U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Should we build the HSR network
Yes 192 60.57%
No 125 39.43%
Voters: 317. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 12-02-2012, 11:40 AM
 
Location: 15 months till retirement and I can leave the hell hole of New Yakistan
25,233 posts, read 13,977,359 times
Reputation: 6469

Advertisements

I dont think we need a HIGH speedrail, as much as a better more efficient standard rail, and lite-rail

 
Old 12-02-2012, 11:42 AM
 
4,690 posts, read 3,904,085 times
Reputation: 1584
Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero View Post
I dont think we need a HIGH speedrail, as much as a better more efficient standard rail, and lite-rail
I don't think these are separate things - "more efficient standard rail" includes a limited number of HSR routes, because judicious use of HSR is one of the chief ways you gain efficiencies in the system.
 
Old 12-02-2012, 11:50 AM
 
Location: 15 months till retirement and I can leave the hell hole of New Yakistan
25,233 posts, read 13,977,359 times
Reputation: 6469
Quote:
Originally Posted by squarian View Post
I don't think these are separate things - "more efficient standard rail" includes a limited number of HSR routes, because judicious use of HSR is one of the chief ways you gain efficiencies in the system.
HIGH speed rail is for LONG distances...but who is really going to ride a maine to miami with no stops...even with a few stops (ie portland to boston to NYC to DC to richmand to savannah to miami) the wear and tear on the high speed train is very costly

the biggest wear and tear of rail is the accelleration , declleration

I can go out right now and walk a mile of CSX (freight) rail and spot a 1000 ties that need to be replaced

sorry but the current flavor of the week 'high speed rail' is not what we need as much as QUALITY and EFFICEINT rail, and lite-rail systens with in the short distance

how can we even talk about high speed, if we cant do the standard rail, and lite-rail well

how can we even talk about high speed rail , if we ( both private (CSX) and government(Amtrac, MTA)) CAN'T PROPERLY MAINTAIN the current track that has been laid

just last month there was a derailment in KY

Last edited by workingclasshero; 12-02-2012 at 12:08 PM..
 
Old 12-02-2012, 12:03 PM
Status: "Nevertheless, America's baseball team -- Roar, Tigers, ROAR!" (set 27 days ago)
 
Location: Nescopeck, Penna. (birthplace)
12,314 posts, read 7,458,312 times
Reputation: 15892
And one HSR network has been developing in this nation since 1960; two more have emerged over the past several years.

The biggest single obstacle currently faced by the West Coast network is what railroaders refer to as the "Tehachapi bottleneck" -- a stretch between Bakersfield and Mojave currently occupied by an overloaded Union (nee' Southern) Pacific freight route which has to share "trackage rights" with rival Burlington Northern Santa Fe. (That agreement, BTW, specifically forbade passenger service of former tenant Santa Fe from using the route, which led to development of a successful Bakersfield-based bus hub which served most of the Southland until 1971, and was reinstated after a three-year hiatus in 1974; it has since tripled in frequency.)

BNSF is 100% owned by "progressive" Warren Buffet's Berkshire Hathaway. What is to prevent BNSF and Caltrans from cooperating on two separate, but paralell lines skirting the "Tehachapi Loop" on a route whaich has already been surveyed?

Can you say NIMBY, my children? There goes a few million more.

In reality. this writer strongly suspects that some of those who participated in the last round of negotiation -- which at least had the effect of commencing work on an upgrade to 110 MPH speeds Bakersfield-Fresno-Merced -- had exactly this development in mind.

Last edited by 2nd trick op; 12-02-2012 at 01:19 PM..
 
Old 12-02-2012, 12:11 PM
 
Location: Richmond/Philadelphia/Brooklyn
1,263 posts, read 1,268,793 times
Reputation: 741
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrapperJohn View Post
But not air travel ...

You have got to be joking. HSR is much safer than air travel.
 
Old 12-02-2012, 12:55 PM
 
Location: Palo Alto
12,172 posts, read 7,019,756 times
Reputation: 4174
Quote:
Originally Posted by pantin23 View Post
You have got to be joking. HSR is much safer than air travel.
Per passenger mile, nothing is safer than air travel.
 
Old 12-02-2012, 02:58 PM
 
Location: Richmond/Philadelphia/Brooklyn
1,263 posts, read 1,268,793 times
Reputation: 741
Still only 144 deaths in accidents in the history of high speed rail is not much.
There are more car accidents per day than that.

Also, that's about as many aviation deaths there are per year.
 
Old 12-02-2012, 03:21 PM
 
Location: Palo Alto
12,172 posts, read 7,019,756 times
Reputation: 4174
Quote:
Originally Posted by pantin23 View Post
Still only 144 deaths in accidents in the history of high speed rail is not much.
There are more car accidents per day than that.

Also, that's about as many aviation deaths there are per year.
Most of the rail travel won't be high speed.

I'm a fan of rail in the right setting. We'd be better off focusing on public transport at the regional level and leaving the long-haul to airplanes. Greater long-term energy savings and less damaging to the environment.

And each state or region should decide and fund the projects that benefit it the most.
 
Old 12-02-2012, 03:30 PM
 
Location: Richmond/Philadelphia/Brooklyn
1,263 posts, read 1,268,793 times
Reputation: 741
I do think that for cross country there should be aviation, but in the dense northeast, and California, I believe that we should build a high speed rail network.
 
Old 12-02-2012, 03:32 PM
 
10,357 posts, read 7,951,223 times
Reputation: 4547
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrapperJohn View Post
Most of the rail travel won't be high speed.

I'm a fan of rail in the right setting. We'd be better off focusing on public transport at the regional level and leaving the long-haul to airplanes. Greater long-term energy savings and less damaging to the environment.

And each state or region should decide and fund the projects that benefit it the most.
How do you know most of the rail travel won't be high speed? --- I thought it was high speed rail that is being proposed.
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.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:22 PM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top