HIGH-SPEED RAIL SERVICE

[Anonymous]

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

[wallyworld]

It's a commendable wish but so is world peace. The United States could easily be classified as a third world nation in comparitive terms as far as having a balanced mass transit system, let alone one that could be considered intermodal. This won't happen in my lifetime nor that of either my children or grandchildren. One of the few struggling manufacturing bases in this country that has survived is the manufacture of automobiles. As I write this, our nation's national debt is at record levels. Most of the non railfan electorate has a image of railroads as a quaint 19th century technology that is still powered by steam engines. As far as the federal government funding the tens of millions of dollars for inumerable enviromental impact studies before the first tie is spiked, bear in mind they were the sole managers for our space station that was supposed to be supplied by obsolete space shuttles, that really has no compelling reason to float above the earth. It will take a much larger crisis than the last gas shortage to compell our leaders to act and who wishes for that to happen?.

[Anonymous]

Yes, the Highway Lobby has much clout.....as do their friends, Big Auto and Big Oil. While they can no longer get away with any National City Lines scandals, other than that they may as well be God as far as the DOT is concerned.
You see, Big Auto isn't content that everyone wants a car anyways.....they want it to be the ONLY way. And Big Oil want$ thing$ a$ inneficient as po$$ible. Trains are too efficient. And any "funding" into alternate technologies is probably just a ruse.....Big Oil and Big Auto are happy with the way things are! Sadly, things are too similar up here in Canada.....even if VIA is in a better state than Amtrak

~Ra'akone

[daveklepper]

Is the USA Government funding fuel-cell development to pour money to solve highway transportation problems, when Hybrid technology already exists to solve the problem, but won't spend money on intercity rail transportation (frieght and passenger) other than the very tiny, in comparison, Amtrak subsidy? Why? The political clout of the highway lobby? Dave Klepper

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Juniperhouse

I BELIEVE THE UNITED STATES SHOULD BUILD A NATIONAL NETWORK OF NEW, DEDICATED, HSR LINES COAST-TO-COAST AND NORTH TO SOUTH. I WOULD RECOMMEND THREE E/W LINES (I.E., NORTHERN TIER OF CITIES, CENTRAL US DC/BALT. TO SAN FRANCISCO, SOUTHERN TIER OF CITIES, AND THREE NORTH-SOUTH LINES--WEST COAST, MISSISSIPPI VALLEY CHICAGO-NEW ORLEANS, EAST COAST.

CONNECTIONS WOULD BE ESTABLISHED AT KEY NODAL POINTS FOR INTEROPERABILITY. LINES WOULD BE PRIVATELY OPERATED, OVER PUBLICLY-OWNED RIGHTS-OF-WAY CREATED BY GOVERNMENT LAND CONDEMNATION AND RE-USE OF EXISTING ROW IN URBAN AREAS (LIKE FRANCE, FOR EXAMPLE).

TECHNOLOGY WOULD BE STEEL-WHEEL-ON-STEEL-RAIL, WITH THREE TIERS OF SERVICE: NONSTOP COAST-TO-COAST, EXPRESS BETWEEN KEY CITIES, AND EVERY-CITY SERVICE. LINES WOULD BE DOUBLE-TRACKED WITH HIGH-SPEED CROSSOVERS.

FINANCING WOULD BE PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP (LIKE ORIGINAL RRS IN 19TH CENT).

YOUR THOUGHTS?

JOSEPH J. SNYDER
SHEPHERDSTOWN, WV
E-MAIL: [e-mail]

Gov Frank O'Bannon (Indiana) was kicking around some story about HSR from Pittsburgh to Chicago utilizing the old Pennsey right of way, through Ft Wayne, but the plan was laden with so many if's, ands, buts, and potential "gotcha" s that it seemed more a ruse than anything else. First of all it was all solicitous as to how much local backing might be obtainable, and while referancing a "private enterprise" who would be chiefly responsible as dev/operator was careful to not name the party, nor indicate the financial commitment they were willing to put into "their" end of it..

