Love this line:

"[T]he benefits from less car and airplane travel will make up for 150% of the construction costs in 15 years of operation."

What benefits are those exactly?

Followed by this:

"Best of all, the system will be so fast that for many of the routes, it could get you there quicker than an airline could, for less money."

Really? Because tax-payer subsidized slow poke Amtrack is what, cheap?

GWoM (Gigantic Waste of Money)

We need high-speed trains that connect Atlanta, DC, NYC, Boston, Chicago, Houston, Albuquerque, Denver, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, San Diego, and Seattle (And points in between).

I hope I live to see it.

Why is it that everyone seems to forget that, contrary to popular belief, Acela is not a high-speed rail train when using the definition of HSR SNCF seems to go by. This map doesn't even include a 220 mph train between Washington and Boston. What, have we forgotten one of the only Amtrak routes that economically pays for itself? Other than maybe the California HSR project, the rest of these seem to be pittences in comparison to what a 220 mph train running on the NEC would bring.

Question: Amtrack is government funded, and operated. They have been operating in the red for 20 years. Why give the government an opportunity to screw something new up until they fix what they have?

Mycroft,

Given the security measures and other boarding procedures for most airlines, door-to-door time for short routes is indeed less for rail (This is true for many short hops here in India). High speed rail makes this true for longer routes as well. Plus they are likely be less polluting and cheaper than air-fare.

monorail monorail monorail...

Uh oh, someone forgot to let Mycroft in on the little not-so-secret that the glorious taxpayers have been heavily subsidizing the airline and automotive industries since way before he was born.

why do none of you understand how far ahead Europe is!? I didn't actually realize it until I visited 5 European countries this year.
The problem here is that we want our Hummers and Escalades so that we can drive ourself around and we wanna fly everywhere because we DESERVE IT.. We are Americans and we wanna do everything backwards because we wanna do what we wanna do and we don't know how to do anything right. Not only is mass transit actually cheaper and better for the environment but it is better for your mental health. This entire year I have not had a car, and I will let you know my stress levels have decreased greatly. I don't have to wait in traffic, worry about getting hit, cry when I have to see the low fuel light and realized I have to give my left arm, don't pay car insurance, pay for upkeep, pay for registration and emissions, etc etc etc. When I goto school and work I either ride my bike(exercise and trasnportation in one) or ride my bike to a bus and then bike the rest of the way. This basically gets me anywhere in the city or surrounding cities here in Phoenix.
The only thing I have prayed for since coming home from Europe is High Speed Trains. I know it is possible and it works. I went from Paris France to Rome Italy for roughly $76 and we went from Italy to Greece by train, boat, train, bus train for about $45-50. Paris to Rome is about from Phoenix to Seattle for 75 dolalrs is cheap. No waiting in lines, going through tons of security, etc. They are very effective, very fast, people aren't afraid of crashing, etc. I really wish we had them. I would like to hop on a train to LA, San Diego, Vegas, etc and get there quickly, have room, do my work or read a book, or what not, and not pay 3-400 dollars for the round trip. I think when and if we were to get better mass transit, buses and light rail included, also improving the sidewalks to provide for better bike and foot traffic, we might have a healthier lifestyle if we implemented some of these things.

Just my opinion but I am tired of deserving everything and having to do nothing physical or mental anymore.

If we keep following those people who do wanna not be physical or mental because we have great technology and everything should be done for us.. we all die. And hopefully soon. Grow up people and actually think about things. Have respect, and rational thinking, have work ethic, etc.

Ugh

Their map looks much more sensible than the map the Federal Railroad Administration has been operating with.

Each one of these things costs as much as a four lane divided highway and they go right to the middle of town---so, not cheap. But affordable. We could build one a month for the cost of our wars.

Once again I remind everyone of the two reasons why we don't have these trains already:

1) Small commuter airlines actively lobby against them when ever they get far enough for a funding measure on a ballot somewhere.

2) The population density in the U.S. (especially west of the Mississippi) is so much lower than that of Europe that these trains haven't been that feasible until the prices for aviation and automotive gas spiked.

My point is, if you really want these trains (and good mass transit in general) prove it the next time you're in the voting booth!

