HIGH-SPEED RAIL SERVICE

[brilondon]

QUOTE: Originally posted by SuperChiefFan

QUOTE: Originally posted by Doggy

I do support HIGH SPEED RAIL I got an idea GERORGE EL STUPIDO BUSH GIVE ALL the $87 Billion Dollars for IRAQ to HIGH SPEED RAIL from Chicago to St.Louis, Los Angeles via San Luis Obisbo to San Francisco, Chicago to MInneapolis, Dallas to Houston, Los Angeles to Phoenix, Chicago to Detorit, Cleveland to CInciattai via Columbas and Chicago to Cincattai

I second that motion![8D][:D][:)][8D][:D][:)][8D]

Motion carried most likly by a huge majority if not unanamously

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by daveklepper

Again, isn't all this billion to be spent on Fuelcell-Hydrogen research and development from Government funds both (1) extremely wasteful since hybrid technology can do the job faster cheaper and more efficiently, and (2) a direct subsidy to automotive interest that everyone would yelling ouch about if were directed to private railroads? Wouldn't the Billion over the five years proposed by the Government ( some handed to you know who already) do a lot for Amtrak and give us some practical, OK just 125 mph, corridors outside the northeast? If there were every hour departures for the 2-1/2 hour trip Chicago - St Louis and St. Louis - Kansas City, wouldn't people ride the train instead of flying? And freight service would get better because of the better track, also? Dave

You know Dave, even if HSR service criss-crossing the country is a pipe dream, I agee with you that we ought to at least have more high-speed rail corridors. The NE benefits from ACELA service; why can't we have Amtrak owned and operated corridors between Chicago and St. Louis, as well as Chgo-Milwaukee-Minneapolis? What about HSR between running between Oakland, CA up to Seattle? There are many 'hotspots' that could be targeted for high speed rail. The route that the California Zephyr follows, or the Empire Builder for that matter, will probably always be considered 'cruise routes'. Fair enough; many people who take those trains are in no particular rush and also enjoy the incredible views as you travel closer to the mountain ranges. But having to deal with the hassle of security checks...and the waiting...and actual take-off of airplanes from airports for a relatively short journey is a major inconvenience. High speed trains for these routes would be highly effective and, I believe, supported by riders.

[daveklepper]

Again, isn't all this billion to be spent on Fuelcell-Hydrogen research and development from Government funds both (1) extremely wasteful since hybrid technology can do the job faster cheaper and more efficiently, and (2) a direct subsidy to automotive interest that everyone would yelling ouch about if were directed to private railroads? Wouldn't the Billion over the five years proposed by the Government ( some handed to you know who already) do a lot for Amtrak and give us some practical, OK just 125 mph, corridors outside the northeast? If there were every hour departures for the 2-1/2 hour trip Chicago - St Louis and St. Louis - Kansas City, wouldn't people ride the train instead of flying? And freight service would get better because of the better track, also? Dave

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by TheAntiGates

And REALLY, who wants to go coast to coast in 16 hours, if you can fly there in 4? I might do it once, just to say I did, after that it would seem Like 12 hours down the drain, and I suspect this would be a popular perspective, time being all valuable to most people, so after the novelty wears off, the public gets stuck with a high maintenance item that nobody uses? Seems like I've seen this scenario unfold once before, and private industry depended on a public bailout then, the only thing that's changed is we don't know who they are (yet, if ever) this time.