Further, the "high speed" end of it would not come for 10 years, and only then if "ridership merited the further investmenment"

Sounds like a whammy in the making, if you ask me, I can just hear it all now "cancel the high speed, local private investment was too scant, and ridership too sparce to justify the main investor commiting more of their own funds, so don't blame the primary investor for the failure of the locals or the riders" In the mean time the primary's make a nice grab on tthe Amtrak assets, having duped "joe sixpak" into gleefully abandoning same in a "fire sale" as a preliminary in the hubris of expectation of something that ain't never gonna be fulfillled.

Yes, I think it's all a clever scam devised as part of a ruse to facilitate the liquidation of Amtrak, sorry.

[RudyRockvilleMD]

Virginia, and possibly North Carolina, want to extend their so called version of high speed rail from Washington to Richmond, Raleigh, and Charlotte traveling at a top speed of 110 mph. At 110 mph top speed the average speed would be about 75 - 80 mph provided the stops are few and far between. That is hardly high speed in my book. The distances are Washington - Richmond 115 miles; Richmond - Raleigh [using the ex SAL alignment is 185 miles, while Raleigh to Charlotte is approximately 175 miles. I doubt if there would be sufficient ridership between Richmond and Raleigh or Raleigh and Charlotte to justify the expenditure for high speed rail service.

People fly more than 6 hours, and most of those flights are overseas. Six hours on a plane in the continental United States is going to get you across the country non-stop.

Yes, people ride a train for 6 hours or more, and they do that if they travel between Boston and Washington on the Acela Express; however, more people fly than travel by train the NEC between Washington and New York [226 miles] being an exception. High speed rail would serve mainly business travelers as an alternative to flying. The standard of business travel today is air for trips that take longer than 4 hours via surface transportation.

The shortest distance between Los Angeles and San Francisco is through the San Joaquin Valley, approximately 420 miles, and I suspect there is sufficient ridership in that corridor to justify high speed rail; however; using that route you face a problem in getting out of the Los Angeles Basin at any speed because it is surrounded by mountains, and a high speed train would be little faster than a conventional train in that territory. I base this on my experience in riding a TGV through the Western French and Italian Alps. That train was no faster than a conventional train on the same route, but the distance through the Alps was long enough to keep that train's average speed down.

Philadelpia - Pittsburgh - 350 miles via Altoona. Again where is the ridership? West of Harrisburg the Pennsy-Conrail-NS ran through the Juniata Valley, which is anything but straight, to avoid the mountain ranges west of Harrisburg.

The whole point in building high speed rail is to provide an alternative to flying mostly for business travelers where it is economically feasible.

[Anonymous]

It used to be 300 miles, the distance from Lyons to Paris. Our NEC is 450 miles. France's TGV has extended the line to Marsailles, to London, to the Netherlands with links to Germany's ICE trains...... 300 miles indeed!

Already Virginia wants to extend the HSR line to Richmond, North Carolina wants to extend the line to Raleigh and Charlotte. Once we get to Charlotte, we are more than half the way to Atlanta, and Atlanta is two thirds of the way to Orlando, but why stop there, why not go all the way to Miami? There are a lot of people living in Virginia, the Carolinas, Georgia and Florida.....

Pennsylvania wants to build HSR to Pittsburgh, and Chicago wants to build HSR to Detroit, why not fini***he line through Toledo and Cleveland? There are a lot of people living in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, and Illinois.....

Yes, we should build lines longer than 300 miles, or even longer than 450 miles. Why not go to the hub of the next largest population areas, such as Chicago, Atlanta and Florida, and on to Texas? Most of these lines have a distance of 800 to 900 miles.....with large cities inbetween..... Time traveled is 6 hours @ 150 mph over 900 miles. Six hours is not too long on a train. People fly more than 6 hours, people will ride a train for more than 6 hours. They do today!

And as I noted before, many Amtrak passengers go all the way and then some.... Half the passengers traveling to Chicago get on another train.....

