Home Open Account Help 165 users online

Passenger Trains > article: hsr between u.s. hubs may be closer than it appears.....


Date: 04/19/24 21:21
article: hsr between u.s. hubs may be closer than it appears.....
Author: goneon66




Date: 04/20/24 05:33
Re: article: hsr between u.s. hubs may be closer than it appears.
Author: WM_1109

My favorite quote from the article:

“In the rest of the world, you can go 200 mph between cities, with no security delays,” Moulton said. “In America, you’re either stuck in traffic or you’re in a pressurized steel tube at 30,000 feet, hoping the door doesn’t blow off.”

I'm not an aeronautical engineer, but I think I see the problem.
/Ted



Date: 04/20/24 06:51
Re: article: hsr between u.s. hubs may be closer than it appears.
Author: cchan006

Brightline West is the brainchild of private equity billionaire Wes Edens, who bankrolled the Brightline project in Florida.

No it's not. Brightline merely "purchased" XpressWest (previously known as DesertXpress), originally funded by Las Vegas casino interests, specifically Anthony Marnell II. More people will be suckered into associating the success of Brightline with Brightline West, just because of the "Brightline" name.

45th President's potential re-election is cited as the death knell for HSR, but that's not necessarily true. At the early phase of his 2016 campaign, he voiced "support" for HSR, and deep research suggests a connection to Anthony Marnell II. Funny no one remembers Sir Richard Branson trying to IPO Brightline West as Virgin Train USA (symbol: VTUS) maybe 4-5 years ago? (I guess failure needs to be buried, LOL)

I see this as rushed election year PsyOp to sucker people into voting one way, and a scheme inferior to grade school fund raising drive. Don't expect real results when the priorities aren't correct.




Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/20/24 06:52 by cchan006.



Date: 04/20/24 07:41
Re: article: hsr between u.s. hubs may be closer than it appears.
Author: hsr_fan

cchan006 Wrote:

>
> 45th President's potential re-election is cited as
> the death knell for HSR, but that's not
> necessarily true. At the early phase of his 2016
> campaign, he voiced "support" for HSR, and deep
> research suggests a connection to Anthony Marnell
> II. 

He spoke in his typical nonsensical hyperbole about how China has HSR but if he gets in, we'll have the best, believe me.  Then he did nothing on infrastructure.  All bluster and bs.  



Date: 04/20/24 07:49
Re: article: hsr between u.s. hubs may be closer than it appears.
Author: cchan006

hsr_fan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> He spoke in his typical nonsensical hyperbole
> about how China has HSR but if he gets in, we'll
> have the best, believe me.  Then he did nothing
> on infrastructure.  All bluster and bs.

If one removes emotions from analyzing his "actions," he's quite transactional. That means with right people behind him, he can include HSR in his bluster again.

I'm merely exposing the BS and lack of real analysis from the useless article. There's definitely politics behind HSR, but regardless of this year's election results, no major changes will occur in 2025. More fund raising, more waiting, and more brainwashing in 2028 for the next political hype-fest.



Date: 04/20/24 07:49
Re: article: hsr between u.s. hubs may be closer than it appears.
Author: goneon66

i think there is a need for true hsr systems here.  however, can true hsr systems be built within their proposed schedules and within their proposed budgets here?

can privately funded passenger railroads be profitable?

66



Date: 04/20/24 08:20
Re: article: hsr between u.s. hubs may be closer than it appears.
Author: cchan006

goneon66 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> i think there is a need for true hsr systems
> here.

There will be no demand (and no need), where travel in most U.S. cities start with the automobile. Driving to a parking lot to ride trains will not grow public transit use enough to justify a functioning HSR network as this article pipe dreams. So comparing us to Europe and Asia is USELESS.

> however, can true hsr systems be built
> within their proposed schedules and within their
> proposed budgets here?

Proposed budget is just that. Here's the real priority: grow public transit and make it convenient to live WITHOUT the automobile. We get lies like "self-driving" that will cure congestion, or people flock to EVs instead of riding public transit for "cleaner" environment. LOL. Our infrastructure "innovation" is TRAPPED in the automobile.

I think I cited another blatant example of this trapping earlier: Elon Musk's Boring Co. vs. Seattle's Transit Tunnel. The fomer gets the hype, while the multi-use bores in Seattle gets little publicity.

Some metropolitan areas are bringing back public transit, but because of the Automobile Society we committed to, there's limited success at best. Todd (webmaster) mentioned in his earlier threads on his Monterey Branch ventures, about going to the Bay Area and witnessing  the pathetic ridership of VTA, Silicon Valley's transit system. Not too far away, new BART stations have low riderships despite the nearby transit villages and multi-story parking lots. I know because I use it often enough.

> can privately funded passenger railroads be
> profitable?

Yup. I'll eventually post some threads about Operating Ratios in Japan, compliments of Toyo-Keizai, publication focused on Japan's and Asia's economics. Their HSR obtains OR in the 60s easily, but one of their subway lines has OR in the 40s*. That subway line happened to be the 2nd oldest in Japan, and serves as a vital connection between HSR station and non-HSR downtown.

There are no large parking lots at most train stations in Japan, because people walk, bike, take buses, etc. to train stations. People living in a "driveway economy" has no business promoting HSR.