GATES, my good man--so good to see ya. I see you're in rare form as usual! [:D]

Actually, travelling coast to coast would be cool--very cool. Although I must agree with you that it's not a trip that everyone would want to take on a 'have-to' basis, it would be intriguing for perhaps more folks than we realize. As one writer indicated, not every one would be traveling the entire stretch each trip. Personally, I would appreciate such an option--if for no other reason than I dislike planes. Surely I can't be the only one? HSR, nationwide, is a 'doable' thing. All that remains is commitment--from public and private sources, as well as Americans showing a willingness to support such a massive undertaking via our tax dollars. Heck, I'll even toss in an extra $50 here and there![8D]

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Doggy

I do support HIGH SPEED RAIL I got an idea GERORGE EL STUPIDO BUSH GIVE ALL the $87 Billion Dollars for IRAQ to HIGH SPEED RAIL from Chicago to St.Louis, Los Angeles via San Luis Obisbo to San Francisco, Chicago to MInneapolis, Dallas to Houston, Los Angeles to Phoenix, Chicago to Detorit, Cleveland to CInciattai via Columbas and Chicago to Cincattai

I second that motion![8D][:D][:)][8D][:D][:)][8D]

[Anonymous]

I do support HIGH SPEED RAIL I got an idea GERORGE EL STUPIDO BUSH GIVE ALL the $87 Billion Dollars for IRAQ to HIGH SPEED RAIL from Chicago to St.Louis, Los Angeles via San Luis Obisbo to San Francisco, Chicago to MInneapolis, Dallas to Houston, Los Angeles to Phoenix, Chicago to Detorit, Cleveland to CInciattai via Columbas and Chicago to Cincattai

[Anonymous]

Signalling systems that only allow 79 mph top speeds and grade-level crossings are the major impediments to h.s. rail service in U.S.
The NYC proved in 1966 that the standard rail technology of that day could handle it, example being the New York Central main line that runs between Butler, Indiana, and Air Line Junction (west of Toledo), Ohio—the longest multiple track railroad line in the U.S.—68.49 miles. At that time, the line consisted almost entirely of standard, 39-foot sections of 26-year-old bolted 127-lb/yard Dudley Modified rail (with one short four-mile portion of continuously welded rail). The M-497 jet-powered RDC-3 got up to over 190 mph but was under orders to go through the timing point around 180 mph so the U.S. rail speed record stands at 183.85 mph instead of 190+ mph.
Most TGV and Japanese service is on roadbed that doesn't have grade-level crossings. True, not all. But, the most developed lines have no crossings.
The h.s. tests last summer in southern Illinois showed that h.s. service is possible, but that the signalling systems have to be in-cab and highway crossings have to be eliminated to make such service a practical reality.
Fixing the signals and getting rid of the grade-level crossings will cost far less that making dedicated high-speed corridors from scratch--and we can have such service available in shorter time.
I would think that it would be in everybody's interest to get rid of the grade-level crossings anyway. If we did, there'd be no need for Operation Lifesaver programs. I bet the reduction in insurance rates would cover some of the costs of the revisions needed.

[rrnut282]

Forget the fuel tax to fund the HSR network, as it is self-defeating. By using a 2cent fuel tax to fund it, as more people stop driving to ride the train, less money would be available to fund expansion of HSR. Until the US government weens itself of the gas tax and institutes a rational tax reform, any chance at a sustainable funding mechanism is very slim.

[Supermicha]

I think the ideas are good. the problem is, for distances over 400 kilometers, the plane is faster. in germany we had raillines with good conditions also 50 years ago, so they were only modernized. in the usa, you need to build ne hs lines. and that is expensive. and would somebody ride the trains? how long would atrain from dc to frisco nee with 300 kilometers per hour? and how long does a plane need?

Micha

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by DTrainguy

Germany, France, Japan and other countries with high speed rail are smaller than many of our states. The distances and time factors make air travel impractical for many trips. In the US, we make those trips in the car because there is no viable alternative.

Start with the short corridors, keeping in mind that not everyone wants to go from one end to the other. It should be more convenient to board a high speed train than to get to an airport. A 2 hour schedule from Detroit to Chicago means little if one can only board in Detroit or Chicago. To be successful, the corridors must not only serve the core of major cities but must also provide convenient, hassle free access to the airline system for long distance travelers. This does not mean get off the train, haul your bags to the airline check-in counter and wait. Once the airlines see high speed rail as a feeder rather than a competitor progress will ensue.

Good points, I never thought about it that way.

The costs involved in spanning this much bigger country really drive up the cost per terminus served, expotentially. Making each "link" between cities served more costly to build, more costly to operate,and a further "stretch" to break even than in ANYof the currently existing systems

[Anonymous]

Germany, France, Japan and other countries with high speed rail are smaller than many of our states. The distances and time factors make air travel impractical for many trips. In the US, we make those trips in the car because there is no viable alternative.

Start with the short corridors, keeping in mind that not everyone wants to go from one end to the other. It should be more convenient to board a high speed train than to get to an airport. A 2 hour schedule from Detroit to Chicago means little if one can only board in Detroit or Chicago. To be successful, the corridors must not only serve the core of major cities but must also provide convenient, hassle free access to the airline system for long distance travelers. This does not mean get off the train, haul your bags to the airline check-in counter and wait. Once the airlines see high speed rail as a feeder rather than a competitor progress will ensue.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by brilondon

Correct me if I am wrong but aren't the Fed's trying not to fund AMTRAK at all. Amtrak has to go hat in hand and grovel for its megre funding requests every year. Here in Canada we get all gaga over any additional money our government wishes to give it. It is planning to give VIA Rail a bone to the tune of 800 million CDN dollars over the next five years. Unfortunatly that is the ramblings of a senile old man who is our present king, I mean Prime Minister, who when he finally gets his butt out of our government will be sadly disapointed when the hier apparent Paul Martin come in and reverses everything Johnny Cruton has screwed up.

Yes, that's the gist of it, but as with all things Republican, there is substantially more to the story than meets the eye. There are some lucrative markets in the Amtrak fold, and the Prez has some friends in low places (hereinafter refered toas the"cronies") who'd like to get their hands on them. Hence ~Amtrak~ A "BROKEN SYSTEM" needs to be done away with..

But, there are sizeable public owned assets in Amtrak, that just wouldn't look right handing those assets over to the "cronies" unless (my take) some popular sentiment can be built to make "Joe six pak" see a silver lining in doing so.

Enter "High speed rail service coming to a town near you" but with the deal structured with so many outs, and no strings attached to the cronies, that when the pie in the sky fails to meet proforma, the deal get trashed due to "local and public failure to fulfill their end of the bargain", but that comes to form a few years down the road, with Amtrak a distant memory, with the valued assets long since transfered into the hands of the "no strings attached" cronies, amid blubberings of "Don't you dare blame the cronies for the failures of the local and public sector"

And BLAMMO , the cronies have a nice shortline passenger railroad that is as profitable as it is exclusive.

[brilondon]

Correct me if I am wrong but aren't the Fed's trying not to fund AMTRAK at all. Amtrak has to go hat in hand and grovel for its megre funding requests every year. Here in Canada we get all gaga over any additional money our government wishes to give it. It is planning to give VIA Rail a bone to the tune of 800 million CDN dollars over the next five years. Unfortunatly that is the ramblings of a senile old man who is our present king, I mean Prime Minister, who when he finally gets his butt out of our government will be sadly disapointed when the hier apparent Paul Martin come in and reverses everything Johnny Cruton has screwed up.

[CG9602]

QUOTE: Originally posted by METRO

Forget National! There are still plenty of short-haul lines that need work! The Chicago-Milwaukee-Madison-Twin Cities corridor has just started to run faster than a snail's pace. Even some turbo-trains would be an improvement over the P-42s we have, let alone some nice Acelas.

While I concur with your sentiments, I think that you still have to work with the incremental approach - Madison is a market of such character that it would be an easy sell. You have to get the word of mouth out that people really do travel by train. Living in WI, and having lived in Madison, I cal tell you from anecdotal experience that the tracks in that area will never be brought up to Class 6 standards until the local Yuppies and Legislators get it into their heads that people really do take the train, and that it can be less of a hassle than flying. Like most non-rail fan USAmericans, the legislators probably don't know anyone who takes the train in WI (besides one particualr individual who was a very successful realtor in Madison). You have to spend money in order to make money, and there are lots of folks out thater who still think that "No one takes the train, why should we spend money on it?"

I can tell you from personal experience that plenty of folks take the train. If the train went to sports-crazy Madison, the current schedule of the Empire Builder would put its arrival just in time for the start and end of football games, and hockey games. Think of the patronage!
However, one must increase the service, fix up the tracks between MSP and MKE via Mad Town, and then get AMTK to go through Madison. One also has to foot the bill to return Amtrak to a State Of Good Condition, similar to what Mr. Gunn is working towards. I would like to see HSR in the USA as much as any member of this forum, but I think we ned to work on getting rid of the currenty faults before introducing something new.
I'd love to be able to take the train to see the relatives in MSN, but I'd also like to see more frequency of service as well.

Sorry, Enough pontificating.

[eastcoast]

QUOTE: Originally posted by eastcoast

Look, we all need to consider that the government IS NOT going to do this anytime soon. Amtrak is faltering as it is! Do you like paying taxes?? It will come straight out of OUR POCKETS!! And then, how much for tickets on thes trains? What about grade crossing collisions or do we seek MAG LEV?? THE ACELA HAS NOT BEEN WITHOUT PROBLEMS! It still has to deal with all kinds of restrictions and limits. Now, Disney Corp. is toying with the idea in Florida to boost tourism and to save the environment from all the vehicle exhaust.The solution? MONORAIL.MAGLEV.NO GRADE CROSSINGS.MAYBE BY 2025.[B)]
KEN_ECR

Like I said before, DISNEY CORP. WANTS TO BUILD AND CONTROL THE FLORIDA MARKET. THE FACT THAT THEY(DISNEY) MUST COMPETE WITH F E C IN THE MIAMI MARKET WILL BE A HUGE ISSUE. DID YOU KNOW THAT MAGLEV WAS THE FIRST IDEA ON THE TABLE??? ALL TRACKS LEAD TO THE MOUSE!!!

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by donclark

Yes, the price with a Saturday night layover is $356 from LA to Fort Wayne. But lets change that a little, say from Santa Barbara to Fort Wayne. Price is $632 without a Saturday night layover on the red eye flight, and $722 for a day flight....

Flying from or to major airports is cheap. Flying elsewhere isn't......

Amtrak beats this easily....hey, you might even want to plunge on a sleeper.....

Are you kiddin? Ft Wayne is a Pudunk town, 275,000 maybe. We BARELY have jet service.

I derned near took Amtrak for that trip, priced it out, with the summer discount it was like $600 round trip, which while nearly twice the air fare, I had a ~use it before we loose it~ outlook, youknow one last trip for old times sake? So, I wasgonna splurge, but when I went to order, I found out I ALSO had to buy a coach seat to go along with the sleeper, for an extra $325.00 And $925 was out of the question.

For the extra $575 they wanted to charge me for "lodging" compad t Airfare, I could spend those 4 nights in an A+ resort, sorry AMTRAK, that ain't no way to run a railroad. I just wanted to rent the sleeper berth, not buy into it's amortization on a time share basis

[michaelstevens]

Looks like something is finally moving in Florida.
Check out the news wire.
Bombardier/Fluor got a contract yesterday to build a system (using the "JetTrain") between Tampa and Orlando.

[Anonymous]

Yes, the price with a Saturday night layover is $356 from LA to Fort Wayne. But lets change that a little, say from Santa Barbara to Fort Wayne. Price is $632 without a Saturday night layover on the red eye flight, and $722 for a day flight....

Flying from or to major airports is cheap. Flying elsewhere isn't......

Amtrak beats this easily....hey, you might even want to plunge on a sleeper.....

[wallyworld]

By the reply to my post I understand some clarfication is due. I am not opposed to HSR. However it is not a matter of simply being negitive or thinking within a box when you take an objective survey of the political and social barriers to begin a national consensus toward funding such a massive project out of the public purse . Especially when that purse is not only empty, it will shortly contain an estimated 500 billion dollars worth of IOU's. Rather than being in a box or being negitive I think a better term is being realistic. I am as idealistic as the next person, and can appreciate the great engineering projects of past centuries but none of these attributes contributes one iota to getting a project off the ground. Appealing to either past glories or idealism won't get two cents out of every gallon of gas sold. The simple math of investing billions of dollars to travel 16 hours coast to coast when I am loathe to do the same now in much less time does not appeal to the vast majority who have less and less time to devote to a personal life let alone killing even more time on a train while paying even more to use my car. America right now has a shortage of both idealism and a real appreciation of history, let alone knowing who the current speaker of the house is. You need to work from the bottom up. If we saw only a fifteen second spot on tv that showed a TGV flying past at warp speed, a shot of hundreds of frustrated airline passengers in line waiting to be frisked, another shot of expressway traffic stalled while a narrator asks " Think theres no alternative? Join us. WWW. Alternative." Or a shot of horrific hurricanes, devasting wildfires and droughts with the narrator asking " Think there's no alternative? Join us in a cleaner world with less pollution at WWW. Alternative."
Forget about economics, studies or patriotic appeals. This is America-you have to sell, sell sell. Get an alliance going with the railroads ( they would like electrification), passenger groups etc to fund an ad campaign.Use a website to build petitions, activist groups, etc. I would be willing to contribute to some reasonably realistic effort toward a sorely needed national dialog as would others as evidenced by these posts. Until we have the leadership capable of focusing a vision toward a goal, all of this discussion is like pouring from the empty into the void. You need to bypass professional politics and do an end run on the electorate and have the numbers to drive decisions from them that you want. The railroads are their own worst enemy. See the UP ad running now? Some old grizzled voice says they have been around forever while a freight train the public has no relation to runs through a barren landscape .Railroads are so far below the public radar, the only exposure they receive is negitive. A train hits a car. A train derails. You sit in stalled traffic behind gates down for a train. Their biggest public relations effort while laudable is another negitive- Operation Lifesaver -how not to be killed by a train. They desperately need a more positive image but they too are in the 19th century in their thinking. Until they realise the public are their customers who happen to also make shipping decisions in their employment which provides them profit, they will remain stuck with a shrinking range of services and commodities to ship. My point is until a product is agressively marketed directly to the public in a positive manner, you are relying soley on fate, politicians and fortune cookies.

[Anonymous]

cost/benefit ratio of flying isn't a poblem for me. Couple years ago american Airlines charged me $350 round trip L. A. -Ft Wayne Indiana While AMTRAK wanted $325 (for coach) add another $800 for sleeper service on the same trip. But would drop me 38 miles from my destination, out in the boonies.

Are you saying HSR would charge less than $350 and get me there in one day? Sounds like the return on investment wont justify the up front expense of building the thing, if you ask me.

[Anonymous]

You can fly coast to coast in 4 hours is a lie. By the time you add the 2 hour wait to go through security, it is actually 6 hours. Add another hour (some live closer to and then some live further from the airport) to get to the airport, and from the airport to your destination and home, it is 8 hours. Yes, big business considers flying a day of work....

Up to the 6 hour mark high speed trains are as effective time wise as any airliner. Buiding a network of high speed trains will provide the traveler more choices they currently don't have. The idea is to drive prices down, not up, especially in the smaller city category. It is easy to find a cheap airline ticket from Chicago to Dallas, but it isn't so easy to find a cheap airline ticket from Oklahoma City to Chicago....It is easy to find a cheap airline ticket from Dallas to Atlanta, but it isn't as easy to find a cheap airline ticket from Dallas to Birmingham....