However, if you have seen my map, you will notice that there isn't much population density west of Minneapolis, Kansas City, and Dallas, except for Denver, Seattle-Portland, and California. So I agree with you, it is fooli***o build HSR over the Rockies.... well, I wouldn't do so at the start of building HSR. Maybe later....... but lines can be built serving LA and the Bay area, and Portland and Seattle. Oh, by the way, the distance between LA and Oakland is further than 300 miles.

So get off this 300 miles kick, or the 450 miles kick...... The whole point in building HSR is to provide choices for travelers...... whatever the distance!

My map:
http://homepage.mac.com/donclark/.Public/DonHSR.jpg

[RudyRockvilleMD]

Let's be realistic. Adding anything to fuel tax, and diverting it for use other than for highway maintenance or construction just isn't going to fly. I drive, and I want my roads to be in good condition and as safe as possible. I further believe any talk of high speed rail lines longer than 400 - 500 miles is pure pie-in-the sky. Assuming a train could average 150 mph between Washington and San Francisco the journey would take 22 hours. High speed trains can only run at high speeds over terrain which is flat. The minute they get into the mountains they are litle faster than most conventional trains so crossing the mountains will slow them down appreciably to the point where they may not be able to average a high speed or run at sustained high speeds..

[Anonymous]

Or we could add a penny or two to the federal gasoline tax just for the construction and operation of HSR. Either way will suffice....

[Anonymous]

The trick would be to set up a specific legal authority to make the HSR national system possible. This authority (agency) would have its own enabling legislation, allowing it to receive public monies (in federal legislation, it is a two-step process--first an authorization, then an appropriation).

The HSR agency would establish a staff, and proceed to promulgate a schedule of lines to be built, with specific guidelines and requirements for type and operation. This would guarantee a US national HSR system of uniform type and standard (unlike the original rail lines, which were rebuilt to standard gauge after starting with wildly different gauges and standards--too expensive for such folly now).

Having established the standards, a bidding process for specific lines (say, San Diego to Vancouver, CN or Chicago-New Orleans, DC-San Francisco, NY to Miami, etc.) could be set up. This would require bidders to have a legal corporation, and minimum capitalization to enter the bid process. Once a firm won that bid, it could then be legally empowered to issue a certain amount of capital stock, bonds and other debentures, and also to receive federal subsidy on a per-mile-built basis (this is how the Union Pacific was built, in essence).

I think you get the idea. Of course, the original enabling legislation would also establi***hings like a deadline for completion of the national system, say 25 years from date of inception.

J. Snyder

[CG9602]

OK . . . .Let me see here. Juniper, how would you set about doing the financing of these rail lines? Would the US set up some sort of Trust Fund, similar to what exists for the highways & avaition? I'd also like to see high-speed, ( or just plain increased speed) trains here in the US. The ones that would benefit me the most would be the MWHSR. I also think that the RRB should have all of its functions and responsibilities combined with the Social Security, so RR's don't have to pay such exhorbitant RRB taxes, but that's off topic. The main question I have here is funding. US military test pilots have a saying: "No bucks, no Buck Rodgers."


Also, plase turn off the caps, here There's no need to shout.

[Anonymous]

How about Carnelle ( i think this is how it's spelled)...no fast food restaurants allowed!

[Anonymous]

I agree with you, Juniper. And a problem is that "Big Auto" (who happen to be real good friends of the oil industry, because no fuel cells are out yet, and companies are dragging their heels on hybrids) encourages this mentality.....one where the solution to crowded highways is more highways.....and one where people get the "bigger is better" mentality (if it wasn't for certain laws, everyone who could afford to would be driving tanks) And too many people believe a)that if the US gets into wars because of its policies, SO WHAT, they'll always win.....a kind of mentality that there are always just two sides and everything's black and white...just because Hollywood and even the Bible present the world that simply......and b)that it's always more FUN FUN FUN to GET AROUND in a LITTLE DEUCE COUP or a CUSTOM MACHINE, advocating some to SHUT DOWN transit systems....the group I'm kinda poking fun at, they wrote those songs BEFORE people realized such things as traffic jams and the point of saturation (which, except for a few remote places, has pretty much been reached all over the US, as well as around major metropolitain areas in Canada.

