What's new

Why California Failed High-Speed Rail

jhungary

MILITARY PROFESSIONAL
Oct 24, 2012
13,998
357
13,840
Country
China
Location
Australia
I said youtube section has more people , I didn't ask you to leave this discussion. and I didn't say your points are all wrong why you have to make me to refute them? it's not a competition here, it's a dicussion.
nobody said it was a competition, actually, nobody said it but you.

If you want to discuss, then discuss, if not, then move on, don't forget, I did not quote you, you quote me on this post.
 

beijingwalker

ELITE MEMBER
Nov 4, 2011
49,495
-12
93,695
Country
China
Location
China
nobody said it was a competition, actually, nobody said it but you.

If you want to discuss, then discuss, if not, then move on, don't forget, I did not quote you, you quote me on this post.
But I didn't say your points are all wrong why you have to make me to refute them?

, I did not quote you, you quote me on this post.
I quote you for discussion, not accusation.
 

jhungary

MILITARY PROFESSIONAL
Oct 24, 2012
13,998
357
13,840
Country
China
Location
Australia
But I didn't say your points are all wrong why you have to make me to refute them?


I quote you for discussion, not accusation.
again If you want to discuss, then discuss, if not, then move on, don't forget, I did not quote you, you quote me on this post.
 

Hamartia Antidote

ELITE MEMBER
Nov 17, 2013
29,360
28
19,681
Country
United States
Location
United States
Government is not stupid. They will follow procedures in exercising eminent domain. Municipal governments do it all the time to build highways, subway lines and other infrastructure.

He's correct on the lawsuits. When they were putting in the highways back in ~1960 they had to detour 95 around the Boston area due to lawsuits and the insane expense of eminent domaining through a population of 10's of thousands who were not poor farmers. They did pay the expense of 90 (the blue line running East/West) which passes through one of the most expensive towns in the US only because the population density was so low they could actually manage paying them all off.

interstate95detour.png



Same thing happened in DC I believe.

Now in 2022 it would be impossible to do anything because the areas that were once farmland in 1960 are now full of expensive homes. That red detour line would need to be much wider.
 
Last edited:

WotTen

FULL MEMBER
Mar 18, 2022
1,006
-3
1,691
Country
Australia
Location
Australia
Right now US aviation fills this domestic need. Just did a little bit research about it.

Doesn't Europe have an equally busy and competitive aviation sector? I don't know. I am asking. At one point the London-Dublin route was the busiest air route on the planet.

Europeans in general seem to have a love affair with trains and trams. Many European cities have trolleys/trams which are heavily subsidized but they give the city a certain charm and are eco-friendly compared to cars.

Perhaps the reason is cultural and political just as much as financial. As @Hamartia Antidote pointed, Americans voted to reject public subsidies for HSR. I think subways in American cities are still subsidized, though. I don't know if the US interstate highway system is subsidized but the airlines certainly are not. Many of them go out of business.
 

Hamartia Antidote

ELITE MEMBER
Nov 17, 2013
29,360
28
19,681
Country
United States
Location
United States
Doesn't Europe have an equally busy and competitive aviation sector? I don't know. I am asking. At one point the London-Dublin route was the busiest air route on the planet.

Europeans in general seem to have a love affair with trains and trams. Many European cities have trolleys/trams which are heavily subsidized but they give the city a certain charm and are eco-friendly compared to cars.

Perhaps the reason is cultural and political just as much as financial. As @Hamartia Antidote pointed, Americans voted to reject public subsidies for HSR. I think subways in American cities are still subsidized, though. I don't know if the US interstate highway system is subsidized but the airlines certainly are not. Many of them go out of business.

This all comes down to a history of cheap passenger plane flights combined with geography.

After WW2 all these companies that were building military planes saw that there was a viable market for commercial airline passenger service in the US (compared to other countries) because:

crazydistances.png

1) The US is very large and taking a train from NYC to LA or NYC to Miami is simply not much of an option (even with today's HSR tech the times are still unreasonable due to the vast distances). This is a unique geographical situation not seen in most other countries that currently have HSR systems due to their shorter distance needs allowing their trains to have a reasonable travel time for their citizens. (Note: Even China's longest HSR line only goes half the distance from NYC to LA)

2) Oil was dirt cheap in the US compared to most of the world so we could accomplish widespread airline passenger service without having incredibly expensive fares due to fuel costs. (This is also seen in our cars where we have huge engines compared to most of the world due to our history of cheap gasoline). Hopping on a plane to go from place to place became easy and the norm. I remember an instance where a bunch of us were talking about how cold it was in Boston in February and somebody said let's just fly the 1000+ miles to Miami and sit on a beach for a week. The flight was $99 round trip. We all left the next day and grabbed a convertible on arrival.

So while we built airports other countries built more rail service lines to crisscross their country because it was actually a viable option compared to planes due to their comparable short ride times.

BTW Airbus didn't really make a name for itself until much later. While they had a jet ready in the 1970's. I don't think they really got any traction until the 1980's. So basically if countries wanted a jet they had to wait inline behind the huge US airline demand up until then.
 
Last edited:

WotTen

FULL MEMBER
Mar 18, 2022
1,006
-3
1,691
Country
Australia
Location
Australia
This all comes down to a history of cheap passenger plane flights combined with geography.