Finally, to bad it takes a French company to get the ball rolling.

Going by the map, that looks like a good idea, though it could definitely be expanded.

While it's true that, until the middle of the country gets a much larger population we're not gonna have high-speed train networks connecting every major city throughout the country connecting the cities on the coasts to each other and connecting areas with large population centers, like in Texas, or even extending a line to Denver is a good idea and one that's feasible.

SustainUS - If you like Europe so much...move.

As people have pointed out, Amtrak is government owned, and they lose more money every year. Why let them control a bigger train network, when they cant manage what they have right now.

For most Americans is all about freedom. and vehicles give you just that, You dont have to go only where the tracks run, or the bus routes. You can go where ever you want, when ever you want, no question asked.

Cars and trucks will continue to be the US's #1 preferred mode of transportation for the foreseeable future.

Plus, its only around a decade away before cars will be able to drive themselves to your destination...so you can relax or work, until you arrive at your destination.

I don't see a map and a promise of sustainable systems that offer "benefits" that "make up for 150% of the construction costs in 15" as a business model. The government is not a transportation company. There is only one thing the government does well, and that is provide armed forces. Well, you can call taxation a government service that works. There is a reason that Hoover ran on a platform to reduce waste, fraud and inefficiencies from government. It is because that is the nature of all human government, to be wasteful, fraudulent, and inefficient. You cannot force human society to be a utopian society. We are humans, not utopians. Dystopians, maybe, given the opportunity to live without boundaries. A human government will always embody human stupidity and amplify it, not eliminate it.

I live near Oxford, UK, and even including catching the train into London and changing to the Eurostar connection from St Pancras, it's as quick to Paris than plane.

But the main kicker is the pleasure of the journey - these high speed trains are as near to a magic carpet as most of us are likely to get.

To put it another way: my first Eurostar trip in 1996 marked the last time I bothered to fly this route.

Oops, I meant to say: "it's as quick to Paris as catching a plane".

In fact, I just noticed that new Eurostar timetables mean that my next trip in a couple weeks should be comfortably quicker.

And for Paris anyway, I arrive in the middle of where I want to be, not at an airport many miles away.

the TGV is more like 320 km/h than 340 mp/h

Re:Big plans for 220mph trains could forever change the way Americans travel.Sadly, all of this movement to high speed rail, will leave us here in Tennessee, like a 3rd world country, when it comes to passenger rail. Chicago to Florida via Nashville. Last train 1976 ! We would be elated here in Nashville, if we could have train service with the breath taking speed of just 80mph. Nashville to Atlanta just over 3 hours. Wow. that would beat flying from here. City centre to City centre, no TSA,no getting to the airport 2 hours ahead of the flight.Comfortable seats, AC outlets at the seats, coffee shop and restaurant,,, to be able to leave your seat, work, relax, and be connected to the rest of Amtrak and Atlanta airport to catch flights overseas. We would think we had died and gone to heaven. Back to reality. It will never happen here. Tennesse and the " Powers that be " Didn't even bother to submit a request for any of the stimulus money, to tempt Amtrak back here. Heads buried in the sand as usual.We can't get there from here !

oke this is retarded bit in a good way...

it's nice that you amaricans want to do someting else besides drive cars , büt like withe everything you guis do ,you want to do good but inenverterably do do a wrong !!!

same here...

you had loads of rail in the past , then neglekted it , and now you want to reinstate it.... withe oudated rail technologie...

and yes i say outdated , and you would say "but it's the state of the art highspeed train you guis use in europe" and yes i would stil say outdated !!

look at the german maglev train , and oke not many are running it .... you know why ???

yes they say it's expensive , but so is a tgv train setup , and to be honest , in the long run magleve is far cheaper....

why ???

whel becouse maglev has far les maintanance then a tgv style train systhem....

there are fewere waring parts , and you can go much faster....

and the cost , whel that's an excuse the train companies use over here....

why ??

whel becouse france has invested loads of money in making it's fast train systhem and it's boycoting al the other countries ....

so rather then other countries taking up maglev , and france ditshing it's tracks and relaying them withe maglev , we are so wusses to take in withe france and go withe someting they have a monopely on ....

wich for me is like totaly wrong ... it's blackmail at the higest order....

now back to the us , you guis have far les rail in use then we have , and you guis have far graiter dictances to travel , thus paying for those les maintanace cost in the long run....

you guis could put in a maglev sythem , be the world leader , and it would take les adapting then the whole of europe.... and it would be more kost effective...

and now your proposing tgv tipe trains ???

pleaze kick some frensh but and dont buy that stuf , go german , go maglev !!!

America will be changing in decades to come. Think it through. Fuel sources will be changing from fossil to electric. Will our nation be ready? Here's a bit more from a recent editorial I've written, if you care to read it. Mike

Is High Speed Rail (HSR) a good investment for the future?
Americans have talked about energy independence, green house gas emissions, and transportation woes for decades now – yet we still import more oil than at any other time in our history, exhaust greater amounts of CO2 into our atmosphere, and spend more time struggling to get from point A to B.
In the not to distant future, our way of life may change in dramatic ways that few can imagine.
Oil is a dwindling supply. We depend on it for everything from plastic bags to jet fuel. Any economist will tell you that as supplies get smaller, prices go higher. Our hopes are that alternate energy will be developed in time to offset the loss of fossil fuel. The problem is this: Most of the emerging supplies (wind, solar, nuclear, bio) will create electricity, not gas or diesel. Finding ways to get from A to B on electric supplies will have profound effects on our current fleet of vehicles and airline industry.
Emitting huge quantities of greenhouse gas into our atmosphere is a fool’s errand. Whether you believe in global warming or not doesn’t really matter anymore. Most scientists agree were close to the tipping point of polluting ‘too much’. If you believe them, then action is long overdue. If you don’t, and you’re wrong, we’re all screwed if we do nothing, and if you hedge your bet and change your behavior, you’ll be out very little. The smart move here is to reduce CO2 emissions and pray it’s not too late, or at the very worst, not needed, but still a good thing to do.
America spends more and more time trapped in our autos, watching the rear bumper of the guy ahead of us. Sure, we’ve transformed our cars into dens and breakfast nooks, filled with gadgets to make the time go by, but there we sit, poking along. Flying is no bargain, requiring a strip search for the privilege of being packed into a tiny seat for an expensive trip to Portland. Driving eats away at your being able to read a good book on the way, or take a nap.
So what’s an alternative? High Speed Rail is looking pretty good at this point.
Train routes are the most logical mode to electrify as fuel sources change in years to come. Electric trains are far more efficient at moving goods and people than planes or cars (USDOT).
Trains, either clean diesel or electric emit much less CO2 per passenger mile than either planes or cars (EPA).
Trains are a great way to relax, sight see, meet new people, or just nap while being transported from city center to city center. Public transit is getting much better to begin and end your journey for many of the trips we now make. HSR trains, with competitive fares, can operate without public subsidy when systems are completed (WSDOT, HSR, Long Range Plan).
The choice is ours to make. Continue massive public investments into freeways and airports, or continue to develop HSR corridors. Our own Cascade Corridor could link Eugene, Portland, Seattle and

So, multiply the construction costs by 10 and cut the recoup cost by 4 and you have what it will REALLY cost to build this.

As much as I like riding for pleasure on trains, a high speed rail system for the US is an enormous waste of money unless and until the population density of the USA approaches that of Western Europe. Until then, the personal automobile is the best form of transportation for trips under 200 miles and the airplane the best for longer distances. The trillion dollars or so it would take to build a high speed rail network is better spent on improving the efficiency and automation of the personal car. Make 'em electric, make 'em smaller, and make 'em robotic. What problem doesn't that solve?

Dagny Taggart LIVES!!!

They really need to connect the East Coast to the Mid-West.

I like this idea, but, as one person put it, it needs to be expanded. Connect the regions on the above map by on line, to be a good alternative to air travel. I also agree this country needs more rail travel, esp in large, developing urban areas. I live in Ft Worth, TX, and we need an expansion project on one of our freeways that is projected to cost $13 Billion, but there is no money aviailable to do it. There is talk of adding rail service on existing lines, and building new rails is a lot cheaper that six or eight lanes of roadway. Albequerqe and Sante Fe New Mexico just built a line between the two cities, and they are not all that big. They had a need and they filled it.

We need more trains.

I grew up in Arkansas. I love my car. Its not like in DC, where i currently live, where you can only get the metro at certain times. I loved being able to jump in my car and go where ever i want, when ever I want. I can see a rail system connecting the largest cities in the US but I think it would cost too much.
And I agree with the idea of a maglev instead. They are faster and, I think, would be greener. I made a model maglev in my HS - Undergraduate years. I like that system the best.

They have been talking about this for twenty years. Back when I worked as an Intern for the City of HB and Santa Ana, they were all about this. They were sure it would be finished by 2005. Too many politicians with egos the size of Rhode Island made it stand still. I doubt it will ever get done.

They have been talking about this for twenty years. Back when I worked as an Intern for the City of HB and Santa Ana, they were all about this. They were sure it would be finished by 2005. Too many politicians with egos the size of Rhode Island made it stand still. I doubt it will ever get done.

I've never understood the people that get all bent out of shape about how trains are government-supported. But roads are free? Hardly. Roads are incredibly expensive to build and maintain and we've seen no problem with government--via our tax money--footing the bill for them (except for the occasional toll-road).

And Amtrak is cheap when compared to the cost of you driving the same route yourself. Not just the gas, but the wear on your car, oil, tires, etc. The government currently values this "wear and tear" cost (+ gas) at something like 45 cents a mile.

AND, when you add in the whole idea of being able to *do* something during the trip, like check email, make calls, read, or even sleep, the nonmonetary value of the train goes up and up. (Not to mention the environmental benefits, which most nay-sayers don't even want to hear about...)

Need one down the whole eastern seaboard. Hop on in Miami, get off in NY.

We would have already had this had not Rockefeller and Ford bought off congress in the late 1800's and early 1900's and forcefully persuaded them to go with the gasoline engine and automobiles...this won't work unless we ban cars from cities along the route, which we all know, isn't going to happen. It's nice t dream, though...SyFy...just imagine...

I, too, have experienced the joy of Europe's train system. In a heartbeat I would give up my car if the 'viva la revolucion' politicians in Miami would build mass transit that actually transports the masses from where they are to where they want to go reliably and safely.

For those commenters who have repeated the talking points in use since Reagan, the subsidy costs for functional train service are quite reasonable compared to the subsidies being paid for highways, cars, airports, and planes.

What European train systems have returned to the governments that support them is reduced auto traffic, allowing for less highway construction and maintenance, less pollution, less fuel use, and more choices allowing people to get around faster.

Instead of repeating the tired old talking points, try doing a little research, or even do something as radical as traveling in places that have functional train service, or talking to people who have had that experience.

For those saying the US doesn't have the population density for rail, the areas to be served by these proposed lines is very high. The population density of Ohio, for example, is higher than the population density of France, home of the TGV. So the density is there.

Murc sayeth: "SustainUS - If you like Europe so much...move." Good grief. It is patriotic to see where our nation could improve. Over 36 countries have longer life expectancies than the U.S. Is that hate speech? No, it is a desire for the U.S. to be #1. Same here - if some other place is doing something better, and we want the U.S. to be #1, then we need to honestly look at ourselves.

"Captain, we should be like other ships and change course to avoid that ice berg!"

" If you like the other ships so much...jump ship."

"No, it is because I love this ship so much!"

"A patriot loves his ship no mat..." Crrrrunch. "Huh? How did that happen?!"