* pre-COVID
 



Date: 04/20/24 13:25
Re: article: hsr between u.s. hubs may be closer than it appears.
Author: goneon66

most trips to the airports start with traveling in a vehicle.  driving to an airport has not decreased the demand for air travel even without huge growth in public transit.

if a trip on hsr competes with the airlines regarding time spent from the curb of the orgin station to the arrival time at the curb of the destination station AND is not more expensive, i still think there would be a demand for hsr here.

as far as privately funded passenger trains being being profitable here, i guess we shall see...........

66


 

 



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/20/24 13:26 by goneon66.



Date: 04/20/24 13:42
Re: article: hsr between u.s. hubs may be closer than it appears.
Author: Lackawanna484

There are undoubtedly hubs where high speed rail makes abundant sense. And many others where it does not.

BrightLine Florida obviously grabbed several, if you include Tampa.

FWIW, I am amazed at how much new residential development is taking place in West Palm Beach, and Fort Lauderdale. Compared to 20 years ago, it is astonishing.

Posted from Android



Date: 04/20/24 13:55
Re: article: hsr between u.s. hubs may be closer than it appears.
Author: goneon66

my concern about brightline in florida are the ped/veh accidents and the possibility of speed reductions through those densely populated areas

how are the prices compared to airfare between orlando and miami?

from what i have seen, it sure looks like a comfortable ride between orlando and miami.................

66   



Date: 04/21/24 01:13
Re: article: hsr between u.s. hubs may be closer than it appears.
Author: cchan006

goneon66 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> most trips to the airports start with traveling in
> a vehicle.  driving to an airport has not
> decreased the demand for air travel even without
> huge growth in public transit.

Nope. Wrong logic.

Most trips to the airports start in a vehicle in the U.S. because of automotive hegemony, which we live in. That explains the huge parking structures that need to be built at all major airports to prop up air travel.

You didn't consider lack of parking spaces (or non-parking areas used as overflow "parking") when air travel demand is high. This is based on personal experience. Anyway, that's where your logic fails. Because we lack real choices in airport access, air travel demand tends to dictate vehicle use, not the other way around.

I've already discussed the 6 railroad access to 3 major airports in 2 major cities in Japan in the International Discussions. That's in addition to frequent airport buses and ubuiquitous taxis. Real choices. No need to drive and worry about airport parking.

> if a trip on hsr competes with the airlines
> regarding time spent from the curb of the orgin
> station to the arrival time at the curb of the
> destination station AND is not more expensive, i
> still think there would be a demand for hsr here.

Imaginary demand based on "bench racing" logic.

People are forgiving with time, if the access is consistent and convenient. 15-30 minutes penalty doesn't really affect your travel day, either for airline or HSR travel where travel time is measured in hours and distance is measured in hundreds of miles. So consider convenience as the major factor instead of micromanaging time or counting pennies. In the U.S., it's convenient to drive for most people. If they start their travel in a car, anyway, what's the incentive to choose train over air?

But you're neglecting something big regarding HSR. Train's (and HSR's) advantage is that train station can be in middle of downtown, amidst the skyscrapers. It's where access is central and convenient, ESPECIALLY with good public transit already in place.

Try that with an airport. "Downtown" airports still have to be built away from downtown. Because of massive land use required to support air travel, they tend to be built farther away, or they migrate out. Denver Stapleton --> DIA toward Aurora 19 miles further out is one obvious example.

Successful HSR network is supposed to connect large public transit networks, region to region. I see no real public transit networks at Rancho Cucamonga, Victorville, Merced, or Bakersfield. Unlike airports, it's easier to design HSR stations to be adjacent to non-HSR public transit modes (local trains, streetcars, buses, etc) with far fewer parking demands than airports, and far far less land, and right in downtown.

If most people in their daily lives visit downtown frequently without a car, then it's convenient for them to just hop on HSR to travel farther. No major changes in their routine except more luggage.

The HSR "promoters", who seem to lack the understanding of functional HSR networks are blind prisoners of the car society, so they have no idea what I'm talking about, except to "bench race" with Europe and Japan - TAW's often mentioned "they have one, so we need one, too" illogic. 

> as far as privately funded passenger trains being
> being profitable here, i guess we shall
> see...........

That's a minor concern for me. HSR "planners" need to really understand how to obtain ridership (no fake studies please), enough that trains run frequently, as in every 15-30 minutes at least, if not more. Without that, they have little hope of profitability.



Date: 04/21/24 07:21
Re: article: hsr between u.s. hubs may be closer than it appears.
Author: goneon66

IF an hsr train could compete with the travel times AND prices of air travel in the u.s., i think there would be a demand for it in the u.s.

nothing about the u.s.'s current vehicle ownership or what happens in europe or japan will change my mind..........

66

 



Date: 04/22/24 14:02
Re: article: hsr between u.s. hubs may be closer than it appears.
Author: ProAmtrak

I don't get why one part he says Brightline goes only 79 on FEC, where did he get that, I heard they run 90 on the FEC! Besides, if they actually funded Amtrak properly with good leadership included, Amtrak would still be like it was in the 90s!



[ Share Thread on Facebook ] [ Search ] [ Start a New Thread ] [ Back to Thread List ] [ <Newer ] [ Older> ] 
Page created in 0.0959 seconds