Did Florida get something right? High Speed rail service thriving

[+ azdr0710]

Only when we get the population density of Europe will train travel be viable in the US. Those few areas of the US already with that density have successful train operations. It's a nice dream, but geography, economics, and selfish Americans doom it. 

[mike carey]

7 hours ago, azdr0710 said:

Only when we get the population density of Europe will train travel be viable in the US. Those few areas of the US already with that density have successful train operations. It's a nice dream, but geography, economics, and selfish Americans doom it. 

At the risk of deviating from 'Florida' and 'high speed rail' I've seen two things that could foreshadow some changes even in the US (although between some intermediate city pairs not cross-country, and I'm not holding my breath!). In Europe night trains are making a comeback with, for example ÖBB starting Berlin-Paris and Vienna-Brussels services (they cross in Mannheim and carriages are swapped between the two trains giving passengers the option of Berlin-Brussels and Vienna-Paris}, and Eurostar is running London-Switzerland ski trains, admittedly with an across-the-platform change in Lille, to allow people to avoid flying. The second data point is the recent upsurge in demand for the two daily Sydney-Melbourne trains which have a sleeper option on the night one. No extra services so far, but they have added carriages on some occasions.

[+ tassojunior]

10 hours ago, pubic_assistance said:

The lack of rail service in the United States is becoming a real problem. Airports are completely overwhelmed. Flights are packed-tight like cans of tuna, and check in at most any airport is a humilating experience.

Traveling by rail in Europe is a joyful break from all the misery of US travel that forces you to fly instead of having a rail option..

but population in Europe is dropping fast. 

[+ tassojunior]

On 8/12/2023 at 5:38 PM, samhexum said:

Could somebody please explain to me why kiddie docs are so vulnerable?

you've obviously never been to a pediatrician in Florida.

 lol- seriously it s total of 30 people- maybe one SUV with 6 pediatricians

[+ tassojunior]

On 9/3/2023 at 1:21 PM, EZEtoGRU said:

All true.  Plus real high speed rail has little interaction with road traffic.  It goes either above or below the roads to maximize speed and safety.  That would be prohibitively expensive to build in today's world in the US.  

medians should be free but anyway the Japanese company proposes to build and finance the system themselves. Problem is you get into vested interests of rail unions, AMTRAK, even "smarter growth" people employed by lobbyists or rail and the companies whohave captive control of the the Transportation Dept. 

I think transit and pollution both would benefit a lot by having a super high-speed, even an expensive, fast link between Dulles, DCA, BWI, PHL, EWR, and maybe LGA/JFK. It's amazing how many air travelers fly between those airports and it's substantial numbers of connections. IAD or DCA to PHL in 25 minutes or NYC in an hour will never happen by traditional rail and traditional rail made a little  faster will not take more of the market than it has from air. .But the vested financial interests will veto like everything else.  

[+ Vegas_Millennial]

On 12/23/2023 at 8:14 AM, azdr0710 said:

Only when we get the population density of Europe will train travel be viable in the US. Those few areas of the US already with that density have successful train operations. It's a nice dream, but geography, economics, and selfish Americans doom it. 

Train travel in the U.S. was quite popular in the 1940s.  People regularly traveled all over California and the West via train when it was much more sparsely populated than it is today.  It's not that Europe has more density than the U.S, it's that the U.S. has more travel options with a great Interstate Hghway System and lots of airports.  As roads become more congested and flying becomes less of a luxury and more onerous, train travel will once again become popular.

[EZEtoGRU]

I took Brightline from Miami to Ft. Lauderdale last week.  My Premium ticket cost $32.  A Premium Class ticket entitles you to an Uber ride to your departing station and from your arriving station (I think there is a five mile limit for each segment).  I made use of Uber on both ends with the costs being fully covered by Brightline.  According to their calculations, the Uber costs were just over $30.  If this is accurate, that means my resulting train fare in Premium Class was $2.  BTW, the Premium ticket entitled me to an alcoholic beverage and a small snack (potato chips and a candy bar).  I declined both but I could have had them if I wanted.  How is Brightline making any money?  I'd be interested in seeing their financials.  Who is funding this project?

FWIW, the train seemed only about 10% full on this segment.  After Lauderdale, my train was stopping in Palm Beach and then Orlando.  This was my 4th time on Brightline and none of the trips have been very full.  I hope they can make a go of this...but I really wonder.