This is coming late in the conversation but I have a few points to make......
1. For all those living down in Miami.....how much is it going to cost to repair the system after each Hurricane comes through?? Maybe the HSR or Maglev should end in Tallahassee since it seems that it takes less damage per decade. But then again if it did go all the way to Miami it would make getting to Disney World a whole lot easier to get too from N.Y. if the line went all the way down the coast that is.
2. The HSR.....IF used properly could re-invigorate our country if we went and put a line running from coast to coast. 1 line running from N.Y. to Seattle & another running from Atlanta to Ca. Think of all the transporting of goods that would take soooo much less time in transit &/also if you put a couple of HSR cars (or Maglev) to transport the Human types you could also do what Amtrak is already doing and pulling double duty.
3. If we Americans build it and not a French company.....we might just be able to do what the Gov. tries to do all the time, No I don't mean keep the poor man poor & the rich rich, I mean create new jobs. We could put wind farms near the most used rails to collect & "farm" the wind from each train. <---This idea is from going through Denver’s airport on their trams (of course this would only be feasible in an area of mass use). The HSR would create a new set of crews the go around and inspect the systems to make sure "Everything" is fine and running smoothly. We could build our own trains (everyone’s always ripping off the US anyway so why not do it to someone else [or Country]). Oh, I know why we don't want to build our own trains.....our Country hasn't built QUALITY ANYTHING in years & the HSR or Maglev would take QUALITY parts not throw away parts.
4. For all those eco-friendly tree-hugging folks out there....come up with a NEW LUBRICANT that isn't based in oil & you'll be on your way to a new mode of life. I for one haven't seen anything on different forms of lubricants, everything I can think of is OIL BASED.....from 10W-40 to plastic bushings to grease. Anything that’s got moving parts needs to be lubed so how come the tree-huggers haven't been complaining about that??? They always bitch about gas, logging, or dead animals that people wear or that Presidents swat. So tree-huggers (I mean that in the most slanderous way possible) do your duty & come up with something, don't just complain about it anymore.
5. As far as these people talking about the HSR not having TSA people....hahahaha you actually think that the Gov. won't put something in place to monitor and curb would be Terrorist or would be (wanna-be's) gangsters/thieves from trying to hijack or crash something that’s going over 200Mph into a densely populated city??? We should do what the Middle-East does and make it to were you get "scanned" before you even enter the building thereby reducing the chances of someone destroying something that would help our Country out.
6. We don't need another Country showing up and building something and taking our money to another Country. All that’s going to do is make our "PRESIDENT (hahaha)" print more and make our money go down in value even more.

I'm really surprised that so many of the readers here are backwards. Usually we're a progressive bunch that welcome new (especially good) ideas. The US could benefit from a great public transportation system. Please think about it before arguing against the helpful suggestions of others.

Money TAX MONEY!!: As cars become more efficient and we burn less gas and travel fewer miles in our cars and trucks all States are finding it harder to get the road tax revenue that is needed to maintain the highway and bridge systems that we all drive on.
THE NEXT TAX WILL BE ON MILEAGE. Florida is already talking about this and as cars guzzle less and less gas the states have to get new tax revenue from somewhere. As these taxes start to take effect more and more drivers will opt to drive fewer miles and then the HSR system will be the transit system that we will need to truly clean up our countries air and it will truly be a grand future we leave our children.

dancesonsnow: "My point is, if you really want these trains (and good mass transit in general) prove it the next time you're in the voting booth!"

dosent matter, we voted for it in florida and the govt told us we weren't allowed to have it.

I wish people will stop arguing about who wants it more and who deserves it more.

Really, this is a good idea, and I hope that this could be the standard for long-range transportation.

I wish people would stop calling this a good idea. This is a stupid idea.

It annoys me at the small number of people who have mentioned MAGLEV trains in here but even those that did missed out on the biggest advantage... yes the environment is important and the trains are way faster and quieter than the TGV HSR trains and insanely cheaper to run and operate, but everyone seems to be missing the largest difference between the USA and Europe, and why HSR will not succeed in the USA...

People hate to die. If you think at-grade HSR systems will work, just google the slower "amtrak + death" and see what your search engine spits out. Maglevs are not at-grade, they travel above traffic so they will never collide with a bus full of school children. Maglevs are wrapped around a track so they can never derail.

Over 900 people die ever year on or having contact with a train. If these tracks were raised and the trains couldn't derail this death toll would drop to nearly nothing.

I have followed the success of the shangai maglev and look forward to visiting southern California if they ever get theirs built... http://www.scag.ca.gov/Maglev/

Those of you in the majority who think that HSR is the way to go should have read a school report I did on Amtrak subsidies... I concluded that the USA government was paying roughly $1 million dollars per person that amtrak killed whether in a derailment or by colliding with other vehicles. It was a hefty price for population control, and still is. The last nnumbers I saw had that subsidy down to almost $100,000 per death.

