The Davy Crockett
Engineer
Another article on HSR, this one from the folks who publish The Atlantic.
Why Can't the United States Build a High-Speed Rail System? The problem isn't geography, demographics, or money—it's federal will.
The article starts:
The article concludes:
Why Can't the United States Build a High-Speed Rail System? The problem isn't geography, demographics, or money—it's federal will.
The article starts:
What follows is a good read about the building of the Interstate Highways, how people's attitude towards the Federal Government has changed from positive to negative in the intervening years, the resulting devolvement of many former Federal responsibilities to the states, and the need for more efficient transportation modes for future growth.Virtually every wealthy nation in the world has invested in a high-speed rail network—with the striking exception of the United States. From Japan to France, even from Turkey to Russia, trains travel through the country at speeds of 150 miles per hour or above, linking city centers and providing a desirable alternative to both air and automobile travel. Meanwhile, outside Amtrak's 28 miles of 150-m.p.h. track in rural Massachusetts and Rhode Island, the American rail network is largely limited to speeds of 110 m.p.h. or less. There are few reasons to think the situation will change much in the coming decades.
So why has the United States failed to fund and construct high-speed rail?
The article concludes:
IMHO: I find it interesting that, according to this article, our current national political mood makes implementing a national HSR system impossible, as it was the need for an improved transportation system, primarily canals for interstate commerce, that conviced George Washington, John Adams, Alexander Hamilton, and James Madison, to name a few, that we needed to scuttle the Articles of Confederation for our present Constitution.The planning and funding of the interstate highway system was premised on the fact that the travel needs of Americans occur irrespective of state lines. Indeed, the 50 largest metropolitan areas, representing more than half of the country's population, are located in 31 separate states and 15 of them actually straddle state borders. Given this reality, it would be ridiculous to plan an intercity transportation system at the state level. California's high-speed rail progress—its proposed San Francisco-to-Los Angeles line remains the only truly fast train project in the country—is the exception that proves the rule; that state's size makes it no example for the rest of the nation.
It's time for the United States to commit to national planning, funding, coordination, and prioritization of rail investment. Intercity transportation systems require active federal engagement to guarantee the development of routes that reflect national needs and national priorities. Yet without political consensus on the need to develop national goals and focus investments, high-speed rail will remain a pipe-dream for decades to come.
Last edited by a moderator: