A review of "Amtrak, America's Railroad"
November 7, 2021 11:16 AM Subscribe
American trains need more than railfan nostalgia. "Foreign intercity rail networks succeed not just through boosterism but with realistic assessments of what kind of city pairs, distances, and railroad speeds are genuinely viable in a competitive marketplace. ... High-speed rail, which doesn’t exist in the United States, is most competitive with automobiles and airplanes on short- to medium-length journeys that are less than 5 hours, or about 500 miles. Slower conventional rail is competitive only on even shorter distances. This is unfortunately the challenge for most Amtrak services outside the Northeast Corridor." By Eric Goldwyn and Jonathan English.
A good read. There is a group trying to bring passenger rail to southern Montana and they never talk about travel times.
In a state where there are 1.6 vehicles for every person, I can't imagine passenger rail replacing a lot of vehicle trips if the train takes substantially longer than driving 80 mph.
posted by ITravelMontana at 11:40 AM on November 7, 2021 [6 favorites]
In a state where there are 1.6 vehicles for every person, I can't imagine passenger rail replacing a lot of vehicle trips if the train takes substantially longer than driving 80 mph.
posted by ITravelMontana at 11:40 AM on November 7, 2021 [6 favorites]
You also need to separate long- and short-distance passenger rail if you want to system to be efficient. Longer, city-to-city routes work best with very fast trains and fewer stops. Local travel tends to need smaller, slower trains and more stops. You can't run both types of train efficiently on the same set of rails.
posted by pipeski at 12:02 PM on November 7, 2021 [3 favorites]
posted by pipeski at 12:02 PM on November 7, 2021 [3 favorites]
most competitive with automobiles and airplanes on short- to medium-length journeys that are less than 5 hours, or about 500 miles
Exactly. If I'm going Minneapolis to Boston, I'd still fly even if high-speed rail were available. High-speed rail from Minneapolis to Chicago totally hits the sweet spot. I'd expect it would only make a couple of stops along the way (Madison, Milwaukee, etc.), but those are stops I'd like, too.
posted by gimonca at 12:09 PM on November 7, 2021 [6 favorites]
Exactly. If I'm going Minneapolis to Boston, I'd still fly even if high-speed rail were available. High-speed rail from Minneapolis to Chicago totally hits the sweet spot. I'd expect it would only make a couple of stops along the way (Madison, Milwaukee, etc.), but those are stops I'd like, too.
posted by gimonca at 12:09 PM on November 7, 2021 [6 favorites]
I'm in Portland, Oregon. If I had a high-speed - or, quite honestly, even a RELIABLE - rail service to Seattle, Vancouver BC, and San Francisco, I would travel up and down the North American west coast all the goddamned time. It's so frustrating that this technology is not only available but also relatively old, inexpensive, and reliable. We could absolutely do this. We just.. choose not to.
posted by curious nu at 12:19 PM on November 7, 2021 [31 favorites]
posted by curious nu at 12:19 PM on November 7, 2021 [31 favorites]
I’m very impressed with one of Amtrak’s Illinois Services, the Illinois Zephyr/Carl Sandburg. It runs on the old Burlington Route out of Chicago, and it’s double or triple track the whole way so there’s almost never a delay for freight traffic. Most of the delays are because of traffic on the Metra BNSF line.
So if you ever need to travel between Chicago and west central Illinois, well, there you go.
posted by hwyengr at 12:31 PM on November 7, 2021 [8 favorites]
So if you ever need to travel between Chicago and west central Illinois, well, there you go.
posted by hwyengr at 12:31 PM on November 7, 2021 [8 favorites]
The Northeast is not the only place with distances that could support high-speed rail. The West Coast from San Diego to San Francisco (Napa, really) and from Medford to Bellingham could easily support it. (Realistically, send the rail west from San Francisco to Sacramento and then up through Chico and Redding to Medford and that's the whole West Coast.) There has been this plan to build high speed rail in California, but through the center of the state. LA -> Santa Barbara -> San Luis Obispo -> Paso Robles -> Monterey -> Santa Cruz -> San Francisco is a route that would support tourism as well as people's needs for going back and forth. LA to Las Vegas is another city pair. There's an attempt to build a private line there, but it's not going from LA proper, which is an issue. There's a lot of Florida that would do well with high speed rail too. And I can think of a lot of snowbirds who would love a fast sleeper car from Boston (or Cape Cod, but that's unrealistic) to Florida in October/November.
posted by rednikki at 12:39 PM on November 7, 2021 [7 favorites]
posted by rednikki at 12:39 PM on November 7, 2021 [7 favorites]
I just want as a person in LA a rail from here to Santa Barbara then to San Francisco, and down to San Diego and then to Vegas and maybe Palm Springs. It hits all the main points and isn't that far.
posted by downtohisturtles at 12:48 PM on November 7, 2021 [6 favorites]
posted by downtohisturtles at 12:48 PM on November 7, 2021 [6 favorites]
You can run local and long-distance on the same tracks, you just need good signalling and traffic management, so that everything runs on time and the long-distance trains swoosh by while the local's stopped at a station. Quite often just improving the signalling allows for higher safe speeds on the same tracks. Alas, harder to do with unpredictable and oft-delayed freight trains, especially since I think even in the US freight trains don't reach the standard local-train max speeds in Europe (100-120 km/h).
I was helping someone plan a train trip across the US a couple years ago. On each leg we were running into the issue of train stops in larger cities being in places not accessible by public transport or the public transport stopped running way before the passenger train hit the station (usually in the dead of night). Once someone needs to get in a car anyway, it's much harder to persuade them to continue the journey by train. The only ways I know this works is if the parallel car corridor is crowded and unpredictable, which is mostly suburb-city commutes.
posted by I claim sanctuary at 12:51 PM on November 7, 2021 [8 favorites]
I was helping someone plan a train trip across the US a couple years ago. On each leg we were running into the issue of train stops in larger cities being in places not accessible by public transport or the public transport stopped running way before the passenger train hit the station (usually in the dead of night). Once someone needs to get in a car anyway, it's much harder to persuade them to continue the journey by train. The only ways I know this works is if the parallel car corridor is crowded and unpredictable, which is mostly suburb-city commutes.
posted by I claim sanctuary at 12:51 PM on November 7, 2021 [8 favorites]
The problem with rail in the US is that passenger and freight rail use the same tracks.
The US needs to invest massively in dedicated passenger rail tracks, both within metro areas (light rail and RR stops) and long RR tracks between cities. Amtrak is a disaster outside of the NE Corridor because of freight's right-of-way on the tracks, making long distance on-schedule passenger travel basically impossible.
The problem of Amtrak trains being delayed by freight is real. But it would be enormously expensive to build a national dedicated passenger rail track system separate from the freight rail track system. Such a thing has never existed, even at the height of U.S. passenger rail travel.
