I don’t think anybody is disagreeing - HSR does not make sense for routine trans-continental travel (rail tourism is a different matter but does not need high speed). The capital costs are astronomical and air is always going to have a massive time advantage.
Most of this thread has been about the practicality/desirability of building regional HSR routes and or networks. To answer some of Rick’s points in this context:
HSR is by definition on new tracks and probably on new rights of way (you can’t have sharp corners or steep gradients).
Following from this the HSR passenger trains always get priority over frieght.
Yes, building new HSR lines is bloody expensive but - as already noted - so is building airports and maintaining the other infrastructure for air travel.
When the HSR line meets a hill you go under it in a tunnel not over it (this is old technology, thinkAlpine tunnels).
As to stops - generally HSR runs as an express with few stops along the route.
Finally ticket prices - well it depends on the business model. Generally in Europe HSR tickets sell at a significant premium over low cost air fares but comparable to standard tickets. People will pay to avoid the general unpleasantness to air travel these days, and to travel from city centre to city centre.
It’s a two days long trip. And not at high sped. Two changes, in Berlin and Warsaw. It also costs much more than a flight. And indeed nobody buys such train tickets according to the french railways’ employee who gave me these informations (and took a very long time to find them).
Why I inquired? Because I’m afraid of flying. That’s why.
So if we’re building this train, either coast-to-coast of city-to-city, we’re more than likely going to need to get some land to put new track on, not only the right-of-way, but also things like long-term parking, station facilities, maintenance areas, etc…
What do we say to the private property owners when we need their land? Eminent domain is a horribly distasteful tool to use, the reimbursements are generally a joke, and it’s kinda, well…unAmerican.
How many thousands of acres will the gov’mt need to take from private landowners in the interest of yet another train boondoogle? That should be enough to sink it right there…
And yet a road near me was recently widened from 2 to 4 lanes. A bunch of business and homes lost big chunks of property. There were minimal complaints, as far as I know. Somehow it got done.
**The Pittsburgh to Chicago run in 30 minutes does require a speed of 900mph. Is that really possible in the next 50 years? **
If so the NYC to Chicago makes a lot more sense to me, It should take under an hour which is amazing.
Boston to NYC to DC would be very valuable. That would be in the 30 minute range plus the stop-over time in NYC. Then on to Orlando with a few stops in places like Atlanta could be a good option. DC to Orlando should be 1 hour plus stops.
Ideally they can have it like a high speed long distance subway system with constant trains and stops maybe 100 miles apart. NYC & Philly could become a commuter distance from each other. Though 100 miles may be too short a distance for acceleration and deceleration.