What's new

The US is a first-world nation with a third-world rail system

we have the best HSR - it is called Boeing jetliner. I can travel from Los Angeles to Miami in 5 hours faster and cheaper than any high speed rail

But mid distance travel like LA to SF, San Diego to Phoenix, Dallas to Houston, Miami to Atlanta or NYC to Chicago is a nightmare that takes far longer than it should thanks to drives to and from airports, security checks, waiting, takeoff delays, landing delays, etc.

High speed rail is for fast mid distance travel.
 
The problem is we really have no demand for high speed rail that is worth eminent domaining the route.

Our #1 busiest air route is LA to NYC
View attachment 759474

Let's look at China's longest HSR route

Beijing to Guangzhou: All aboard the world's longest high-speed rail route
View attachment 759476

Let's see how far that goes
View attachment 759478

How long does that train take?
View attachment 759481

So to get a little more than halfway across the country is about 8 hours (if perfectly straight).
Let's say it would take 14 hours to do the whole trip to NYC.

How many people do you really think would take it compared to the unfathomable amount it would cost to buy the land. Sure take it once or twice as a novelty but after that people will be back to planes
View attachment 759494

Let's try another popular route.
NYC to Orlando
View attachment 759482
1543/2298=67%
8hr*67%=5.36 hours to get to Orlando.
It takes less than 3 by plane.
View attachment 759484

I used to think like that but now i am changing. A high speed rail will definitely help if i have a quick errand say 400-600 miles away. Look at the infra chinese have -a train leaves beijing to shanghai every few minutes. The only option in america is greyhound bus which takes one full night if at all there is a direct connection or flights which can be really expensive unless planned well in advance.
Actually there is no real excuse for not building a HSR in america. The land is much more forgiving than china which is far more mountanious also land is more plentiful in america, the nation is wealthy. And there is clear value proposition in it.
 
Are you willing to drive 600 miles in a car? The perfect use case for HSR is you need to make a dash 600 miles for urgent business/govt work and come back the same day. Nothing meets this use case like HSR.

Yes, I’d be perfectly willing to drive 600 miles.

However, there is absolutely nothing wrong with HSR. It’s just not as important here in the states as it is in another countries
 
Yes, I’d be perfectly willing to drive 600 miles.

However, there is absolutely nothing wrong with HSR. It’s just not as important here in the states as it is in another countries

I think we are missing out.
 
I used to think like that but now i am changing. A high speed rail will definitely help if i have a quick errand say 400-600 miles away. Look at the infra chinese have -a train leaves beijing to shanghai every few minutes. The only option in america is greyhound bus which takes one full night if at all there is a direct connection or flights which can be really expensive unless planned well in advance.

there lies the problem - you have not going to have a train every few minutes for a lot of destinations
 
Are you willing to drive 600 miles in a car? The perfect use case for HSR is you need to make a dash 600 miles for urgent business/govt work and come back the same day. Nothing meets this use case like HSR.

how many US cities are 600 miles apart ? how much traffic is there between those cities to justify HSR ?

I did one example for San Francisco to Portland - there are 20 flights daily mainly on narrow bodied Boeing 737.
No amount of dollars will justify the HSR between SF and Portland.
 
how many US cities are 600 miles apart ? how much traffic is there between those cities to justify HSR ?

I did one example for San Francisco to Portland - there are 20 flights daily mainly on narrow bodied Boeing 737.
No amount of dollars will justify the HSR between SF and Portland.

There are plenty on east coast. Washington dc to cleveland or Philadelphia to columbus ohio.. pittsburgh to boston. They all have urban populations exceeding million with relatively poor or expensive air connections.
 
There are plenty on east coast. Washington dc to cleveland or Philadelphia to columbus ohio.. pittsburgh to boston. They all have urban populations exceeding million with relatively poor or expensive air connections.

the use cases for high speed rail is limited to a few cities. the case for a national network is simply not there
 
the use cases for high speed rail is limited to a few cities. the case for a national network is simply not there

Dude this is not some poverty stricken country where you need to make huge justifications.
 
The infrastructure is not that good in the US and the same situation in Europe.. Alot of people mistakenly assume Europe is glittering but they couldn't be far from the truth
 
Last edited:
how many US cities are 600 miles apart ? how much traffic is there between those cities to justify HSR ?

I did one example for San Francisco to Portland - there are 20 flights daily mainly on narrow bodied Boeing 737.
No amount of dollars will justify the HSR between SF and Portland.

^^ This.
There needs to be a DEMAND. Not the Field of Dreams "build it and then they will come".

If you build a HSR line...to keep it profitable for the build cost you will need a large number of runs a day at a significantly lower cost than a plane.

This is where you are going to have problems.
 
Last edited:
Our passenger rail is trash rn but we have one of the best freight systems in the world.
cuz america always takes care of businesses and their profit before its people's direct interest and care. fact!
 
Back
Top Bottom