The Faster-than-a-Bullet Train

You wrote, "...there are few places I feel as safe as at an airport."

I consider everything before the airport security checkpoint a soft target and therefore a high risk. There is little security before that checkpoint and hordes of people are all crammed together.

As for feeling safe, there is no place like home. :)

As for high speed trains, Amtrak has never been profitable (they are always earning less than what they spend and have a negative cash flow).

I am not certain that speed is the reason why they never earn their keep, but if it increased ridership enough could it offset the actual cost of operation? Most analysts say no.

This has been the deal killer in Florida and other states. No one can make a good business case for high speed rail except for the politicians and their donors.

All of this has been tried before and never went anywhere. It would not surprise me that it will go nowhere again, despite the lofty dreams coming out of the bedroom of the White House.

The US simply does not have a love affair for mass transit. When you compare the mass transit in the US to Singapore (or Europe), the US mass transit looks like something used to transport refugees and prisoners. The only explanation I can find is that it is simply a cultural thing. Americans simply do not find romance in mass transit, so, no matter how grand the scheme for a new rail system, people do nothing but yawn.

That being said, I just booked our first trip a few days ago on Amtrak's Autotrain for this Fall.

The ride is 17 hours and costs over $1,000. We can drive that same route in 15 hours sticking to the speed limits for a $125 in gas, but we thought we would try it once.

Our trip is long enough that the absence of paying for a rental car gets us close (but not equal) to what airfare and a rental would be for the week of travel and we avoid the TSA menagerie.

I will be glad to report back after the trip.

I agree, here in Japan, it is the opposite, mass transit is ingrained in the culture (driving a car here in the city is inconvinient).

I've had the opportunity to ride the Shinkansen (bullet train) in Japan a few times. It's a pleasant experience, very much like an airplane ride but without the pressure changes and turbulence and so forth. It's very quiet. But I've read that even the Shinkansen needs government subsidies to survive; that only a few of the sections generate profit, and most operate at a slight loss.

I agree completely with AH's assessment about high speed rail in the US.

Even if you make the wild assumption that some technology breakthrough cuts the costs by 80 percent, the map shown makes no sense. There are a number of glaring flaws: A separate non-stop line from New Orleans to Chicago being the most obvious; it would make more sense to have the line go from NO to Little Rock. There is no need to have 3 lines crossing the southwest (and skipping Las Vegas?!); there should be a single line from StL to LV and from there there could be 2 lines, one going to Phoenix and San Antonio, the other going to Los Angeles and tying into the CA line.

The vacuum system proposed here reminds me of the 'spam in a can' description of the early space program, when the command ships were called 'capsules'. Would these tubes have windows, so you could watch the landscape passing by? I'm guessing no.

No bullet trains for me.

I've ridden the Coast Starlight from L.A. to Seattle twice and the scenery is spectacular. I wouldn't want to rush through that.

I wonder if you factor in the tax dollars supporting road maintenance and building,and if that was instead diverted to rail, if the rail costs would actually be lower. Our roads are paid for by taxes, but is it proportionate to rail?

Looking at the price differences between Amtrak and local trains, Maryland's MARC and Pennsylvania's SEPTA, the costs are far different. Amtrak averages 2-4x the cost of a local train. I don't think that a lot of low income riders are riding Amtrak. I'm guessing they're using local trains. Buses are more the choice of low income riders for longer trips.

Amtrak is great for moving along the northeast corridor, from DC to Boston. Not so great for getting across Pennsylvania. I took a trip from Pittsburgh to Philadelphia a few years back, as my plane trip had been canceled due to a snow storm. It took nearly 8 hours. It was a nice ride with a lot of pleasant scenery, but it was not quick. The trains top speed was around 50 mph, but it averaged less than 40 for the trip.

I'm curious as to how well the freight rail systems are doing financially? In the midwest and west, I'm sure they're doing well. Here on the east coast, they have to compete with highway traffic.

because something "can be built" doesn't mean it should be. I admire Musk and his accomplishments to date but this isn't Europe or Asia. Americans love their freedom and the individuality that car ownership brings them. we might see some smaller systems but an entire network? no way! give me 50 MPG and I'll go quietly

As far as flying commercial is concerned, I stopped when the normal contents of my pockets were declared contraband. High speed rail has one major problem which is shared with air travel. When you finally get to the carrier's destination, you still need toi get to your destination - usually requiring the rental of a car. For travel within 1,000 miles or so, I find it's easier to drive my own vehicle thus enabling me to take a virtually unlimited amount (and type) of 'stuff'. Takes a little longer, but usually is still cheaper than air or rail travel.

Did you see the high speed crash of the Spanish train yesterday? Engineer texting perhaps?

This is the California ''White-elephant-express'', on steroids.

What, may you ask is a White elephant? Figuratively speaking, it is an object of such great value that the intended recipient would be to embarrassed to refuse, and that the giver would be too insulted to be allowed to be refused.

The salient feature of the exchange is that the (white elephant) is so expensive to maintain and support that it will eventually bankrupt the recipient.

Thus, the recipient has to give away the (white elephant) before going bankrupt, or figure out new ways to make enough money to support such a millstone.

Ground is about to be broken for the initial phase of the California (elephant) train from Fresno to Bakersfield. Bakersfield is a large city which is already in bankruptcy.

There just aren't enough people who want to go to either city, by any means.

So, the question remains, how can this relatively,little white elephant EVER pay for itself, let alone, a transnational one as discussed above???...

What I keep envisioning is all the ways bureaucracy will screw it up anyway if it ever gets built. (I'm speaking more to the California line, but certainly can apply elsewhere).

The first time someone gets aboard with a fuse sticking out of their underwear, we'll get all the hassle of an airport with security, X-rays, removing shoes, etc. adding hours to this "high speed" form of travel.

Very difficult to protect thousands of miles of track from terrorists... so better go slow for safety!

They will charge some insane amount to park your car at the station, and won't provide security so said car will get broken into... Customer lost.

They'll be sure to subsidise the ridership of criminals (they're poor and underprivileged dontcha' know) so they will make the commuters uncomfortable. Or homeless will be living on board.

Still need ground transportation from the destination that will be union controlled monopolized taxis that will be sure to negate any hoped for $ savings. Buses will be sure to have a different schedule from the trains, but of course neither will run on time anyway.

Construction costs have already tripled or more since it was voted for with certainly more to come.(Have all the environmental lawyers to pay off, of course the environmentalists are the ones screaming for this).

This will cost so much that roads will be more underfunded/poorly maintained (thus gently coaxing us to use the train).

Okay, better take a breath and enjoy the rest of CR4.

Rather than the high speed passenger service now proposed I would prefer the resumption of the auto train, expanded to go east/west with n/s feeders every 750 miles or so. Just load your stuff into your vehicle near your point of origin, then unload at a terminal somewhere near your destination. On a long trip it should save both stress and fuel, especially if Con-Rail fuel quotes are anywhere near realistic.

I am scheduled to take that train this Fall.

Only because I just want to do it once.

It costs a ridiculous amount of money. I could ship my car and fly there for the same money.

It is slow. 17 hours of train travel time versus 15 hours of drive time by Google Maps. I don't know if the 17 hours includes loading and unloading time.

So, is it a better alternative? Not decisively so in my book.

Add to the fact that even though the train is expensive, Amtrak still loses money as a company and requires huge tax payer subsidies to keep going.