VSmith, there's an area like (Clockwork) Orange County around Montreal, called Senneville....big estates, use of Artisian wells and septic tanks (heaven forbid they have to share water with "the masses" of the rest of the island), and generally don't like outsiders. Before Senneville was swallowed up into the city of Montreal in 2002, they had a law prohibiting buses from running on their streets. However, a limited "taxibus" service is run to get around that....and possibly for the benefit of some servants or something. Only difference is Senneville is French speaking. But I guess it's pretty much an "OC" in many other ways.

~Ra'akone

[Anonymous]

I SENSE THAT VSMITH IS JUST A TAD FRUSTRATED BY THE "APPARENT" ATTITUDES IN THE USA AND IN GOVERNMENT TOWARD HSR AND INFRASTRUCTURE.

CLEARLY, THE INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM OF THAT LAST 60 OR SO YEARS HAS BEEN IN SUPPORT OF THE OIL INDUSTRY SPECIFICALLY, AND NOT AIMED AT ANY SORT OF TRANSPORTATION, ENERGY, OR ECOLOGICAL BALANCE. NOT ONLY THAT, IT HAS UNDERMINED US CITIES SEVERELY, WHICH HAVE HAD TO RESORT TO EXTRAORDINARY FINANCING PROCEDURES, WHICH HAS, IN TURN, FORCED EVEN MORE PEOPLE TO FLEE THE URBAN ENVIRONMENT. THIS, I SUBMIT, IS IMPRACTICAL AND DESTRUCTIVE OF URBAN CIVILIZATION, WHICH IS THE HEART OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION, AND HAS BEEN SINCE THE DAYS OF ANCIENT ROME.

FURTHERMORE, THE OILIGARCHS AND THEIR FRONT MEN IN THE POLITICAL REALM ARE EMBARKING ON COSTLY, RISKY, UNCERTAIN-OF-OUTCOME ASIAN ADVENTURES IN THE PURSUIT OF EVERY LAST DROP OF CRUDE (AND, OF COURSE, EXPANDED MARKETS, WHICH LOOK LIKE THEY WILL BE EXPANDED MARKETS FOR CHINESE/ASIAN MANUFACTURES, NOT AMERICAN OR EUROPEAN, AS THINGS ARE GOING).

WE ARE COMING TO THE POINT THAT THE PRIMARY AMERICAN EXPORT WILL BE WAR. IS THIS WHAT WE WANT?

YOU MIGHT WANT TO CHECK THE ASCE (AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERS WEBSITE). THEIR RECENT STUDY GIVES A GRADE OF ABOUT "D+" TO US INFRASTRUCTURE, WITH A HEFTY PRICE TAG, AS YOU WILL SEE, FOR CORRECTING THE SITUATION ACROSS THE BOARD.

IF WE DO NOT REVERSE GEARS AND START REBUILDING THE US AND ITS LONG-TERM INFRASTRUCTURE, WE WILL SOON FIND OURSELVES TALKING ABOUT THE COUNTRY IN THE PAST TENSE....

J. SNYDER

PS--VSMITH'S HISTORY IS A BIT OFF THE MARK. WHAT REALLY GOT HSR GOING WAS OLD MAN SHINJI SOGO IN JAPAN, WHO BAMBOOZLED THE JAPANESE DIET INTO BUILDING AN HSR (HE GAVE A COST ESTIMATE HALF OF WHAT WAS NEEDED), AND IT GOT GOING IN THE LATE 1950S, AND OPENED IN 1964. I RODE THAT SYSTEM--THE TOKAIDO LINE, BETWEEN TOKYO AND KYOTO (IT GOES FURTHER, TO OSAKA) IN 1971, WHILE I WAS ON LEAVE FROM THE ARMY IN VIETNAM. THE LINE HAS BEEN UPGRADED AND IS FASTER AND BETTER NOW THAN IT WAS 32 YEARS AGO.

