China is able to put 14 bullet trains into operation quickly, with own designs, why not US?

The Chinese system is heavily subsidized and would fail if it had to run as a for -profit standalone entity.

 

Easy answer, too many BS gov bureaucracies and too many regulations with associated red tape.

 

That has been true for most of the history of railroading.

Railroads always made most of their money hauling freight. A ton of coal never needed a sleeping car, a parlour car, a separate station, heat, or a bathroom.

In the US, the only passenger rail service that pays for itself out of the fare box are the New York City Subway system and the Acela trains and the Northeast Regional.

The automobile transport infrastructure was entirely government built and financed by user taxes (until recently, when politicians have lacked the courage to raise gas taxes to match the revenue needs, resulting in crumbling infrastructure). Railroads were also built with heavy government subsidy.

The idea that transportation infrastructure of any kind was ever built and maintained without significant government involvment and subsidy is a myth.

 

Ah yes, the knee jerk response. No analysis, not research, no thought.

 

Sometimes the obvious answer is the correct answer. Having said that I think these bullet trains are a huge waste of money but since my states not trying to put one in I don't really care.

"US law does not allow state-owned rail projects to completely bypass California’s strict environmental regulations, the state Supreme Court said Thursday in a decision that ensures further legal complications for the planned $64-billion bullet train between Los Angeles and San Francisco.

The high court overturned a lower court ruling and gave renewed hope to those who have used the California Environmental Quality Act to challenge the high-speed rail project championed by Gov. Jerry Brown."

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-bullet-train-20170727-story.html

 

The Texas Central bullet train project is not taxpayer funded. Its all private investors.

 

This is exactly the sort of high speed rail investment I advocated earlier in this thread. High speed rail between cities like Houston to Dallas, and maybe San Antonio.

All across the US, air travel between major and secondary cities, or secondary to secondary cities require flying to hubs and changing planes. It's not unusual for this sort of trip to be not significanly shorter than driving once you've factored in driving to the airport, parking, riding the shuttle, security, etc. I know this from first hand experience!

I will again state that most of the far right wingers who dismiss high speed rail knee jerk fashion never travel, or have only flown to Vegas or Disney World once in their lives, or been on military transport. They don't know anything about the crummy world of modern American business travel, the crowded stations, the long lines, the indifferent service, the narrow seat and stale air.

They also don't appreciate the fact that high speed rail opens up regions, not just destinations.

If you can reduce a five hour regional flight ordeal to a two hour train ride, you free up time on both ends.

When you have people working in Manhattan and commuting from places like Allentown, Pa, or going from Ft Monmouth NJ to work in Baltimore, you have a market for high speed commuting. All you need is the infrastructure.

Thanks for bringing up Texas Central. It's just what I am talking about.

 

Yep. I think its a fabulous idea. Let's hope Texans can get out of their own way and make it happen, Domestic air travel these days is the pits.

 

I think it is time for all the wet behind the ears capitalists, to face some facts. Things we humans NEED, AREEEEEEE subsidized, right here in river city.

Food is subsidized. Industry is subsidized. School, subbed. If humans need to move about, and that is getting too hard, then subbing a train, is GOOD FOR BUSINESS.

 

Right but downtown DC doesn't look like that.

I think I kind of answered my own question. It's not just that you would need high speed rail between distant points, you'd also need a good set of local trains/subways.

Seeing the crime evident on most local trains/subways, I still think it has a lot to do with people feel safer driving where they want to go.

 

So you'd like people who have jobs to pay for your trains too. No surprise there.

 

Now we are getting down to the brass tacks. You think we need a dictatorial central control.

 

According to the studies 50,000 people a week commute between Houston and Dallas and 80,000 college students. Texas Central is not using taxpayer money.... Its privately financed.

 

Everything is bigger in Texas, even the train speed. It's the perfect state to pioneer HSR.

Where have you been? I thought you died.

 

The DC system was designed with a busing component. The bus system sucks

 

I'm not sure what the Mixing Bowl has to do with the Metro system, other than the fact that Fairfax, Arlington,and Montgomery Counties, Alexandria and the District would be far harder to get around in without it.

BTW, folks I know in Burke take the trains all the time. The thought of sitting on the Shirley Highway (which seems to have been your preferred option) was something they were not going to put themselves through.

 

I never spoke of any area specifically, that was another poster.

 

Yeah I hope to never make the drive from Reagan to Quantico ever again.

 

Why are bullet trains good? I understand there can be some benefits, but I'm not sure why the US should build them for the sake of building them.

 

You don't see the advantage of traveling long distances at 200-400 mph?

 

When I can do it at nearly 600mph already?

I went to Beijing for the 08 Olympics. We, like everyone else in the country, wanted to try the high speed rail to Tianjin. You're talking about population density that never seems to drop. Between Dallas and Houston, there's nothing. What's the advantage over taking a plane, and the travel time tilts towards planes the further you travel.

 

The main reason there will never be bullet trains in America is that the airlines pay billions of dollars in bribes...oops I mean "campaign contributions" to make sure it doesn't happen. The airlines want to protect their monopoly on national travel so that they can continue ****ing over employees and customers.

 

Comfort, cost, not being anally probed when you try to get on a plane, not having to look at the TSA and their crack team of professionals, not having to watch people get dragged off flights, keeping my shoes on....quite a few advantages really. When you factor in layovers, delayed flights, showing up hours early, going through baggage claim.....I'm not sure it's that much of a time savings.

Would the train be a good idea coast to coast? Probably not. A few states away? Sure.

I travelled the shinkansen all over Japan, and it was better on all counts than taking a plane.

 

Yeah well, Americans aren't Japanese. Their shinkansen system was built as a matter of national pride. It was a way of saying "we're back" for the Tokyo Olympics. On the other hand, we sent men to the moon for national pride. They got a bullet train and we got tang.

These days, there is no pride in being the last industrialized country in the world to develop a high speed rail system.