since though, it allows for the movement of the army across the country in case of an attack, transportation of goods from city to city and a cheaper way for people to move about the country. During the Cold war it was planed that if there was a massive nuclear attack on the USA, the survivors would have a pre set system for them to establish a new society along the high ways. A high speed rail line across the USA does not make since because If your going to travel across the country your going to fly. the rails would only work for regions.

[nomarandlee]

Originally Posted by Arist

I think the USA is to large for High Speed Rail. The Airlines are what you need to get across the country. High speed rail only works if their is 100 miles or less between your major stops, which is why Amtraks Acela Express Works operating between Washington, D.C. and Boston via Baltimore, Philadelphia, and New York along the Northeast Corridor. These Corridors are the only way it can work in my opinion.

Other places it would work....
The Texas Triangle
Houston, San Antonio, Dallas/Fort Worth with stop in Austin and Waco, and make it a circuit.

What I call the Pacific Shot
From San Diego to LA, stopping at Huntington Beach and Ocean side (all this along the coast) then up into Bakersfield, Fresno, then to San Jose, San Francisco, Oakland and turning around in Sacramento, all at 120 mph.

those are the only places I think High Speed Rail could work in the USA, anyone else have any ideas?

I generally agree with you. However I think the Pacifec NW, Florida triangle, and some regional Chicago (Chi-Mil, Chi-St.Louis, Chi-Cinny) also make some sense. If Canada ever deveoped their St.Lawerence corridor I think linking Detroit-Chicago up to would also make sense.

[andysimo123]

Originally Posted by Arist

A national highway system makes since though, it allows for the movement of the army across the country in case of an attack, transportation of goods from city to city and a cheaper way for people to move about the country. During the Cold war it was planed that if there was a massive nuclear attack on the USA, the survivors would have a pre set system for them to establish a new society along the high ways. A high speed rail line across the USA does not make since because If your going to travel across the country your going to fly. the rails would only work for regions.

Can I point out something.....

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=BZmO60-BIZs

All armies use rail transport to move large amounts of equipment.

found this as well http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=dNeiTv03YMQ

... it looks like something out of war of the worlds.

[vgmLiquid]

Originally Posted by andysimo123

Can I point out something.....

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=BZmO60-BIZs

All armies use rail transport to move large amounts of equipment.

found this as well http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=dNeiTv03YMQ

... it looks like something out of war of the worlds.

When you posted this it reminded me of a picture I saw on flickr recently...notice the tanks.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/pjayres/3049973769/

image hosted on flickr

[hoosier]

In reality, most of the US would be well served by HSR. CHina is larger than the U.S. and has plans for a national HSR network.

The NW, California, Texas, and everywhere east of the Mississippi can support a HSR system. But the existing passenger rail infrastructure in the low population areas needs to be improved even if it is not HSR.

[ir desi]

Yes, the US rail network is frequently used to move military equipment.

The US can easily support a HSR system, particularly centered on regional hubs. However, it requires a significant change in psychology that just takes time to occur.

I also think that if we do build full regional networks, we should connect the entire network nationally as well, particularly when the distances between unconnected networks are 100-150 miles. Although the traffic will be less than on other stretches, these stretches will provide the cohesive nature that the system needs.

[Onn]

Originally Posted by hoosier

In reality, most of the US would be well served by HSR. CHina is larger than the U.S. and has plans for a national HSR network.

Huh?

1. Russia: 17,075,200 km2 (6,591,027 mi2)
2. Canada: 9,984,670 km2 (3,854,082 mi2)
3. United States: 9,631,418 km2 (3,717,727 mi2)
4. China: 9,596,960 km2 (3,704,426 mi2)
5. Brazil: 8,511,965 km2 (3,285,618 mi2)
6. Australia: 7,686,850 km2 (2,967,124 mi2)
7. India: 3,287,590 km2 (1,269,009 mi2)

http://geography.about.com/od/countr...gcountries.htm

Actually no, the US is larger (counting Alaska). And half of China is mountainous territory, that is probably unfit for building high-speed rail. A fully connected US mainland would probably never work, it is too large. China's major cites are mostly concentrated in the East, in a much smaller region, unlike in the US, where the major cities are East, West, North, South; with substantial nothingness in between. I think most people could be served by high-speed rail corridors, but they would still have to take planes anywhere outside their region.

[nomarandlee]

Agreed, plus China has a little important factor which makes HSR a vital priority compared to the U.S. is that they have more then four times the people crammed into their territory.

[Onn]

Originally Posted by nomarandlee

Agreed, plus China has a little important factor which makes HSR a vital priority compared to the U.S. is that they have more then four times the people crammed into their territory.

http://www.china-highway.com/bencand...id=165&id=7641

This map illustrating highway planning says it all.

[Quadrilateral]

Originally Posted by Onn

Huh?
Actually no, the US is larger (counting Alaska). And half of China is mountainous territory, that is probably unfit for building high-speed rail. A fully connected US mainland would probably never work, it is too large. China's major cites are mostly concentrated in the East, in a much smaller region, unlike in the US, where the major cities are East, West, North, South; with substantial nothingness in between. I think most people could be served by high-speed rail corridors, but they would still have to take planes anywhere outside their region.

Uh... don't think Alaska necessarily needs HSR. So for the purpose of building it, we can consider just the contiguous US.

[Onn]

Originally Posted by Quadrilateral

Uh... don't think Alaska necessarily needs HSR. So for the purpose of building it, we can consider just the contiguous US.

Well if we're not considering Alaska it’s hard to consider half of China also, because half the country has mountains where high-speed rail is improbable to build, as the map above clearly illustrates.

[YeahWho]

Originally Posted by Arist

I think the USA is to large for High Speed Rail. The Airlines are what you need to get across the country. High speed rail only works if their is 100 miles or less between your major stops, which is why Amtraks Acela Express Works operating between Washington, D.C. and Boston via Baltimore, Philadelphia, and New York along the Northeast Corridor. These Corridors are the only way it can work in my opinion.

Other places it would work....
The Texas Triangle
Houston, San Antonio, Dallas/Fort Worth with stop in Austin and Waco, and make it a circuit.

What I call the Pacific Shot
From San Diego to LA, stopping at Huntington Beach and Ocean side (all this along the coast) then up into Bakersfield, Fresno, then to San Jose, San Francisco, Oakland and turning around in Sacramento, all at 120 mph.

those are the only places I think High Speed Rail could work in the USA, anyone else have any ideas?

I always think the Texas triangle would work. They cover a population in excess of 10 million combined. Probably from Dallas, it will branch off to OKC and Tulsa.

[Third of a kind]

That California HSR looks like ICE trains with a different color scheme. Now if it's built and moves just as quick as the ICE that will be amazing!

[Onn]

Originally Posted by Third of a kind

That California HSR looks like ICE trains with a different color scheme. Now if it's built and moves just as quick as the ICE that will be amazing!

Those trains in the videos are only placeholders, California is no where near the stage of buying the trains.

[Third of a kind]

Originally Posted by Onn

Those trains in the videos are only placeholders, California is no where near the stage of buying the trains.

Hence the fact I said "If" they were built.