https://qz.com/1761495/this-is-why-the-us-still-doesnt-have-high-speed-trains/
Fairly neutral analysis.
Simple - no sustained political and financial will. No will, no way.
I am curious about the cancelled $400M plan for Cincinnati-Cleveland-Columbus passenger rail. What was the actual plan? It mentioned a 39-mph train. Was that the average speed, including a particularly high number of stops, for proposed service on an existing freight route? Why so slow?
Was this to be a state-supported Amtrak route? I’d appreciate it if someone could fill me in on what was proposed.
It might be slow indeed if it goes to those cities in that order.
In my 1965 Official Guide, NYC’s Ohio State Limited made the run at about 47 mph including 7 intermediate stops.
California appears to have had the political will and some measure of financial will. At least more than any other state contemplating such a project.
They appear to be failing and flailing. You dispute me? California is part of the United States, the US still has not high speed train ergo California does not have one.
I gave you a topic. Talk amongst yourselves.
California would screw up a one car funeral procession.
I don’t know why California’s HSR seems so messed up, but in my opinion it is a combination of poor planning and very inaccurate cost estimates.
“California’s bullet train project confronts an array of political and financial challenges, but its biggest problem involves mismanagement of land acquisitions, which has contributed to construction delays, cost increases, litigation and the launch of a federal audit.”
https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2019-09-15/california-bullet-train-land-acquisition
This is a good article.
“The question really is, for us as an industry and as a company (Amtrak), in being pragmatic,” he said. All over the country, there are underserved segments of around 300 miles which are ripe for high-quality rail, he added. “We don’t even need to spend money on necessarily expensive high-speed trains*—just getting what we have today working well at a hundred miles an hour, which is very feasible, is really viable.””*
Texas Central proposes to build an high speed passenger rail line between Dallas and Houston. Is this really the best outcome for Texas? Or would upgrading the existing rail line, which would not require taking any private property, to 125 mph be a better option?
How about upgrading the existing rail lines from DFW to San Antonio, arguably one of the most congested corridors in the U.S., with two sizeable markets ideally situated for rail between the end points, be a better outcome than a high-speed rail line?
Outside of a few highly congested corridors, Americans don’t want passenger trains. They have demonstrated a preference for airplanes for medium to long hauls and personal vehicles for most other transportation needs. That is not likely to change in the near future.
It was turned down for the same reason Wisconsin turned it down. The Governor of Ohio whom I think was Republican John Kasich at the time stated he did not want to accept a grant that turned into a loan if the system was not finished on a project timeline. Because the vast experience of the past was these HSR projects never finish and the starter loan is not enough to either finish the system or to operate it free of additional cash. Basically, he would have accepted a grant with a commitment from the Feds to cover the risks but he was not willing to accept what amounted to an initial loan with no guarantee of future assistance from the Feds. A lot of the Republican governors viewed the structure of the program as problematic and causing large future state spending deficits.
Not a surprise the same reason Amtrak has issues. Initially funded inadequately and never given a stable source of future funding that can be relied on over a period of years where management can plan the future in a cost efficient manner.
BTW, as with Wisconsin…the project in Ohio was never officially cancelled, it just had it’s funding suspended and the project was postponed at some TBD future date as it was a Federal vs State project.
Among the failures was inability to partner with the private sector which was the initial promise of the California project. You’ll note that Virgin Trains is proceeding with XPRESS WEST funding and construction, independent of California… really should have been a partnership there and I would like to know why the State and Virgin Trains could not or would not work together on at least a portion of the LA to Las Vegas routing.
On a serious note, the snail train moniker ignored the long-term plan of the corridor.
I suspect the ultimate goal which we will see on the Chicago to Milwaukee corridor as well as the NEC is that it was to be a mixed train corridor in that you would have trains that stopped at every city as well as express trains that only stopped at the end points. The Wisconsin and Ohio proposals were mixed trains when complete not a train stopping at every stop. Pretty sure that Chicago to St. Louis as well as Chicago to Detroit will also evolve that way if they are not currently planned to end up that way.
