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.
It is too late for high speed rail in America. Maybe if we were talking about advancing our train networks back in the 50s, it might have worked, but we are too developed around cities, and too big of a land mass to afford it. But I think that a NE Corridor highspeed rail is realistic, and could help free up crowded east coast highways and airports. We will never get it though, so its just a thought. Trains/Plains/Cars/Trucks/Boats/Skates/ect... are all going to be a thing of the fast in five years anyways!
It is too late for high speed rail in America. Maybe if we were talking about advancing our train networks back in the 50s, it might have worked, but we are too developed around cities, and too big of a land mass to afford it. But I think that a NE Corridor highspeed rail is realistic, and could help free up crowded east coast highways and airports. We will never get it though, so its just a thought. Trains/Plains/Cars/Trucks/Boats/Skates/ect... are all going to be a thing of the fast in five years anyways!
Whether its too late or not, it isn't practical here. High speed systems are basically encapsulated. You couldn't run them through communities like they do with railroads. Limited high speed systems in remote areas might work, but the expense involved with operating such a system would be prohibitive. It couldn't compete with air travel. The reason they use it Europe is there are comparitively few airports.
That would cost billions upon billions to construct (right of ways, track, stations, rolling stock, ect) and millions more to maintain. It would then have to compete with low-cost air carriers like Southwest, Frontier and JetBlue, which would make it difficult to be profitable. You would also have to deal with political barriers, especially at the local level in regards to station/ track placement and train speeds. HSR at a national level is just not practical or economical.
Edit: also, your travel times are entirely unrealistic
Airlines are subsidized by the government. If rail.got the same kind of support from the govt it would be viable.
Whether its too late or not, it isn't practical here. High speed systems are basically encapsulated. You couldn't run them through communities like they do with railroads. Limited high speed systems in remote areas might work, but the expense involved with operating such a system would be prohibitive. It couldn't compete with air travel. The reason they use it Europe is there are comparitively few airports.
Europe is much more dense than the US. Cities are closer together, and less sprawly. That is why rail works. Notice they dont have it ln desolate empty parts of Europe.
Airlines are subsidized by the government. If rail.got the same kind of support from the govt it would be viable.
LCCs are not. The only real subsidy program for airlines is the EAS program, which should be eliminated. And that program typically only affects small local carriers like Colgan air.
Europe is much more dense than the US. Cities are closer together, and less sprawly. That is why rail works. Notice they dont have it ln desolate empty parts of Europe.
Flying is usually not cheapet in Europe.
They do have some low cost airlines in Europe. There is one, for example, offering cheap flights from Frankfort to Dublin. I lived in Europe for 4 years and was generally positively impressed with their rail service. In Germany, you could practically set your watch by them. Yes, in general Europe is more densely populated than here.
In general, our public transit is not very developed in this country because most Americans have a preference for auto travel. We tend to not want to wait for trains or busses, and like the flexibility a car affords. It is better developed in some large cities, but in West Virginia if one wants to catch a local bus, for example, he often has to wait out in the elements for it to arrive. That gets old very quickly if the weather is bad.
Flying can be dirt cheap in Europe. Ryan Air & Easy Jet come to mind. I flew from Newcastle to Dublin round trip for about $55 including all fees with a late booking, had I booked earlier, it would have been cheaper. Flew KLM from Newcastle to Amsterdam RT for $170 and Air France to Paris from Newcastle RT for $150. You can't fly from Beckley to DC in a turbo prop for those prices.
Flying can be dirt cheap in Europe. Ryan Air & Easy Jet come to mind. I flew from Newcastle to Dublin round trip for about $55 including all fees with a late booking, had I booked earlier, it would have been cheaper. Flew KLM from Newcastle to Amsterdam RT for $170 and Air France to Paris from Newcastle RT for $150. You can't fly from Beckley to DC in a turbo prop for those prices.
When I was in Europe you could buy a month long train pass for about $100 more than that ticket and ride unlimited rail in the EU for a month.
When I was in Europe you could buy a month long train pass for about $100 more than that ticket and ride unlimited rail in the EU for a month.
It's probably different depending on where you are. I know to take the train from Newcastle to London was like $75-90 one way (occasionally, there were specials and what not where it was like $35-40, but those were only like once a month and at odd hours.
Ryan Air is dirt cheap though.
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.