Obama supports high speed rail to Philly from Pittsburgh (Philadelphia: home, income)

[Hopes]

Originally Posted by ainulinale

Thank God we're not spending billions to transfer a bunch of idiot college students to Penn State.

That would be rediculous. It would be like spending tons of money to transfer Pirate and Steeler fans across a river.

[ainulinale]

Originally Posted by Hopes

That would be rediculous. It would be like spending tons of money to transfer Pirate and Steeler fans across a river.

So true.

BTW, it is "ridiculous". I am on patrol.

[Hopes]

Originally Posted by ainulinale

So true.

BTW, it is "ridiculous". I am on patrol.

I'm glad someone's on patrol because I'm too busy to care about typing on the internet.

[OyCrumbler]

I'm all for it, even if it's a rather (sadly) loose definition of high speed rail.

[Geeo]

I guess it's not really "high speed rail" like they have in other parts of the world. But compared to what we have today, even 75 MPH would be considered high speed. It would be so nice to have 12 trains east each day like Harrisburg has. Then we wouldn't have to fly into that outdated Philadelphia airport anymore.

[pman]

Originally Posted by Hopes

I hope politics doesn't kill the high speed rail system. The airlines are totally against it. I'm so tired of industries influencing our politics with lobbyists.

While I'm sure boeing is against it (GE is not since they still make locomotives in Erie), I'm not sure the airlines are. One of the more surprising advocates of HSR has been the former head of continental, though his name escapes me now. HSR, esp this version, would likely eat into auto traffi first. Even real HSR only takes air traffic from the least profitable routes...the short hauls. It's not all bad for airlines and may even be good. HSR in Europe hasn't led to mass bankrupcty for the airlines, just a shifting of destinations.
as for speeds, 110 is slow enough to enjoy the scenery, no worries there. I don't know that there's a need for 10 to 14 trains a day to Philly (maybe if the trip were 2 hours) quite yet, but even 3 0r 4 at 5 hours would benice, maybe enough to dustoff the old station (even the ticket windows are still there)

[chielgirl]

I'm a Pittsburgher currently living in Europe and love train travel. I can take a train to Paris overnight and not worry about room rates for the night. I can eat, read, plug in my laptop, nap, etc. and let them worry about being alert.

I frequently travel to Philly and would love a 5 hour train ride. It takes 3.5 hours to drive and the opportunity to relax would be greatly welcomed. No turnpike tolls, no trucks splashing slush on my windows as I try to pass, no State troopers.

[Awesomo.2000]

Originally Posted by ainulinale

Thank God we're not spending billions to transfer a bunch of idiot college students to Penn State.

Yeah, thank God we don't spend out tax money for those idiot college students who are getting educations to help become engineers and architects that will better society. Thanks God man. Screw education, people don't need it, and as a society we shouldn't support it!

[Awesomo.2000]

Originally Posted by user_id

Huh? It will do no such thing. Trains either run directly on fossil fuels or indirectly as most electricity is generated by fossil fuels.


Yeah, obviously the plans for a variety of HSR or rail upgrades have nothing to do with lobbying. The related industries are rather ethical, there is only hundreds of billions on the line. [/sarcasm]

A maglev (which this isn't) is very efficient. It uses electrical current for the magnetism the propels the train. If you compared 300 people on a Maglev cruising from Pittsburgh to Phillly to 300 people driving in 100 cars from Pittsburgh to Philly that amount of power to transport them would be extremely significant. I couldn't answer how much, but as an engineer I could tell you it would be enormous.

"It would do no such thing" isn't really correct to what hopes was saying. It would help us limit our need on foreign fossil fuels.

[Awesomo.2000]

Originally Posted by Hopes

That would be rediculous. It would be like spending tons of money to transfer Pirate and Steeler fans across a river.

You bring up a good point. That tunnel still ticks me off.

Pittsburgh's options

A) Light rail from Downtown to Oakland. Link the most two bussy and important parts of town for the local economy. Link the two parts of town with the largest need for transit.

B) Get a bunch of drunk yinzers across the river for the only important thing that this city cares about.....The Steelers for 8 Sundays a year.