It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why doesn't the US have a high speed rail system

page: 3
7
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 17 2019 @ 06:27 AM
link   
Because in the Us the vehicle is king.

Anyone that's taken a good look at public transportation in any major city can see why we don't.




posted on Feb, 17 2019 @ 06:34 AM
link   
I think a high speed rail system will come about one day. Roads are becoming to cluttered with traffic, overall driver competence is getting worse and worse, road maintenance crews can’t keep up with the decaying infrastructure, and we are moving towards less of a reliance on fossil fuels. When all those come together in an intelligent conversation, room for a trans continental high speed rail system has a place to grow.

Factor in our polluted air traffic and the massive amounts of fuel it costs for each flight, and there’s a motivation there as well. But it’s going to have to go through the coal and oil industry, who have a chokehold on American transportation and probably don’t want to give up any parts of their cash cow to make room for something that would work better for them.

For me, if I could hop on a train that gets me from point A to point B just as fast, if not faster than an aircraft...I’d be fine with that. But if we’re going to do it, I would rather wait until the designs for it can be done by Artificial Intelligence; one that focuses on maximizing efficiency and convenience...not one that’s based on political motivations or under the table and off the record buddy deals.

It won’t happen under a republican tenure, it’s going to take a democratic administration...but it could be done. And I hope it is one day, but only if it’s done right.
edit on 17-2-2019 by Assassin82 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 17 2019 @ 06:51 AM
link   
This is just a hunch, but if one were to place shiny new bullet trains like these;





....into a city like Chicago, surely it wouldn't take long for them to end up looking something along the lines of these;





I mean, sure - reasons for not building a high-speed rail could include lack of appropriate funding, political will, and for geographical reasons, but I'd say another reason for not building one would be people; people are the reason that people can't have nice things.

*Disclaimer: I've neer been to Chicago and I know nothing about trains. This post isn't about me judging a city or her inhabitants, it's more about pointing out what I see as the obvious; the minority would try their hardest to spoil it for the majority.

Images for illustration purposes only.

(Why do I feel I'm about to get flamed, lol)




posted on Feb, 17 2019 @ 06:53 AM
link   
I would guess it's mainly because the majority of Americans typically don't travel long distances on a frequent basis.



posted on Feb, 17 2019 @ 07:58 AM
link   
a reply to: [post=24194201]JAGStorm[/post

Because we already have an equivalent called an interstate highway system.

Most people in the US own their own cars, and we can then pick and choose exactly when we want to use that system and where we want to go on it.

Contrast that with a highspeed rail where we are beholden to when the trains travel and where their routes run and when we get to the end of the route, we are still having to figure out how to get around our destination.

Right now, the system we have offers far more flexibility and freedom than a rail system does or ever will.



posted on Feb, 17 2019 @ 08:09 AM
link   
a reply to: JAGStorm

This is a good subject.
I think the problem here is we as a society want to "get there" on our own schedule and not on a train schedule.
It seems that rail travel in this country is limited to people who are afraid to fly and people looking for a nostalgic experience.

A high speed rail would get a lot of attention when it is new but I'm afraid that most would lose interest pretty quick.

We have railroads now.... How many of you have ever taken a trip by train?

On Long Island I took the Long Island Rail Road ( which my maternal grandfather helped build btw) into New York city because it was easier than driving and looking parking in Manhattan. I never took a trip to a vacation by train. Maybe because my dad worked for an airline and we flew pretty much for free.

Then too we have these stories about trains derailing all the time.



posted on Feb, 17 2019 @ 08:14 AM
link   
a reply to: Doodle19815

Well wont the plane you take from Tennessee to China going to go faster than 200 miles per hour?



How Fast Do Commercial Airliners Fly? Commercial jet aircraft cruise at about 400 – 500 knots (460 – 575 mph / 740 – 930 kph) – read more to understand the background behind it. Speed can get a bit confusing when talking about an object moving through the air.


Of course thats in the air where theres not much they can hit lol.



posted on Feb, 17 2019 @ 08:23 AM
link   
a reply to: MerkabaTribeEntity

Wouldn't a high speed train be for long distance travel? Would it be used as transportation around a city?
It would be a lot of starts and stops. Not sure how fast you can get between stations.

Amtrak... our long distance rail system is subject to vandalism too and not just in cities. These vandals even deface large rocks in the middle of the desert.



posted on Feb, 17 2019 @ 08:32 AM
link   
a reply to: JAGStorm

Because the US is not Europe or China. Europe is not exactly all that large so the use of trains / public transportation is more prominent there than in the US.

In general The UK is a little bit larger than Illinois, Germany is a bit larger than Wisconsin and France is roughly the size of Texas. When you put 80 million people into a land area the size of Wisconsin or 65 million in Illinois public transportation becomes more efficient.

Not to mention the infrastructure boom in the US started after WWII where as the infrastructure in European cities date back hundreds, if not thousand, of years.

As for China its based on economics and their style of government.Now that cares are becoming more and more common in China look at their rush hour traffic. People get pissy here waiting in traffic for an hour. There have been incidents in China where grid lock has left people stuck in traffic for more than a day. Its easier moving people by rail than by car given the level of their road infrastructure,
edit on 17-2-2019 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 17 2019 @ 09:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: musicismagic
It's sad to think about all the money wasted on pet projects when a bullet train or bullet trains can be built.
Yes, air travel is fine and fast, but when people see that trains are "cool", hopefully America will have them.
During holidays when airlines are over booked, trains also are over booked. And this is in Asia.


