The Need for a National Railway Program

[@Daveomabegin]

This was awesome, thank you so much for sharing these presentations on KZbin! 😊

[@josephschwarten6468]

Love the Cleveland painting. Chicago to Cleveland high speed rail is needed!

[@EdwardM-t8p]

Chicago to DC, New York City, Boston, and Quebec City through Detroit and Toronto!

[@josephschwarten6468]

@@EdwardM-t8p Cleveland would be a great stop to have in between most of those.

[@EdwardM-t8p]

What we need is a National Interstate and Defense Railway Act! Our fathers and grandfathers built the interstates which were supposed to be designed to accommodate defense traffic but they cannot take the load of heavy military equipment nor can troops get from point A to point B fast on them because they're often choking on traffic!

[@kennixox262]

I doubt that will be happening now.

[@jonathanstensberg]

Bizarrely missing links in most maps: St Louis - Indianapolis St Louis - Nashville Memphis - Oklahoma City Memphis - Dallas We can cross the Mississippi, guys!!

[@JimBones1990]

The tracks from SE of Shawnee to just west of McAlester have been out of service by UP, and They are not going to pay M$$$ for something They don't use.

[@billsmith5109]

High speed rail infrastructure, and existing Amtrak sets. If you build a section of dedicated rail minus the electrification aspect, could existing trains operate at their maximum design speed? Or are they engines too heavy?

[@HighSpeedRailAlliance]

Roughly 125 mph is roughly the point at which overhead wires are needed. Otherwise, the energy that it costs to carry the fuel is too great. Battery and hydrogen locomotives would probably make top spped lower because they contain less energy per pound compared to diesel.

[@qjtvaddict]

You can’t skip electrification if you want High Speed Rail. Existing Amtrak sets can’t cut it give it up to local state lines or just scrap it for electric trains

[@GaryBickford]

A national rail system could have been done easily back in the 1960s, when most railroad companies were facing bankruptcy. The government could have cut a deal to nationalize the rail routes, paying for it with free or reduced cost transport for the rail companies for some period of time. Then those national rail tracks could have provided a free market for rail users, similar to the interstate highway system. Then the network could have been expanded and maintained using government resources, and anyone who could put together a passenger or freight train could use the tracks according to federal rules and rates. But instead, the opposite tactic was taken - the government bailed out the rail companies without taking over the tracks, and built Amtrak with rules that guaranteed it could never break even. It's still possible to nationalize the main tracks and create and allow competition among the existing and new rail companies.

[@ortegaperu8510]

Right now the car lobby is too strong american cites too car ecentric and american minds to car focused but I hope that changes one day

[@提案チャンネル]

As a Japanese citizen that is suffering the burden (higher taxes) of supporting so many unprofitable train lines, and as a person who watched KZbin that showed how China built too many unprofitable high-speed train lines (and too many unused train stations "ghost train stations"), we strongly recommend that you build the minimum amount of high-speed rail lines as possible. If you want to build 5 lines, it is strongly recommended to build only the best one, because that is how unprofitable (and burdensome to the local community) it's going to be. Since the United States has so many airports, it is very strongly recommended that airplanes should be used when traveling across areas with low population density. Trains should then be used to connect the airport to the local communities. If the airplane is fueled by some sort of biofuel, using airplanes can still be environmentally friendly. Freight trains basically do not need to be operated with high speed. Furthermore, freight trains are often heavier than passenger trains, leading to more stress on the railroad tracks and the necessity of a more frequent maintenance/replacement. It's nice if the cargo arrives earlier, but if everyone needs to be burdened with higher taxes to support such a rapid delivery, it is strongly recommended that the citizens are informed with the information of how much more taxes that must be paid for an earlier delivery.

[@jamalgibson8139]

I'm curious, how profitable are your highways? Do you recommend demolishing those since they don't return any revenue?

[@JoyClinton-i8g]

The problem is Amtrak. The federal government should spend its passenger rail network money where the population is GROWING, not where it is LEAVING. Texas and Florida should be "ground zero" for expanded rail services. But instead, $16 BILLION is being spent to dig a new Gateway Tunnel (2.4 miles, i.e. $6 BILLION per mile). That is Amtrak budgeting. Brightline would build 50x that for the same amount (it's like comparing NASA with SpaceX).

[@thetrainguy1]

Well the project was at first 7 billion when it was first proposed, then canceled by the NJ governor at the time. Then Amtrak brought the project back, modified it to fit their needs. Went up to 12 billion in 2011 ... Put on the back burner by tRump. And now after inflation and almost 15 years. It's now at 16 billion. And NYC mega region is one of the most important regions in the US with established Passenger Rail. Improve one of the most important passenger rail corridors in the US.

[@jamalgibson8139]

Let me ask you this, do you think the governments in Texas and Florida would support rail projects? Brightline got going in Florida despite the meddling by the Florida government, and even now it has to face constant challenges by FDOT. Also, how's Texas high speed rail doing?