I took Amtrak from Detroit to Chicago this weekend....My train was 45 minutes late.....

[marmar]

on the outbound, and 45 minutes late on the return. Amtrak doesn't own the rails in the Michigan-Indiana-Illinois corridor, so the trains have to constantly stop to let the freight trains, which have priority, pass.
Also, the bar/snack car was sad, with watered-down coffee for $1.80 and a CAN of Mountain Dew for $2. The bathrooms on board the train weren't particularly pleasant. And the lines to board trains at Chicago's Union Station bordered on anarchy.

And you know what, it was still 100x more pleasant than flying.


That said, the 250-mile trip from Detroit to Chicago shouldn't take 5 1/2 hours (and that's if it runs on time). London to Paris, which is a longer trip in miles, takes 2 hours flat, from St. Pancras Station to Gare du Nord.


HIGH SPEED RAIL NOW !!!


Four airlines fly more than 40 flights a day between Detroit and Chicago.....and I-94 could use a break from traffic. This is long overdue, and I hope Congress fully funds Obama's high-speed rail plan.

[xchrom]

1. recommend -- i love riding the train. nt

[BlooInBloo]

2. I'd love high-speed too. I take the train routinely on the sea-pdx pipe...

and have had no troubles. They let you bring your own food (& liquor!), and I haven't had lateness problems.

Faster would always be better. As it is, I accept the +1 hour versus a car drive as a fair trade for the lack of hassle.

[quiller4]

61. Love the Seattle-Portland trip. I live in Tacoma and take the

train to Portland with some regularity. I haven't had problems with delays. The cars are clean and comfortable.

[auntAgonist]

3. I agree. And as a side note

we're planning on going from Jackson MI to Chicago via Amtrak. Never done it, but it sounds like it's not that pleasant, although better than driving.

I travel I94 to Ann Arbor EVERY day and I'd love to see LESS traffic on the highway.

:hi:
aA

[create.peace]

56. just bring your own food, and put your booze in a thermos if you must

how many times are you going to be in the head anyway, i love the train, and i just bring wipes, food in a trader joes zip cooler, and knitting or reading. i also bring an led flashlight, just in case the train loses power, i can still read, and earplugs if you are traveling all night and snoring bothers you. that hardly happens but once it was pretty loud. bring a camera for fun, when the train is stopped or slowed you can get some rare shots.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

4. Hell, just visiting the new St. Pancras and Gare du Nord is a pleasant experience.

I haven't done that particular run, but I've done Thalys from Brussels to Paris, and TGV from Paris to Strasbourg. Damn, that is a fun way to travel.

[marmar]

6. St. Pancras is a beauty....especially compared to hideous King's Cross next door.

n/t

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

12. I like the old Victorian parts of King's Cross.

...but it's just such a clusterfuck the way it's laid out now with stuff under construction, overcrowding, poor retail options. I used to live in Cambridge, and trains from there to London went to King's Cross.

[insanity]

147. Agree

I dislike Kings Cross because it is always a mass of confusion. I was spoiled by the Edinburgh station when I lived abroad and I miss riding the damn train every day.

The Thalys is excellent, but the Dutch-ran route between Brussels and Amsterdam is fanfuckingtastic.

[Captain Hilts]

49. Waterloo is like a scene from Metropolis. nt

[Pacifist Patriot]

74. Lovely cheese plate at the champagne bar at St. Pancras. Why can't we...

have such things in America? I love traveling by rail.

[Bigmack]

102. Yeah, but you have to remember...

Them furriners have all them fancy trains and depots and like that, but we have the best nuklar subs and fighter planes in the world.

USA! USA! We're #1!

(But rapidly headed from 1st world to 3rd world)

[peacebird]

5. We *love* the train! Our vacation this year we're training across country for InLaws 50th anniv!

Can't wait - very relaxing, fun way to travel. We even splurged and got sleeper cars! I absolutely detest flying nowadays - seems people at the airport are tense and irritable. But the train, what a delight!

[marmar]

7. Yep, I used to love to fly......but it's become so unpleasant.

And $15 to check a bag was the final outrage for me. I only do it if I have to. I travel to Chicago often and used to fly all the time, but that's over.

[peacebird]

13. side note: Why can't airline security provide benches so elderly folk can sit to take off shoes?

It would help pregnant women as well, and anyone with balance issues. It is a tiny thing that could make life more pleasant for so many, yet they don't do it. I actually posted that on the TSA website - where they asked for suggestions.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

17. The thing I always suggest to people in that position...

...is to take off your shoes before you get in line. It helps a lot.

