World Speed Record Broken Again

[Dave V]

If dudes could conquer the Rockies with picks, shovels and black powder, the only reason we don't do this stuff is because we don't want to.

Yes, they did this because profits could be made.  In today's world passenger rail is not profitable outside of a few very dense corridors.  Private industry has no incentive to do it without significant public subsidies.  I could easily go on a political rant about what we do deem worthy of large public subsidies, but I will restrain myself.

[lock4244]

America spends money on the military that other nations spend on fast trains. Personally, I like that America has a strong, well funded military and slow passenger trains... I sleep better at night knowing we are protected by the benevolent might of the US. Fast trains, could care less.

[victor miranda]

Yes, they did this because profits could be made.  In today's world passenger rail is not profitable outside of a few very dense corridors.  Private industry has no incentive to do it without significant public subsidies.  I could easily go on a political rant about what we do deem worthy of large public subsidies, but I will restrain myself.

I keep wondering how trains and profits are political?

I may not know this correctly. I am pretty sure that passengers were not profitable
even back when the lines were built... maybe they were at break even.
There was agreement between government  and the lines to carry passengers.
Freight was why the lines were built.

people agreed to incentives (taxbreaks and land-snatching) because they wanted to travel about.

nowadays... faster and more convenient are clearly required to lure passengers.

If we can't seem to keep our roads in good repair even with heavy taxes in the form of fuel taxes,
I do think we will,as a nation, never build a high speed passenger network.

If it is NOT completely separate from freight, it will not be faster and more convenient...
I will point out that airplanes are, however...faster and more convenient.

Given the distances in the US, high speed rail may not be the best solution in any case.


victor
 


 

[nkalanaga]

Passenger trains were profitable when most of the North American network was built, simply because the alternatives were much worse.  When the choices are train, stagecoach, horseback, or walk, anyone with money will take the train.  By the 1920s cars and buses were becoming viable alternatives, and in the 50s airlines were becoming affordable for more people.  Those who weren't in a big hurry, or were going where the train routes were less convenient, drove.  Those in a hurry, where the routes allowed, flew. 

Many passenger trains could still at least break even, thanks to mail revenue, but that ended in the late 60s, with trucks and planes taking over. 

European and Asian countries have the advantages of shorter routes, higher population densities, higher fuel taxes on auto fuels, and/or populations that can't yet afford a car for every would-be driver.  Trying to duplicate their systems in the US would be impractical, especially in the West, due to long distances between towns, and many towns not having rail service at all. 

Finally, how many crews would it take to provide hourly service to every town in the US of at least 50,000 people?  Could we find enough qualified applicants to do it, even if we had the money, track, and trains?  Even using RDCs, or something similar, it would be more expensive than a universal bus system, similar to Switzerland's Post Buses.

In my opinion, for most of the country, the idea others have had to improve the slowest sections, and raise overall average speeds, would serve us much better than trying to build a nation high-speed passenger network.  The freight railroads could probably support the idea, as it would also improve their service, and capacity.

[Ed Kapuscinski]

America spends money on the military that other nations spend on fast trains. Personally, I like that America has a strong, well funded military and slow passenger trains... I sleep better at night knowing we are protected by the benevolent might of the US. Fast trains, could care less.

Hey, wait a minute... oh, right, the US military DOES protect quite a few more people than just US citizens...

[jagged ben]

America spends money on the military that other nations spend on fast trains. Personally, I like that America has a strong, well funded military and slow passenger trains... I sleep better at night knowing we are protected by the benevolent might of the US. Fast trains, could care less.

I pretty much feel exactly the opposite.