However, you will point out it is 800 miles from Dallas to Atlanta, but to Birmingham it is 700 miles. You might be shocked to find out it is cheaper to fly from Birmingham to Atlanta than it is to fly from Birmingham to Jackson, but not as cheap to fly from Dallas to Atlanta. The airlines are based on hubs, flying to hubs is cheap, flying anywhere else is expensive. To fly from Birmingham to Jackson there is a very good chance you will have to fly to Atlanta and make a connection.... A high speed train along that route will obviously drive airline tickets down.....

There are many cities in America that have that problem, expensive airline tickets, that would be well served if another mode of transportation was available.....

[Anonymous]

What kind of cost to ride is envisioned for the public at large? You know, the same public that's gonna be expected to conceed publicly owned assets to the cause, most likely have to bear higher local taxes to fund the ~local commitment~, and will be expected to forgo benefits through opportunity cost as the Federal contributions siphon resources that could be used elsewhere, if not for the needs of the HSR program?

Then, of course, whoever the ~private entity~ beneficiary of all that public contribution ends up being, will expect to earn a profit (naturally) after the public puts them in business to begin with, so How much will I have to pay to ride my (as a taxpayer) friggin railroad?

[METRO]

Forget National! There are still plenty of short-haul lines that need work! The Chicago-Milwaukee-Madison-Twin Cities corridor has just started to run faster than a snail's pace. Even some turbo-trains would be an improvement over the P-42s we have, let alone some nice Acelas.

[RudyRockvilleMD]

As for the population density issues, the demographers tell us the center of the US has been slowly emptying toward the coasts the last century. Building a new national HSR network would be one way to reverse that trend, and move people back to the more-accessible heart of the country (more accessible because of the arrival of HSR).


We (our group, including transport engineers) have looked at the speed issue, and we believe we can cross coast-to-coast using off-the-shelf HSR equipment in 16 hours. This, of course, involves substantially higher speeds where possible to compensate for the slower speeds in urban environments and in mountainous terrain. Note that the French TGV has done 322 mph in test runs, and the German ICE trains over 250 mph in tests. Conventional HSR is now very close to maglev in speed capability, and we believe it can be improved still further.

J. Snyder

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by raakone

AntiGates......if there was Coast to Coast highspeed rail service.....you think most people would be riding coast to coast? Of course not.......it would be at the intermediate stops.
One thing that's often forgotten about.....TRAINS ARE NOT LIKE PLANES.......with airplanes, it doesn't make economical sense to have them landing at multiple stops (which is why it's seldom done, except with certain longer routes that call at more obscure destinations) Trains, on the other hand, you don't have to spend all that money for landing fees and refueling at each stop. Sure, on corridor trains you'll find more end-to-end riders......but on longer routes, more people get on or off at intermediate locations.

~Ra'akone

Hey, the gentleman was plugging the coast to coast time as though it was a desireable "do-able" endeavor. I was merely replying to the concept......

No, my bet is that the maximum range appeal for any HSR transit will be in the 400-600 mile range

So I ask " why build from coast to coast then?" I`ll tell you what I think, its `window dressing` to make anyone who might have a meaningful input on the issue of AMTRAK think ~h`mm, HSR for my community? maybe it`s worth a shot~....... PORKBARREL!!

[Anonymous]

AntiGates......if there was Coast to Coast highspeed rail service.....you think most people would be riding coast to coast? Of course not.......it would be at the intermediate stops.
One thing that's often forgotten about.....TRAINS ARE NOT LIKE PLANES.......with airplanes, it doesn't make economical sense to have them landing at multiple stops (which is why it's seldom done, except with certain longer routes that call at more obscure destinations) Trains, on the other hand, you don't have to spend all that money for landing fees and refueling at each stop. Sure, on corridor trains you'll find more end-to-end riders......but on longer routes, more people get on or off at intermediate locations.

