# A national-scale high speed rail? For whom? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 12, 2008, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-national-scale-high-speed-rail-for-whom/459750 "2008-08-12T17:17:23Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![smiling\_bandit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9a140/32.png) [@smiling\_bandit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smiling_bandit)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2008, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-national-scale-high-speed-rail-for-whom/459750/1 "2008-08-12T17:17:23Z")
Honestly, I’m a little confused as to whom is going to use this giant, national-scale rail network. Huge sections of it will carry virtually no one, ever. I don’t quite see what advantage it has over airplanes for passengers. Sure, the airlines are acting like idiots right now, but rail will have most of the same problems, just with a little more space. You’ll have the same obnoxious security checks. You’'ll get to your destination and have to rent a car. But it also has a lot of further troubles. Frankly, you can’t connect everywhere with high-speed rail. The north-east might like it, since you can have a Boston-New York-Philly-Washington run, but you’d need a gross amount of land-grabs and you’d harm existing rail services. Outside of that, yforget profitable - you’ll be lucky to go merely go _bankrupt_. And of course, you’ll need all kinds of special overpasses, security, and maintenance over a huge area. Japan got away with it because they laid the track down a narrow mostly pre-existing corridor between its two huge population zones. But they do not, and practically speaking cannot, connect it further. And the price of a ticket would be _ungodly_. I mean, either the thing would wholly subsidized and virtually free (and would cost a ridiculous amount in taxes) or it would be completely uncompetitive with air travel. So, my question is, who would use this? I’m not saying I don’t like the idea of feeling like heading to the beach so I hop on the train to Atlanta, am there in two hours, and then hop the next to the coast. But it ain’t gonna be that easy. And what’s the purpose of this? To use less gas? Color me cynical, but I don’t think spending vast amounts of money on huge unproductive enterprises with little upside is somehow better than, say, opening up new nuclear plants or encouraging flex-fuels. ---
**Author:** ![dalej42](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/67e7ee/32.png) [@dalej42](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dalej42)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2008, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-national-scale-high-speed-rail-for-whom/459750/2 "2008-08-12T17:24:02Z")
I don’t think we necessarily need coast to coast high speed rail. However, high speed rail could be used to reduce the number of commuter flights. A high speed rail connecting Dallas, Austin, Houston and San Antonio would be an example. Currently the only options are driving and flying. The drive from Dallas to Austin is about 3 hours or so, depending on traffic. The flight is about an hour, but involves the airport security headaches. Plus, once you’re in Austin, you then have to drive from the airport to downtown. Downtown to downtown train stations would be nice. Plus, I don’t think security would need to be as tight (I don’t think it needs to be as tight in airports, but that is another issue). ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2008, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-national-scale-high-speed-rail-for-whom/459750/3 "2008-08-12T17:33:40Z")
What came first? The railroad or the population centers that cropped up around it’s hubs? People always forget that transportation systems bring development to barren areas. You’re thinking about it backwards. Also, the airlines aren’t acting like idiots now, they are scrambling to not go out of business. High gas prices are screwing them up more than any other business. Air traffic is also becoming over-used. Too many people are flying in and out of a few hubs. NYC cannot accomodate the traffic it currently has. High-speed rail will not run on petrofuels like Jets will, thus the cost of Jets will continue to rise at a fantastic pace. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2008, 5:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-national-scale-high-speed-rail-for-whom/459750/4 "2008-08-12T17:34:41Z")
[QUOTE=dalej42] I don’t think we necessarily need coast to coast high speed rail. However, high speed rail could be used to reduce the number of commuter flights. A high speed rail connecting Dallas, Austin, Houston and San Antonio would be an example. Currently the only options are driving and flying. The drive from Dallas to Austin is about 3 hours or so, depending on traffic. The flight is about an hour, but involves the airport security headaches. Plus, once you’re in Austin, you then have to drive from the airport to downtown. Downtown to downtown train stations would be nice. Plus, I don’t think security would need to be as tight (I don’t think it needs to be as tight in airports, but that is another issue). [/QUOTE] ^^This. For short (relatively speaking) hauls high speed rail would make a lot of sense. As mentioned in the NE, in Texas, Midwest (Chicago/St. Louis/Detroit/Cleveland/Kansas City/Minneapolis) and perhaps a few other places. When a flight takes less than an hour of fly time but you spend 2-3 hours getting to the airport, dealing with security and so on then it’s just silly. Far better to take a 90 minute train trip with far less hassle, particularly if they train can get you to the city center. Coast-to-coast would likely be silly. ---