California couln't even build a high-speed rail system from LA to SF without going way over budget and behind schedule.



posted on Feb, 17 2019 @ 09:40 AM
link   
CA cant get it done because too many pockets get lined. My wife is the industry for supporting CA construction and its a cess pool. let trump negotiate and we could get it done! you could get to chicago in 10 hours.. a flight takes 5.5 with airport time ( parking- checking in- luggage)its at least 8. there is a big need. Too many special interests stopping it. Our "representatives" are too busy getting paid to worry about giving us what we need.



posted on Feb, 17 2019 @ 09:47 AM
link   
couse its infrastructure ….and maintenance cost to much !

a reply to: JAGStorm



posted on Feb, 17 2019 @ 09:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: MerkabaTribeEntity

Wouldn't a high speed train be for long distance travel? Would it be used as transportation around a city?
It would be a lot of starts and stops. Not sure how fast you can get between stations.

Amtrak... our long distance rail system is subject to vandalism too and not just in cities. These vandals even deface large rocks in the middle of the desert.


The only place it would make sense is between to nearby (relatively) hubs. Like NYC to D.C. or something.



posted on Feb, 17 2019 @ 03:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Doodle19815



Why do you continue to say no one will ride it?


If you can get a private company to fund a passenger train in the U.S. then have at it. You won't be able to because it will lose money and everyone knows it as it has been tried before. The city of Cincinnati wasted money on a light rail system for literally hundreds of millions of dollars and guess what? No one rides it...it loses money.

That is because NO ONE RIDES it and I will keep saying it because it is true. Rail is antiquated and no one is going to ride it because it is slower than a car or plane or other modes of transportation and less convenient.

I get that you and your liberal pals might ride it, but I know you wont make it profitable because IT ISN'T. That is the point. You don't build something that loses money.



posted on Feb, 17 2019 @ 03:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

A private group is working towards building one from Houston to Dallas and later expanding to San Antonio and Austin. They are waiting for the environmental impact study now. When that is complete construction should start. In Houston they are renovating an old mall facility as the terminal.

For Houston to Dallas it makes sense timewise as it is a 3-4 hour drive and just about that for a flight given airport time, etc. The train is supposed to make the trip in 90 minutes for about the same price as the flight.



posted on Feb, 17 2019 @ 03:59 PM
link   
Needs to be elevated so not to hit stupid people. That makes it expensive. A friend works for a large freight line. They kill people every day and all those people's familes hire lawyers to sue because their family member is dead. 98% of the times they did it to themselves.

Blame lawyers for the $100 an acre property that now is $100,000 an acre.

Flint MI bad water who bought all the empty homes lawyers.




posted on Feb, 17 2019 @ 04:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

I am wondering if this will change soon.

When I was young, America's love for the automobile was so great that people, especially men, would sell their spouses for a sporty set of wheels, but many young people today have no interest in owning automobiles.

They want to travel from point A to point B, and highly rely on transportation types such as Uber or Lyft, but they are only practical for short jaunts.

Maybe bullet trains will be more appealing in the future.



posted on Feb, 17 2019 @ 04:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: JAGStorm
Can you imagine a bullet train that goes from Chicago to California, or New York to Texas?
Florida to Las Vegas?


Can you imagine how much that would cost? How much land would have to be taken from private owners to accommodate it since the current rail system takes routes that simply would not work for high speed rail? The massive costs of the environmental impact studies and the law suits that would tie it up in court for year and years? Just take a look at what happened in California.

Amtrak has to be subsidized because the true cost of a ticket would be way to high for anyone to ever take it. Amtrak is slower and more expensive than flying or driving and imagine what the cost would be for a new high speed rail to make it profitable. We don't need it, we fly.

What does make sense is to continue to improve the fuel efficiency of jets and to find a way for domestic flyers to have a simple ID that would make it so there is no need for them to deal with TSA. Flying removes all the issues of dealing with mountains, rivers and other obstacles that make putting in a high speed rail impossible to afford.

A single earthquake, a single storm, a single large flood or a forest fire could and would constantly be causing issues with a high speed rail, raising the costs dramatically.

Follow the money for why it's such a bad idea.
edit on 2/17/2019 by Blaine91555 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 17 2019 @ 04:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Doodle19815

Just because you will ride it doesnt equate to everyone else riding either. The same logic you responded with can be flipped.

You are thinking that a high-speed rail wont have stops and that we would choose destinations that everyone wants.

Similar to the highway system, we create a point to point high speed from say Los Angeles to San Diego. Great you say...until the towns that people used to drive through start demanding their own stops.

Even if we include air travelers, they will look to a rail system that doesnt get them anywhere near where they want to be.

Another note is geography. Our country is vast. Train corridors in the upper East work because of the general closeness of cities. Start moving west and those major cities become vast with small towns in between.



posted on Feb, 17 2019 @ 05:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

That is exactly what my husband keeps saying! I guess I'm just accustomed to being slung around in the air. Doing it on the ground just seems scarier. However, I really am looking forward to taking advantage of it to see more of China than would have been possible without it.

I would love to take weekend trips out to Cali or up to NY City from Nashville. I know, I can fly. But, if given a choice, I would take the "Bullet Train" and see the (200mph) sights along the way.




top topics



 
7
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join