What would the founding fathers think about this.

[jimrice4449]

I can understand one notable absence in this discussion since it seems to be absent from most discussions of "what the government should do" and that is, where is the constitutional authority for the govt's participation in this or any other scheme. Article 1 section 8 of the Constitution enumerates the powers of Congress. The 10th ammendment to the Constitution reserves all powers not ennumerated to "the states and the people respectively". I can see how the Interstate Highway system, the air traffic control network and even the 1862 Pacific Railway Act could, w/o undue straining of one's powers of extrapolation, be justified by the enumerated power to "establish post offices and post roads" but a psgr rail system stretches it to the breaking point.

[vsmith]

QUOTE: Originally posted by owlsroost

QUOTE: the US has a lot more roads to avoid

James,

Have you ever been to the UK (or anywhere else in Europe) ?

Europe in general is densely populated and has a road network to match (including a modern motorway (interstate) network), most of which existed in some form or other before railways were invented. The safety hazards of grade crossings were an issue here 150 years ago, let alone today.

High speed passenger rail (150 - 200 mph) makes sense up to around 500 miles or so between major population centres - much beyond that aircraft have the journey time advantage, but this is offset by modern trains being regarded as nicer, less stressful way to travel, so even if trains take a bit longer overall many people still prefer it to air travel. Eurostar has a dominant market share of London-Paris passenger traffic, and the original Paris-Lyon TGV line pretty much wiped out the air service between those points soon after it opened - they now have to run double-deck trains at close headways to cope with the demand.....

Modern high speed trains don't have a problem with 3%-4% gradients, so following motorways/interstates isn't that much of a problem provided the curvature is OK (parts of the Paris-Lyon TGV line in the mountains feel a bit like a roller-coaster ride at 170mph !).

Building trans-continental high speed passenger rail lines in the US wouldn't make economic sense - the overall population densities are too low for the most part, but in the right corridors I think it would work.
Tony

Try being in the upstairs bathroom when its going thru some of those curves![:D][;)]

Exactly my feeling. Most cross country routes makes no sense. But in the denser urban areas currently nearing gridlock on the roads and airports its very logical. Some suggested routes

1. Boston, NYC, DC, Raliegh, Savannah, Jacksonville, Orlando, Miami.

2. NYC, Pittsburg, Cleveland, Toledo/Detroit, Chicago.

3. Chicago, St Louis, Memphis, New Orleans

4. Sacramento, Oakland, Bakersfield, Palmdale, Los Angeles, Santa Ana, San Diego

5. Vancouver, Seattle, Tacoma, Portland


The longer routes would likely be broken up into shorter indivdual routes, like Boston to DC then DC to Jacksonville, then Jacksonville to Miami.

these routes parallel air routes that are currently very crowded with airlines cutting services and flights to save costs, this would give the HSR a definite advantage.

The biggest deterent is aquiring the ROWs to allow for grade crossing free routes, thats were the largest costs would be associated.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by vsmith



you post all this hoopla and you have the kahona's to call me a windbag? Sheeee-it!

I think we know WHO the windbag is...[;)]

[:0]WE KNOW WHO THE LIAR IS! Wouldn't you be the windbag since you said you would shut-up then didn't.[:0]Triple handedly dragging us well of the beaten path and then complaining that we got there.[D)]
[:(][xx(] [tdn][tdn]I am glad you have your priorities straight; SOCOLISMFIRST, the LIVES OF WOMEN AND CHILDREN LAST![tdn][tdn][xx(][:(] [V]



TOO BAD YOU WON'T OPEN YOU EYES TO SEE THE TRUTH![V]
YOU NEVER PRESENTED ONE SHRED OF FACTS.

[Anonymous]

So is freight viable on a short corridor run? Can a line really fit in a freeway median, without being elevated (or would that not help), what about passing sidings? Or junctions, would the line lift up and over one lane of traffic, then back down? What about emergency vehicle turn arounds on the freeway would these cross the tracks; nothing worse than waiting for a train while someone is dieing.

Thank you, Jiminy Cricket. [:)]

[dharmon]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098

QUOTE: Originally posted by vsmith



you post all this hoopla and you have the kahona's to call me a windbag? Sheeee-it!