Passenger rail service was a legal obligation that the railroad companies were mandated to take on in exchange for all the land the U.S. government gave them (after taking it from native tribes, natch). But the railroads were always primarily freight businesses, running passenger service on the same tracks because they had to.
It did make them some money, back when most people traveled long distances by train. But after WW2, with the advent of widespread personal car ownership, the interstate highway system, and air travel, long-distance passenger rail became a less and less lucrative business.
The railroads wanted to dump passenger service, but legally could not. Amtrak was created in 1970 by the federal government to take the passenger carriage obligation off of the railroads' hands. In exchange, they agreed to give Amtrak trains the right of way on their tracks, which they would henceforth be using only for freight.
Unfortunately, the private railroads don't live up to their end of the bargain. But the law does not have good enforcement mechanisms, so Amtrak basically can't do anything when their trains are delayed by freight. There has been some talk of changing this under Biden. We'll see. It could be yet another thing Manchin sabotages because the coal companies in WV ship a lot of their product via freight train.
posted by Artifice_Eternity at 1:24 PM on November 7, 2021 [11 favorites]
The US needs to invest massively in dedicated passenger rail tracks, both within metro areas (light rail and RR stops) and long RR tracks between cities. Amtrak is a disaster outside of the NE Corridor because of freight's right-of-way on the tracks, making long distance on-schedule passenger travel basically impossible.
The problem of Amtrak trains being delayed by freight is real. But it would be enormously expensive to build a national dedicated passenger rail track system separate from the freight rail track system. Such a thing has never existed, even at the height of U.S. passenger rail travel.
Passenger rail service was a legal obligation that the railroad companies were mandated to take on in exchange for all the land the U.S. government gave them (after taking it from native tribes, natch). But the railroads were always primarily freight businesses, running passenger service on the same tracks because they had to.
It did make them some money, back when most people traveled long distances by train. But after WW2, with the advent of widespread personal car ownership, the interstate highway system, and air travel, long-distance passenger rail became a less and less lucrative business.
The railroads wanted to dump passenger service, but legally could not. Amtrak was created in 1970 by the federal government to take the passenger carriage obligation off of the railroads' hands. In exchange, they agreed to give Amtrak trains the right of way on their tracks, which they would henceforth be using only for freight.
Unfortunately, the private railroads don't live up to their end of the bargain. But the law does not have good enforcement mechanisms, so Amtrak basically can't do anything when their trains are delayed by freight. There has been some talk of changing this under Biden. We'll see. It could be yet another thing Manchin sabotages because the coal companies in WV ship a lot of their product via freight train.
posted by Artifice_Eternity at 1:24 PM on November 7, 2021 [11 favorites]
I'd been letting my romance with Amtrak fall by the wayside for a while, but it was basically over for good some years ago, when some high school friends and I were having a get-together in Chicago to celebrate our turning forty, and I decided to take the train up because my car was starting to become mechanically unreliable. I could have just as easily taken the bus, but I had good memories of using the train to go between Chicago and my different colleges. There was some sort of gas leak north of the station near the tracks, and at some point it must have occurred to Amtrak that the delay would probably last for several hours... but instead of making alternative arrangements for us (i.e. the bus) or even just letting us know, they let us sit in the train on the tracks for eight hours, and I missed seeing my friends.
posted by Halloween Jack at 1:25 PM on November 7, 2021 [8 favorites]
posted by Halloween Jack at 1:25 PM on November 7, 2021 [8 favorites]
There has been this plan to build high speed rail in California, but through the center of the state.
Not just a plan -- it's happening! Not many people seem to realize how much of the system is already being built -- 119 miles of the route is currently under construction. It's a long way from completion, but the project is far enough along that it will amost certainly be finished eventually, notwithstanding all the skeptics and critics.
posted by Artifice_Eternity at 1:30 PM on November 7, 2021 [9 favorites]
Not just a plan -- it's happening! Not many people seem to realize how much of the system is already being built -- 119 miles of the route is currently under construction. It's a long way from completion, but the project is far enough along that it will amost certainly be finished eventually, notwithstanding all the skeptics and critics.
posted by Artifice_Eternity at 1:30 PM on November 7, 2021 [9 favorites]
Writing from a full train heading into Tokyo (soon to change trains to one that would give anyone with personal space issues hives), one key factor, at least for short distance commutes (suburbs to city, or short city to city) is making tolls on highways near or equal to the commute, and past that, make parking incredibly expensive or impossible to find. My commute in is roughly equivalent to driving in terms of cost, but is much faster (rush hour trains aren’t any slower than off peak, but rush hour on a highway…), but even if I did drive, the only parking I know of is a longer walk to work than the train station, and would run me anywhere from $15-$20 for the day (and that’s outside of central Tokyo price).
Another aspect of this, that I can’t ever imagine catching on in the States, is that my employer pays for my transportation, which is the norm in Japan. Some (not great) companies will cap transportation reimbursement, but for the most part, the employer foots the bill for employee commutes. Technically, I could drive and get reimbursed for gas, but not parking or tolls. Of course, in the states, it’s a cart before horse thing, but one way to empty roads and fill trains and busses is to create an incentive for businesses to subsidize commutes using public transportation only. Bus passes and train passes paid for, but private car? You’re on your own (plus jacked up tolls, laws regulating away sprawling parking lots, higher parking fees, etc).
It’s fun to think about, but it would require a complete rethinking of American culture. I imagine we’ll be seeing car companies touting waterproofing and semi amphibious trucks and suvs before we get any solid movement on trains and public transportation.
posted by Ghidorah at 1:57 PM on November 7, 2021 [9 favorites]
Another aspect of this, that I can’t ever imagine catching on in the States, is that my employer pays for my transportation, which is the norm in Japan. Some (not great) companies will cap transportation reimbursement, but for the most part, the employer foots the bill for employee commutes. Technically, I could drive and get reimbursed for gas, but not parking or tolls. Of course, in the states, it’s a cart before horse thing, but one way to empty roads and fill trains and busses is to create an incentive for businesses to subsidize commutes using public transportation only. Bus passes and train passes paid for, but private car? You’re on your own (plus jacked up tolls, laws regulating away sprawling parking lots, higher parking fees, etc).
