Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
Don, You must take into account that the capital costs in that 900 mile corridor are higher for the rail line than it is for the airline. Assuming that no one gets a subsidy, all the airline has to pay for in terms of capital investment is the airplane, and about 20,000 ft worth of two runways, and maybe their share of each air terminal. The railroad has to pay for 900 miles of railroad. The HSR may actually be more fuel efficient than the airline, but their capital costs are a multitude higher. Plus the airplane will still get there faster. There is a reason passenger rail plays second fiddle to all other forms of moving people. Rairoads are slower than airlines, less flexible than bus lines, and lack the individual freedom of the private auto. The only way around this is to use freight rail lines (hopefully only having to pay for incremental maintenance costs), and run the rail schedule in situations where the time factor is not critical e.g. sight seeing tour trains and/or the overnight sleeper trains (where it is better for the traveller to take eight or so hours in transit than to only take two hours by plane in the same corridor but having to embark/disembark at odd hours of the night). That is why it is important to lobby for a retention of the rights of passage over the Class I rail network, and pinpoint those corridors in which sufficient tour passengers can make a go without the need for a subidy, and those corridors where a train can leave at a decent evening hour from one city and arrive at a decent AM hour in the next city at normal freight train speeds.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag