4 ms·

> There already is high speed-ish rail travel in the Northeast and it's very popular. But, for example, even if you could magically offer 6-8 hour train service

> There already is high speed-ish rail travel in the Northeast and it's very popular. But, for example, even if you could magically offer 6-8 hour train service between New York and Chicago, relatively few people would take it given that flying would be significantly faster. Texan living in NYC here. I disagree. I would happily pay to take a 6 hour train to Chicago over a flight anyday. LGA/JFK are nightmares to book last minute flights and high-speed rail is a favorable experience to flying sometimes. In contrast, there's no "useful" rail network in Texas — at all. If there was a rail network, like the single-high speed line proposed between Dallas and Houston, it would totally dominate and disrupt. People fly to/from cities in Texas all the time. There are many many cities that would benefit from a rail network because the cost would be considerably lower than flying. If you build it, they will come.

bdickason 10y ago
Also a Texan who lived in NYC :D and now lives in the bay area. I'm constantly amazed that we haven't placed a solid, high speed rail throughout this area. Housing costs are skyrocketing and you have people who work for all ends of the spectrum (Google down to dishwashers) moving away because they can't afford the lifestyle they envision here. Hour long commutes are the norm and every day I see at least one wreck on my way to work. Coming from NYC where you can get anywhere in Manhattan w/in 20 minutes by train.. it's incredibly frustrating. I agree we should also be looking outside of the bay area (connecting cities across America), but also see a pressing need here with a market that would use the rail system like crazy.
D_Alex 10y ago
>if you could magically offer 6-8 hour train service between New York and Chicago You know, that's not terribly fast... 1200 km in 6 hrs, so 200 km/hr. France started operating 320 km/hr trains in 1990's. Do you think people would go by rail if the journey was 4 hours, city center - to - city center?

bdickason 10y ago

Also a Texan who lived in NYC :D and now lives in the bay area. I'm constantly amazed that we haven't placed a solid, high speed rail throughout this area. Housing costs are skyrocketing and you have people who work for all ends of the spectrum (Google down to dishwashers) moving away because they can't afford the lifestyle they envision here. Hour long commutes are the norm and every day I see at least one wreck on my way to work. Coming from NYC where you can get anywhere in Manhattan w/in 20 minutes by train.. it's incredibly frustrating. I agree we should also be looking outside of the bay area (connecting cities across America), but also see a pressing need here with a market that would use the rail system like crazy.

D_Alex 10y ago

>if you could magically offer 6-8 hour train service between New York and Chicago You know, that's not terribly fast... 1200 km in 6 hrs, so 200 km/hr. France started operating 320 km/hr trains in 1990's. Do you think people would go by rail if the journey was 4 hours, city center - to - city center?