I think we know WHO the windbag is...[;)]

[:0]WE KNOW WHO THE LIAR IS! Wouldn't you be the windbag since you said you would shut-up then didn't.[:0]Triple handedly dragging us well of the beaten path and then complaining that we got there.[D)]
[:(][xx(] [tdn][tdn]I am glad you have your priorities straight; SCOLISM FIRST, the LIVES OF WOMEN AND CHILDREN LAST![tdn][tdn][xx(][:(] [V]

Scolism? Is that some kind of disease?

"Hi I'm Sally Struthers, and for just pennies a day, less than the cost of a dictionary, you can sponsor a poor child suffering from scolism. Young Aswam here contracted scolism when he was sucked down the street by a passing SABO round, fired from a US tank......."

Say Vic....it's time for a beer....you fly (or ride the train) and I'll buy...

Dan

[Anonymous]

I was making a joke, why just count all of vsmith's mispelling. My spellcheck also thinks scolism is a word.

[Anonymous]

I was making a joke, why just count all of vsmith's mispelling. My spellcheck also thinks scolism is a word. That's SABOT.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098

So is freight viable on a short corridor run? Can a line really fit in a freeway median, without being elevated (or would that not help), what about passing sidings? Or junctions, would the line lift up and over one lane of traffic, then back down? What about emergency vehicle turn arounds on the freeway would these cross the tracks; nothing worse than waiting for a train while someone is dieing.

Thank you, Jiminy Cricket. [:)]

The reason today's freight railroads prefer long haul to short haul is simply an outgrowth of the railroads' marriage to the carload/classification yard mentality. Yards eat up profits, having to make up trains eats up profits, so they try to make up for that by going long. That doens't mean short haul railroading can't work, HSR or no HSR. The advent of the unit train actually makes shorter haul corridors more profitable, because once you eliminate the need for yard work, you are left with simply running from point of origin to destination and back, e.g. it's all in the cycle. If you count intermodal as a form of the unit trains concept, you can see how the short haul can work there too. There are several 3PI's in Washington State running short haul intermodal from Eastern Washington to Puget Sound, with runs averaging 100 to 300 miles point to point, and they are making good money doing so.

For HSR it can work the same, because the profits are all dependent on the number of cycles per year, not the length of the haul. 10,000 revenue ton miles per year is 10,000 revenue ton miles per year, whether it is in the form of a few hundred 100 mile cycles per year or ten 1000 mile cycles per year. And on the shorther hauls you can usually charge a higher per ton mile rate than on the long hauls because in the short hauls you are siphoning market share from the truckers.

Regarding freeway medians, obviously it won't work everywhere, but I have driven thousands of miles worth of our Nation's Interstate Highway System out West here and there are quite a few long stretches where rail access to the median would be unencumbered by anything, e.g. overpasses with no median-situated support pier. The rails would need an entry overpass or underpass to get to and from the medians, that is true. But the cost savings of running down the literal middle of the freeway would go a long way toward making the concept viable.

If you are from Southern Idaho, next time you drive I-84 east out of Boise take a notice of the space available in the median. Or if you are from the Great State (of mind) of North Idaho, take in I-90 if you ever travel to Seattle. Plenty of room in that median. So what if the cops can't play speed trap in the median?

There are also quite a number of abandoned railroad grades out West where there are long tangents and/or gradual curvatures that could also be converted to HSR at less than prime cost. Much of the Milwaukee ROW west of MIles City MT and along the Clark Fork River in western Montana is ideal. The ex-Milwaukee ROW and SP&S corridors in Eastern Washington are also good expamples.

[Anonymous]

As for the whole political thing, just a quick anecdote.

Teddy (hic) Kennedy was being interviewed by NBC's Tim Russert. Russert read a statement to Kennedy from an ostensible proponent of the Iraq war which went something like this (paraphrasing);

" 'Saddam has WMD's, and he will use them against us if we don't take action against him, etc. etc.' "

Russert then asked Kennedy for his response to this statement. Kennedy replied to the effect (paraphrasing);

"(hic) Well, Tim, whoever (hic)made shuch a statement should be made (hic) accountable for lying to the American people about the reashons for going to war in I(hic)raq."

Russert replied (paraphrasing) "Well, Senator, that was YOU who made that statement back in 1998".