It’s fun to think about, but it would require a complete rethinking of American culture. I imagine we’ll be seeing car companies touting waterproofing and semi amphibious trucks and suvs before we get any solid movement on trains and public transportation.
posted by Ghidorah at 1:57 PM on November 7, 2021 [9 favorites]
The US needs to invest massively in dedicated passenger rail tracks, both within metro areas (light rail and RR stops) and long RR tracks between cities
From what I understand, the freight railways own the right of way, and charge monopoly prices on any proposed engineering work to expand capacity over what they themselves will use, because they can. A turning loop to allow passenger trains to overtake freight would cost billions, just because they wouldn't be doing their fiduciary duty to their shareholders if they didn't extract every red cent from the taxpayer.
posted by acb at 2:00 PM on November 7, 2021 [2 favorites]
From what I understand, the freight railways own the right of way, and charge monopoly prices on any proposed engineering work to expand capacity over what they themselves will use, because they can. A turning loop to allow passenger trains to overtake freight would cost billions, just because they wouldn't be doing their fiduciary duty to their shareholders if they didn't extract every red cent from the taxpayer.
posted by acb at 2:00 PM on November 7, 2021 [2 favorites]
Not just a plan -- it's happening! Not many people seem to realize how much of the system is already being built -- 119 miles of the route is currently under construction. It's a long way from completion, but the project is far enough along that it will amost certainly be finished eventually, notwithstanding all the skeptics and critics.
Or it will be scrapped to become semi-mythical ruins like the (almost finished, never commissioned) Cincinnatti Subway.
The most likely outcome could be a slow diesel service between Fresno and Bakersfield for as long as that is economically viable.
posted by acb at 2:04 PM on November 7, 2021 [2 favorites]
Or it will be scrapped to become semi-mythical ruins like the (almost finished, never commissioned) Cincinnatti Subway.
The most likely outcome could be a slow diesel service between Fresno and Bakersfield for as long as that is economically viable.
posted by acb at 2:04 PM on November 7, 2021 [2 favorites]
Metafilter: California == Cincinnatti
posted by viborg at 2:10 PM on November 7, 2021 [8 favorites]
posted by viborg at 2:10 PM on November 7, 2021 [8 favorites]
Trains/busses/ferrys will become better and better options as security lines get longer. My family used to show up an hour before a domestic flight, 90 minutes before an international. Now it is required to show up 90 minutes before a domestic, two hours before an international. Plus then you have the trip from the airport to anywhere- that is a lot of overhead vs showing up at the train station and walking onto it. I mean, anything under 2 hours and the train wins vs a plane even if the actual fight time was instant.
posted by Canageek at 2:12 PM on November 7, 2021 [4 favorites]
posted by Canageek at 2:12 PM on November 7, 2021 [4 favorites]
I used to be very afraid of flying, and I don't like driving or riding in cars very much, so I took a train from North Carolina to Texas. It was long, but I expected it to be long (it's a 16-20 hour drive depending on traffic). What made it really unbearable was the waiting on the tracks for freight. We were extremely delayed coming in to the station on all directions and legs of the trip. And based on some stories I've since read, we had a relatively good trip - the HVAC didn't break down, the commissaries didn't run out of food, we were delayed about 4-6 hours each time rather than 8 or more.
I love the idea of rail travel but I think using European countries or Japan as a model is less helpful than it could be; they have much smaller areas and not so many very large areas of relatively sparse population. I'm not sure that the right model is (China?).
posted by jeoc at 2:49 PM on November 7, 2021 [1 favorite]
I love the idea of rail travel but I think using European countries or Japan as a model is less helpful than it could be; they have much smaller areas and not so many very large areas of relatively sparse population. I'm not sure that the right model is (China?).
posted by jeoc at 2:49 PM on November 7, 2021 [1 favorite]
But it would be enormously expensive to build a national dedicated passenger rail track system separate from the freight rail track system. Such a thing has never existed, even at the height of U.S. passenger rail travel.
It may be enormously expensive, but building a dedicated high-speed rail network (with slower connections to smaller centres) is something that China, Japan and much of western Europe have managed to do. The US certainly could too. Sure, they have greater population density, but there are plenty of large cities in the US that are fairly close to one another and there's plenty of cheap land in between them to put in direct high speed lines. And if we're going to do anything about climate change, we need to drastically reduce aviation, which means long-distance high speed rail is going to get a lot more realistic.
But a real high speed rail network would have almost nothing to do with Amtrak as it currently exists. It would probably make more sense to bring in experts from a country that actually makes high speed rail work and start from zero.
posted by ssg at 4:12 PM on November 7, 2021 [9 favorites]
It may be enormously expensive, but building a dedicated high-speed rail network (with slower connections to smaller centres) is something that China, Japan and much of western Europe have managed to do. The US certainly could too. Sure, they have greater population density, but there are plenty of large cities in the US that are fairly close to one another and there's plenty of cheap land in between them to put in direct high speed lines. And if we're going to do anything about climate change, we need to drastically reduce aviation, which means long-distance high speed rail is going to get a lot more realistic.
But a real high speed rail network would have almost nothing to do with Amtrak as it currently exists. It would probably make more sense to bring in experts from a country that actually makes high speed rail work and start from zero.
posted by ssg at 4:12 PM on November 7, 2021 [9 favorites]
Of course, in the states, it’s a cart before horse thing, but one way to empty roads and fill trains and busses is to create an incentive for businesses to subsidize commutes using public transportation only. Bus passes and train passes paid for, but private car? You’re on your own (plus jacked up tolls, laws regulating away sprawling parking lots, higher parking fees, etc).
My company gives out free bus/light rail passes to anyone who asks. Most people don't bother to ask for one, and virtually no one (speaking about the pre-pandemic times) used it. Without simultaneously making car commuting expensive and difficult -- like with the tolls you describe -- just having free transit available isn't enough.
But it would be enormously expensive to build a national dedicated passenger rail track system separate from the freight rail track system. Such a thing has never existed, even at the height of U.S. passenger rail travel.
It wouldn't just be expensive -- it would likely get bogged down in lawsuits and environmental permitting over the impacts all those tens of thousands of miles of new track would cause. I'd be completely in favor of this happening, because long drives are boring and riding a clean, fast train is wonderful, but right now it's more of a pipe dream.
posted by Dip Flash at 4:20 PM on November 7, 2021 [3 favorites]
My company gives out free bus/light rail passes to anyone who asks. Most people don't bother to ask for one, and virtually no one (speaking about the pre-pandemic times) used it. Without simultaneously making car commuting expensive and difficult -- like with the tolls you describe -- just having free transit available isn't enough.
But it would be enormously expensive to build a national dedicated passenger rail track system separate from the freight rail track system. Such a thing has never existed, even at the height of U.S. passenger rail travel.
It wouldn't just be expensive -- it would likely get bogged down in lawsuits and environmental permitting over the impacts all those tens of thousands of miles of new track would cause. I'd be completely in favor of this happening, because long drives are boring and riding a clean, fast train is wonderful, but right now it's more of a pipe dream.
posted by Dip Flash at 4:20 PM on November 7, 2021 [3 favorites]
Every once in a while I remember the trivia factoid I picked up at one point, that it now takes longer to take a train from New York to Chicago than it did a hundred years ago.
