KeystoneRegional Posted April 21, 2009 Share #26 Posted April 21, 2009 Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTR Admiralty Posted April 21, 2009 Share #27 Posted April 21, 2009 Well, I know rail transportation seems old and stubborn. But still, would you pay more to expand highway systems and airports or just build a trans-continental high-speed rail system? You need to take in mutiple ideas and facts and put them all together and examin them. My word on New High-Speed Rail vs Roads and Air: High-Speed Rail: Pros: Fast, Reliable and rolling under all weather. Cons: Not so Flexible - Need rails to travel. Roads/Air: Pros: Can be Fast, Fully Flexible - Can go anywhere. Cons: Can be Slow, Less Reliable, Cannot operate under bad weather. Period! I am again, not anti-HSR, I am only against a transcontinental high speed railway. Regional high speed rail lines would be comparable and may be even better than the European ones if built. You don't get my point, you think you do, but you don't. You are misinterpreting the information here. What you're telling me is, that you think I'm simply anti-HSR, no. I am for HSR, just that it should be built where it should. A lot of people give great ideas (like the transcontinental high speed line), but in the end, when it faces reality, it's not going to work. Only lines where there is a potentially successful market will be successful in the future. If it won't be succesful, it's a waste. Two considerations that HSR operating companies in America must consider: -Low cost -High speed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maserati7200 Posted April 21, 2009 Share #28 Posted April 21, 2009 MTR is right, high speed rail doesn't make any sense from New York to Cali. However, HSR would be great for something like San Francisco to Los Angeles. HSR is should be an alternative to a long car/bus ride or a really short distance by airplane. HSR would also make sense for like upstate NY to Manhattan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTR Admiralty Posted April 21, 2009 Share #29 Posted April 21, 2009 MTR is right, high speed rail doesn't make any sense from New York to Cali. However, HSR would be great for something like San Francisco to Los Angeles. HSR is should be an alternative to a long car/bus ride or a really short distance by airplane. HSR would also make sense for like upstate NY to Manhattan. You got me right, Maserati. That's what I like to see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metsfan Posted April 22, 2009 Author Share #30 Posted April 22, 2009 High speed being over 90 mph. Chicago division struggles with antiquated freight lines inherited from the first railroads. Amtrak does not own any tracks out west that i know of. That needs to change with state owned trackage with federal, state, or multi-state funding for the train itself. It's being done now and it really works well. - A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTR Admiralty Posted April 22, 2009 Share #31 Posted April 22, 2009 High speed being over 90 mph. Chicago division struggles with antiquated freight lines inherited from the first railroads. Amtrak does not own any tracks out west that i know of. That needs to change with state owned trackage with federal, state, or multi-state funding for the train itself. It's being done now and it really works well. - A I do not find that as justification for a high speed transcontinental railway line. THSR will be SLOWER and pricier than commercial flights. This will most likely go through: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ohio_Hub The reason is, the distances are shorter and it could compete very well with buses and cars. The Ohio Hub project will bring dollars, not the THSR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metsfan Posted April 22, 2009 Author Share #32 Posted April 22, 2009 The point isn't to ride out west from nyc on the train, the point is that the speed on all lines should be 110+. - A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTR Admiralty Posted April 22, 2009 Share #33 Posted April 22, 2009 The point isn't to ride out west from nyc on the train, the point is that the speed on all lines should be 110+. - A Let's settle the Transcontinental thing first, will you go for it (after my talk)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.