And you want more at-grade trains and you want them to go faster?

Those who bemoan government subsidies of mass transit would change their song if forced to pay tolls to finance construction and maintenance of vast road and street system they take for granted.

Dear Mycroft:

For the rest of your life please do us all a favor and:
*Drive only on roads built without government funding or subsidies.
*Ride only in automobiles designed without government funded research, propelled by fuels developed and brought to market without government subsidy or research.
*Ride only in airplanes etc, etc, etc.

The rest of us will work on building the future.

Thank you

A few comments on what I read:

"the TGV is more like 320 km/h than 340 mp/h."

You are right 320 km/h is the regular operating speed, but the the 340 mp/h is probably referring to the TGV speed record 574 km/h = 356 mph (without people and on a new track).

Concerning the amtrak, I can understand that it fails...I saw it around san diego (where I live). It is sooooo slow !! When you see that it takes 2h40 minutes to go from San Diego to LA why would you take it !! 2H40 it is the time it took us on the TGV during our Honey Moon to go from Paris to Avignon (429 miles and 6h of driving on the freeway...). You can't compare the Amtrak to real Train !! I love train and I would take the TGV but taking the Amtrak no way !!

Shane, perhaps you should google "automobile" + "death".

TGV and European high speed trains are on their own grade separated dedicated rights of way.
The cost to build a line like this from NYC to LA or Seattle would be enormous. The major problem are the two mountain ranges that have to be crossed. $6 TRILLION minimum.

Now let's say we are going to build a new HSR line between Chicago and St. Louis, or Cleveland and Cincinnati.
Step one, environmental impact studies and assessments. Two, Right of way acquisition. Three, Construction at the cost of probably $2 million per mile. Four, fighting Nimby and environmental lawsuits, and political meddling, during the ten years of steps one and two.

Amtrak. It owns only the Northeast Corridor between Boston and D.C. It can make its operating costs on this route, that is it earns enough passenger revenue to pay for the costs of its crews, fuel, dispatching, etc. What it does not recover hardly any of its costs on is the maintenance of its R.O.W. , structures(stations, car and locomotive shops), cars and locomotives. Additionally cars, locomotives, track, ties and bridges all wear out and need to be repaired and replaced. This is where the major government subsidy is necessary to the tune of $1-2 billion dollars a year just for the NEC.
Everywhere else Amtrak operates over the private freight railroads.

This year the federal Highway Trust Fund, paid for with the federal 18.4 cent per gallon gas tax, is running at an $8 billion dollar deficit. The tax hasn't been raised in 15 years. It is a user fee and if it were raised by 5 cents and then indexed to inflation it does cover all federal highway construction and maintenance. BTW, some of the gas tax money is currently diverted to pay for things like urban light rail and bike paths.

I agree that maglev sounds like the way to go though I am not convinced how successful any sort of rail will be. So if I lived in San Francisco and caught this train to Los Angeles, then what? Other than maybe downtown I am still stranded without transportation to get me around. Also, which would be safer? This version, a monorail version or a maglev version? Remember here in Cali we get a lot of earthquakes and the idea of flying on a train doing 100+ mph when a large earthquake hits doesn't really excite me.

Thank god we have some smart people posting on this...some people turn everything into a political argument...I wouldn't mind having my taxes spent on health care and AWESOME things like these..

Look Folks, there are a couple things people forget to mention when compairing US to most of Western Eroup , it happened in the early part of the 1900 and ended well It was calld WW1 and WWII, see when you start with nothing in your way because a lot of your country has been bombed out of exsistance , your industry and even things like housing and well lets face it in part entire towns, well then you need to rebuild. Guess who LENT you all that money and technical help and personel, Yep the Bad old US, now we didnt have to rebuild so what we got out of it was decaying factories, oh and an non sustainable national highway system. Where as You got lets see, rebuilt industry at least in the areas controled by the us , GB and friendly nations of the day, you got Investment, Infrastructure , and Modernization. The same thing happend for Japan, why do you think after a while they kicked our BUT in so muc of industry, yeah we had and I mean Had the technical advantage but you got the toys and now we have even given away most of that , You know if I could stand fried rice I, might just move to China, at least they are ADVANCING THERE ECONOMY NOT DESTROYING(ED) IT !