After that, Kennedy tried to change the subject with some mumbo-jumgo to save face.

Yep, the only stench coming from that side of the aisle is the stench of complete and utter dishonesty. And you folks on the left want us to go back to THAT?! No thanks.

[Big_Boy_4005]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098

Democrats, this is your conscience. WAS IT WRONG TO OVER-THROW A DICATOR WHO MURDERED THOUSANDS OF HIS OWN PEOPLE A YEAR?!!!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2854019.stm Ahem, ahem.

http://www.state.gov/p/nea/rls/01fs/14906.htm http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/iraq/timeline3.htm The proof is in the pudding, these violations alone, are strong indicators he was hiding something; and reason enough o invade! Why so you suppose he wouldn’t allow inspections. SO THEY WOULDN’T FIND THE WEAPONS.

Saddam implied, according to the former Presidential Secretary, that Iraq would resume WMD programs after sanctions in order to restore the “strategic balance” within the region and, particularly, against Israel.

---

Following Husayn Kamil’s defection, Saddam took steps to better manage Iraqi industry, and with the creation of the Iraqi Industrial Committee (IIC) in September 1995, the stage was set for a renewal of Iraq’s chemical industry. The IIC coordinated a range of projects aimed at developing an indigenous chemical production capability for strategically important chemicals that were difficult to import under UN sanctions, according to reporting.

---

Between 1996 and 2003, the IIC coordinated large and important projects for the indigenous production of chemicals.
· A written order from Saddam established the National Project for Pharmaceuticals and Pesticides (NPPP). NPPP focused on the synthesis of drugs and pesticides, for which Iraq in the past relied heavily on foreign suppliers.
· The IIC examined over 1,000 chemicals for initial R&D to determine the feasibility of scaled-up production. ISG notes that two chemicals on this list were compounds that are consistent with an experimental VX pathway.
· The process for vetting the 1,000 chemicals for economic feasibility and large-scale production was intensive and formalized. The IIC leadership built in several layers of review, research, and justification before compounds were selected for scale-up, raising further suspicion about the three compounds, particularly dicyclocarbodiimide (DCC)—a dehydrating agent that can be used as a VX stabilizer
· Dr. Ja’far Dhia Ja’far, and IIC member, could not recall which projects were accepted for scale-up but he knew that some compounds were dual-use and declarable to the UN, and that the National Monitoring Directorate (NMD) did not declare all of the chemicals.

---

Reports of an unexplained discovery of VX traces on missile warhead fragments in April 1997 led to further tension between UNSCOM and Iraq. The uneasy relationship escalated with the discovery of the ‘Air Force Document’ (see RSI chapter) in July 1998, which indicated further Iraqi deception and obfuscation over its CW disclosures. Iraq’s anger about these two major issues was a contributing factor to Saddam’s decisions to suspend cooperation with UNSCOM and IAEA.
· The lack of inspectors allowed further dual-use infrastructure to be developed. The lack of effective monitoring emboldened Saddam and his illicit procurement activities.
Concurrently, Iraq continued to upgrade its indigenous manufacturing capability, pursuing glass-lining technology and manufacturing its own multipurpose controllers.
Scientists from the former CW program formulated agent simulants such as concentrated Malathion, a pesticide, and locally manufactured a copy of a system to disperse the simulant in 2001 and 2002.

---

Thionyl chloride, a controlled CW precursor that Iraq had used as a chlorinating agent in its sulfur mustard and nerve agent production processes up until 1990, was part of the program for the indigenous production of chemicals. The IIC tasked the Jaber Bin Hayan State Company between 1996 and 1998 to research the small-scale production of thionyl chloride, according to reporting. According to official reporting, thionyl chloride production was reported to Iraq’s National Monitoring Directorate.

---

Iraq began research on VX in the 1980s but failed to declare any production or attempts to produce VX until August 1995.

---

Excerpts from: http://www.cia.gov/cia/reports/iraq_wmd_2004/chap5.html#sect0
Why look at what your beloved Al Gore said in 1998. “
"If you allow someone like Saddam Hussein to get nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles, chemical weapons, biological weapons, how many people is he going to kill with such weapons? He's already demonstrated a willingness to use these weapons. He poison-gassed his own people. He used poison gas and other weapons of mass destruction against his neighbors. This man has no compunction about killing lots and lots of people."
Only look here if not convinced the war is and was worth it. http://www.cia.gov/cia/reports/iraq_wmd_2004/images/ch5_img00.jpg

QUOTE: Again all your facts are based on pre-invasion intelligence that was openly criticized for being flawed by our allies.

