Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

As the U.S. fantasizes, the rest of the world builds new transport system (2017)

thetransportpolitic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 171 posts

Re: As the U.S. fantasizes, the rest of the world builds new transport system (2017)

#61

Post by rmason »

tomohawk wrote: post #5

High speed rail is a non-starter in the US, except for in certain regions. It's 2000 miles from Chicago to LA. Optimistically, if you had a train that averaged 200 miles an hour, it would still take 10 hours. That's just not competitive.

I agree with you on the long runs. However there are a handful of densely populated runs where I think it makes sense.

For example:

1. Detroit - Chicago

2. New York - Philadelphia - Washington DC

3. Tampa - Orlando - Miami

4. Atlanta - Nashville

5. San Antonio - Austin - Dallas

6. Portland - Seattle

7. Los Angeles - Las Vegas

8. Cleveland - Columbus - Cincinnati

All of these are 70-90 minute journeys at 200 mph. Faster than driving and if you include everything in the journey also faster than flying.

Now that it's legal for us to use European train cars perhaps the French (or the Chinese) can build it for us :<)

Re: As the U.S. fantasizes, the rest of the world builds new transport system (2017)

#62

Post by shdh »

andys627 wrote: post #53

I would like to preemptively suggest that the author is focusing on dense areas of the country. He is suggesting high speed rail between Portland-Seattle, Dallas-Houston, NYC-DC, etc. Not Los Angeles-Chicago or DC-Seattle.

Build small parts of the network first Larger portions later

Re: As the U.S. fantasizes, the rest of the world builds new transport system (2017)

#63

Post by NeedMoreTea »

tomohawk wrote: post #5

High speed rail is a non-starter in the US, except for in certain regions. It's 2000 miles from Chicago to LA. Optimistically, if you had a train that averaged 200 miles an hour, it would still take 10 hours. That's just not competitive.

Britain is tiny in comparison, with a nationally embarrassing rail service compared to our European neighbours. It's been deprived of adequate investment for decades.

Yet the sleeper services to Scotland are still going as a daily service. Even though the rolling stock must be some of the oldest on our railways. New rolling stock due next year.

10 hours HSR service to LA is the perfect time for a good night's sleep and a good full breakfast in the restaurant car. Arrive in LA fully refreshed ready for a full day.

How can that not be competitive and appealing? I'd take that over a 4hr(?) cattle class early morning flight, with an hour or so in airports each end, every single time. Your size is a point in favour of HSR not against. There must be countless viable HSR routes in the US.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edinburgh_sleeper

Re: As the U.S. fantasizes, the rest of the world builds new transport system (2017)

#64

Post by shdh »

quickthrower2 wrote: post #48
rdl wrote: post #4

We have $2/gallon gas, from massive domestic production (and similar or lower prices for Jet-A). There are traffic congestion reasons for mass transit in cities, but we're pretty sorted for inter-city.

The article talks about a train that can go 200mph. That makes having people drive between cities seem a rather slow option. Plus you can get work done on a train. On a car it is not possible as a driver (other than phone calls) and pretty hard as a passenger. I take your point about planes, but it's good to have more than one option and trains are good for middling distances, as there isn't all the need to check in,…

Why just 200mph

Re: As the U.S. fantasizes, the rest of the world builds new transport system (2017)

#65

Post by cnorthwood »

davnicwil wrote: post #46
_delirium wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Traffic congestion is a pretty big issue for intercity too in some regions. Dallas-Houston is a mere 240 miles but often takes 5 hours to drive. Even in "light" traffic, 4 or so is common. You can do a lot better than that with even decently upgraded "legacy" rail, never mind a Shinkansen/TGV type system. For example, London-Manchester is 210 miles, and trains take only 2 hours.

> London-Manchester is 210 miles, and trains take only 2 hours Yes and to further emphasise, this is not a high speed train (though it does use leaning trains making it faster than other lines, and has few stops. Also it's 2 hours 15 mins to be precise). The proposed high speed train promises London-Manchester in ~1 hour.