Trains are great, you guys. Especially if the US doesn't go full airport police state on train passengers, in a hypothetical "what if the US had meaningful high-speed rail for corridors other than DC to New York"
posted by DoctorFedora at 6:19 PM on November 7, 2021 [2 favorites]
Trains are great, you guys. Especially if the US doesn't go full airport police state on train passengers, in a hypothetical "what if the US had meaningful high-speed rail for corridors other than DC to New York"
posted by DoctorFedora at 6:19 PM on November 7, 2021 [2 favorites]
"Another aspect of this, that I can’t ever imagine catching on in the States, is that my employer pays for my transportation, which is the norm in Japan"
This is relatively common in bigger cities (with good transit networks), especially for white-collar employees (because of course). My husband and I have worked for a few different employers in Chicago who paid for monthly passes on the city bus/rail or the suburban commuter rail system, regardless of distance, and now it's getting more common for employers to pay for share bike subscriptions for employees, or provide a discount. The IRS incentivizes companies to provide mass transit benefits -- it isn't a big enough incentive, and not enough companies do it, but it's there. In Chicago, companies typically pay for the suburban rail pass (which is expensive!) but not the daily parking, which incentivizes people to live closer to the station. Again, it's not as big an incentive as it should be, but it's there.
High-speed corridors in the Midwest would be AMAZING -- Chicago-Minneapolis (currently 6 hours by car, 8 by Amtrak), Chicago-Detroit (about 4.25), Chicago-Indianapolis (about 4, depending on traffic), Chicago-St. Louis (about 5). Imagine if all those metros were connected to Chicago by high-speed rail, and students and faculty at UW-Madison, UIUC, Indiana Bloomington, UM Ann Arbor (all major Big 10 research universities) could hop on a high-speed train and be in Chicago in 2-3 hours. Like, the Acela is amazing, but high-speed rail in the midwest could turn Chicago and healthy and thriving outlying midwest metros into a super-urban-area, without the "entire Acela corridor" urban/suburban sprawl. Like, St. Louis could be more dense because it would be valuable to be closer to the high-speed rail to Chicago! (Increasing prices in Midwestern cities are already happening, although often with decreasing density because of lack of family housing/smaller families. But single family homes and condos/apartments in closer Chicago suburbs that can walk to trains are getting INSANE, if the trains take under 30 minutes to the Loop.)
This is completely leaving aside the benefits to cities like South Bend, Peoria, Milwaukee, Davenport, etc., of being stops on a high-speed train corridor -- which would probably be significant! -- but just connecting the already thriving bigger regional cities and already thriving Big 10 Universities with Chicago would be huuuuuuuuuuge. Kenosha is already a SEMI-suburb of Chicago -- the Metra runs there, but it takes an hour and 40 minutes at FAST times. (Which is how long the Amtrak from Milwaukee takes to Chicago!) What if it was a little less than an hour from Milwaukee to Chicago by train, and 35 minutes from Kenosha? That'd be HUGE.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 6:39 PM on November 7, 2021 [12 favorites]
This is relatively common in bigger cities (with good transit networks), especially for white-collar employees (because of course). My husband and I have worked for a few different employers in Chicago who paid for monthly passes on the city bus/rail or the suburban commuter rail system, regardless of distance, and now it's getting more common for employers to pay for share bike subscriptions for employees, or provide a discount. The IRS incentivizes companies to provide mass transit benefits -- it isn't a big enough incentive, and not enough companies do it, but it's there. In Chicago, companies typically pay for the suburban rail pass (which is expensive!) but not the daily parking, which incentivizes people to live closer to the station. Again, it's not as big an incentive as it should be, but it's there.
High-speed corridors in the Midwest would be AMAZING -- Chicago-Minneapolis (currently 6 hours by car, 8 by Amtrak), Chicago-Detroit (about 4.25), Chicago-Indianapolis (about 4, depending on traffic), Chicago-St. Louis (about 5). Imagine if all those metros were connected to Chicago by high-speed rail, and students and faculty at UW-Madison, UIUC, Indiana Bloomington, UM Ann Arbor (all major Big 10 research universities) could hop on a high-speed train and be in Chicago in 2-3 hours. Like, the Acela is amazing, but high-speed rail in the midwest could turn Chicago and healthy and thriving outlying midwest metros into a super-urban-area, without the "entire Acela corridor" urban/suburban sprawl. Like, St. Louis could be more dense because it would be valuable to be closer to the high-speed rail to Chicago! (Increasing prices in Midwestern cities are already happening, although often with decreasing density because of lack of family housing/smaller families. But single family homes and condos/apartments in closer Chicago suburbs that can walk to trains are getting INSANE, if the trains take under 30 minutes to the Loop.)
This is completely leaving aside the benefits to cities like South Bend, Peoria, Milwaukee, Davenport, etc., of being stops on a high-speed train corridor -- which would probably be significant! -- but just connecting the already thriving bigger regional cities and already thriving Big 10 Universities with Chicago would be huuuuuuuuuuge. Kenosha is already a SEMI-suburb of Chicago -- the Metra runs there, but it takes an hour and 40 minutes at FAST times. (Which is how long the Amtrak from Milwaukee takes to Chicago!) What if it was a little less than an hour from Milwaukee to Chicago by train, and 35 minutes from Kenosha? That'd be HUGE.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 6:39 PM on November 7, 2021 [12 favorites]
It's not simply that rail is badly supported in America, the active design of American living is inherently hostile to rail travel.
posted by y2karl at 7:17 PM on November 7, 2021
...President Eisenhower is widely regarded as the catalyst for the IHS. His motivations for a highway network stemmed from three events: his assignment as a military observer to the First Transcontinental Motor Convoy, his experience in World War II where he observed the efficiencies of the German autobahn, and the Soviet Union's 1953 detonation of the hydrogen bomb, which instigated a fear that insufficient roads would keep Americans from being able to escape a nuclear disaster.One reason the interstate highway system came into being was due in no small part to the impression the German autobahn made upon then General Eisenhower in the Second World War -- not to mention the nuclear arms race between the United States and the Soviet Union which sprang up after that conflict's conclusion.
posted by y2karl at 7:17 PM on November 7, 2021
I love trains. I used to use the bus/train system via Amtrak when I was in a long-distance relationship and neither of us drove. You can just relax and do what you want on the train for hours and it's chill. But the whole freight thing means that GOD ONLY KNOWS when you are going to arrive, period. Hours of lateness. HOURS of it. Sometimes I'd get to the station around 1 in the morning. And that was just short distance. A friend of mine and her husband thought it'd be romantic to take the train to Reno and back and what with the extreme lateness, it was not.
