Cincinnati-Indianapolis-Chicago high speed rail (Columbus, Dayton: wage, costs, bus)

[flashes1]

Originally Posted by ProkNo5

You know Ohio has a population density greater than France, right?

I'll take your word for it, but how does that make rail economically feasible in the scenario I posted above...i.e. Montgomery to Elyria?

[American Luxury]

Originally Posted by Wilson513

Uh huh. That and the Honda hybrid, VW TDI, Pruis Plug in (55mpg), Four (55 mpg), Volt, Tesla, Focus, Mits, Leaf.

The 800,000 pound behemoth was a technological advance when there were horse drawn carriages in the street and a tire was unlikely to make it 42 miles.

All of the cars you mention either do not achieve 50mpg (ok the Accord does in the city, but tests have shown otherwise) or they are electric and do not have enough range to travel to Chicago without having to recharge. Ok maybe the Tesla can, but you are looking at spending $100k.

[American Luxury]

Originally Posted by WILWRadio

Time to bring back the Honda CRX. I owned a first run of those in 1984 and bought another in 1987. I was able to get over 50 mpg on the highway in both cars.

50mpg was the only positive it had lol.

[Wilson513]

Originally Posted by American Luxury

All of the cars you mention either do not achieve 50mpg (ok the Accord does in the city, but tests have shown otherwise) or they are electric and do not have enough range to travel to Chicago without having to recharge. Ok maybe the Tesla can, but you are looking at spending $100k.

I don't think one needs to achieve 30 mpg much less 50 mpg to make it more economical than the 800,000 pound behemoth running down the rails with a crew of professional retainers, bringing folks to a bus stop or car park. My family used to live along the L in Chicago. Today, not 1% of Chicago's population could end a trip to there by getting off a train and walking to their final destination. Every trip into the city requires a bus trip, mostly two, or a taxi or a car in addition to the train. Cincinnati would be less than 1%. Meanwhile the friendly Honda is happily sitting in the driveway using no gas or electricity waiting to carry its proud owner to the restaurant, day care, work or play he desires without a crew of union train workers or a stranger drooling on his shoulder.

[neilworms2]

Originally Posted by Wilson513

I don't think one needs to achieve 30 mpg much less 50 mpg to make it more economical than the 800,000 pound behemoth running down the rails with a crew of professional retainers, bringing folks to a bus stop or car park. My family used to live along the L in Chicago. Today, not 1% of Chicago's population could end a trip to there by getting off a train and walking to their final destination. Every trip into the city requires a bus trip, mostly two, or a taxi or a car in addition to the train. Cincinnati would be less than 1%. Meanwhile the friendly Honda is happily sitting in the driveway using no gas or electricity waiting to carry its proud owner to the restaurant, day care, work or play he desires without a crew of union train workers or a stranger drooling on his shoulder.

I'm not sure on your numbers on that, unless you are including suburbia, are you?

[Wilson513]

Originally Posted by neilworms2

I'm not sure on your numbers on that, unless you are including suburbia, are you?

Yes. That's where people live.

[ProkNo5]

Originally Posted by flashes1

I'll take your word for it, but how does that make rail economically feasible in the scenario I posted above...i.e. Montgomery to Elyria?

The same way it works everywhere else. You develop a hub a spoke system starting with the largest population centers and add onto it piecemeal to connect the smaller population centers. You can't develop a robust system overnight, but we definitely have the population, economy and population density to support it.

[flashes1]

Originally Posted by ProkNo5

The same way it works everywhere else. You develop a hub a spoke system starting with the largest population centers and add onto it piecemeal to connect the smaller population centers. You can't develop a robust system overnight, but we definitely have the population, economy and population density to support it.

Yea, I just don't see the population density on such a scale in Ohio. I see three cities that could support rail lines from the suburbs to downtown. There's just not enough demand to connect those downtowns to make it economically feasible. I still haven't seen anyone show me how someone gets from Montgomery to Elyria or Dublin quickly, cheaply, and without hassle.

But I'm willing to wait and see how much demand there is for Cinti's street car. Should it prove there's a big demand for the service and it can stand on it's own financially---I will have to reconsider my position.

[Wilson513]

Trains are a thing of the past. Move on.

Soon, cars will be controlled by the roadways and one will ride in the comfort of one's own vehicle without attention to the road, avoiding traffic delays and accidents, and at a fraction of the cost of trains. And, without the moronic behavior of drivers who think that an Interstate Highway is a great place to talk on the telephone or send messages to one's cronies.

Subsidizing a trip from downtown to the suburbs by train at $15-$20 per trip as is the case in Portland, is a non starter.

[unusualfire]

^Setting yourself up to fail I see. The more the people that use the system the less it will be. Cars are the future? LOL