Some of you seem to be missing an important point about amtrak's profits or lack of.

With a train network, feeder systems are as important as the trunk lines. A fast line between two cities is good, but if there are lots of smaller lines coming off them, it can become hugely profitable. Let amtrak expand and pretty soon it will look after itself.

I'm european and find american transport to be stupidly behind the rest of the world. You'll happily spend days driving accross the country, or going through the hassle of domestic flights - uncomfortable and basically allowed to take nothing on with you.

Europe and Japan are ahead in transportation, way ahead. Chine is investing hugely in their own network and will be up with the "big boys" of france, germany and japan very soon. Italy and Spain have designs on expansion to their own networks, and the UK is planning the second and third high speed lines as we speak.

Let your pride rule you if you wish, but you're fighting a losing corner.

Deunicorn - Britain has an even older rail infrastructure than the US, with the added disadvantage of having very little space in comparison. How is it that we have trains running at 190mph with plans for more?

Wulf, earthquakes? Please think before you post - do you actually know anything about geography. Japan has one of the most effective train systems in the world, and is also the area of the world most affected by earthquakes. If they can manage it, so can you.

Well, that one Amtrak trip through the Midwest at 70 MPH a few years ago was pretty rough, but I almost never travel in any mode other than auto, and at that, I rarely crosses 7 towns in a single run, so I'm probably not going to benefit from this high speed rail goal in a direct sense (they won't want to be stopping every 10 miles). Passenger revenues aren't going to quickly justify such a massive shift (motive power, appropriate passenger cars and the necessary infrastructure). There needs to be revenues for rail to return (nobody works for free, etcetera). I conclude that the better ROI for such a highly overhauled rail system would seem to MANDATE carrying freight.

With any changes to the present system, we have several standing issues to correct:
-most people I know do not want to travel by ANY rail to simply cross 7 or more towns between stops; the economical operation of high speed rail seems to warrant long time spans at maximum speed in order to be of any benefit;
-people usually want to stop and get last minute items at the convenience store or get a Latte at any of what might be 4 shops of ONE vendor along their commute routes - with rail commutes, a measure of freedom is revoked (sure, there is still the trip home from the rail station, but what if your hometown doesn't HAVE a WalMart?);
-the prevailing concept that OTR trucking is de-facto standard and thus automatically deemed the pinnacle of economical transport is a concept which has to be dispelled (as CSX recently broadcast on NPR);
-JIT manufacturing techniques mandate as short a delivery time (dock to dock) as can be had (40,000+ Manufacturing Engineers can't be wrong) so the nod goes to not dropping anything at a depot for transition between modes;
-for freight by high speed rail to work, there needs to be rail depot near by each freight client so that freight change between transportation modes, therefore (as presently implemented), the distances from rail depot to destination can't be too great or the OTR transport mode will persist unnecessarily;
-the passenger trackage cannot be abused by freight haulers (I believe Amtrak employees mentioned to me that Union Pacific was partly responsible for the bad ride I took west of Des Moines, the discussion implicated the problem to be at least partly due to a bandaid track repair mentality used by UP (a 'We only haul freight and freight doesn't care about a few bumps, allowing passenger service on our rails is a nuisance' mentality, if you will), and partly due to lack of technical build/rebuild equipment/methodology (at present speeds of under 90 MPH, rail height variations of a few inches in 50 yards or so is nothing to be upset about; at 200+ MPH, this will destroy rail and vehicle alike, so the speeds have to come down significantly and thus the concept of high speed rail is wasted... and many many more details.

Brits and Euros have had such changes come a bit easier, where the rail service seems to persist from initial services in the mid 20th century; Amtrak is about all there is left of legacy passenger rail in the US (with notable exceptions, but again, comparatively worse than legacy Brit or Euro systems).

Interesting that many don't realize that Maglev is a short 19-mile demonstration segment at Shanghai’s Pudong Airport. Rather than extend this demonstration project, China chose to terminate utilization of Maglev and implement its own state of the art high speed rail network similar to what is being used in Europe and other parts of Asia.