We're never going to fix the freight thing, so....rail is just gonna be like this. It can't be popular when it's not super cheap and it IS incredibly unpredictable.
posted by jenfullmoon at 7:22 PM on November 7, 2021 [1 favorite]
We're never going to fix the freight thing, so....rail is just gonna be like this. It can't be popular when it's not super cheap and it IS incredibly unpredictable.
posted by jenfullmoon at 7:22 PM on November 7, 2021 [1 favorite]
I'd love to love trains. I wish they went where I was going. Even when they do the schedules are crazy unuseable. Taking the train from Portland to the SF Bay Area was stunningly slow. I kept waiting for it to get up to speed.
On the other hand, trains I took in France and Italy were wonderful.
We're doomed, I fear, to live trainless.
posted by cccorlew at 7:31 PM on November 7, 2021 [2 favorites]
On the other hand, trains I took in France and Italy were wonderful.
We're doomed, I fear, to live trainless.
posted by cccorlew at 7:31 PM on November 7, 2021 [2 favorites]
not to mention the nuclear arms race
If only Eisenhower had been as much of a train spotter as Kim Jong Un. Choo Choo!
posted by rhamphorhynchus at 7:51 PM on November 7, 2021
If only Eisenhower had been as much of a train spotter as Kim Jong Un. Choo Choo!
posted by rhamphorhynchus at 7:51 PM on November 7, 2021
The same sort of set up was once considered for the United States.
posted by y2karl at 7:58 PM on November 7, 2021 [1 favorite]
posted by y2karl at 7:58 PM on November 7, 2021 [1 favorite]
We regularly travel from Petaluma (north SF Bay area) to Fresno (wife has family there). Amtrak takes a more direct route, so is time competitive with driving, but even at a few hours longer is more pleasant. The Amtrak bus leaves from within 2 miles of home: i can walk, park for $5/day, or take a taxi.
Fresno is completely unnavigable without a car. We have looked for ways to make a car rental at the far end, at the times we normally arrive or leave, happen.
Transportation is more than city to city, it's also what happens when you get there, and many American cities suck if you don't have a car, so why not bring your own?
posted by straw at 8:05 PM on November 7, 2021 [5 favorites]
Fresno is completely unnavigable without a car. We have looked for ways to make a car rental at the far end, at the times we normally arrive or leave, happen.
Transportation is more than city to city, it's also what happens when you get there, and many American cities suck if you don't have a car, so why not bring your own?
posted by straw at 8:05 PM on November 7, 2021 [5 favorites]
oh yeah, I'm used to Japan's trains, where you get an announcement at the station if a train will be more than a minute or two late, and it's frankly odd if trains are even a full minute late, even on longer lines, but at one point when visiting my hometown in southeast Pennsylvania, I decided to take a train into Philadelphia, at which point I learned that, for SEPTA regional rail at least, "on time" means ±15 minutes.
The "±" part is extremely important too, because on a different trip into the city, I missed a train back to Market East because it arrived early and then just sort of passed through the station while I watched from the ticket booth, like it was a bus or something.
posted by DoctorFedora at 8:07 PM on November 7, 2021 [2 favorites]
The "±" part is extremely important too, because on a different trip into the city, I missed a train back to Market East because it arrived early and then just sort of passed through the station while I watched from the ticket booth, like it was a bus or something.
posted by DoctorFedora at 8:07 PM on November 7, 2021 [2 favorites]
We're never going to fix the freight thing, so....rail is just gonna be like this.
Most trains in the northeastern U.S. run more or less on time, because Amtrak and the commuter railroads here own their own tracks. It certainly could be that way elsewhere in the U.S., with a sufficient investment. In some cases it may just be a matter of adding an additional track to an existing route.
posted by Artifice_Eternity at 8:32 PM on November 7, 2021 [6 favorites]
Most trains in the northeastern U.S. run more or less on time, because Amtrak and the commuter railroads here own their own tracks. It certainly could be that way elsewhere in the U.S., with a sufficient investment. In some cases it may just be a matter of adding an additional track to an existing route.
posted by Artifice_Eternity at 8:32 PM on November 7, 2021 [6 favorites]
Another aspect of this, that I can’t ever imagine catching on in the States, is that my employer pays for my transportation, which is the norm in Japan
Nthing the transit subsidy, and we have plenty of shuttles / private buses to supplement the public routes. Unfortunately, it takes 30 minutes one way to commute 4 miles by bus, and if you have to stay late for an international meeting, off peak time is more like an hour. Versus 20 minutes by bike or car. So I've taken it a few times just to know how it all works in an emergency but at this point my monthly bus pass is more performative than useful. Also, I haven't driven to work in almost 2 years. So it's kind of a chicken and egg problem using Clipper card data -- I'm not gonna waste an hour of my day on the offhand chance it signals my interest in a faster route to the VTA.
If the point is that companies are expected to pay you for car mileage, and that will incentivize them to lobby to make public transit better society such that you want to take the train, that seems like it won't accomplish much without a handful of keiretsu with enough power and influence to set transit and housing policy. For example, last placed I lived in had like, two employers: Oregon State University and Hewlitt-Packard, and the fare-less bus system is funded via a flat fee on everyone's water bill.
posted by pwnguin at 9:05 PM on November 7, 2021 [1 favorite]
Nthing the transit subsidy, and we have plenty of shuttles / private buses to supplement the public routes. Unfortunately, it takes 30 minutes one way to commute 4 miles by bus, and if you have to stay late for an international meeting, off peak time is more like an hour. Versus 20 minutes by bike or car. So I've taken it a few times just to know how it all works in an emergency but at this point my monthly bus pass is more performative than useful. Also, I haven't driven to work in almost 2 years. So it's kind of a chicken and egg problem using Clipper card data -- I'm not gonna waste an hour of my day on the offhand chance it signals my interest in a faster route to the VTA.
If the point is that companies are expected to pay you for car mileage, and that will incentivize them to lobby to make public transit better society such that you want to take the train, that seems like it won't accomplish much without a handful of keiretsu with enough power and influence to set transit and housing policy. For example, last placed I lived in had like, two employers: Oregon State University and Hewlitt-Packard, and the fare-less bus system is funded via a flat fee on everyone's water bill.
posted by pwnguin at 9:05 PM on November 7, 2021 [1 favorite]
Another aspect of this, that I can’t ever imagine catching on in the States, is that my employer pays for my transportation, which is the norm in Japan.
It's very common among large companies to offer free or highly subsidized passes for whatever transit exists in their area here in the US. Largely because of tax benefits that make it effectively free to them in most cases, but still. The take rate is super low, though, because transit is highly inconvenient for most trips (when it exists at all), though there are exceptions even in places where transit is generally bad. Some also offer reimbursement for cycling, as well. They can pay part of the cost for a bike, etc. It's worth looking into if you work for a large company.
The scheduling issue with Amtrak isn't that freight always wins, that's a myth. The issue is that they only have priority during a very limited window around their scheduled services. If they are running on time the track owners don't generally make them late, but if something does make them late, it results in a cascading series of ever increasing delays. As soon as they are contractually able, dispatchers will be putting their own late trains or hotshots ahead of Amtrak.
posted by wierdo at 10:05 PM on November 7, 2021 [2 favorites]
It's very common among large companies to offer free or highly subsidized passes for whatever transit exists in their area here in the US. Largely because of tax benefits that make it effectively free to them in most cases, but still. The take rate is super low, though, because transit is highly inconvenient for most trips (when it exists at all), though there are exceptions even in places where transit is generally bad. Some also offer reimbursement for cycling, as well. They can pay part of the cost for a bike, etc. It's worth looking into if you work for a large company.
The scheduling issue with Amtrak isn't that freight always wins, that's a myth. The issue is that they only have priority during a very limited window around their scheduled services. If they are running on time the track owners don't generally make them late, but if something does make them late, it results in a cascading series of ever increasing delays. As soon as they are contractually able, dispatchers will be putting their own late trains or hotshots ahead of Amtrak.
posted by wierdo at 10:05 PM on November 7, 2021 [2 favorites]
Also, for regional routes you don't really need high speed rail to beat a car, you just need higher speed rail that runs at 80-125mph and limited stops (preferably alongside a local service with more frequent stops or subway/light rail to get people near to their destination). You need true high speed rail on medium distance routes where people would otherwise be flying instead.
posted by wierdo at 10:14 PM on November 7, 2021
posted by wierdo at 10:14 PM on November 7, 2021
making long distance on-schedule passenger travel basically impossible.
This year, there is finally an option to fine the railroads if their freight trains delayed an Amtrak passenger train. Amtrak is still pushing for increased legal enforcement options through legislation.
That said, my train through Oakland was held up for two hours recently because some clown abandoned their car on the railway crossing. Not sure how to prevent that without removing all at-grade crossings (although two hours felt like a long time to shove a car out of the way and check it hadn't damaged the tracks?)
posted by bashing rocks together at 11:19 PM on November 7, 2021 [3 favorites]
This year, there is finally an option to fine the railroads if their freight trains delayed an Amtrak passenger train. Amtrak is still pushing for increased legal enforcement options through legislation.
That said, my train through Oakland was held up for two hours recently because some clown abandoned their car on the railway crossing. Not sure how to prevent that without removing all at-grade crossings (although two hours felt like a long time to shove a car out of the way and check it hadn't damaged the tracks?)
posted by bashing rocks together at 11:19 PM on November 7, 2021 [3 favorites]
As soon as they are contractually able, dispatchers will be putting their own late trains or hotshots ahead of Amtrak.
I rode a hotshot container train from Ogden, UT to Roseville, CA. It was damn fast, especially with the wind in your face.
posted by ryanrs at 11:43 PM on November 7, 2021
I rode a hotshot container train from Ogden, UT to Roseville, CA. It was damn fast, especially with the wind in your face.
posted by ryanrs at 11:43 PM on November 7, 2021
two hours felt like a long time to shove a car out of the way and check it hadn't damaged the tracks?
First you gotta call the cops, wait for them to call an approved row truck, then coordinate with the track owner to verify no trains will be coming along, then actually move the vehicle. It's theoretically legal to flag the intersection and cross at about walking pace (the commuter rail does that all the time here because of broken gates) if the crossing gates broke from landing on the car, assuming Amtrak conductors or other on-train staff are trained to do so, but I wouldn't be surprised if Amtrak's own procedures don't make it quite that simple.
And yeah, out west track speed is often 85mph, so those trains move decently quick. Still takes a while for them to traverse a crossing, though, because they're often (usually, from what I saw back when I worked next to a mainline a week or two a year) at least 15,000 feet long. I've heard they're even longer than they used to be.
posted by wierdo at 2:49 AM on November 8, 2021 [1 favorite]
First you gotta call the cops, wait for them to call an approved row truck, then coordinate with the track owner to verify no trains will be coming along, then actually move the vehicle. It's theoretically legal to flag the intersection and cross at about walking pace (the commuter rail does that all the time here because of broken gates) if the crossing gates broke from landing on the car, assuming Amtrak conductors or other on-train staff are trained to do so, but I wouldn't be surprised if Amtrak's own procedures don't make it quite that simple.
And yeah, out west track speed is often 85mph, so those trains move decently quick. Still takes a while for them to traverse a crossing, though, because they're often (usually, from what I saw back when I worked next to a mainline a week or two a year) at least 15,000 feet long. I've heard they're even longer than they used to be.
posted by wierdo at 2:49 AM on November 8, 2021 [1 favorite]
We're never going to fix the freight thing, so....rail is just gonna be like this.
It's not just passenger trains having to wait for freight trains. Because in the US we co-mingle the two on the same tracks at all hours of the day, rolling stock for passenger trains has to be built much heavier and stronger so that it has a better chance of surviving an impact with a fully loaded freight train. This drastically increases manufacturing costs, lengthens design time, and results in slower and less efficient trains.
One thing that's often overlooked about Europe is that their freight railroads are a joke compared to the US and somewhere over 70% of all goods are shipped by truck. This leaves the rail network almost exclusively for passenger service. It's much easier to have high speed passenger trains zipping along at >200km/hr when you don't have to design them to survive an impact with a mile-long freight train of fully loaded coal hoppers going 49mph. This isn't to say that European trains aren't safe (because they are incredibly safe) they just don't have to meet the same worst-case scenarios that passenger rail in the US must account for.
posted by RonButNotStupid at 4:50 AM on November 8, 2021 [5 favorites]
It's not just passenger trains having to wait for freight trains. Because in the US we co-mingle the two on the same tracks at all hours of the day, rolling stock for passenger trains has to be built much heavier and stronger so that it has a better chance of surviving an impact with a fully loaded freight train. This drastically increases manufacturing costs, lengthens design time, and results in slower and less efficient trains.
One thing that's often overlooked about Europe is that their freight railroads are a joke compared to the US and somewhere over 70% of all goods are shipped by truck. This leaves the rail network almost exclusively for passenger service. It's much easier to have high speed passenger trains zipping along at >200km/hr when you don't have to design them to survive an impact with a mile-long freight train of fully loaded coal hoppers going 49mph. This isn't to say that European trains aren't safe (because they are incredibly safe) they just don't have to meet the same worst-case scenarios that passenger rail in the US must account for.
posted by RonButNotStupid at 4:50 AM on November 8, 2021 [5 favorites]
Are European freight rail's deficiencies compared to the US comparable to US passenger rail's deficiences compared with Europe, though?
