High Speed Rail
02-08-2011, 06:31 PM
#1
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: Top
Posts: 472
High Speed Rail
Colleagues,
As promised in the "Latest & Greatest" thread, here's a message about high speed rail that I urge you to copy, modify, and send to your representative in Congress. Thank you for your consideration.
---
Dear Congressman,
Thank you for your service to our nation.
I was shocked to read tonight's article in the Wall Street Journal entitled "Biden Announces $53 Billion Rail-Funding Plan." (Biden Announces $53 Billion Rail-Funding Plan - WSJ.com)
I understand that the Vice President is a customer and a fan of high speed rail and that he wants to offer its delights to as many Americans as possible. However, I offer you the following four arguments in opposition to this plan:
1. High speed rail is a niche market. I'm a regular rail commuter to New York City. I *always* take the Northeast Regional instead of the Acela. Why? Because the Regional gets me there twenty minutes later for $100.00 less.
2. High speed rail is a product in search of a customer. If high speed rail were economically viable on its own, Acela would turn enough of a profit for Amtrak to be able to build out the system without extra taxpayer dollars.
3. Our deficit is enormous, and it's only getting bigger. I don't know about you, but I don't buy shiny new toys on credit: that's financially irresponsible.
4. I'm an airline pilot. Investing my tax money in a service that functions as a direct competitor to my industry is just plain wrong: it's like the Vice President wants me to pay to put myself out of business.
According to the article, Vice President Biden says we need to invest in our infrastructure. I agree: fix our crumbling bridges; fill our expanding potholes; update our woefully inadequate electrical grid. But high speed rail is, to use a term from my military service, a boondoggle of the highest order.
I urge you to defy the Vice President on this embarrassingly wasteful initiative. Please, oppose throwing good money after bad. Oppose federal funding for high speed rail!
As promised in the "Latest & Greatest" thread, here's a message about high speed rail that I urge you to copy, modify, and send to your representative in Congress. Thank you for your consideration.
---
Dear Congressman,
Thank you for your service to our nation.
I was shocked to read tonight's article in the Wall Street Journal entitled "Biden Announces $53 Billion Rail-Funding Plan." (Biden Announces $53 Billion Rail-Funding Plan - WSJ.com)
I understand that the Vice President is a customer and a fan of high speed rail and that he wants to offer its delights to as many Americans as possible. However, I offer you the following four arguments in opposition to this plan:
1. High speed rail is a niche market. I'm a regular rail commuter to New York City. I *always* take the Northeast Regional instead of the Acela. Why? Because the Regional gets me there twenty minutes later for $100.00 less.
2. High speed rail is a product in search of a customer. If high speed rail were economically viable on its own, Acela would turn enough of a profit for Amtrak to be able to build out the system without extra taxpayer dollars.
3. Our deficit is enormous, and it's only getting bigger. I don't know about you, but I don't buy shiny new toys on credit: that's financially irresponsible.
4. I'm an airline pilot. Investing my tax money in a service that functions as a direct competitor to my industry is just plain wrong: it's like the Vice President wants me to pay to put myself out of business.
According to the article, Vice President Biden says we need to invest in our infrastructure. I agree: fix our crumbling bridges; fill our expanding potholes; update our woefully inadequate electrical grid. But high speed rail is, to use a term from my military service, a boondoggle of the highest order.
I urge you to defy the Vice President on this embarrassingly wasteful initiative. Please, oppose throwing good money after bad. Oppose federal funding for high speed rail!
02-08-2011, 07:19 PM
#3
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: Out
Posts: 448
Have you seen high speed rail in Europe or Japan? ACELA is not high speed by any strech of imagination. Japanese high speed rail goes as fast as 200 mph vs 75mph that ACELA does. 2 hour train ride from NYC to DC sure beats a 1 hour flight when add transportation time to and from the airport and 1 hour wait for TSA screening.
