Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The California one,of course. And if one day they could connect with the PNW line to have HSR from Vancouver through LA
It'll never happen. Eugene is 530 miles from SF, with absolutely nothing in between. HSR is only meant to cover spans of 200-500 miles, to bridge the gap between driving and flying.
Instead of The Gulf Coast corridor mentioned, we should have one that connects Houston/ Galveston to San Antonio, to Austin, Waco, Dallas/ Ft Worth, to College Station, and out to Abeliene, Lubbock and Amarillo
...Of course this would cost alot, but connecting all the centers of business/ education would be nice
It'll never happen. Eugene is 530 miles from SF, with absolutely nothing in between. HSR is only meant to cover spans of 200-500 miles, to bridge the gap between driving and flying.
But Sacramento is only 400,and less than that to Medford. "It'll never happen" Is a bit pessimistic. If they ever did build that though I probably wouldn't care by the time it was finished.
High speed rail IS interesting, but as some people point out, should only be put in certain areas. I have heard various opinions on Cali's, and I still am curious about Texas.
As for Georgia, I will actually be surprised if the politicians would be interested. Utilization/Cost/Benefit is a legitimate issue, but I think Georgia needs to get something else in order
If what I read is true, Metro Atlanta seems like it needs help with AREA traffic like YESTERDAY. I normally don't like to do outside commentary, but it's completely baffling that the state doesn't provide SOME cash to the MARTA with how allegedly popular it is, that just makes NO sense.
I agree. If you spend any lengthy time in the area you will quickly find out why.
I think the reason why the South needs it more than the North is due to the fact that the North already has something similiar to a high speed rail ready. I could be wrong and right now I can't remember the name of it.
Well for high-speed rail to work there has to be demand and it has to roughly time equivelent or better than other forms of transportation. Some already work, yesterday I took 3 trains (one of which the Acela the other two subways) and got from CC Philly to Midtown NYC for an 8:30 meeting leaving my house at 6:45, pretty efficient
I think the points of destination need to be close enough to end business centers, just my humble opinion
Well for high-speed rail to work there has to be demand and it has to roughly time equivelent or better than other forms of transportation. Some already work, yesterday I took 3 trains (one of which the Acela the other two subways) and got from CC Philly to Midtown NYC for an 8:30 meeting leaving my house at 6:45, pretty efficient
I think the points of destination need to be close enough to end business centers, just my humble opinion
The Bos-Wash corridor is a perfect example of where HSR makes good sense: the cities are close enough together that flying isn't always practical, besides which both the aviation and highway infrastructure are stretched to the limits of conceivable capacity and a third option is actually a necessity rather than a luxury. My issue is with the idea some have that everyone everywhere needs to be connected to each other by HSR when our existing transportation infrastructure is already perfectly adequate for the job. In other words, HSR makes sense as an intra-regional transportation option in some cases, but not so much as an inter-regional transportation option.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.