I can believe that the US ships a lot more freight by rail than Europe. I find it harder to believe that European rail freight is severely dysfunctional, not fit for purpose (and unlike passenger rail, there is no hard core of sentimental train buffs to fall back on here if the economics don't stack up) or a marginal sector on the verge of disappearing. (On a tangent, apparently they now send long container trains from China to Germany.)
Also, weren't the US rolling stock weight rules relaxed (more or less to parity with European standards) a decade or two ago?
posted by acb at 5:11 AM on November 8, 2021 [1 favorite]
I can believe that the US ships a lot more freight by rail than Europe. I find it harder to believe that European rail freight is severely dysfunctional, not fit for purpose (and unlike passenger rail, there is no hard core of sentimental train buffs to fall back on here if the economics don't stack up) or a marginal sector on the verge of disappearing. (On a tangent, apparently they now send long container trains from China to Germany.)
Also, weren't the US rolling stock weight rules relaxed (more or less to parity with European standards) a decade or two ago?
posted by acb at 5:11 AM on November 8, 2021 [1 favorite]
Maybe? I think as of a few years ago when the MBTA was briefly exploring the possibility of DMUs for regional inter-city travel it was an issue and at the time no off-the-shelf DMUs from major manufacturers met FRA standards.
I can believe that European freight not being as dominant as it is in the US makes it easier to time-separate or route-separate traffic for safety rather than having to account for it in rolling stock.
But there's other effects. Most of the northside MBTA Commuter Rail stations have to make due with mini-high platforms with breakaway edges to satisfy the freight clearance requirements. Smaller high level platforms -> more delay in boarding times -> slower passenger trains.
posted by RonButNotStupid at 6:26 AM on November 8, 2021
I can believe that European freight not being as dominant as it is in the US makes it easier to time-separate or route-separate traffic for safety rather than having to account for it in rolling stock.
But there's other effects. Most of the northside MBTA Commuter Rail stations have to make due with mini-high platforms with breakaway edges to satisfy the freight clearance requirements. Smaller high level platforms -> more delay in boarding times -> slower passenger trains.
posted by RonButNotStupid at 6:26 AM on November 8, 2021
The US needs to invest massively in dedicated passenger rail tracks,
All those rails-to-trails bike trails? Yeah, we're never getting those back, and while I love them for biking and hiking, they should have stayed if we wanted any sort of rail based society.
posted by 922257033c4a0f3cecdbd819a46d626999d1af4a at 6:36 AM on November 8, 2021 [2 favorites]
All those rails-to-trails bike trails? Yeah, we're never getting those back, and while I love them for biking and hiking, they should have stayed if we wanted any sort of rail based society.
posted by 922257033c4a0f3cecdbd819a46d626999d1af4a at 6:36 AM on November 8, 2021 [2 favorites]
They're easier to get back than if there were tracts of suburban housing there.
OTOH, a lot of those old alignments dating back to the age of slow locomotives and labour-intensive civil engineering are a lot less straight than you'd build today, and certainly than you'd want for any sort of reasonable speed. Which would be OK for a volunteer-run tourist railway, but less so for an efficient transport alternative.
posted by acb at 6:46 AM on November 8, 2021 [5 favorites]
OTOH, a lot of those old alignments dating back to the age of slow locomotives and labour-intensive civil engineering are a lot less straight than you'd build today, and certainly than you'd want for any sort of reasonable speed. Which would be OK for a volunteer-run tourist railway, but less so for an efficient transport alternative.
posted by acb at 6:46 AM on November 8, 2021 [5 favorites]
Re co-mingling freight and passenger stock, in my area we have the Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit. For various reasons, most probably involving rail being a very effective way to funnel public dollars into private coffers, the decision was made to go with big heavy DMUs rather than seeking a FRA waiver to run lighter units, because even though the freight runs at odd hours to the passenger rail, the rules apparently require that the passenger rolling stock be built so that it can be coupled into the middle of a mile-long freight train. Or something.
Anyway, the end result of that is that we likely (SMART is really cagey about its numbers) have a situation where the passenger miles per gallon simply cannot exceed those of an SUV on the current single-track system, the whole thing looks like a boondoggle, and there's a good chance that we're gonna have spent all of this money on refurbishing the tracks for passenger rail capability only to lose voter support because it isn't delivering what voters thought it promised, and it'll once again revert to weeds.
posted by straw at 10:32 AM on November 8, 2021
Anyway, the end result of that is that we likely (SMART is really cagey about its numbers) have a situation where the passenger miles per gallon simply cannot exceed those of an SUV on the current single-track system, the whole thing looks like a boondoggle, and there's a good chance that we're gonna have spent all of this money on refurbishing the tracks for passenger rail capability only to lose voter support because it isn't delivering what voters thought it promised, and it'll once again revert to weeds.
posted by straw at 10:32 AM on November 8, 2021
I do wonder about some of the comparisons with trains elsewhere vs US, given the relative distances.
Japan has super trains...well yeah, they've got a population the size of Russia, on an island the size of California; I sure hope they would.
I'm not saying that comparisons with European train systems are invalid, I just wonder if it's apples to apples, in terms of common trips taken.
Regional inter-city rail in the US needs vast improvements. I bet there are great trains from Madrid to Barcelona. That's the distance from Seattle to Spokane, and should have much better train services.
But LA to Chicago? That's the distance from Lisbon to...Warsaw. Is that a train trip that 'Europeans' normally take by train? It still takes two days on high speed Euro-rail.
Or a family vacation from Cincinnati to Disney World in Orlando. If a family in suburban Berlin wants to go to...Monaco. Do they say Komm, Kinder, let's all get on the train for 20 hours?
posted by bartleby at 10:56 AM on November 8, 2021 [3 favorites]
Japan has super trains...well yeah, they've got a population the size of Russia, on an island the size of California; I sure hope they would.
I'm not saying that comparisons with European train systems are invalid, I just wonder if it's apples to apples, in terms of common trips taken.
Regional inter-city rail in the US needs vast improvements. I bet there are great trains from Madrid to Barcelona. That's the distance from Seattle to Spokane, and should have much better train services.
But LA to Chicago? That's the distance from Lisbon to...Warsaw. Is that a train trip that 'Europeans' normally take by train? It still takes two days on high speed Euro-rail.
Or a family vacation from Cincinnati to Disney World in Orlando. If a family in suburban Berlin wants to go to...Monaco. Do they say Komm, Kinder, let's all get on the train for 20 hours?
posted by bartleby at 10:56 AM on November 8, 2021 [3 favorites]
But LA to Chicago? That's the distance from Lisbon to...Warsaw. Is that a train trip that 'Europeans' normally take by train? It still takes two days on high speed Euro-rail.
Or a family vacation from Cincinnati to Disney World in Orlando. If a family in suburban Berlin wants to go to...Monaco. Do they say Komm, Kinder, let's all get on the train for 20 hours?
