This is how I view the way high speed rail will need to succeed.
1.) Speed
If you want Americans to chose rail over cars or air you need to make it convenient for them. A train going 110 mph is good for regional service and not long distance travel. However Americans are going to want faster service between cities. Although the current plan is to use existing right-of-ways that do serve more smaller cities and communities, and make it easier to draw in people from smaller cities into the larger urban areas; but as far intercity travel between major urban centers will require designated corridors 150 mph + . It would be expensive but would be worth the investment as studies show more of the countries population is living in cities and will offer a faster & more frequent service for travel, which brings me to my second point.
2.) Frequency
To make the train more convenient; frequency and the flexibility to travel at different intervals of the day to a city and even return the same day would be a huge plus to a lot of travelers.
3.) Co-operation with Mass Transit
A key issue is that once you get to an urban center it is difficult for there is no way to get around efficiently. The best way is to make Train stations in cities the hub of mass transit where light rail & buses could move travelers from the trains around the city to popular areas, and possibly invest in Personal Rapid Transit to taxi folk from the light rail and bus lines. Think about if you could drive to a station near you, use a park and ride option, take the train into the city and then just us mass transit for the rest of the day it would be a great travel option. If you make train stations the main transit center it could make travel flow a lot easier and not have people worrying if their would be a way to get around when they arrive.
4.) Keep Freight & Passenger separate
If you want passenger and freight trains to share the s
Commitment…Proper design…Locations…Who to have responsiblity and ownership…Did I say money…Some workable way of financing, long term…Citizens attitude.
There is one more component needed to make passenger rail become the preferred national method of travel. That is a high tax on gasoline, coupled with high tolls on every road. It will kill two birds with one stone by getting people out of their cars and into the trains; and it will pay for the trains. There is no need to wait for the public attitude to change when you can just use force.
Quite so. Increase income tax to pay for the new track and new trains and increase gas tax and tolls to increase cost of driving so people will be priced out of their cars. Fast trains by the power of the gun!!! All we need for high speed rail to be successfull, that is to exist, is more taxes or for the Chinese and Saudis to buy more of our bad paper. Bad news is that the Chinese are cutting back on our debt, and I don’t think the Saudis hold much. Why should they, they have a splendid cash cow in oil and enjoy the protection of our military.
The good news is that either we will have a revolution, hopefully at the ballot box, or our economy will collapse before we get very far into the OP’s dreams.
IMO, Number 3 is the most important thing to make HSR work once it is in place. Travel between your house and your destination must be absolutely seamless to attract the masses to mass transit and HSR. High gas taxes would not just make people re-consider their cars, it would actually make the roads better. Was it last year a federal study came out stating that the country needed to spend $750 billion that year to bring roads and bridges up to snuff? What do you folks think about long distance trains ever paying for themselves once huge hordes of travelers are taking them and more routes are brought back? Could a really long train pay for itself? Or would it just require more people and equipment? Obviously the railroads didn’t make a profit at the end of passenger service. I’ve read that they never made a profit on the service in the best of times.
I’m going to play devils advocate a bit. 1. Not speed, but trip time. You don’t have to go fast, you just have to beat the reliable driving time - which includes a cushion for congestion.
Not frequency, but a schedule that fits travel demand. Out in the morning an back in the evening might be a good starting point. There are successful air routes that don’t have great frequency, just convenient schedules.
Good coordination with local transit is nice, but not vital. Air service in most places does not have much, if any. You DO have to keep the first and last mile in mind, though.
Keeping passenger and freight separate is an artificial constraint. There are places where it makes great sense to keep them totally combined. Why mandate separation “just because”?
Fast - Frequent - On time - City Center station in large cities with food court, car rental, AND mass transit at the station. Very quick platform stops at small towns.
Most important: Keep security at the level it is now, don’t jump into the swamp of paranoia like the airports did.
Plus a serious attitude change in the American population’s perspective; to encompass all the things mentioned, convienience of schedules, locations served and cost effectiveness of the service provided.
Do not forget it took the Europeans many years to achieve the relatively limited network of HSR service over the conventional rail network; as well, the Japanese system of HSR took many years to assemble.
The major hurdle for the American system to overcome will be the current rush of the Federal Government to jump into a financial abyss. Not to mention NIMBY’s and all the other special interests who think that their own ox is about to be gored, and are ready to lawyer up.[2c]
How many threads, how many revivals of threads, how many different headlines and different titles for threads does it take to ask and answer the same question? Or is it when one closes down or gets too unwieldly you just start anew?
An HSR system that provides a seamless travel experience to each individual rider would be wonderful, but that is a quantum leap beyond what is being contemplated even with the full national plan proposed by the FRA.
The FRA proposal is a tiny objective compared to building HSR that is capable of meeting everyone’s travel needs for time and place at a price that is cost effective for the traveler. For that objective, it might be much easier to just reduce everyone’s travel needs by restructuring society.