A little proof please! Wasn’t it British intelligence information that helped get us started?

QUOTE: I've stated my last post of this as the original topic is now irrelevant.

Aren’t you proud of yourself for doing that! Well I don’t plan on having this thread derailed. Back to the subject!

James, the answer is yes it was wrong. We never invaded Cuba or China during the cold war. It is none of our business what soverign nations do within their borders. When their actions leak out over their borders then the UN can get involved. Who died and left the US in charge of the world?

What does any of this crap have to do with trains?

[Anonymous]

Murphy Siding addressed that! Your bringing this back up only helps to drag us farther off topic. Windbag alert. Why in the world did we invade Germany in World War II, it didn't have anything to do with mass murder?
Of course what do you expect from someone who calls the truth crap, and doesn't want us to uphold UN sanctions, protect our country, and spread freedom. WHAT WOULD THE FOUNDERS OF OUR GREAT NATION THINK OF THAT? This is my last post on the thread dealing with WMDs; and I am not lying, like vsimth. Blow up a storm; thank you for attempting to derail yet another try to get us back on Trains. I don't want to have Bergie nuke a very informative train thread. I apologize for having gotten us this far into politics, and will try yet again to get us back on trains.

railroads son, railroads.

[vsmith]

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

As for the whole political thing, just a quick anecdote.

Teddy (hic) Kennedy was being interviewed by NBC's Tim Russert. Russert read a statement to Kennedy from an ostensible proponent of the Iraq war which went something like this (paraphrasing);

" 'Saddam has WMD's, and he will use them against us if we don't take action against him, etc. etc.' "

Russert then asked Kennedy for his response to this statement. Kennedy replied to the effect (paraphrasing);

"(hic) Well, Tim, whoever (hic)made shuch a statement should be made (hic) accountable for lying to the American people about the reashons for going to war in I(hic)raq."

Russert replied (paraphrasing) "Well, Senator, that was YOU who made that statement back in 1998".

After that, Kennedy tried to change the subject with some mumbo-jumgo to save face.

Yep, the only stench coming from that side of the aisle is the stench of complete and utter dishonesty. And you folks on the left want us to go back to THAT?! No thanks.

Oh Scooter, Scooter Libby where are you?

And of course the republicans only smell like roses...Guess that explains why the approval rating for this president is a horrible 37%. worse than Clinton (oh thats gotta hurt)

Face it, the only stench is eminating from the oval office.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098

So is freight viable on a short corridor run? Can a line really fit in a freeway median, without being elevated (or would that not help), what about passing sidings? Or junctions, would the line lift up and over one lane of traffic, then back down? What about emergency vehicle turn arounds on the freeway would these cross the tracks; nothing worse than waiting for a train while someone is dieing.

Thank you, Jiminy Cricket. [:)]

The reason today's freight railroads prefer long haul to short haul is simply an outgrowth of the railroads' marriage to the carload/classification yard mentality. Yards eat up profits, having to make up trains eats up profits, so they try to make up for that by going long. That doens't mean short haul railroading can't work, HSR or no HSR. The advent of the unit train actually makes shorter haul corridors more profitable, because once you eliminate the need for yard work, you are left with simply running from point of origin to destination and back, e.g. it's all in the cycle. If you count intermodal as a form of the unit trains concept, you can see how the short haul can work there too. There are several 3PI's in Washington State running short haul intermodal from Eastern Washington to Puget Sound, with runs averaging 100 to 300 miles point to point, and they are making good money doing so.

For HSR it can work the same, because the profits are all dependent on the number of cycles per year, not the length of the haul. 10,000 revenue ton miles per year is 10,000 revenue ton miles per year, whether it is in the form of a few hundred 100 mile cycles per year or ten 1000 mile cycles per year. And on the shorther hauls you can usually charge a higher per ton mile rate than on the long hauls because in the short hauls you are siphoning market share from the truckers.