YES, JAPAN IS A VERY POPULOUS ISLAND, AND THE US IS, COMPARATIVELY, LAND-RICH. BUT OUR SPRAWL POLICIES (OR IS THE ABSENCE OF A POLICY?) OF THE LAST 6O YEARS HAVE LED TO ENDLESS PROBLEMS, MANY OF WHICH CAN BE DEALT WITH (AND REVERSED) BY GOING IN AN URBAN-SUPPORT DIRECTION--WHICH MEANS WALKABILITY, LIGHT-RAIL, HSR AND GENERALLY MORE RATIONAL PLANNING.

[Anonymous]

oh, that's OC...hehe

I actually watched that show on TV, only like the first 2 episodes, then it got repetitive and boring

but a lot of people in my school are obsessed with it <---- guys and girls!

[Anonymous]

Yes, my map is a good place to start. We can always add more lines later, hopefully after the first lines are a huge success! When I ride Amtrak I have noticed that more than half of the passengers are going all the way and more. Therefore, I suggested building to the four major population areas east of the Rockies: the NEC, the Midwest, Texas, and Florida. The best hubs in my opinion are New York City, Chicago, Dallas, and Atlanta. We need to get this parralegram built first, adding legs off of it later, although I think its essential to finish all three legs into Florida out of Atlanta....from Dallas, Chicago, and Washington DC.

Why stop at Detroit from Chicago, why not go half way to Cleveland? And if we are going to go half way from New York City, why not go all the way to Chicago and through Detroit even if its a bit out of the way from Toledo? Sixty miles at 186 mph is around 20 minutes. Its the same with the other legs of my parralegram, especially to Atlanta. Atlanta is only two thirds of the way to Florida.

The map again:
http://homepage.mac.com/donclark/.Public/DonHSR.jpg

[vsmith]

ICEman,

Sorry I was referring to Orange County, California, called locally, OC. Theres even a really bad TV show on the WB network called "The OC" ( it STINKS!!! ) And the OC down here is one of the screwiest places on Earth, When I worked down there, my impression was of a land of BMWs Hummer's Benz's, $1M homes where no one knows who there next door neighbors are and if they did they would consider them evil child molesters, a bunch of self-absorbed-self-rightious-self-concerned twits who drive with "I love dolphins" bumper stickers on there 2 car wide 9 mpg SUV's while complaining how hard there lifes are cause they cant go to the Celine Dion concert after dark because the OC Performing Arts Center is too close to Santa Ana and all those "gang banging foriegners" ( I heard this) might rob me and take my Benz from me" even thought Santa Ana is a good two miles away and perfectly safe. OC aint far enough from Pasadena for me. "The Heart of Whiteness" to paraphrase Joseph Conrad as a good friend of mine called his neighborhood after moving there. Now he's turning Orange around the edges, there drugging the water, I know it.

Sorry to hear you have similar problems with light rail in Canada.

PS I Apologize if any readers live in Orange County, OC is a nice enough place it just that when I worked there, I had to deal with a bunch of jerks, so my opinion got pretty tainted.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by vsmith

A light rail system in OC was also voted down, I think it was by the NIMBY's who were afraid that the "people of a lesser economic bracket" would take the trolleys down to their onclaves of privilege. (OC is a REALLY screwy place)

If you are talking about Ottawa-Carleton, you are totally right!

In 2001, our OC Transpo decided to start a pilot project light rail. Using existing freight lines not being used, they established a north-south service from nowhere to nowhere with 5 stations. The plans were to later on expand it to the airport, downtown, accross the river north to Hull and Gatineau, east to Kanata (where I live), and west to Orleans. All these areas already have rail-lines going through them, and not being used. They planned to double-track and electrify all these lines and build a complete light-rail system.

