4 ms·

Well, as a European, that's actually interesting to compare it to high speed train. Outside the US, high speed train is not only something we can do, it is some

by gutnor 11y ago

Well, as a European, that's actually interesting to compare it to high speed train. Outside the US, high speed train is not only something we can do, it is something already done.

vasilipupkin 11y ago
I am curious to see whether the net benefits have been positive. My understanding even in Europe most of the links are unprofitable. Sure, there are positive externalities that may not be factored into the accounting profits, but there is also opportunity cost of the money. Are there good studies on this ?
- simias 11y ago
  I know that in France the high speed lines connecting areas with high population density like Paris-Marseille or Paris-Lyon are among the most profitable for the SCNF. But of course that's a complex issue, some say that the local service degraded as more resources were diverted to the TGV lines. I can't really imagine that having the center of Marseille 3 hours away from the center of Paris can be a net negative overall. It beats the plane every time, that's for sure.
  - vasilipupkin 11y ago
    why does it beat the plane? the plane is 1hr, the train is 3 ?
    - simias 11y ago
      The airport is not in either city centers, there are more security checks, you have to check your luggage in etc... The door-to-door travel time is significantly more than 1hour for the plane. Also in my experience the TGV is much more comfortable than similarly priced airplane tickets. You can look at the landscape (unless you're traveling by night), you have more room, you can walk around etc...
    - pgeorgi 11y ago
      It takes half an hour from Marseille to its airport. Another hour because you have to be early for check-in and 'security' procedures. Yet more 30 minutes in Paris to get back to the city center (no matter at which airport you land). The high speed train stops right in the city center. So unless one of your endpoints is close to one of the airports it's 3 hours for both of them.
- krschultz 11y ago
  Highways are also not self funding. Note that the Northeast Corridor, the only thing approaching high speed rail in the US, is very profitable. Unfortunately Amtrak then has to take that surplus to subsidize unprofitable routes elsewhere.
  - vasilipupkin 11y ago
    well, some highways are private and self funding. But yeah, even if they are not, the issue is whether to build something in addition to the highways.
Turing_Machine 11y ago
The fastest train time I can find between London and Cologne (almost the same distance as Los Angeles to San Francisco) is 4 hours, 11 minutes, about 130 km/hr or 81 miles/hour. Paris to Nuremberg (also a similar distance) is 9 hours, 53 minutes. Berlin to Stuttgart (within the same country) is 6 hours, 9 minutes.
- koheku 11y ago
  The french TGV will soon take 2 hours and 5 minutes to go from Paris to Bordeaux (567 km). The japanese shinkansen takes 2 hours and 22 minutes to go from Tokyo to Osaka (515 km).
- lmm 11y ago
  Paris to Lyon is a similar (slightly shorter) distance and done in 1:53 (average 208 kph). Beijing to Zhengzhou is slightly further and takes 2:24 (average 304 kph). These are best cases running directly along the high-speed line, but presumably the direct LA-SF service will be one of those too. Edit: the closest comparison distance-wise is probably Barcelona to Madrid; 2:45, average 227kph.
- Turing_Machine 11y ago
  Looking at the French high speed rail system (which is the one we seem to hear the most about in the United States), the longest link I see is 106 km. Los Angeles to San Francisco is 544 km. New York to Los Angeles is about 4,000 km. London to Moscow is only 2,500 km. Edit: the point here is that Europeans, in general, have no conception of the distances involved in the U.S. transportation network. Passenger rail (high speed or otherwise) works well for relatively short distances in relatively densely populated regions. The trouble is that we don't have very many of those regions. Edit 2: so you're moderating down arithmetic now? Awesome.
  - seszett 11y ago
    Where are you looking for these data? The longest link in France is probably Brussels-Montpellier, which is about 850 km. Paris-Nice might be longer than that, though it's very slow after Marseille. There used to be a slow Quimper-Vintimille journey that was more than 1000 km, but it's been significantly shortened since then. Your numbers show you have no conception of the distances involved in Europe. Thinking that the longest train link in France, a country that's 1000 km wide and 1000 km high, is 100 km long is completely ridiculous.
gnoway 11y ago
I've got nothing to back this up, but every high speed train project I've heard of in the US - which is admittedly like 2 or maybe 3 - has failed due to budget mismanagement, politics or both. Do we have any meaningful HSR in this country? This is IMO the biggest issue w/ Hyperloop - budget and/or politics will kill it well before engineering challenges.
- __z 11y ago
  >Do we have any meaningful HSR in this country? We have the Acela which isn't quite high speed rail (it is higher speed rail - up to 150mph in some areas but a lower speed limits in others). The Acela is very popular and actually profitable. The Acela has the potential to improve speeds by improving tracks to be able to accommodate higher speeds safely in places as well as removing the remaining grade crossings and probably more infrastructure to ease some congestion. High speed rail has huge potential in some areas. Hopefully this potential can be realized!
Symmetry 11y ago
The FRA puts out a lot of stupid safety regulations that don't apply in Europe and which make high speed rail much more difficult. US trains have to be built like tanks in the theory that this will help them survive collisions with freight trains. The fast accelerating French trains can't be used on US rail without special permits. https://bikeeastbay.org/rail/fra.html https://bikeeastbay.org/rail/fra.html And for various reasons rail construction in the US costs about 5 times as much as it does in France. And because it costs more we do less of it. The figures below are for subways but I believe long distance rail sees the same effect. https://pedestrianobservations.wordpress.com/2011/05/16/us-rail-construction-costs/ https://pedestrianobservations.wordpress.com/2011/05/16/us-r...

by gutnor 11y ago

Well, as a European, that's actually interesting to compare it to high speed train. Outside the US, high speed train is not only something we can do, it is something already done.

vasilipupkin 11y ago

I am curious to see whether the net benefits have been positive. My understanding even in Europe most of the links are unprofitable. Sure, there are positive externalities that may not be factored into the accounting profits, but there is also opportunity cost of the money. Are there good studies on this ?

simias 11y ago
I know that in France the high speed lines connecting areas with high population density like Paris-Marseille or Paris-Lyon are among the most profitable for the SCNF. But of course that's a complex issue, some say that the local service degraded as more resources were diverted to the TGV lines. I can't really imagine that having the center of Marseille 3 hours away from the center of Paris can be a net negative overall. It beats the plane every time, that's for sure.
- vasilipupkin 11y ago
  why does it beat the plane? the plane is 1hr, the train is 3 ?
  - simias 11y ago
    The airport is not in either city centers, there are more security checks, you have to check your luggage in etc... The door-to-door travel time is significantly more than 1hour for the plane. Also in my experience the TGV is much more comfortable than similarly priced airplane tickets. You can look at the landscape (unless you're traveling by night), you have more room, you can walk around etc...
  - pgeorgi 11y ago
    It takes half an hour from Marseille to its airport. Another hour because you have to be early for check-in and 'security' procedures. Yet more 30 minutes in Paris to get back to the city center (no matter at which airport you land). The high speed train stops right in the city center. So unless one of your endpoints is close to one of the airports it's 3 hours for both of them.
krschultz 11y ago
Highways are also not self funding. Note that the Northeast Corridor, the only thing approaching high speed rail in the US, is very profitable. Unfortunately Amtrak then has to take that surplus to subsidize unprofitable routes elsewhere.
- vasilipupkin 11y ago
  well, some highways are private and self funding. But yeah, even if they are not, the issue is whether to build something in addition to the highways.

Turing_Machine 11y ago

The fastest train time I can find between London and Cologne (almost the same distance as Los Angeles to San Francisco) is 4 hours, 11 minutes, about 130 km/hr or 81 miles/hour. Paris to Nuremberg (also a similar distance) is 9 hours, 53 minutes. Berlin to Stuttgart (within the same country) is 6 hours, 9 minutes.

koheku 11y ago
The french TGV will soon take 2 hours and 5 minutes to go from Paris to Bordeaux (567 km). The japanese shinkansen takes 2 hours and 22 minutes to go from Tokyo to Osaka (515 km).
lmm 11y ago
Paris to Lyon is a similar (slightly shorter) distance and done in 1:53 (average 208 kph). Beijing to Zhengzhou is slightly further and takes 2:24 (average 304 kph). These are best cases running directly along the high-speed line, but presumably the direct LA-SF service will be one of those too. Edit: the closest comparison distance-wise is probably Barcelona to Madrid; 2:45, average 227kph.
Turing_Machine 11y ago
Looking at the French high speed rail system (which is the one we seem to hear the most about in the United States), the longest link I see is 106 km. Los Angeles to San Francisco is 544 km. New York to Los Angeles is about 4,000 km. London to Moscow is only 2,500 km. Edit: the point here is that Europeans, in general, have no conception of the distances involved in the U.S. transportation network. Passenger rail (high speed or otherwise) works well for relatively short distances in relatively densely populated regions. The trouble is that we don't have very many of those regions. Edit 2: so you're moderating down arithmetic now? Awesome.
- seszett 11y ago
  Where are you looking for these data? The longest link in France is probably Brussels-Montpellier, which is about 850 km. Paris-Nice might be longer than that, though it's very slow after Marseille. There used to be a slow Quimper-Vintimille journey that was more than 1000 km, but it's been significantly shortened since then. Your numbers show you have no conception of the distances involved in Europe. Thinking that the longest train link in France, a country that's 1000 km wide and 1000 km high, is 100 km long is completely ridiculous.

gnoway 11y ago

I've got nothing to back this up, but every high speed train project I've heard of in the US - which is admittedly like 2 or maybe 3 - has failed due to budget mismanagement, politics or both. Do we have any meaningful HSR in this country? This is IMO the biggest issue w/ Hyperloop - budget and/or politics will kill it well before engineering challenges.

__z 11y ago
>Do we have any meaningful HSR in this country? We have the Acela which isn't quite high speed rail (it is higher speed rail - up to 150mph in some areas but a lower speed limits in others). The Acela is very popular and actually profitable. The Acela has the potential to improve speeds by improving tracks to be able to accommodate higher speeds safely in places as well as removing the remaining grade crossings and probably more infrastructure to ease some congestion. High speed rail has huge potential in some areas. Hopefully this potential can be realized!

Symmetry 11y ago

The FRA puts out a lot of stupid safety regulations that don't apply in Europe and which make high speed rail much more difficult. US trains have to be built like tanks in the theory that this will help them survive collisions with freight trains. The fast accelerating French trains can't be used on US rail without special permits. https://bikeeastbay.org/rail/fra.html https://bikeeastbay.org/rail/fra.html And for various reasons rail construction in the US costs about 5 times as much as it does in France. And because it costs more we do less of it. The figures below are for subways but I believe long distance rail sees the same effect. https://pedestrianobservations.wordpress.com/2011/05/16/us-rail-construction-costs/ https://pedestrianobservations.wordpress.com/2011/05/16/us-r...