Regarding freeway medians, obviously it won't work everywhere, but I have driven thousands of miles worth of our Nation's Interstate Highway System out West here and there are quite a few long stretches where rail access to the median would be unencumbered by anything, e.g. overpasses with no median-situated support pier. The rails would need an entry overpass or underpass to get to and from the medians, that is true. But the cost savings of running down the literal middle of the freeway would go a long way toward making the concept viable.

If you are from Southern Idaho, next time you drive I-84 east out of Boise take a notice of the space available in the median. Or if you are from the Great State (of mind) of North Idaho, take in I-90 if you ever travel to Seattle. Plenty of room in that median. So what if the cops can't play speed trap in the median?

There are also quite a number of abandoned railroad grades out West where there are long tangents and/or gradual curvatures that could also be converted to HSR at less than prime cost. Much of the Milwaukee ROW west of MIles City MT and along the Clark Fork River in western Montana is ideal. The ex-Milwaukee ROW and SP&S corridors in Eastern Washington are also good expamples.

Yeah, I have seen them. I think the freeway idea is very good. Who owns the median, is it federal, or state? Does it really make sense fuel-wise to run freight that fast, don't a lot of railroads focus on fuel efficiency?

Again folks, I apologize for the democrats attempting to hijack this thread, and kill it.

[vsmith]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098

Murphy Siding addressed that! Your bringing this back up only helps to drag us farther off topic. Windbag alert. Why in the world did we invade Germany in World War II, it didn't have anything to do with mass murder?
Of course what do you expect from someone who calls the truth crap, and doesn't want us to uphold UN sanctions, protect our country, and spread freedom. WHAT WOULD THE FOUNDERS OF OUR GREAT NATION THINK OF THAT? This is my last post on the thread dealing with WMDs; and I am not lying, like vsimth. Blow up a storm; thank you for attempting to derail yet another try to get us back on Trains. I don't want to have Bergie nuke a very informative train thread. I apologize for having gotten us this far into politics, and will try yet again to get us back on trains.

railroads son, railroads.

The facts today back me up, its you who cannot and will not accept any other concept of reality that the one you've chosen. I detest being called a liar by someone who has continually parroted the official party position [:(!]

Jezzzuz buddy you call me a socialist? Your a Soviet...If you understand exactly what a Model Soviet citizen was intended to be, then you'll understand why I call you that.

"The model Soviet citizen shall be only be educated by doctrine approved by the party, he shall obey the party unquestioningly, and be loyal to only the party and will not tolerate dissent from outside the party."

Sound familiar? SOVIET

[Anonymous]

Sorry Murphy, I tried, my fault. I say to vsmith, if the boot fits, wear it. If you are honest do like you said and SHUT UP!
PLEASE BACK TO RAILROADS?

[vsmith]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098

QUOTE: Where did I ever say I wanted the US to operate like France? thats out of context. I just said government funding of HSR is a good idea. I can tell you've never been to France...Actually visiting a place before you condemn it is always a good idea, I used to think Italy was a dump, till I spent some time there, now I wont hesitate to take a visit there ...Ah Venice! France is a beautiful place, amazing country sides, terrific wine, food, OH the cheeses! But if you dont like France might I suggest Japan? Perhaps the most awesome national rail system in the world, all funded by the government, and great sushi too!

It is apparent you have not been there recently either. Have you looked at the headlines about France; the place is in a near civil war. You always want socialism, and France is run on total socialism, which is just a mild from of communism. People don’t like working to pay for nonsense like that, so they get mad and burn things. France will never compare to America, head out to Idaho, and take a look at the wide-open country on an early morning, no distant smoke from burning vehicles, no stench of the unabated populace. Not to mention, you can’t hunt in France, or even own a gun. Food well, I will take a hamburger any day of the week, and I can’t drink wine, plus if you want cheese got to Wisconsin. If you want real good eats nothing can ever beat a mess of homemade fried chicken, that’s good eatin. Japan would be better, but you idea of awesome, is being built on the backs of laborers being stolen from. If I were to steal rob banks, and mug people to build a HLS, you would call me a criminal. Were I to have congress do it, you would be pleased as punch.
I have decided to take you up on you offer, why don’t you get together with you friends and pay for a ticket for me to Europe. If it is as good as you say, I might change my mind.


IF THESE PLACES ARE SO GREAT- WHY ARE YOU STILL HERE?

PS it was this last line where I decided I might have to unpack the flamethrower.

I was up to this point keeping it cordial agreeing with some of your arguments while holding my own opinion, but the tone and demenor of this post it where I decided not to step down but be more confrontational. I AM WILLING TO TALK TRAINS, but I WILL NOT backdown when confronted. I mearly replied, you kept escallated, your print got LARGER and again I mearly reply and hold my ground, I never called you a lair, you started the name calling. I will not stand by and have someone call me names.

[vsmith]

If I'm Honest shut up? No!

I'm willing to play nice but not until I get an apology from Lotus for calling me a liar merely for DISAGREEING with him, If he does then I'll apologize for calling him a Soviet, but not until...I'm having to much fun!

[DSchmitt]

QUOTE: Originally posted by jimrice4449

"I can understand one notable absence in this discussion since it seems to be absent from most discussions of "what the government should do" and that is, where is the constitutional authority for the govt's participation in this or any other scheme. Article 1 section 8 of the Constitution enumerates the powers of Congress. The 10th ammendment to the Constitution reserves all powers not ennumerated to "the states and the people respectively". I can see how the Interstate Highway system, the air traffic control network and even the 1862 Pacific Railway Act could, w/o undue straining of one's powers of extrapolation, be justified by the enumerated power to "establish post offices and post roads" but a psgr rail system stretches it to the breaking point."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Somtimes to understand what the Constitution means, we need to look at what the Government did when the writers of the Constitution actually ran things. From my post on page 2 of this thread.

The basic National Transportation Policy of the United States was established by "Gallatin's Road and Canal Report" presented by Treasury Secretary Albert Gallatin to the Senate on April 4, 1808. < added: Mr. Gallatin was Treasury Secretary under Thomas Jefferson>
1. "the legitimacy of Government aid to finance transportation projects transcending local needs."
2. "only those routes be constructed, which would yield reasonable returns for the original investment."
3. "a nationwide system of thansportation was essential in the interests of national defence."

This policy was determined when the only "instruments of transportation" were roads and canals but has not been restricted to them.


One of the early US Government built roads was the Natchez Trace from Nashville TN to Natchez (the capitol of the Mississippi Territory) . Thomas Jefferaon directed the Secretary of War to to negotiate a treaty with the Indians to allow improvement of road access through their territory. A 460-mile road traversable by wagons, constructed by the Army, was officially opened in 1809.

<added: US Government spending on roads predates the Gallatin Report for instance>

The National Pike (officially Cumberland Road) wad authorized by Congress in 1803 was the "first important road to be built with Federal funds". The route of the first 72-mile (Cumberland MD to Brownsville PA) segment was selected by commissioners apointed by Presedent Jefferson. It eventually (by 1841) ran 677 miles from Cumbrtland to the Missippi River in the vicinity of St Louis.

<added: The policy as established appears to allow Federal assistance in building transportation facilities such as roads, canals, railroad lines and airports when they serve a national purpose. I don't think it justifies the Federal government furnishing the transportation (for instance owning and operating passenger trains). Item 2 of the Gallatin Report requires a reasonable return on the investment. I don't believe that a National passenger rail system, in essence, owned and operated by the Federal government (AMTRAK) yields a reasonable return on the investment. I do believe that there may justification for some Federal investment in Regional systems owned by State and local agencies, however. >

[blhanel]

//wheels popcorn popper over from diner

I promise I won't break it, CopCarSS!

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Son: I worry sometimes that you just don't get it.How about trying to get back to subject (TRAINS) without needing to get in the last jab? ( Oh yea? Yea! Oh Yea? Yea!=) Think about it please.

Yes Sir, and Sorry Sir! [*^_^*] [B)] Thank you for being so patient. [bow]

QUOTE: Now then: How are you going to pay for the lines between areas of high population density that have to pass through long distances of low population states, like yours and mine?

Well the main problem I see with funding, goes back to economics. There ain't no such thing as a free lunch. We are going to have to pay, be it taxes or otherwise.

[vsmith]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

Now then: How are you going to pay for the lines between areas of high population density that have to pass through long distances of low population states, like yours and mine?

Like I said I'd prefer to talk TRAINS....