Saying the price was too high, this plan was quickly gotten rid of. Instead they planned to electrify and double-track the current section. But even this short little section 'costs too much' for them. So now, instead of expanding the network, they are thinking of shutting it down...

Once the light rail is gone, we are back to the Transitway. Hooray! [:(!] (sarcasm)
*Transitway is a network of bus-only roads <--- a big failure and waste of money
Other cities, don't follow Ottawa's model! Unless you want to see public transit ridership go down.... [V][:(!][xx(]

As you can see, I'm really angry about this! But I'm done, so...uhm...back to HSR

btw, if you want to see pictures of the light rail in Ottawa:

Click Here

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Juniperhouse

The system must be built, opened, and operated incrementally--so that each segment operates effectively, and each new increment piggybacks on the ones built--as Icetrain suggests.

We finally have found common ground! And call me Will, please.

Now, let's start buildin! [;)]

[vsmith]

I am very aware of that troubled history here in LA. Seen the 60 minutes story, PBS did a knock-out show on the subject a couple of years ago, I wish I could find that on tape. I still will never buy a GM product (but mostly cause they build ugly-lousy cars)

Its taken 50 years for people to pull thier heads out and realize what a priceless commodity we lost went PE was destroyed. I find it supremely ironic that the existing and proposed Metro light-rail lines are almost on top of the old PE rights of way.

[mudchicken]

VSMITH:

Pacific Electric won a battle but lost the war over there in Southern California in the late 1950's vs. GM and Firestone plus others in a now classic lawsuit about collusion to supplant the PE red cars with GM busses. Interesting reading if you can find the book and published articles that even had the attention of "60 Minutes" in its early years.

Mudchicken

[vsmith]

I think we should all remember that when we point to Japan or Europe as models for American HSR we should be aware that they have been concentrating on HSR since 1945! Thats a 55 year head start to overcome.

The infrastructure needed here is something I think is undo-able for purely socio-political reasons, no one will stick their neck out and take a stand. Earlier this year Caltrans (the people out here responsible for the interstates and freeways) announced plans to widen a badly overcrowded freeway her in LA. The response was so violently negative that the idea was shelved, now they worried that ANY changes will be NIMBY'd to death by people complaining to their representitves. A much needed Orange County airport got NIMBY'd to death, the residents would rather slug it out in a 2 to 3 hour drive to LA international than have the airport in "thier" backyard. Of course when they get to LAX they complain about how crowded it is. A light rail system in OC was also voted down, I think it was by the NIMBY's who were afraid that the "people of a lesser economic bracket" would take the trolleys down to their onclaves of privilege. (OC is a REALLY screwy place)

While we here were building interstate highwaysat the behest of the trucking lobbies during the 50's and 60's, Europe and Japan were focusing on improving an already effecient rail system. No one would allow them to build "freeways" thru the hearts of their major cities so none were built until the late 60's. Meantime their trains got faster, they learned to seperate their frieght lines from the HSR lines and everyone living there just got used to not having to own a car and taking the train.

Its a hugely different mindset from the wide open spaces of the US. New York City is the closest comparison. The rest of us live spread out all over the place. HSR will work but it has to overcome the hurtles of an airline industry that wants a monopoly on travel even as they are bleeding cash and bankrupcy, and an appethetic government that would just assume if you cant afford to fly, then you're a nobody. Its really ridiculous.

No one in our government even wants to think about rebuilding our infrastructure, even as billions of $ are sent overseas. I guess it will take a few major bridge disasters, some dam failures, or a couple more major blackouts to get them to consider the idea. Then they wont want to pay for it.

OK, meandering rant is over, back to pushing my rock up the hill.

[oltmannd]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Victrola1

Hauling people never pays. Tax subsidies to the airline industry are so large it should qualify their being administered by the Department of Agriculture.

Rail passenger service in its glory was heavily subsidized by mail and express. The 19th century rail system was never built just to move people. It would have economically impractical without freight.