It's only 2hrs 15mins if you go the longer way via Crewe, the more direct services via Stoke with fewer stops are around 2hrs 5mins. It also depends on your definition of high speed train, the original definition is 125mph, which the Pendolino definitely is (and is actually the max speed of the British train called the High Speed Train). We keep redefining what High means... HS2 with a max speed of 186mph will be 67minutes.

Re: As the U.S. fantasizes, the rest of the world builds new transport system (2017)

#66

Post by sandworm101 »

simongray wrote: post #54
sandworm101 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Canada's size, terrain, and population density make it a special case. Ottawa-toronto might work, but vancouver-calgary would be insanely expensive if even possible. Linking across the country ... we might as well not bother charging for tickets and just call it a government project never intended to break even. And in the north, spaceX rockets might be cheaper.

Seems like Canada could realistically cover almost 75% of the population: https://i.redd.it/sjbijiqb0u211.png

Similar maps work for the us. East and west coasts are dense, so too the boarder with canada (the great lakes cities). Every developed country has population centers around ports. There just arent any ports in the north. (That may one day change.)

https://wywing.files.wordpress.com/2017/03/us_population_den...

Re: As the U.S. fantasizes, the rest of the world builds new transport system (2017)

#67

Post by masonic »

tanilama wrote: post #43
lunchbreak wrote: post #20

Wendover had a good video about China's rail network a while ago. [1] Major points are: 1. China is willing to build loves that aren't self sustainable - whereas the USA isn't (and the US doesn't factor in the social benefits) 2. China's airspace is mostly military - leading to only small flight corridors and therefore significant delays for flights - making trains more reliable 3. China is willing to make train line…

Maybe US should rethink a little bit why it takes until 2029 to build a railway in between SF and LA, maybe the due diligence is exaggerated and wear the whole process down?

  it takes until 2029 to build a railway in between SF and LA
SF to LA has had rail service for over 140 years.

The failure of HSR in CA has nothing to do with "the US" and everything to do with graft internal to CA.

Re: As the U.S. fantasizes, the rest of the world builds new transport system (2017)

#68

Post by toufiqbarhamov »

soheil wrote: post #59
mythrowaway1124 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd take a 10 hour train trip from Chicago to LA in a heartbeat. Security lines are shorter, and the beginning and end of a train trip both happen at a literal train station, so it's usually easier to get into and out of the city center.

Security lines are shorter than airports now because public is not relying on trains in the US for travel as much as airplanes yet, if that happens what makes you think there won't be TSA all over train stations making you take your shoes off before boarding?

Security lines are shorter because you can’t fly a train full of jet fuel into a pair of skyscrapers.

Re: As the U.S. fantasizes, the rest of the world builds new transport system (2017)

#69

Post by lifeformed »

rdl wrote: post #60
reindeerer wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you think you see general solution for "self driving" in next 20 years, i have a bridge to sell you

In a restricted lane (dedicated to only self driving vehicles), we have had this capability for at least 15 years.

I hope no one is working or sleeping in those lanes.

Re: As the U.S. fantasizes, the rest of the world builds new transport system (2017)

#70

Post by craigzucchini »

rdl wrote: post #42
craigzucchini wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you have, have access to, are able, or want to drive a car, then at best it's reasonable option for places outside of denser areas, albeit far more expensive than the cost of gas. While cars are certainly good in some ways at getting people around to places that don't make sense to service with more significant options, they shouldn't be considered first when thinking about new development imo.

A non-new, efficient car (say, a 3 year old Prius) is about $0.15/mi to operate.

Perhaps, though I don't know where that number comes from. If it's purely gas mileage, then it doesn't account for cost of insurance, cost of the car, risk of an accident, cost of storing the car, cost of general maintenance, and, while sort of ancillary, cost the urban area if everyone relies on driving. If it's not pure gas mileage, I'd be curious how that formula works out, but there remain problems with that as a solution to anything.
Post reply on HN