China Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 This I like. But I would agree that the whole rail system needs upgrading, not just adding high speed. Obama Wants To Build High-Speed Trains! Barack Obama just announced his plan to spend $13 billion to build a vast high speed rail network across the nation. The stimulus will provide $8 billion initially, after that it will require $1 billion each year for the next five years. "There are those who say high-speed rail is a fantasy -- but its success around the world says otherwise," Obama said today. "Building a new system of high-speed rail in America will be faster, cheaper and easier than building more freeways or adding to an already overburdened aviation system, and everybody stands to benefit." Above is the map of how the Department Of Transportation wants the rails to sprawl across the nation. Developing a high speed rail system falls right in line with two major priorities for the administration. It provides "jobs that can't be exported" and it cuts back on the import of oil as well as greenhouse gasses. Certainly rail advocates (and train-riders) are excited about this development, but it really just presents a ton of questions. For example, why does the administration insist upon high speed rail, as opposed to just standard commuter railways? High speed is obviously very cool, and fun to say, but it's not like the government is telling GM to build a bunch of cars like the Tesla Roadster. It's saying it wants cars more like the Prius. Repairing the suffering commuter rails might provider greater benefit to riders over building a massive high speed network. The current rail business is terrible, so how will this change? Click on the link for the full article Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 13 billion is a drop in the bucket. I doubt if it would even cover the west coast portions of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fifty Gut Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 one of the best ideas coming out of the Obama camp, and our federal government, in a long time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattFancy Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 i'd be down with this. i hate flying so it would be cool to be able to travel by train and get there quicker than driving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexey Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 Will we be able to transport our cars on this thing? Not having to drive + having a car once you get there = awsome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUSkinsFan Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 This is the kind of stuff I really want to see Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 What will it cost to ride? And how tall do you have to be to get on the ride? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duckus Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 Great idea. I question how it would only cost that much - seems like a low figure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinInsite Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 I don't see how you can have a high speed rail system similar to Japan or Europe with only 13 billion. You'll need new tracks and trains to replace the current system. Unless you are happy with going at around 85mph. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskins Diehard Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 Train travel is great. Best option available in my opinion between DC and Boston and everywhere in between. Problem is ticket price. Much more expensive than even flying these days. And I don't think Amtrak is even profitable with those prices. I wonder how much this thing will cost even after it is built. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 For example, why does the administration insist upon high speed rail, as opposed to just standard commuter railways? Because if it isn't high-speed, Americans won't take it. They will drive or they will fly. There should be a highspeed rail network between the downtowns of the 10-12 largest cities in the east and midwest, and a line running up the west coast from San Diego to Seattle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad_Edwards_Fan Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 I don't see how you can have a high speed rail system similar to Japan or Europe with only 13 billion. You'll need new tracks and trains to replace the current system. Unless you are happy with going at around 85mph. Agree- I would rather see us spend the $$ to make a true high speed system, rather than $13B if we are still sub 100 mph Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#98QBKiller Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 This is an awesome idea, I'd love to see some different lines than the ones proposed but the idea is definitely on the right track....no pun intended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duckus Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 Train travel is great. Best option available in my opinion between DC and Boston and everywhere in between. Problem is ticket price. Much more expensive than even flying these days. And I don't think Amtrak is even profitable with those prices. I wonder how much this thing will cost even after it is built. Wondering the same thing. I love train travel, but the prices on the east coast were more expensive than flying, so I rarely did it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattFancy Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 This is an awesome idea, I'd love to see some different lines than the ones proposed but the idea is definitely on the right track....no pun intended. Yeah they should include a direct route from DC to Cali. Seems kind of pointless if you can't travel across the entire country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boofMcboof Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 Yeah they should include a direct route from DC to Cali. Seems kind of pointless if you can't travel across the entire country. Eventually I can see that happening but connecting major cities that are relatively close should be the priority. An increasingly mobile workforce combined with broader hi-speed internet access and you have the makings of the next economic boom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsHokieFan Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 If it is only 13 billion I am in full support. This would be terrific. A great initiative from the administration Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#98QBKiller Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 A couple more links: http://abcnews.go.com/Travel/story?id=7351798&page=1 This one has him talking about it: http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/04/obama-outlines.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsHokieFan Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 Because if it isn't high-speed, Americans won't take it. They will drive or they will fly. There should be a highspeed rail network between the downtowns of the 10-12 largest cities in the east and midwest, and a line running up the west coast from San Diego to Seattle. This vision is as good as I have seen You have several "clusters" which makes it easy to reach nearby cities (as opposed to flying from Reagan to JFK) Now airlines can focus on the cross country money making flights Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattFancy Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 Eventually I can see that happening but connecting major cities that are relatively close should be the priority. An increasingly mobile workforce combined with broader hi-speed internet access and you have the makings of the next economic boom. Yeah that makes more sense for know I guess. It could make living in DC and working in New York pretty simple. I guess that should be the priority first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 Train travel is great. Best option available in my opinion between DC and Boston and everywhere in between. Problem is ticket price. Much more expensive than even flying these days. And I don't think Amtrak is even profitable with those prices. I wonder how much this thing will cost even after it is built. I said in another thread on the subject that IMO, if you can't make a profit with high speed rail between DC and Boston, (and the cities in between), then you can't make a profit anywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thirtyfive2seven Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 AWESOME!! Who's going to pay for it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lloyd Braun Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 I'm skeptical of the 13 billion. Houston wants to add 30 miles to the light rail system here and it's estimated to cost 1.46 Billion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 Yeah they should include a direct route from DC to Cali. Seems kind of pointless if you can't travel across the entire country. I dunno. 3000 miles is an awfully long way. It makes sense to take a plane that far. Even a highspeed train would take 12-15 hours with no stops. What makes no sense is to take a plane from DC to NYC (or Chicago to St Louis or Boston to Philly etc.) when the time for downtown to airport to airport to downtown takes 3 times as long (and causes more traffic) than a direct downtown to downtown highspeed train link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsHokieFan Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 AWESOME!! Who's going to pay for it? I think something like this is worth spending the dough for. Cut out some of that 80 billion dollar DOE budget Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.