After WW2 all these companies that were building military planes saw that there was a viable market for commercial airline passenger service in the US (compared to other countries) because:

View attachment 849159
1) The US is very large and taking a train from NYC to LA or NYC to Miami is simply not much of an option (even with today's HSR tech the times are still unreasonable due to the vast distances). This is a unique geographical situation not seen in most other countries that currently have HSR systems due to their shorter distance needs allowing their trains to have a reasonable travel time for their citizens. (Note: Even China's longest HSR line only goes half the distance from NYC to LA)

2) Oil was dirt cheap in the US compared to most of the world so we could accomplish widespread airline passenger service without having incredibly expensive fares due to low fuel costs. (This is also seen in our cars where we have huge engines compared to most of the world due to our history of cheap gasoline). Hopping on a plane to go from place to place became the norm.

So while we built airports other countries built more rail service lines to crisscross their country because it was actually a viable option compared to planes due to their comparable short ride times.

BTW Airbus didn't really make a name for itself until much later. While they had a jet ready in the 1970's. I don't think they really got any traction until the 1980's. So basically if countries wanted a jet they had to wait inline behind the huge US airline demand.

All this is true but the Boston to DC corridor is almost like Europe in terms of city and population density. But as you mentioned it is probably too expensive to buy out property to build a HSR unless they rip up existing Amtrak tracks and replace it with HSR. But then all the small towns serviced by Amtrak would not be. No easy answers, I guess.
 
Last edited:

Hamartia Antidote

ELITE MEMBER
Nov 17, 2013
29,360
28
19,681
Country
United States
Location
United States
All this is true but the Boston to DC corridor is almost like Europe in terms of city and population density. But as you mentioned it is probably too expensive to buy out property to build a HSR unless they rip up existing Amtrak tracks and replace it with HSR. But then all the small towns serviced by Amtrak would not be. No easy answers, I guess.

They said even if they ripped up the Amtrak lines it still wouldn't be helpful since it meanders around so much that there isn't many long stretches of straight track to get up to a decent HSR speed. The Acela already is limited in speed because of the route not the track.


In order to justify buying up the property along the route you'd have to prove an advantage. Right now HSR doesn't have the bang for the buck.

Also remember you are creating alot of infrastructure that has to be maintained when you build that HSR route. It's alot cheaper to pave the DC/NY/Boston airport runways than maintain hundred of miles of tracks with multiple bridges along the way. Plus its also easier to widen a runway for a bigger plane than a rail line.
 
Last edited:

letsrock

SENIOR MEMBER
Mar 10, 2019
2,148
-1
1,721
Country
United States
Location
United States
while i admire how china built its HSR its not practical expecting us to do the same. completely different scenarios here.
 

FairAndUnbiased

ELITE MEMBER
Nov 25, 2011
10,147
-1
15,469
Country
China
Location
United States
When it comes to airliners and airports VS trains and railroads, U.S is in a unique position that China or India are not there yet.U.S is manufacturer of both of them and China or India are not so it makes perfect sense for China/India to make best possible situation with what they have.

Let's make imaginary case:
it's 1980 and China have abilities similar to corporation Boeing at home and similar capabilities like what China have today in regards to rails and fast trains.
How would be China's railroads looked like today if they had these things in this case ?
False. EU has Airbus yet they have more HSR ridership.
 

Cancerous Tumor

FULL MEMBER
Oct 2, 2011
307
0
382
False. EU has Airbus yet they have more HSR ridership.
Company like Airbus in hands of China and India would be much different beast than what it is now.
main issue is efficiency difference between HSR and jet airliners which is heavily in favor of HSR right now.

There are multiple ways to solve this issue :
New airplane designs
New efficient jet engines
No baggage for passengers
Giving some air routs to turboprop airliners
Add metro line to airports
 

FuturePAF

SENIOR MEMBER
Dec 17, 2014
7,505
21
8,512
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Yeah, for population center. Not much of a point for anywhere outside metropolis

Most rail in US are commuter rail, people take the rail because they need to go from A to B and that is the only way to get there, not too many people take rail for leisure, I mean I don't even remember when is the last time I took Amtrek. I mean if I can drive, I drive, if I can fly, I fly, if not that's railway time.
That is why Amtrak operates on tracks run by the commuter rail companies around New York. Their intercity service piggybacks on the tracks of Metro North and New Jersey or they just all share the cost in some kind of joint funding/operational standpoint.

At this point the best bet for the CA HSR is to get the tunnel built between Palmdale and the San Fernando Valley (in the tehachapi pass area) to allow for the private brightline west project to build out their project and connect to the section in the Central Valley for the sake of housing.

US also didn't build or upgrade their city subways, American city fellows also don't ride subways?

View attachment 848950
A lot of Americans feel public transportation is for the poor (and the poor have less resources to influence elections)
 

FairAndUnbiased

ELITE MEMBER
Nov 25, 2011
10,147
-1
15,469
Country
China
Location
United States
Company like Airbus in hands of China and India would be much different beast than what it is now.
main issue is efficiency difference between HSR and jet airliners which is heavily in favor of HSR right now.

There are multiple ways to solve this issue :
New airplane designs
New efficient jet engines
No baggage for passengers
Giving some air routs to turboprop airliners
Add metro line to airports
China and India are not really the same type of economy, so I don't think it is useful to conflate them. China has operational domestic jet airliners and multiple Airbus component suppliers while India does not. So while Airbus in the hands of Indian management may differ significantly I believe it will change little or be improved if it were under Chinese management.
 

Cancerous Tumor

FULL MEMBER
Oct 2, 2011
307
0
382
China and India are not really the same type of economy, so I don't think it is useful to conflate them. China has operational domestic jet airliners and multiple Airbus component suppliers while India does not. So while Airbus in the hands of Indian management may differ significantly I believe it will change little or be improved if it were under Chinese management.
That's whole argument. even with your previous post and logic we don't see the type of rail network growth in EU compared to China.

400$ billion investment in China's HSR did wonders that even 2000$ billion can't produce same results in US.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom