More choices for better transportation
« Newer Older »
February 15, 2010 • 9:38 pm
Europe and Asia have enjoyed high-speed passenger trains for years, but the United States has lagged behind, holding on to older and slower trains, except fo…
Vodpod videos no longer available.
Filed under: Uncategorized
What, may I ask is wrong with our slower trains? I say nothing except there are not enough of them, and they can be cut, truncated, terminated, or whatever, apparently at Amtrak’s daily whim.
HSR is nice, but give us two frenquencies a day on the current LD routes including truncated ones, as well as several routes lost, mostly during the infamous Jimmy Carter period, and then there will be more than enough ridership to eventually demand HSR. Now is not the time, there is no political will to do it, and the next administration will stop it, mark my words.
The shot of Acela by the water is really good, makes me want to ride, funny right when they are trying to bash it…
There is no reason why the USA cannot have true (180MPH)
between the major metro regions that are 400-500 miles apart. It is only now starting to crack open the door that should have happened 20 years ago..Money, well this nation if it wants to has plenty…example the 1 Trillion and gowing cost of the Iraq war..30 Billion extra just added now what could we have done with say 100 Billion of just that?
We can spend all the money we want as long as China is willing to write us blank checks. I shudder to think what will happen when they have had enough of us using their largesse. Then a cup of coffee will probably cost $20 or more.
All this free federal money that is used to fight wars and build tracks has to be paid for by someone.
“give us two frenquencies a day on the current LD routes including truncated ones, as well as several routes lost”
You mean like service to Columbus, Ohio, which hasn’t had service since 1971? Some of the “high-speed” rail funds will be used to restore service between Cincinnati, Columbus, and Cleveland. Just a few trains a day, and they won’t be exceeding 79mph for at least the first few years.
You mean like service in Maine north of Portland, where there hasn’t been service for decades? Some of the “high-speed” rail funds will be extending the Downeaster northward and (of course) eastward. Again, the trains won’t run over 79mph.
With all due respect, Mr. Sullivan, don’t react negatively just because this progam bears the name “high-speed rail.” Please consider the actual plans and projects that are being funded.
Spending money on something that will last a 100 years and that will have a huge benefit for the American people is worth every penny..
I agree with Mr.Sullivan. What IS wrong with a 79MPH line? The speed limit is lower than that on most Interstates anyway….and the Highway Patrol will be happy to ticket you for 79-80MPH, as they should. Starting with 79MPH, and eventually speeding up to 100,120, etc. MPH is the idea. But first some lines will have to observe a 79MPH limit. Ever drive into a major city, like Chicago, and watch the passenger trains wizz by, as you sit, stuck in traffic? I sure have.
Didn’t we spend more money bailing out US Air, Northwest, etc. ???
Nice piece. Better than average reporting, with good stats and nice shots of the Acela cruising.
“What IS wrong with a 79MPH line?”
People will prefer use the car.
Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:
You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Twitter account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Google+ account. ( Log Out / Change )
Connecting to %s
Notify me of new comments via email.
Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.