I don't know, but when I travelled from Paris to Munich by sleeper train, I did that in the company of family who were travelling from London to Sofia by train. And certainly pre-pandemic you could get a direct train from Paris to Moscow, as I nearly did accidentally.
Most of the truly long distance train rides in Europe and Asia seem to be travelled by a few tourists all the way, and a lot of others over intermediate distances. That 500 mile figure seems to be about right, the train travel guru Man in Seat 61 reported that in a race from central London to central Edinburgh, the plane beat the train by a handful of minutes. For LA to Chicago to be a really viable route, you'd need to have people wanting to travel between pairs of cities on that line, which may not really be the case.
posted by plonkee at 12:28 PM on November 8, 2021
Or a family vacation from Cincinnati to Disney World in Orlando. If a family in suburban Berlin wants to go to...Monaco. Do they say Komm, Kinder, let's all get on the train for 20 hours?
I don't know, but when I travelled from Paris to Munich by sleeper train, I did that in the company of family who were travelling from London to Sofia by train. And certainly pre-pandemic you could get a direct train from Paris to Moscow, as I nearly did accidentally.
Most of the truly long distance train rides in Europe and Asia seem to be travelled by a few tourists all the way, and a lot of others over intermediate distances. That 500 mile figure seems to be about right, the train travel guru Man in Seat 61 reported that in a race from central London to central Edinburgh, the plane beat the train by a handful of minutes. For LA to Chicago to be a really viable route, you'd need to have people wanting to travel between pairs of cities on that line, which may not really be the case.
posted by plonkee at 12:28 PM on November 8, 2021
These achievements, the authors argue, highlight the potential and appeal of intercity passenger rail, but miss the point of Amtrak. They argue that holding Amtrak to the standard of a business is counterproductive. Amtrak, like the National Park Service and US Postal Service — both of which charge fees — are not expected to be profitable. There’s a kernel of truth to this line of argument.
Infrastructure doesn't turn a profit like a business. We subsidize automobiles through the taxes we pay to build and maintain the roads and bridges. I doubt the US road network would exist if it were exclusively composed of toll roads or left to the automakers to maintain. Until we get over this mindset, we'll never be able to fully realize rail in this country.
Amtrak, for its part, as the article points out, is forced to maintain unprofitable routes to rural areas to curry the political favor necessary to ensure its survival. Politicians in rural areas fight for Amtrak stops because those towns often are too small to justify large airports capable of maintaining passenger jet routes.. Given that, its amazing Amtrak was ever close to turning a profit.
Also, regarding the viability of high speed rail in the US, the distance between between Philly and Chicago - the route that used to be called the "Main Line" - is about 770 miles. That's just outside the 500 miles cited in the article as the break even point within which high speed rail is competitive with air travel. However, the aim isn't to connect Philly and Chicago. People rarely ride from end to end of existing rail lines. Rather, the point is to connect cities in between, which all fall within the 500 mile envelop. The United States has many regions where such rail lines would make sense. The Obama administration even released a plan for high speed rail way back in 2009-2010. Obama plan Here is an updated version of that plan: Updated plan for 2020.
posted by eagles123 at 9:55 PM on November 8, 2021 [6 favorites]
Infrastructure doesn't turn a profit like a business. We subsidize automobiles through the taxes we pay to build and maintain the roads and bridges. I doubt the US road network would exist if it were exclusively composed of toll roads or left to the automakers to maintain. Until we get over this mindset, we'll never be able to fully realize rail in this country.
Amtrak, for its part, as the article points out, is forced to maintain unprofitable routes to rural areas to curry the political favor necessary to ensure its survival. Politicians in rural areas fight for Amtrak stops because those towns often are too small to justify large airports capable of maintaining passenger jet routes.. Given that, its amazing Amtrak was ever close to turning a profit.
Also, regarding the viability of high speed rail in the US, the distance between between Philly and Chicago - the route that used to be called the "Main Line" - is about 770 miles. That's just outside the 500 miles cited in the article as the break even point within which high speed rail is competitive with air travel. However, the aim isn't to connect Philly and Chicago. People rarely ride from end to end of existing rail lines. Rather, the point is to connect cities in between, which all fall within the 500 mile envelop. The United States has many regions where such rail lines would make sense. The Obama administration even released a plan for high speed rail way back in 2009-2010. Obama plan Here is an updated version of that plan: Updated plan for 2020.
posted by eagles123 at 9:55 PM on November 8, 2021 [6 favorites]
Meanwhile, in Australia, the federal opposition Labor Party is promising to establish an agency to build high-speed rail, should they win power*. This would create the latest in some 4 decades of high-speed rail plans.
* an outside chance at best; they're ahead of the governing conservatives in polling, but by an uncomfortably small amount that will undoubtedly shrink further as the election draws nearer, and the conservatives have sizeable structural advantages.
posted by acb at 1:21 AM on November 9, 2021
* an outside chance at best; they're ahead of the governing conservatives in polling, but by an uncomfortably small amount that will undoubtedly shrink further as the election draws nearer, and the conservatives have sizeable structural advantages.
posted by acb at 1:21 AM on November 9, 2021
One thing that's often overlooked about Europe is that their freight railroads are a joke compared to the US and somewhere over 70% of all goods are shipped by truck.
It's important to remember that Europe's coal trains are located in the Mississippi valley. When the City of New Orleans is delayed six hours, remember that coal is going to Germany, the UK, and the Netherlands.
posted by eustatic at 3:31 AM on November 9, 2021
It's important to remember that Europe's coal trains are located in the Mississippi valley. When the City of New Orleans is delayed six hours, remember that coal is going to Germany, the UK, and the Netherlands.
posted by eustatic at 3:31 AM on November 9, 2021
The UK? I mean, barely.
Man in Seat 61 reported that in a race from central London to central Edinburgh, the plane beat the train by a handful of minutes
I'm surprised by this. I used to do that journey all the time by train because it was faster, or at least less hassle. Did he fly out of City or something?
posted by rhamphorhynchus at 7:52 AM on November 9, 2021 [2 favorites]
Man in Seat 61 reported that in a race from central London to central Edinburgh, the plane beat the train by a handful of minutes
I'm surprised by this. I used to do that journey all the time by train because it was faster, or at least less hassle. Did he fly out of City or something?
posted by rhamphorhynchus at 7:52 AM on November 9, 2021 [2 favorites]
According to this tweet he was "flying from Luton to Glasgow and then taking a coach to Edinburgh", so much more hassle.
posted by bashing rocks together at 1:04 PM on November 9, 2021 [2 favorites]
posted by bashing rocks together at 1:04 PM on November 9, 2021 [2 favorites]
« Older The Drink short film | Saturday Afternoon Ikea Trip Simulator Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by Ferreous at 11:37 AM on November 7, 2021 [16 favorites]