Does it? In that case, there’s no excuse not to do it on our own soil, especially if the same returns that other countries are getting on HSR can be gotten here, correct?
Not at all. In one case, you’re making money. In the other, you’re spending it.
[quote user=“JT22CW”]
Using that logic, then the Soviet Union should have had high speed rail before anybody else.
For the record, Argentina’s average population density is 35 people per square mile, which is about 40 percent of the USA’s average population density.
From what I’ve read on the web, the USA has the contract to build the high-speed line, which is ironic. Costs thus far are estimated to be $1.35 billion, or a minuscule $3.1 million per mile, which is a new precedent for low costs.
How come most air passengers have to endure two or more stops in order to make such travel affordable, then? I can’t go to Wilkes-Barre/Scranton Airport or Lehigh Valley International Airport (the two international airports closest to me) and hope for an unlimited plethora of one-seat ride destinations by air, never mind reasonable fares unless I fly in the wrong direction for a couple of hours.
Critics of high-speed rail in Germany (these are the pro-rail critics, not anti-rail) often note that the ICE trains on the NBS (dedicated high speed) corridors make too many intermediate stops, slowing down average speeds to 125 mph when they can be a lot faster. On the Shinkansen, the most popular trains are the super-expresses that travel endpoint to endpoint.
As for McCain, the “Rail Passenger Service Improvement Act” that he sponsored in 2002 was a bizarre and vain (IMHO) proposal to have Amtrak broken up into three different units (namely “Amtrak Operations”, "Amtrak Main
No, of course it isn’t. It has to be trillions. Plus a whole new bureaucracy. We could call it the Department of High-speed Spending (DHS), and administer the day-to-day operations through the Trains Splurging Agency (TSA).
More seriously, let’s see how Veolia does in Austin.
RWM
Sweden’s X2000. The country has an average population density of 52 people per square mile, yet the X2000 is very successful, even when its endpoints have a mere 14,000 inhabitants (Arvika in particular).
(Here’s a map of France’s population distribution. Overlay a map of the LGV network, and you’d be hard-pressed to find “decent” population centers along the routes.)
The bill thereof was not goofy, but hypocritical (but typical of such politicians’ lip service to less bureaucracy while trying to implement more of it), and also bespoke a lack of research (thus ignorance) into how modern intercity rail works (speed sells).
As for “anything different”, then different it was not; it was a copy (and a bad one) of the failed British privatization model (which was not privatization when all was said and done). Within McCain’s proposal was “backdoor open-access”, which US private railroads would be dead-against, and the problems withal that he leaves completely unaddressed.
You’re imagining something very unrealistic and bizarre, then. Veolia Transport, f.k.a. Connex, does not operate high speed trains anywhere; they’re all about urban/suburban transit (light rail, subway, commuter rail, buses). They are very fond of their pork diet. MBTA’s commuter rail has suffered under their ministrations; and we all know what happened
I’d appreciate it if you’d quit trying to put words in my mouth. Fwiw, I’d love to see a high speed train(s).
However;
- I don’t in the least feel “embarrassed” or any other melodramatic term needed, that some other country has it and the US doesn’t.
Perhaps if you’d lose the obvious chip on your shoulder some of this would be more apparent [;)]
Apple seems to be doing okay.
Nonsequitur. Other US corporations that do lots of outsourcing also “seem” to be “doing okay”. Doesn’t make that smart business.
Mailman: What words are you claiming that I put in your mouth? I claim all the words in my last reply to you as my own and did not misquote you, FTR; if you disagree with my interpretation of what you actually said, then that’s another matter.
Have a nice day JT22CW.
[(-D]
The problem with contract operators, as I see it, is the contract. If you hire someone to run your trains or busses, and they want to maximize their profit, the only lever available is cost. They can cut staffing, cleaning, maintenance, and training. They get paid the same whether the customer show up or are happy or not. They have to do just enough to stop a mutiny by the passengers.
I think it would be interesting to have a provision where the contrator would get a cut of the farebox, so there would be an incentive to provide good service, too. Perhaps go all the way and let them set the fares and do the marketing, too. They payment to provide the service would just raise the profitablity floor.
Actually, it’s the same problem with transit agencies and Amtrak - except they don’t even have an incentive to work the cost side of equation [:O]
[;)]
[quote user=“JT22CW”]
Sweden’s X2000. The country has an average population density of 52 people per square mile, yet the X2000 is very successful, even when its endpoints have a mere 14,000 inhabitants (Arvika in particular).
(Here’s a map of France’s population distribution. Overlay a map of the LGV network, and you’d be hard-pressed to find “decent” population centers along the routes.)
The bill thereof was not goofy, but hypocritical (but typical of such politicians’ lip service to less bureaucracy while trying to implement more of it), and also bespoke a lack of research (thus ignorance) into how modern intercity rail works (speed sells).
As for “anything different”, then different it was not; it was a copy (and a bad one) of the failed British privatization model (which was not privatization when all was said and done). Within McCain’s proposal was “backdoor open-access”, which US private railroads would be dead-against, and the problems withal that he leaves completely unaddressed.
You’re imagining something very unrealistic and bizarre, then. Veolia Transport, f.k.a. Connex, does not operate high speed trains anywhere; they’re all about urban/suburban transit (light rail, subway, commuter rail, buses). They are very fond of their pork diet. MBTA’s commuter rail has suffered under the
The implication here is that you know better than every US CEO? Hmmm…
HSR is NOT profitable in the normal business sense, or it would be funded from private equity. The ROI just isn’t there for private investment. Nor are you considering the “hidden subsidy” of the unprofitable transit feeder systems along the route (or just the end points, if you prefer). Now, you’re gonna have to show me a HSR line supported only by park and ride lots! (with parking fees, of course, to capture the cost of the roads to the parking lot!) [:D]
I’m OK with a RR with $9B in revenues and $2+B in free cash flow. Just my kind of stupid.
Don, remember that the first rule is “Don’t get into an argument with a locomotive.”
…more like getting hit on the head lessons…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y05EmK66Gsk
and blanket statements are soooo easy to debunk.
| i have seen many postings by george and his distain for mc cain he is not in office. california high speed rail has been stopped by the unability to choose between 2 routes from the central valley into the san francisco bay area and has held it up for a long time. the public that dosent have a vision except for the automobile and airplanes other countrys do not put sociates needs up for vote for that reason we should have had that vision a lon time ago we didnt except a few. public transit is mostly unprovitable the bean counters are never going to allow it the myoptic public is hard to vote for it because the anti groups seem to dominate going to the media, news paper and tv. rodmc |
|---|