What is the market for high speed, light weight, time critical freight to move over the same system? 200+ MPH should make every major market between St. Louis and the Atlantic overnight points. Fed Ex and all the rest of the fly guys do not haul coal for a living. Those little packages are worth advertising for during NFL games.

What was true 150 years ago remains so today. People alone will not make it go.

You absolutely, positively, have it nailed! High speed freight service would CREATE a new market, the same way FedEx CREATED the market for overnight letters.

The other missing igredient for HSR is a feeder network. Outside of the NEC, Chic, and Calif., a transit/suburban rail feeder network does not exist. So, the Japanese/European service model would have to be adjusted to fit the autocentric/suburban sprawl of the US.

-Don (who is 47 yrs old and is still hoping to see some sort of HSR in the US before he dies - what a Pollyanna!)

[Anonymous]

Many good points. Yes, gummint must be involved. True, passengers alone won't do it--that is why we plan to have trains daily between, say, ten pm and 6 am that haul mail and express exclusively (as the SNCF does). Like the original passenger trains (and AMTRAK too) mail and express will be a crucial underpinning of the financing to operate. Even so, such service won't be any more "profitable" than an airline is now--which is zilch, as we see. A basic service has little margin for profit, esp. when the costs are high as in rail service. But private operating companies can do it better than a gummint behemoth, we believe.

Fast freight is a realistic possibility. That will have to be part of the planning, but that, of course, brings the HSR into direct conflict with the existing rail lines, which haul about 40% of the intercity freight currently. HSR can do better than that, and faster than the trucks--another entity that doesn't want its rice bowl broken by HSR, nor does it want to lose its grotesque subsidies from the taxpayers.

The system must be built, opened, and operated incrementally--so that each segment operates effectively, and each new increment piggybacks on the ones built--as Icetrain suggests.

But nothing can happen until and unless gummint makes it possible. AMTRAK presently has a legally exclusive mandate to operate interstate passenger trains, which precludes anybody raising money or doing anything else.

A basic problem is the massive subsidy for oil use (not true in Europe), with cheap gasoline, that does not come close to paying its true costs of use. This suppresses transport alternatives.

The world passed its peak of oil production three years ago, in AD 2000, according to the experts in the ASPO (Assn. for the Study of Peak Oil). Time to create practical alternatives, which will take time and financing both public and private. Hence the need to get Congress off the dime.

The heavy dependence on cheap oil of the past century and a half is headed for the scrapheap of history. Time for some new thinking.

J. Snyder
Chairman, APHSR

[dehusman]

If France funds its railroad with private funds, then why is the APHSR bothering to write all those letters to Congress? If it can be done with private funds, raise the money and build the railroad.

The real answer is it can't be done without government funding. BIG government funding. Big government funding forever.

[Victrola1]

Hauling people never pays. Tax subsidies to the airline industry are so large it should qualify their being administered by the Department of Agriculture.

Rail passenger service in its glory was heavily subsidized by mail and express. The 19th century rail system was never built just to move people. It would have been economically impractical without freight.

What is the market for high speed, light weight, time critical freight to move over the same system? 200+ MPH should make every major market between St. Louis and the Atlantic overnight points. Fed Ex and all the rest of the fly guys do not haul coal for a living. Those little packages are worth advertising for during NFL games.

What was true 150 years ago remains so today. People alone will not make it go.

[tree68]

Perhaps it would do well to look at the current airline model when considering the topography of a national HSR system. For Instance, could not Toledo be a hub? Feeders from Detroit and environs, Cleveland, Cincinatti, Indianapolis, Dayton, etc, etc. Just a thought.

Consider, too, that many travellers figure on a day for travel. When I'm headed to a conference, I figure in a travel day on either side of the event. If you can get me from central NY to Tampa in a day, I'm all set. HSR might get me into Las Vegas (another recent conference) from CNY in about a day. If the cost is comparable to flying, my employer isn't going to question it for a moment.