**Author:** ![Zsofia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/7bcc69/32.png) [@Zsofia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zsofia)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2008, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-national-scale-high-speed-rail-for-whom/459750/5 "2008-08-12T17:43:18Z")
I don’t see any _real reason_ why security would have to be so high - in Europe I can walk into the train station at 9 to catch the 9:15 and have time to spare, and it’s not like they don’t have terrorists in Europe. Of course, we’d cock it up, as usual. I see potential for high speed rail down I-95, personally. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2008, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-national-scale-high-speed-rail-for-whom/459750/6 "2008-08-12T17:48:54Z")
So, who’s proposing a national high-speed rail in the first place? ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2008, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-national-scale-high-speed-rail-for-whom/459750/7 "2008-08-12T17:49:07Z")
Has anyone seriously proposed a National one ? I’d say the population densities and distances invovle preclude that. One the other hand there are some huge pockects of [very high population density](http://www.census.gov/dmd/www/pdf/512popdn.pdf) in the US, and its just dumb there isn’t a decent rail link between them. Why there is isn’t a high speed San Francisco-\>San Jose-\>LA link is ridiculous. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2008, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-national-scale-high-speed-rail-for-whom/459750/8 "2008-08-12T17:58:19Z")
[QUOTE=Zsofia] I don’t see any _real reason_ why security would have to be so high - in Europe I can walk into the train station at 9 to catch the 9:15 and have time to spare, and it’s not like they don’t have terrorists in Europe. Of course, we’d cock it up, as usual. I see potential for high speed rail down I-95, personally. [/QUOTE] It has to be as high as in airports because, if somebody seizes control of a train they could steer if off course and plow it into a building full of innocents, just like in 9-11, of course. ---
**Author:** ![smiling\_bandit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9a140/32.png) [@smiling\_bandit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smiling_bandit)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2008, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-national-scale-high-speed-rail-for-whom/459750/9 "2008-08-12T18:01:09Z")
[QUOTE=mswas] What came first? The railroad or the population centers that cropped up around it’s hubs? [/quote] Mostly the latter. Few cities were made by rail travel, Chicago being one. > [@](#): > > People always forget that transportation systems bring development to barren areas. You’re thinking about it backwards. :dubious: High speed rail specifically cannot do that. It is highly inflexible and can’t connect the intervening areas. It passes through them, but due to its nature it can’t stop much. Rail shpping is still used and it’s a totally different beast from High-speed rail. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2008, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-national-scale-high-speed-rail-for-whom/459750/10 "2008-08-12T18:04:30Z")
[QUOTE=Chronos] So, who’s proposing a national high-speed rail in the first place? [/QUOTE] See [here.](http://www.newtrains.org/) And [here.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-speed_rail_in_the_United_States) If it works in Europe and Japan, why not here? ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2008, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-national-scale-high-speed-rail-for-whom/459750/11 "2008-08-12T18:08:41Z")
[QUOTE=smiling bandit] Mostly the latter. Few cities were made by rail travel, Chicago being one. :dubious: High speed rail specifically cannot do that. It is highly inflexible and can’t connect the intervening areas. It passes through them, but due to its nature it can’t stop much. Rail shpping is still used and it’s a totally different beast from High-speed rail. [/QUOTE] Yes, but it could breathe more life into cities like say, Cleveland or Des Moines. (Assuming Coast to Coast) ---
**Author:** ![Spoke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e57/32.png) [@Spoke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoke)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2008, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-national-scale-high-speed-rail-for-whom/459750/12 "2008-08-12T18:48:58Z")
[QUOTE=smiling bandit] Mostly the latter. Few cities were made by rail travel, Chicago being one. [/QUOTE] Huh?? Lots of cities were made by rail travel. Atlanta, Birmingham, Dallas, Denver, and Indianapolis just to name a few. None of those cities would be what they are today if they hadn’t become railroad hubs. For that matter (looking at your location), Knoxville’s growth during the industrial age was spurred by the coming of the railroad. ---
**Author:** ![smiling\_bandit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9a140/32.png) [@smiling\_bandit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smiling_bandit)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2008, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-national-scale-high-speed-rail-for-whom/459750/13 "2008-08-12T20:52:25Z")
[QUOTE=spoke-] Huh?? Lots of cities were made by rail travel. Atlanta, Birmingham, Dallas, Denver, and Indianapolis just to name a few. None of those cities would be what they are today if they hadn’t become railroad hubs. For that matter (looking at your location), Knoxville’s growth during the industrial age was spurred by the coming of the railroad. [/QUOTE] Which is partly true but irrelevant. A “lot” ain’t much in comparison to the cities which were not made by rail travel. Edit: Actually, Atlanta, Knoxville, and Denver at least were either growing substantially from other factors or were enriched but not fundamentally altered by rail. > [@mswas](#): > > Yes, but it could breathe more life into cities like say, Cleveland or Des Moines. (Assuming Coast to Coast) … Methinks you are misssing the point of HSR in the first place. You have HSR because you have several point-to-point destinations that people want to travel between frequently. Stopping at towns along the way completely defeats the purpose of doing it. You only stop is a significant number of passengers want board or disembark at those stops. Moreover, HSR is not at all a _freight_ service, which is what is economically useful to the cities. It is much faster than what is needed, again doesn’t stop along the way, and far too costly. ---
**Author:** ![Robot\_Arm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robot_arm/32/18280_2.png) [@Robot\_Arm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robot_Arm)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2008, 9:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-national-scale-high-speed-rail-for-whom/459750/14 "2008-08-12T21:07:21Z")
[QUOTE=Zsofia] I don’t see any _real reason_ why security would have to be so high - in Europe I can walk into the train station at 9 to catch the 9:15 and have time to spare,… [/QUOTE] In Paris, I arrived at Gare du Nord at 3:44 for a 3:45 train. ---
**Author:** ![GorillaMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/50afbb/32.png) [@GorillaMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GorillaMan)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2008, 9:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-national-scale-high-speed-rail-for-whom/459750/15 "2008-08-12T21:16:12Z")
[QUOTE=smiling bandit] Methinks you are misssing the point of HSR in the first place. You have HSR because you have several point-to-point destinations that people want to travel between frequently. Stopping at towns along the way completely defeats the purpose of doing it. You only stop is a significant number of passengers want board or disembark at those stops. [/QUOTE] Methinks you’re overemphasising the need for infrequent stops. A check on a direct Brussels-Marseilles TGV: intermediate stops are Paris CDG, Disneyland, Valence and Avignon. An average of a little over one every hundred miles. ---
**Author:** ![bdgr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a87d85/32.png) [@bdgr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bdgr)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2008, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-national-scale-high-speed-rail-for-whom/459750/16 "2008-08-12T21:33:41Z")
[QUOTE=dalej42] I don’t think we necessarily need coast to coast high speed rail. However, high speed rail could be used to reduce the number of commuter flights. A high speed rail connecting Dallas, Austin, Houston and San Antonio would be an example. Currently the only options are driving and flying. The drive from Dallas to Austin is about 3 hours or so, depending on traffic. The flight is about an hour, but involves the airport security headaches. Plus, once you’re in Austin, you then have to drive from the airport to downtown. Downtown to downtown train stations would be nice. Plus, I don’t think security would need to be as tight (I don’t think it needs to be as tight in airports, but that is another issue). [/QUOTE] Yeah, we need high speed rail here rather than that stupid corridor. But there is another option here. I can take the train from fort worth to austin, san antonio, or houston cheaper than driving. The downside, I have to wait till the next day to come back. To take amtrak to anywhere east I have to go through chicago…to go to new orleans by rail you have spend the night in houston because the train for new orleans leaves at the same time the train from the metroplex arives. To have high speed rail just in the cities mentioned above would allow commutes to houston or austin…to take the train down to the coast would be killer (amtrak doesnt run that far). as for security. You do not need the same security on a train because you cant hijak a train and fly it into a building. Rail works everywhere else in the world, but we’ve let ours degenerate. I talk to friends going to austin for the weekend and mention taking the train and they look at me like I’ve just told them I have a cure for cancer…it doesn’t occur to anyone that you can do that. ---
