Why doesn't America have a high speed rail network?

Question

I would love to not have to deal with the hassle of the airport for shorter trips.

Answer 1

The big reasons are money, geography, and cars. High speed rail costs billions to build and maintain. Though the government could certainly come up with the money if there was enough demand for rail.

So why isn't there enough demand? For one, major US cities are thousands of miles apart. Even a high speed train would take over 24 hrs to get from say Chicago to San Fransisco. It just doesn't make sense to take a train when you can fly there in 4 hours. Places with high speed rail like Europe and Japan have major cities that are only a few hundred miles apart. That's a perfect distance for high speed trains.

But the US has city pairs that are only a few hundred miles apart, why isn't there high speed rail there? Cars. When the government built the interstate highway system, they made it just as convenient, if not more so, to drive a couple hundred miles as it is to take a train. And Americans love the freedom to go where they want when they want. So they drive.

But things are changing. People are responding to high gas prices and congestion by demanding more public transportation. High speed rail corridors are now being planned and built between high population areas. As of now the only true high speed rail in the US is found on Amtrak's Northeast Corridor between Washington DC and Boston. Trains can reach speeds of 125-150 mph. Currently, Amtrak is also making improvements to track on its Chicago-Detroit and Chicago-St. Louis lines. This will allow 120mph top speeds on these lines. While it's still pretty slow by European standards, it's a huge step in the right direction.

I am a member of this group that promotes high speed rail. Check it out if you want more info on the subject.
http://www.midwesthsr.org/

Answer 2

America is a huge country, covering more than half of the North American continent. The cost of establishing even limited high-speed rail service between major cities would be astronomical! Airports are less expensive to build, more efficient in moving passengers and much more flexible to operate on such a large scale.

There may eventually be some high-speed rail systems built between New York-Boston, or other short-run commuter lines, but don't expect to see it anytime soon, or anywhere besides the biggest cities.

Answer 3

Distance and history, the short answer to your question.

Because of the way America's rail network grew, was financed, and was built, our rails are primarily for freight. Construction and maintenance were performed with freight in mind, not the need for speed that high-speed passenger service requires. Thus, we have too many grade-level crossings to replace, too much infrastructure that would have to be rebuilt at too high a cost for too many miles.

There are some good rail systems in major metropolitian areas, but these are usually run by a regional authority. Amtrak is fun for travel, but not considered high-speed.

Answer 4

Amtrak has a number of short-haul routes which serve city-pairs in less than 5 hours.

"But the airplane does it in an hour"? No it doesn't.
- TSA (gotta leave 90 min.)
- those long walks to/from gates (20 minutes on each end)
- parking and transportation hassles (1 hour +)
- Baggage, if you do that (10-40 min)
- The commute from airport to downtown on each end, padding for possible traffic jams (1-2 hours)

Answer 5

a million. Who knows and you wager chur butt. 2. not likely. severe speed rail is maximum useful with runs of seven-hundred miles or much less, in the two a "hub" operation or "hall" operation. i might assume to make certain hubs in Seattle, Chicago or Omaha, Atlanta and Las Vegas. The north-east hall would be upgraded to severe-er speed. there is 125mph song to be got here upon there at present. 3. relies upon on the "who knows" element of answer section #a million. 4. by utilising the time the undertaking certainly starts or till now final touch, "rail" return and forth itself would be out of date for bullet speeds. Say hi to the magazine-Lev. 5. far in the back of the curve here, we are going to need lots of help. Whomever is interior the White living house or those on the reins of the living house or Senate only have not got any selection. And the chinese language will actual be happy to help, and rightfully so. I propose, they are going to manufacture a great type of the climate besides, so we would as nicely pay 'em to connect all of it jointly for us too...

Answer 6

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Because the U.S. is a miasma of bureaucrats. Every little throttlebottom tries their best to insinuate themselves into the situation so that the project can't go forward unless they have their own personal chop on it. Too many special interest groups and their lawyers try to influence the progress. And lastly, too many of the "what's in it for me" crowd. The more of these nabobs that involve themselves into the mix the more money it costs...until it just becomes much too expensive.

In the end it comes down to $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$!!!!

Enough said?

Answer 7

because congress has never supported the rails and int he 40 and 50s Detroit and cars were king.

Answer 8

Ask Mr. Bush, he needs the money to send troops to places he doesn´t know where they are. The US citizen is third in his thinking.