And I wouldn't be happy if I didn't mention the "toll road" concept - which is how the airlines work now. Apply the same concept to HSR and soon you have the Greyhounds and Gray Lines of the world putting HSR on the tracks, in addition to the "traditional" rail passenger folks we think of now.

[Anonymous]

I still think HSR in North America is only feasible in certain corridors and between certain cities. Once these sections of HSR are well-used and prove succesful, then the plan of connecting the east and west coast can be looked at.

Mr Snyder, notice how in your statement you said "one of these days there will be a train that will take passengers overnight to Moscow from London". Now for how many years had France already have the TGVs and for how many years did Germany have the ICE already? Exactly! You have to start from the ground up.

High speed trains in Europs started between major cities (ie. Frankfurt - Munich, Berlin - Leipzig, Paris - Lyon, etc.). Then they expanded into "short" international serivce (Paris - Zurich, Brussels - Cologne, London - Paris, Amsterdam - Frankfurt, etc.). Now, with all these lines completely in tune and working in harmony with each other, maybe they can expand service to farther destinations, such as Moscow.

That's what we have to do in North America. Start with serivices such as New York - DC, Toronto - Montreal, San Francisco - Los Angeles, Chicago - Detroit. Then we can expand and connect these lines so that the Atlantic and Pacific is connected. To start out building 3 parallel lines from east to west is just not very realistic. What if it's a failure? What if no one wants to ride it? What about all the money wasted? That's why you have to start small, then grow big.

Just my 2 cents

[vsmith]

Why can I take a TGV from Lyon to Paris (300+ miles) in 2 hours but it takes 3 1/2 hours to go from LA to San Diego (only 120 miles) via train?

Because NOBODY cares about HSR until the politicians get there greedy little paws greased with "reelection campaign fund contributions".

In the US the policy is "no lobbiest, no $$$, no project" or they said in the movie"The Right Stuff" ... "no bucks, no buck rodgers"

When go from the the land of the free to the land of the special interest? No one cares about doing things logically, or in THE PEOPLES interest. Its all special interest groups that push policy.

Why isnt Amtrack being pushed more as an alternative to jammed east-coast airports or crumbling west-coast freeways? Because the airlines, lousy service, cancelled flights and all, still wants ALL of your business regardless of what you want, and the auto and gas industry would rather see you have to drive that Ford Exploder (at $2 a gallon for gas) the 7 hours to Aunt Minnies house than leave that SUV parked somewhere while you relax (cant have that) on your trip.

Sure I'm Cynical, thats what happens when you keep your eyes open for too long.

HSR should focus on intercity for now (LA to SF, or NY to Chicago, for example), get that infrastucture built then extend nationally.

[Anonymous]

Glad to see the comments, a positive sign. I don't think the long-distance argument against US HSR is valid (icetrain)--Europe will have an HSR one of these days that will take passengers overnight to Moscow from London--comparable to DC-SF in US. Lots of cities enroute. Germany is getting rid of all intra-German flights as a matter of State policy. Wake up and smell the coffee....

Remember there are three phases to every project:
1. It won't work
2. It will cost too much money
3. I thought it was a great idea all along.

(I've experienced all three in the projects I've done, incidentally)

Mr.Don Clark's ideas are good, a sensible starting point. But we need a whole national network, why not plan for it from the start? As Enrico Fermi once said, "we know our plans are crazy, but are they crazy enough?" HSR travel can beat the pants off the flying cattle-cars any day of the week, for safety, comfort, city-to-city convenience, and travel time and cost. AMTRAK even does modestly well in the NE corridor, living on a shoestring.

For Mr. Glen Woodle: Given all the past wrangling, why not bow to a historic transportation corridor and call it the Natchez Truce?

ScottyDog: Send me your emails [e-mail]. My congresspersons are Sen. Byrd (who funded my project to save the Shepherdstown RR station, here where I live in WV), Sen. Jay Rockefeller (the old oil family, not much interest in competitor rail there), and Congresswoman Capito, rep. the 2nd WV district (of three, all gerrymandered east-to-west)..

J. Snyder, AAAS, ASCE