Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
Paul Milenkovic's comparative analysis is excellent.  He is one of the most thoughtful and seemingly knowledgeable contributors to these forums. Why a 220 mph train other than for bragging rights?  It is approximately 420 rail miles from LAX to SFO.  If a train could maintain an average speed of 105 mph between the two points, it could cover the distance in four hours.  This would be two hours better than the estimated driving time according to MapQuest.  I have found MapQuest's estimates to be a bit optimistic. I don't know what the top speed would need to be over what distance to achieve an average speed of 105 mph between the two points, but I suspect 220 mph is on the high side.  Could it be achieved with a top speed of 150 mph? If the answer is yes, would the cost of building the railroad come in less than the estimated $167 billion, which includes an estimate of the financing?  Or would an average speed of 90 mph make the train competitive with driving?  What would that do to the cost estimates? As I have pointed out in previous posts, proponents of high speed rail, according to studies by the GAO, as well as others, consistently overstate the benefits and understate the costs.  As Mr. Milenkovic has made clear, it appears that the proponents of the CHSRP have followed suit.
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