Interesting article. Well, I have thoughts on both sides of this one.
I think it is shameful and unfair to rail that government makes very large infrastructure investments in highways and airports which benefit trucks, buses, and obviously airlines, while leaving AMTRAK out in the cold comparatively.
No wonder the railroads were happy to get out of the passenger business after the post office left the rails.
As a nation, there is and has been a lot of wrong headed policy for a long time that brought us to this point.
All that said, how would high speed rail benefit me? Directly, it would not.
I don’t travel long distances for work, if I did I would need my truck full of tools. I don’t wear a suit or work in an office, all my meetings are in my clients homes… Never seen anyone on a train (or a plane) with a miter saw and a power drill…
I don’t travel much for vacation, and if I did, it would not be from one large population center to another. I’m not interested in going to NYC to see a show…
And as it turns out, if I was, I am 10 minutes from a NEC station right now… I can catch the train to NYC or DC pretty easy.
Indirectly, better passenger rail might benefit me a lot, but that is more “abstract” and harder to predict or measure.
It might unclog some highways I need to ride on if it served enough other people’s needs. (but so would putting more of those pesky trucks on flat cars)
It may improve productivity somewhere that may benefit everyone?
But it may not?
For what it’s worth, I’m not an airline user either. When I do travel for pleasure, I drive, because yes, I’m not part of the “collective”, I’m not interested in the bus tour or cruise with an itinerary. My wife did not like Disney World because she felt herded like “sheeple”.
This is a life style issue. Political and social values/beliefs aside, as a practic
The key according to the London School of Economics is that it has to be implemented in such a way that it is both faster and more convienent then other competing modes of transport. Those two items have to be measureable enough to entice people to make the decision to use high speed rail on their own without other incentives.
If it does not meet that threshold above, it really does not increase productivity or GDP and it is just another mode of transportation to choose from.
Atlantic, I think your values, profession, and preferences are just great. I hope you have had chidren who absorbed your values if not your profession. But I do think you and your wife would enjoy a day spent riding Amtrak’s California Zephyr one way or the other between Denver and Salt Lake City. If you want privacy, a double bedroom can be had for the additional cost.
If you restore religious buildings that cannot use electronic amplification for certain events and/or landmarked making any fixed changes impossible, the following may be of help:
The canopy and its supports has five wood parts, plus the lectern, and each can be carried through a regular door by one person.
Dave, Thank you for the kind words.
And thank you for the information. I am familiar with those acoustic principles, one of my hobbies is HiFi speaker design.
In my business I do not do any institutional or commercial buildings, only private residences, for a number of professional and personal reasons.
I’m sure we might find such a trip interesting and enjoyable, other obligations would simply not allow that at this time, maybe one day soon enough.
I am pretty well traveled here in the east, not so much out west. I have to admit I am not attracted to the west based on the limited trips I have already experianced. But who knows?
While I almost never comment, I do find most of your posts very interesting.
Take care,
Sheldon
The author of the article misses the point. There’s no high-speed rail in the U.S. because no one actually needs it. I worked on every one of high-speed rail projects that was awarded ARRA funds. Not one of these projects could present a compelling purpose and need statement. High-speed rail is very expensive. Money is not infinite. There’s competition for money. Spend it on HSR, you’re going to not spend it on something else. HSR couldn’t develop an argument that would convince a majority in nearly every political entity to which it was introduced that it had a more urgent need of money than the competing demands on money. Thus it failed.
HSR still can’t produce a compelling purpose and need in the U.S. I don’t forsee any condition under which it will. The cost is staggering compared to the benefits it provides.
JLD
But when I rode the C&NW to Chicago, I used to see men with their window washing equipment, buckets with squeegees, sponges, etc. And I’m sure others were building maintenance people.