Depends if your talking long distance cross country or intercity from large center to large center thru rural areas. It would likely require a combination of State and Federal funding, similar to what California is doing, I beleive its 40% state, 60% federal funding to construct rail systems here. of course the cities where the routes pass through are expected to pay a larger sum of the state fees. The state fees can be a deal buster though, if the state is poor it might not be able to ante up. Even in large populace states, example, Calif is having that problem now trying to come up with its share of the funding for a proposed HSR system here.

[Big_Boy_4005]

If we are going to discuss high speed rail in North America, the discussion is going to be very short. There are two factors that make it virtually impossible, geography and economics.

Economics has been pretty well discussed, if the government doesn't do it nobody will. High speed rail can't coexist with freight, so new right of ways will be needed. That's a knock out punch right there.

So why does high speed rail work in Europe and Japan. Geography. High speed rail works best for trips under 300 miles between dense population centers. It is less practical to fly in Europe and Japan than to take the train. Here in the US we just don't have enough of those situations outside the NEC.

[dharmon]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098

Murphy Siding addressed that! Your bringing this back up only helps to drag us farther off topic. Windbag alert. Why in the world did we invade Germany in World War II, it didn't have anything to do with mass murder?
Of course what do you expect from someone who calls the truth crap, and doesn't want us to uphold UN sanctions, protect our country, and spread freedom. WHAT WOULD THE FOUNDERS OF OUR GREAT NATION THINK OF THAT? This is my last post on the thread dealing with WMDs; and I am not lying, like vsimth. Blow up a storm; thank you for attempting to derail yet another try to get us back on Trains. I don't want to have Bergie nuke a very informative train thread. I apologize for having gotten us this far into politics, and will try yet again to get us back on trains.

railroads son, railroads.

Boy you lost me with the why did we invade Germany thing...Is that like Animal House "did we give up when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor..." thing....


I think it might have had something to do with them being allied with Japan (and Italy) in a little trio known as the Axis. Maybe a bit to do with them pounding the hell out of our Brit friends and a bit more to do with U Boats sinking US merchantmen off the US east coast and it was only going to be a matter of time before we faced off. Roosevelt knew we weren't prepared and was building up for the eventuality. It had very little (read nothing) to do with mass murder...the evidence of the holocaust was not widely known until the camps were uncovered by troops on the ground. But what do I know...I'm not a teenager?

Dan

[dharmon]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Big_Boy_4005

If we are going to discuss high speed rail in North America, the discussion is going to be very short. There are two factors that make it virtually impossible, geography and economics.

Economics has been pretty well discussed, if the government doesn't do it nobody will. High speed rail can't coexist with freight, so new right of ways will be needed. That's a knock out punch right there.

So why does high speed rail work in Europe and Japan. Geography. High speed rail works best for trips under 300 miles between dense population centers. It is less practical to fly in Europe and Japan than to take the train. Here in the US we just don't have enough of those situations outside the NEC.

And in Japan, they have all those huge monsters that tear everything up and eat it, so every few years they get to rebuild from scratch with the latest technology.

[blhanel]

Have a nice big bowl of popcorn, Dan. Those posts were worth it.

[rvos1979]

QUOTE: Originally posted by blhanel

Have a nice big bowl of popcorn, Dan. Those posts were worth it.

This is almost better than watching poker on ESPN.....

Pass the popcorn this way, please.

Randy

[vsmith]

I could use some popcorn MMMmmmm popcorn.[:p]

Dan I give up with this, its like talking to a tree![;)]

Big Boy. I dont see how any justfication for long distance HSR can be made in the US, the airlines do have a definite advantage if they can cross the country at 500mph and the best we could likely get is 150-170mph tops with rail. I say that due to the topography issues, weather conditions could be another issue. Japans system goes thru some mountains and passes that make the wesern US look tame, of course they do it by massive tunneling and bridgeworks to maintain the straightest ROWs and it does so even is some terrible winter weather. But the shorter routes, Chicago to St Louis, LA to Sacramento, could be very competitve with airlines when the airport lag is factored in.

[Anonymous]

Well, for once we agree! How about some popcorn.

[vsmith]

Who's got the soda?

[blhanel]

Last call- gotta take this popper back to the diner before I go to bed.