[samhexum]

 

Biden looking to revive interest in Texas bullet train project

[+ sniper]

Again,  NEW trains are almosr inpossible to put anywhere someone wants them because we ripped up a lot of the old tracks and put up buildings and roads all over then routes. Building a mile of new track might entail buyimg out a couple hundred million worth of real estate and THEN having to tear it down before you've actually built anything. Now multiply that by the number of miles long a route needs to be for it to make sense.

These other countries with good systems built the cities around the rails, not the other way around. You can't get there from here. We'd be better off subsidizing bus travel and making it appealing to get more cars off the road.

[samhexum]

2 hours ago, sniper said:

We'd be better off subsidizing bus travel and making it appealing to get more cars off the road.

Unless the buses are RVs carrying only people traveling together, people are never going to travel long distances by bus in sufficient numbers for that to work.

[+ Vegas_Millennial]

11 hours ago, sniper said:

These other countries with good systems built the cities around the rails, not the other way around.

Actually, it was the other way around.  European cities we established before railroads.  Railroads had to be brought into the centers of European cities by eminent domain or underground tunnels.  In the U.S., most Midwestern and Western cities built up around a railroad.  Major East Coast cities had the train brought in through tunnels and expensive land purchases.

[+ BenjaminNicholas]

I don't see Brightline doing well at the moment, as ridership is low and they're offering a lot of incentives (free ubers to/from) to get people to ride.  

The last few times I've been on it, the trains have been pretty empty.  

I hope that changes.  It was a huge amount of money and a lot of other train projects hinge on it doing well.

[samhexum]

 

California mocked over $11 billion high-speed rail bridge to nowhere that took 9 years to build

$100 billion high speed rail boondoggle reportedly in danger of being scrapped.

 

[samhexum]

On 12/16/2023 at 5:13 PM, SouthOfTheBorder said:

It’s not high speed compared to European or Japanese bullet trains.  As others have mentioned, it’s because of the dozens & dozens of roads that cross the existing tracks.  There have been many deaths because of those trains.  It’s better than nothing tho. Yes, impossible to build real high-speed rail in the US now

 

On 12/23/2023 at 6:52 PM, mike carey said:

At the risk of deviating from 'Florida' and 'high speed rail' I've seen two things that could foreshadow some changes even in the US (although between some intermediate city pairs not cross-country, and I'm not holding my breath!). In Europe night trains are making a comeback 

• Nicole Gelinas 

  Don't romanticize Europe's unreliable high-speed rail

  With Paris closed this vacation season for the Olympics, what could be more fun for a train-lover like me than riding Europe’s reliable high-speed trains across the rest of the continent?

  Instead of enjoying spontaneous, easy travel, though, I’m getting an education.

  It turns out, one reason high-speed rail “works” in Europe is that its customers will put up with inconvenience and uncertainty that Americans would never tolerate.

  Germany’s Deutsche Bahn ICE — intercity express — trains seemed like a great place to start: The country has several cities a few hours away from each other, and a short ride from other European capitals as well.

  And the Germans must apply their world-famous precision to DB, the largest global railway, no?

  The German system, more than three decades old, rivals France’s high-speed lines for global status among railfans.

  The first ICE trip I take — a two-hour jaunt from Brussels to Cologne — goes well enough, although not without an ominous sign: It’s 10 minutes late departing and a few minutes late arriving, with no explanation.

  It’s most unlike the Japanese train company that, a few years ago, apologized for departing a few seconds early.

  But what should have been a four-hour journey from Cologne to Hamburg is a katastrophe.

  We arrive at the station and check the departure board; our train is nowhere to be found.

  It finally pops up, listed as about to leave five minutes late, and then 10 minutes late, and then 15 minutes late.

  Good thing I splurged the extra $60 or so for the first-class carriage, to relax in the DB Lounge for a bit.

  (That, and not sitting on top of strangers, is the only benefit you get in first class.)

  But no — the lounge is being “fixed,” replaced by a temporary lounge in a separate building that’s a 10-minute walk from the station.

  Unlike New York’s Penn Station, DB offers no waiting-room seating for passengers who wisely haven’t paid for the closed lounge, so you just stand around in the heat and noise.

  Finally, we get going.

  But the on-board screen — with no acknowledgement by train staff — informs us that our arrival will be 20 minutes late.

  Then 30.

  Then 40.

  Then an hour and five minutes.

  Then two hours.

  Then close to 2½ hours.

  A four-hour trip has turned into a nearly seven-hour odyssey.

  The only thing we get for this, the on-board café manager informs us, is free water.

