4 ms·

Honestly I'd start with high frequency, non-high-speed rail. With no new track or stations, a lot of routes would be competitive with driving if they just ran m

by gok 7y ago

Honestly I'd start with high frequency, non-high-speed rail. With no new track or stations, a lot of routes would be competitive with driving if they just ran more often and reliably.

tptacek 7y ago
One problem is that the rail routes themselves are incredibly expensive; they involve rights of way through valuable urban land and across multiple states. If you're going to invest billions in new passenger rail routes, you need the ridership to fund it, and if you're running the kinds of routes Amtrak does today (outside of Acela), you're not getting those riders. One reason existing tracks and routes don't run that frequently is that there aren't the passengers to make them worthwhile. Another is that those tracks are also used for freight.
- closeparen 7y ago
  Chicago has existing rail rights of way to several of those places already (Milwaukee and St. Louis routes are both quite popular).
  - tptacek 7y ago
    Yes, I've taken the Amtrak to MKE before. Amtrak doesn't own those tracks. Canadian Pacific does.
- dredmorbius 7y ago
  I'm starting to realise that a major war (and frequently being on the (or a) losing side) is a strong prerequisite for establishing a strong rail network. Otherwise land values rise too high and fast to establish rights of way.
  - gok 7y ago
    The Swiss would disagree, and for that matter what other country hasn't had a major war?
    - dredmorbius 7y ago
      The idea is my own, and not fully rigorous, but there are two general cases for rail infrastructure: de novo development amidst industrialisation, generally lower speed (80 mph max), and post-war (or post-occupation) development and expansion. Note that "prerequisite" != "sufficient requirement", and "strong" == notable, but not essential. Complex systems in reality are multidimensional. The British and US rail systems were developed as industrialisation progressed, notably IR2 (coal, steam, iron) and IR3 (steel, electricity, precision). The US rail system was further developed in the wake of depopulation, genocide, and land appropriation from the indigenous tribal peoples. Governmental land grants to railroads were a major funding mechanism. Development of HSR has tended to be a Post-WWII phenomenon, originating in Japan, then France, Germany, elsewhere in Europe (though generally not the UK), and recently, China. The usual factor cited has been density, which matters. But both national economic policy and rights-of-way acquisition costs are massive factors, which the more free-market, strong-private propert rights regimes of the US and UK resist. Wikipedia's list of HSR systems excludes Switzerland, though lines are presently under construction there (notably GBT): including Belgium, China, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Israel, Italy, Japan, Morocco, The Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Taiwan, the United Kingdom, the United States, Uzbekistan, and Turkey. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-speed_rail https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-speed_rail

by gok 7y ago

Honestly I'd start with high frequency, non-high-speed rail. With no new track or stations, a lot of routes would be competitive with driving if they just ran more often and reliably.

tptacek 7y ago

One problem is that the rail routes themselves are incredibly expensive; they involve rights of way through valuable urban land and across multiple states. If you're going to invest billions in new passenger rail routes, you need the ridership to fund it, and if you're running the kinds of routes Amtrak does today (outside of Acela), you're not getting those riders. One reason existing tracks and routes don't run that frequently is that there aren't the passengers to make them worthwhile. Another is that those tracks are also used for freight.

closeparen 7y ago
Chicago has existing rail rights of way to several of those places already (Milwaukee and St. Louis routes are both quite popular).
- tptacek 7y ago
  Yes, I've taken the Amtrak to MKE before. Amtrak doesn't own those tracks. Canadian Pacific does.
dredmorbius 7y ago
I'm starting to realise that a major war (and frequently being on the (or a) losing side) is a strong prerequisite for establishing a strong rail network. Otherwise land values rise too high and fast to establish rights of way.
- gok 7y ago
  The Swiss would disagree, and for that matter what other country hasn't had a major war?
  - dredmorbius 7y ago
    The idea is my own, and not fully rigorous, but there are two general cases for rail infrastructure: de novo development amidst industrialisation, generally lower speed (80 mph max), and post-war (or post-occupation) development and expansion. Note that "prerequisite" != "sufficient requirement", and "strong" == notable, but not essential. Complex systems in reality are multidimensional. The British and US rail systems were developed as industrialisation progressed, notably IR2 (coal, steam, iron) and IR3 (steel, electricity, precision). The US rail system was further developed in the wake of depopulation, genocide, and land appropriation from the indigenous tribal peoples. Governmental land grants to railroads were a major funding mechanism. Development of HSR has tended to be a Post-WWII phenomenon, originating in Japan, then France, Germany, elsewhere in Europe (though generally not the UK), and recently, China. The usual factor cited has been density, which matters. But both national economic policy and rights-of-way acquisition costs are massive factors, which the more free-market, strong-private propert rights regimes of the US and UK resist. Wikipedia's list of HSR systems excludes Switzerland, though lines are presently under construction there (notably GBT): including Belgium, China, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Israel, Italy, Japan, Morocco, The Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Taiwan, the United Kingdom, the United States, Uzbekistan, and Turkey. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-speed_rail https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-speed_rail