Home
»
Trains Magazine
»
Forums
»
General Discussion
»
Who cares if passenger rail disappears ?

Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
Let's not get too small about distances. While the original TGV line went from Paris to Lyons, that line has been extended to Marsailles, with plans to expand from Marsailes to Barcelona, where Spain is building and built a line to Madrid and Seville. Italy has built a line from Rome to Milan, and is building with the French a line west of Milan to Lyons through the Alps. France, Belgium, and the Netherlands have built a line north of Paris to Amsterdam, and a line from Lille to the chunnel to London, well the British are building from the chunnel to London. France has started construction of a line east of Paris to Strastbourg, where the Germans are building a line from Frankfurt too. Germany has already built a line from Frankfurt to the Ruhr, from the Ruhr to Amsterdam, from the Ruhr to Hannover, from Hannover to Hamburg, and are building a line from Hannover to Berlin. Germany has plans to build south from Frankfurt to Munich, and down to Venice eventually. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT SEVERAL THOUSAND MILES OF HIGH SPEED RAIL CONNECTIVITY IN EUROPE EVENTUALLY. The Paris to Lyons line is now tripled what it once was. TRIPLED! So the 300 mile line, with its advantages of air travel, is and has been extended in Europe. Any high speed rail plan in America that will have any support in the Congress and among the American people will have to AT LEAST connect the northeast corridor to Chicago (the midwest), to Florida (the southeast), and to Texas, not to mention a line on the west coast in California. It is approximately 450 miles from Boston to Washington DC. It is approximately the same distance from Washington DC to Atlanta, and the same farther south to Miami. Yes, the east coast line will be long. Its about 800 miles from Philadelphia to Chicago along the !-76, I-80 route. It is less than 100 miles from Toledo to Detroit. Its around 900 miles from Dallas to Chicago along I-35, I-44, and I-55. Its another 250 miles to Houston and 300 miles to San Antonio. Its around 800 miles along I-20 from Dallas to Atlanta, and about the same from Houston to Jacksonville. One of these routes should be built, not both in the South, but which one is preferreable I will leave to the engineers and the politicians. What Amtrak is missing in its routes today is a line from the Midwest to Florida, Its only 650 miles from Chicago to Atlanta. There are two possible routes for the west coast, a shorter 450 mile line following I-5, or a longer 600 mile route following the former US Hwy 99 through Fresno and Bakersville. The same here, let's let the engineers and politicans choose which route is best. The Portland to Vancouver route already have Talgo trains, but some money could be spent to make these trains go faster. The major population centers would be connected. Here are some of the cities included on this 7,000 mile network. Boston, New York City, Philadelphis, Pittsburg, Cleveland, Detroit, Chicago, St. Louis, Dallas, Houston; New Orleans, Mobile, Tallahasse, or Shreveport, Jackson, Birmingham; Jacksonville, Orlando, Miami, Tampa, Atlanta, Charlotte, Raleigh, Richmond, Washington DC, Baltimore, Indianapolis, Lousiville, Nashville, plus Kansas City, Milwaukee, Minneapolis, possibly Albany, Bufallo, Toronto, Montreal, not to mention San Diego, Los Angeles, San Jose, Oakland, even as far as Sacramento, plus Portland, Seattle, and Vancouver. What large towns are missing, such as Norfolk, Memphis, Columbus, Cincinnatti , Denver, and Phoenix could be eventually be built at a later time. These added cities would be about another 1,500 miles to build. EVERY STATE EAST OF THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER IS INCLUDED, EXCEPT FOR VERMONT, NEW HAMPSHIRE, AND MAINE, AND DEPENDING WHETHER A LINE IS BUILT TO DC FROM PITTSBURG, WEST VIRGINIA COULD OR COULD NOT BE INCLUDED! I see no need to build high speed rail over the Rockies, but either the former UP line in Wyoming or the Santa Fe line would be best for costs. I see no need to maintain daily service on the transcontinentals; once, or even twice a week service would do, possibly by private firms. The best scenery is already being served by the Colorado Ski Train west of Denver already. The same could be said of the service between Sacramento and Portland. Recently I have seen a lot of satellite photos of the Northeast blackout, and photos at night of the llights before the blackout. There is no doubt that America has the population density enough for high speed rail between the Northeast to the Midwest to Texas to Florida, and from the Midwest to Florida, and in California. I have compared these lights to the Europeans satellite photos lights too. No doubt in my mind. The satellite photos showed the lights....the density.... Costs. The 7,000 mile plans can be built for the costs of two years of DOT spending, i.e., subsidies to highways and airports. I call for a moratorium on federal subsidies to highways and airports for two years. We won't miss it in the long run, and we would surely enjoy the new high speed rail network built instead. No doubt about it. Vision and insight is needed, along with a proper sense of priorities. Who will ride the fast trains? You will, once the fast train blows your doors off your car on the interstate.
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