~Ra'akone

[Anonymous]

And REALLY, who wants to go coast to coast in 16 hours, if you can fly there in 4? I might do it once, just to say I did, after that it would seem Like 12 hours down the drain, and I suspect this would be a popular perspective, time being all valuable to most people, so after the novelty wears off, the public gets stuck with a high maintenance item that nobody uses? Seems like I've seen this scenario unfold once before, and private industry depended on a public bailout then, the only thing that's changed is we don't know who they are (yet, if ever) this time.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Juniperhouse

There is nothing to be gained by nay-saying negativism. I think we all agree the present transportation system is not adequate and has many limitations, in addition to making it very difficult for cities across North America to link up.

Instead of fussing, endlessly, about what can't be done (all of which is nothing more than narrow-minded inside-the-box assumptions anyway), I suggest we take a larger look at matters.

As for the population density issues, the demographers tell us the center of the US has been slowly emptying toward the coasts the last century. Building a new national HSR network would be one way to reverse that trend, and move people back to the more-accessible heart of the country (more accessible because of the arrival of HSR).

Great public-works projects (like the original railroad lines) stimulate thousands of spinoffs, and bring business and population to places where it did not exist before, or in our US case, has gradually gone away.

As for solving the problem by adding two cents to the federal gas tax, this is absurd. The rule of thumb is that one cent of gas tax generates a billion dollars in new revenue. Two billion dollars is not enough to even get into trouble, let alone get out of it on HSR. It will take hundreds of billions in financing, both public and private, and concerted cooperation between federal and state governments (like the building of the original RRs in the 19th century, we might add).

We (our group, including transport engineers) have looked at the speed issue, and we believe we can cross coast-to-coast using off-the-shelf HSR equipment in 16 hours. This, of course, involves substantially higher speeds where possible to compensate for the slower speeds in urban environments and in mountainous terrain. Note that the French TGV has done 322 mph in test runs, and the German ICE trains over 250 mph in tests. Conventional HSR is now very close to maglev in speed capability, and we believe it can be improved still further.

The USA has been famous in history for a can-do attitude. That built the railroads, and completed the Panama Canal when the French backed off. Americans love great engineering projects, and, I believe, will pitch in wholeheartedly once it gets underway. God knows the Bush program of overseas imperialism isn't drawing much enthusiasm, and the bloom is off the bush (no pun intended) for the space program.

What else is there to stimulate a national re-awakening? HSR is the answer.

J. Snyder

Well don't get me wrong, I think the idea would be cool. But my suspicions have an uncanny knack for panning out, and it seems more than just a tad..................~vested~ that all this talk about HSR came out of nowhere at about the same time that our fine feathered Prez, and cronies are trying to find a silver spike to kill off Amtrak. Especially with the emphasis upon the public needing to make it's commitment first, and hollow promises that include pre engineered escape chutes, for un-named private entities who have yet to put any meat of their own on the table.

Don't take this personally, but the plan wreaks of asset grab and subterfuge, and high level Republicanism. And I consider myself a Republican...

I just have no desire to line someone elses pockets, sir. And I have very little confidence in the "joe six-paks" of this country to make a rational decision if they've been led to believe "oh goody! Did you hear we are gonna have HSR service?" <ten years down the road, if the mystery investors don't back out and leave us holding an empty bag>.

[eastcoast]

Look, we all need to consider that the government IS NOT going to do this anytime soon. Amtrak is faltering as it is! Do you like paying taxes?? It will come straight out of OUR POCKETS!! And then, how much for tickets on thes trains? What about grade crossing collisions or do we seek MAG LEV?? THE ACELA HAS NOT BEEN WITHOUT PROBLEMS! It still has to deal with all kinds of restrictions and limits. Now, Disney Corp. is toying with the idea in Florida to boost tourism and to save the environment from all the vehicle exhaust.The solution? MONORAIL.MAGLEV.NO GRADE CROSSINGS.MAYBE BY 2025.[B)]
KEN_ECR