**Author:** ![Spoke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e57/32.png) [@Spoke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoke)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2008, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-national-scale-high-speed-rail-for-whom/459750/17 "2008-08-12T21:39:49Z")
[QUOTE=smiling bandit] Edit: Actually, Atlanta, Knoxville, and Denver at least were either growing substantially from other factors or were enriched but not fundamentally altered by rail. [/QUOTE] Again I say, huh??? Atlanta was _entirely_ a creature of the railroad. Before the railroad came, Atlanta was nothing but a dusty crossroad at the edge of Indian territory. As to Knoxville: > [@](#): > > Knoxville’s textile and manufacturing industries largely fell victim to foreign competition in the 1950s and 1960s, and **after the establishment of the Interstate Highway system in the 1960s, the railroad— which had been largely responsible for Knoxville’s industrial growth— began to decline**. [Cite](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knoxville,_Tennessee). As for Denver, it had a reason to exist before rail, but rail spurred growth: > [@](#): > > In the early twentieth century, infrastructure improvements continued, and in 1928, with the opening of the Moffat Tunnel through the Rocky Mountains, the railroad provided a direct connection to the West Coast, spurring additional growth. (The transcontinental line of the Union Pacific Railroad had bypassed Colorado in the nineteenth century, but Denver built a rail line to meet the Union Pacific at Cheyenne, Wyoming.) With a direct link to the West, Denver became a hub for the nation’s rail lines and growing highway system. By World War II, the establishment of government agencies including the U.S. Mint and the Bureau of Land Management helped spur a new surge in population, which continued through the 1950s, as the city’s climate and recreational opportunities sparked a building boom. [Cite.](http://www.city-data.com/world-cities/Denver-History.html) > [@smiling bandit](#): > > A “lot” ain’t much in comparison to the cities which were not made by rail travel. I was just naming a few off the top of my head. There are “many” more. So far we have Chicago, Atlanta, Dallas-Ft.Worth, Denver, Birmingham, Indianapolis and Knoxville. I could add Miami (which didn’t boom until connected to New York by rail). Just that short list takes in four of the ten largest metro areas in the US, and there are many smaller cities which I could name, but won’t, because I’ve made my point. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2008, 10:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-national-scale-high-speed-rail-for-whom/459750/18 "2008-08-12T22:04:38Z")
[QUOTE=smiling bandit] Methinks you are misssing the point of HSR in the first place. You have HSR because you have several point-to-point destinations that people want to travel between frequently. Stopping at towns along the way completely defeats the purpose of doing it. You only stop is a significant number of passengers want board or disembark at those stops. Moreover, HSR is not at all a _freight_ service, which is what is economically useful to the cities. It is much faster than what is needed, again doesn’t stop along the way, and far too costly. [/QUOTE] Yeah, this bears no relation to what I said. I figured the train would stop in one big city per state across the nation, and would stop in some of the biggest cities in the country, like say, Cleveland. Des Moines or Iowa City in Iowa, Lincoln Nebraska, and so on. These are cities that are all more than 100 miles apart at minimum. Doesn’t defeat the purpose of high speed rail at all. Your strawman about freight is irrelevant. ---
**Author:** ![Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bosda_di_chi_of_tricor/32/16845_2.png) [@Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosda_Di_Chi_of_Tricor)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2008, 10:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-national-scale-high-speed-rail-for-whom/459750/19 "2008-08-12T22:14:08Z")
People, I work at an airport, talk with people in Aviation fairly often, & work for a State Transportation Department. Here’s the skinny– [ol] [li]Our air traffic control system is out-of-date & overloaded.[/li][li]Our aircraft are getting larger & larger, in order to carry more people without having more flights.[/li][li]To do this, giant land grabs must be done, & expensive airport redesign & reconstruction takes place, at huge costs, to accommodate Big Planes.[/li][li]NOBODY wants to pay for the above–systems, airport or planes. Nobody.[/li][li]Giant Planes + Overloaded System = Impending Doom For All Aboard™[/li][li]Airline service is really crappy.[/li][li]Airlines are going broke as it is.[/li][/ol] Even pilots admit that good rail passenger service might be a wise move. ---
**Author:** ![enipla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/54ee81/32.png) [@enipla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/enipla)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2008, 12:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-national-scale-high-speed-rail-for-whom/459750/20 "2008-08-13T00:29:11Z")
[QUOTE=Bosda Di’Chi of Tricor] [li]Our aircraft are getting larger & larger, in order to carry more people without having more flights.[/li][/QUOTE] Aren’t aircraft actually getting smaller? The 737 for instance. More flights to smaller hubs. A 100-200 mile hop on an aircraft seems silly to me. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-national-scale-high-speed-rail-for-whom/459750.md?page=2)