02-08-2011, 07:24 PM
#4
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2010
Position: Doing what you do, for less.
Posts: 1,792
Good efficient widespread rail is needed by this country. I can admit that as an airline pilot.
What I also think is that this country is not capable of doing it. There are so many issues with taking on a project like this in our country these days that I don't even think we could accomplish it. Over budget, late, won't meet standards. Its sad what we've become... we used to be the world leader when it came to this sort of stuff, now all we can do is wish we had what other countries do.
What I also think is that this country is not capable of doing it. There are so many issues with taking on a project like this in our country these days that I don't even think we could accomplish it. Over budget, late, won't meet standards. Its sad what we've become... we used to be the world leader when it came to this sort of stuff, now all we can do is wish we had what other countries do.
02-08-2011, 07:26 PM
#5
Kerbal Rocket Surgeon
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: DTW 717A
Posts: 1,099
Originally Posted by Rascal
Have you seen high speed rail in Europe or Japan? ACELA is not high speed by any strech of imagination. Japanese high speed rail goes as fast as 200 mph vs 75mph that ACELA does. 2 hour train ride from NYC to DC sure beats a 1 hour flight when add transportation time to and from the airport and 1 hour wait for TSA screening.
You are absolutely fooling yourself if you think that the same government which pays $50B for high speed rail wont use that same system as an excuse to employ an additional 10,000 TSA screeners with cancer machines and rubber gloves.
02-08-2011, 08:29 PM
#7
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Legacy FO
Posts: 4,096
Originally Posted by lolwut
Good efficient widespread rail is needed by this country. I can admit that as an airline pilot.
What I also think is that this country is not capable of doing it. There are so many issues with taking on a project like this in our country these days that I don't even think we could accomplish it. Over budget, late, won't meet standards. Its sad what we've become... we used to be the world leader when it came to this sort of stuff, now all we can do is wish we had what other countries do.
What I also think is that this country is not capable of doing it. There are so many issues with taking on a project like this in our country these days that I don't even think we could accomplish it. Over budget, late, won't meet standards. Its sad what we've become... we used to be the world leader when it came to this sort of stuff, now all we can do is wish we had what other countries do.
The existing rails in this country are not compatible with America's version of highspeed rail (Acela), and not even close to Europe's or Asia's definition of highspeed rail. Our rails are built for extremely heavy freight. You can not mix American freight trains and highspeed passenger trains on the same rails for a myriad of reasons including the laws of physics.
Our rails are privately owned. European/Asian trains are highly subsidized and/or government owned. It is very difficult to turn a profit. The only place in the US where Amtrak turns a profit, and just barely I might add, is the Northeast corridor.
If you want to expand the Northeast corridor, fine do it. But Americans sure as hell aren't going to pay a couple of hundred bucks to take a full day, if not two, to get somewhere.
Because our population is spread out and not as dense as European or Asian communities, trains have the same issues are airports. The stations will be just as inconveniently located and of course you'll have to pay for parking. Through in the TSA which is sure to be there any day now, and you'll end up with the same old problems with trains as you do with planes, except that in most markets its going to significantly cost you more and take longer to get there.
02-09-2011, 07:05 AM
#9
Day puke
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: Out.
Posts: 3,865
This country HAD high speed rail.... starting in 1934!
Streamliners, The Classic Passenger Train
M-10000 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Hiawatha (passenger train) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
On one stretch, the Twin Cities Hiawatha had a scheduled speed over 80 mph.
Sadly, the streamliners eventually succumbed to competition from ... the automobile. Why anyone thinks high speed trains would fare better today is beyond me.
Streamliners, The Classic Passenger Train
M-10000 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Hiawatha (passenger train) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
On one stretch, the Twin Cities Hiawatha had a scheduled speed over 80 mph.
Sadly, the streamliners eventually succumbed to competition from ... the automobile. Why anyone thinks high speed trains would fare better today is beyond me.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