  Not the chilled bubbly water that costs $4, but a warm box of water.

  Worse, the train silently takes on a mind of its own.

  It skips an important stop, causing people to miss a Berlin connection.

  It adds suburban stops, making us later.

  It terminates short of its scheduled final stop, so people heading there must find alternative transit.

  The strangest part is that nobody on board questions any of this.

  If Amtrak’s four-hour Acela train from New York to Boston were to run nearly three hours late — and, in decades of regular Acela trips, I’ve never had such an experience — passengers would demand an explanation.

  Why is the train delayed?

  Broken track, operator shortage, weather, sick passenger . . .  give us a reason.

  But the weather has been perfect for days, and not a single reason is proffered.

  People accept this tardiness and diversion as normal.

  Yet a delayed, rerouted train is better than no train.

  Part of the fun of a rail-based vacation is that you don’t have to plan; when you’ve seen enough of one city, book passage to the next one.

  Nope: For three days straight, all trains from Hamburg to Denmark’s Copenhagen are booked.

  Our various legs of the journey also demonstrate that efficient, cheap rail travel requires packing people into cramped, uncomfortable spaces, to a degree that’s uncommon at home.

  Eurostar from London to Brussels crowds its ticketed passengers into a sweltering waiting room with inadequate seats (at least there are seats).

  An hour-long commuter-rail trip from Brussels to the medieval Belgian town of Bruges I had dinner there one night in 1990 is mostly spent standing in unventilated heat.

  Passengers open windows for DIY ventilation, so it’s also deafening.

  Things are no better in Italy, the European newspapers report, with vacationers complaining of long delays and crowding.

  Long-distance rail has its place in the transportation system, of course, in both Europe and the United States. Acela service has improved East Coast travel, for example.

  But high-speed rail is never going to rival the car for flexibility and cost on medium-length trips, or the plane for speed and cost on longer ones. 

  If you’re able-bodied and non-elderly, and don’t have children to attend to, relying on rail may be a bemusing adventure.

  But it’s easy to see why most Europeans take summer trips by air (54%) and car (28%); only 10% rely on rails.

  Unless two seats open up on a train from Hamburg to Copenhagen soonish, I’ll be joining them.

  Nicole Gelinas is a contributing editor to the Manhattan Institute’s City Journal.

 

 

Edited August 11 by samhexum
to ensure maximum delight for the reader!

[BSR]

3 hours ago, samhexum said:

But it’s easy to see why most Europeans take summer trips by air (54%) and car (28%); only 10% rely on rails.

I never understood the love affair with trains.  For a family of four, driving is so much cheaper.  Air is so much faster.  At least in Spain, the government keeps throwing good money after bad, pouring €billions more into the high-speed rail system which has already lost €billions.  Yet everyone sees el AVE as the nation's pride & joy, with no significant opposition to this boondoggle.

Interesting stats on what mode of transport Europeans actually take.  As much as they say they love trains, their actions speak louder than words.

[Johnrom]

I would love to take the Amtrak trains more.  But they priced themselves out of the market.  And their timing and reliability has  gotten worse over time.  I prefer to drive too or take a bus which is more cost effective and very convenient too.  

[ericwinters]

12 hours ago, Johnrom said:

I would love to take the Amtrak trains more.  But they priced themselves out of the market.  And their timing and reliability has  gotten worse over time.  I prefer to drive too or take a bus which is more cost effective and very convenient too.  

The only Amtrak service I enjoy and rely on is Acela from Boston to DC with stops in NYC and Philly. I sure wish there was Acela when I was in college! I'm in TexAss now, and Amtrack is sparse to nonexistent. Progressives keep talking about semi-high-speed rail between major cities, but that is decades away if it ever happens.

[pubic_assistance]

18 hours ago, BSR said:

I never understood the love affair with trains. 

For short distances in Europe, the train makes total sense. Renting a car is more expensive and parking in densely populated European cities is always a lesson in frustration. Most trains drop you right in the center of town where you want to be...unlike air travel (also much more expensive ) which drops you miles from your destination and you're going to need to jump on a train anyway .

Edited August 12 by pubic_assistance

[+ BenjaminNicholas]

Euro trains are hit or miss, but still better than what we have in the States.

Asian train systems are brilliant.  They are the epitome of what things can be when you have a society who think about the greater whole of society versus just themselves.

The Florida system is still figuring out their ridership.  I assume the same will happen with Brightline when they open on the West Coast (LA to LV).  Americans need more time to adopt and adapt.  It is what it is.