but it would make a US based high speed rail system look cheap
I think a land transportation link is going to happen eventually. I would not bet on it happening any time soon though.
That may very well be. But it will be a hell of a long time before it goes all the way to Beijing, or to CONUS.
Why don’t these people realise that the expense of laying and maintaining tracks doesn’t make sense unless and until you need a 747 multiple times an hour, every hour, on that route?
HSR doesn’t really compete against aircraft, rather it competes against people driving.
Figure out how many people are going Downtown to Downtown. Boston center to Manhattan to DC.
Then figure how many would prefer to go faster and not work so hard.
Actually it competes with short-haul flights.
there is more then one market, one market is the drive to the airport to fly
400 miles, one is the drive downtown to downtown for 200 miles.
the downtown market is in many respects larger, it’s somewhat deterred by the structural
barrier. I’ve gotten up at 5 AM, taken the Metroliner to Philadelphia, attended an all day meeting and taken the Amtrak home by 9 PM. There could easily by a real advantage
to being able to take a HSR leave at 9 AM, do a series of meetings and home for dinner.
now some of that is people flying the Delta Shuttle, DCA -> LGA -> BOS but
i suspect a lot are people held back by the TSA nonsense.
I can on a good day make Union Station in 20 minutes, and if i have a ticket in hand board
and be on the Acela at 100 MPH, it would be even more enabling to do that at 200 MPH.
I must admit that I find this charming, if incompatible with human nature in various ways; I like trains more than most people. About the only thing that could make it practical is nonstop volcanic activity on the Kamchatka Peninsula rendering air travel between North America and East Asia impossible.
The only way I really want to hear more about this is if Harry Harrison comes back from the grave to write ‘A Transpacific Tunnel, Hurrah!’ Seriously, what is it about lefties that impels such abject worship of the leading personal transportation technology extant when Karl Marx was still a remittance man in London? This matter was settled over a century ago, people! As soon as civilized folks had altenatives to passenger trains, they took them! Give up the goofy track worship!
Rail is pretty cheap. it’s why they move most cargo by rail or ship.
Air travel is great but it’s expensive, have you ever priced Air Cargo?
Rail is pretty cheap if you happen to be bulky, heavy freight. For moving a million tons of coal across eight states there’s nothing better than trains. That’s why freight trains are still a thing. But people prefer to be a lot less densely packed when they travel than grain, crude oil, sheet steel or taconite pellets do. Freight and commodities don’t require stations with a lot of amenities either. They don’t have to be fed enroute nor are arrangements for eliminatory functions required. From a packing efficiency and ancillary cost standpoint, people are expensive to move by rail. That’s why no one can do it profitably anymore.
As to “competiton,” passenger trains compete with both short-haul airline routes and automobile driving. The TSA has done its level best to render flying about as pleasant as moving around the old Warsaw Pact. Despite that, no significant fraction of the formerly flying public has seen fit to make a permanent change to trains, even in the mostly Northeastern cities where it’s a realistic option. As for competition from people who prefer to drive their own cars, if you think passenger rail is in bad shape now, wait until self-driving cars are ubiquitous in a decade or so.
You lefties need to get over your damned train fetish. They ain’t coming back.
it could be possible to go over the Bering Strait.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bering_Strait_crossing
but it would make a US based high speed rail system look cheap
I think a land transportation link is going to happen eventually. I would not bet on it happening any time soon though.
That may very well be. But it will be a hell of a long time before it goes all the way to Beijing, or to CONUS.
Why don’t these people realise that the expense of laying and maintaining tracks doesn’t make sense unless and until you need a 747 multiple times an hour, every hour, on that route?
HSR doesn’t really compete against aircraft, rather it competes against people driving.
Figure out how many people are going Downtown to Downtown. Boston center to Manhattan to DC.
Then figure how many would prefer to go faster and not work so hard.
Actually it competes with short-haul flights.
there is more then one market, one market is the drive to the airport to fly
400 miles, one is the drive downtown to downtown for 200 miles.
the downtown market is in many respects larger, it’s somewhat deterred by the structural
barrier. I’ve gotten up at 5 AM, taken the Metroliner to Philadelphia, attended an all day meeting and taken the Amtrak home by 9 PM. There could easily by a real advantage
to being able to take a HSR leave at 9 AM, do a series of meetings and home for dinner.
now some of that is people flying the Delta Shuttle, DCA -> LGA -> BOS but
i suspect a lot are people held back by the TSA nonsense.
I can on a good day make Union Station in 20 minutes, and if i have a ticket in hand board
and be on the Acela at 100 MPH, it would be even more enabling to do that at 200 MPH.
I must admit that I find this charming, if incompatible with human nature in various ways; I like trains more than most people. About the only thing that could make it practical is nonstop volcanic activity on the Kamchatka Peninsula rendering air travel between North America and East Asia impossible.
The only way I really want to hear more about this is if Harry Harrison comes back from the grave to write ‘A Transpacific Tunnel, Hurrah!’ Seriously, what is it about lefties that impels such abject worship of the leading personal transportation technology extant when Karl Marx was still a remittance man in London? This matter was settled over a century ago, people! As soon as civilized folks had altenatives to passenger trains, they took them! Give up the goofy track worship!
Rail is pretty cheap. it’s why they move most cargo by rail or ship.
Air travel is great but it’s expensive, have you ever priced Air Cargo?
Rail is pretty cheap if you happen to be bulky, heavy freight. For moving a million tons of coal across eight states there’s nothing better than trains. That’s why freight trains are still a thing. But people prefer to be a lot less densely packed when they travel than grain, crude oil, sheet steel or taconite pellets do. Freight and commodities don’t require stations with a lot of amenities either. They don’t have to be fed enroute nor are arrangements for eliminatory functions required. From a packing efficiency and ancillary cost standpoint, people are expensive to move by rail. That’s why no one can do it profitably anymore.
As to “competiton,” passenger trains compete with both short-haul airline routes and automobile driving. The TSA has done its level best to render flying about as pleasant as moving around the old Warsaw Pact. Despite that, no significant fraction of the formerly flying public has seen fit to make a permanent change to trains, even in the mostly Northeastern cities where it’s a realistic option. As for competition from people who prefer to drive their own cars, if you think passenger rail is in bad shape now, wait until self-driving cars are ubiquitous in a decade or so.
You lefties need to get over your damned train fetish. They ain’t coming back.