[Gormy Cuss]

110. Those with balance issues still would benefit from benches at the beginning of the line.

When I'm not wearing slip-on shoes I've looked for a place to sit down to untie shoes before getting in line and there's not always seating available nearby, or there's little of it and the seats are occupied. It would be nice to have a single bench available for people who need it both at the beginning and end of the security lines.

Better still would be if the routine shoe removal went the way of the free meals on board.

[imdjh]

116. Wear flip flops.

[Bette Noir]

141. No, thanks.

The last time I wore flip flops, I tripped and tore my hamstring. I was laid up for two months.

[RC]

18. I just go find a chair and sit down in it.

There is always one available. I sometimes get some funny looks from the 'Security', but no one has said anything yet.
With my grey hair, pot belly and wrinkles, I can fake the need.

[tblue37]

52. Why would they, when they so eagerly deprive people of canes and walkers?

I use a wooden cane. It gets taken from me before I go through the metal detector. My friend's 93-year-old grandmother had to try to totter through the metal detector without her walker, and my friend was forbidden to help her stay upright while she did it. (She refuses to even attempt to fly now.)

I don't understand why they can't either offer us a hand or let a friend or relative support us when they want us to go through the metal detector without a cane or walker. I think it's just casual sadism--bullies amusing themselves at the expense of the vulnerable simply because they have the power to do so.

I avoid flying like the plague now.

[peacebird]

70. That is so petty, so cruel. Robbing elders of their dignity.

:grr:

[KamaAina]

95. They are supposed to offer you a hand

it says so right in their own boilerplate under "Travelers with Disabilities or Medical Conditions".

http://www.tsa.gov

Then again, seeing as how a dear friend (female) was just last week roughly patted down by TSA goons, who then attempted to disassemble her manual wheelchair, with her in it (!!), I really shouldn't be surprised that they don't. :eyes:

edit: "whellchair"? :dunce:

[imdjh]

117. Wow, it's sad when TSA has such a bad reputation that they have a "myths about our workers" link nt

[Grinchie]

132. They aren't myths....

[Grinchie]

131. Because then they might have to clean the benches

Or someone might potentially put binary explosive bubble gum under the seats.

TSA Gangstaz

[mucifer]

8. I think you want to read this artlcle High-speed rail: Biden praises Midwest plan to enhance

High-speed rail: Biden praises Midwest plan to enhance passenger train system
Federal officials laud Midwest pitch for upgrade funds

By Mike Dorning and Jon Hilkevitch | Tribune reporters
June 4, 2009

WASHINGTON -- Obama administration officials offered encouraging signs Wednesday that a proposed Midwest high-speed rail network based around a Chicago hub has an inside track on a significant piece of $8 billion to be distributed among 10 major U.S. projects.

Vice President Joe Biden lauded the Midwest proposal, which envisions passenger trains speeding through the region at 110 m.p.h., as "one of the most comprehensive plans that have been put forward so far."

The full 3,000-mile Midwest corridor system stretching over nine states would cost $9.6 billion to construct over 10 years, according to the latest estimate.

But "for $3.4 billion, you can get a big chunk of this plan done," Biden said in a conference call with reporters. snip
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-midwest-highspeed-rail-04-jun04,0,7751889.story

[marmar]

10. I did see that one......That makes me very happy.

:toast:

[CBR]

9. I totally agree. I have taken Amtrak when it was 3 hours late. nt

[create.peace]

57. i have gone from la, to bay area, to seattle, to whitefish, to chicago,

to utica, to kansas, denver, tucson, etc, and rarely been more than an hour late. the wait beforehand is much less than the airport hassle, and the luggage pick up is usually less too.

[NYC_SKP]

11. Did you have to arrive 1-1/2 hours early and suffer the TSA idiots....

...stand in line at security, then again at the gate, then again before boarding and finding a seat?

Yeah, flying sucks.

:toast:

Recommended.

[marmar]

14. It is nice showing up at the train station and not having to take off your shoes....

..... and remove your belt buckle. Then try to redress yourself in a hurry so the next poor sap can use the chair you're sitting in.

[cherokeeprogressive]

15. If you want to take Amtrak from Jax to Little Rock, it's only a 59 hour trip!

On the interstate, it's 863 miles. Take Amtrak and it's a trip from Jax to DC, from DC to Chicago, and from Chicago to Little Rock.

Interstate medians in rural areas should have high speed rail down the middle. I know of some interstate highways that have medians that are a quarter mile wide, and wider.

[Greyhound]

32. LA to Chicago in only 41!

Assuming on-time, etc.

Why this push to install inefficient, expensive, 19th century technology? Who's going to make a billion?

[YOY]

94. Does this look like 19th Century Technology?

[Greyhound]

134. You didn't say what it is. If it's wheels on tracks, it is updated 19th century

technology with a cool skin to somewhat reduce resistance.

[YOY]

140. By the same chain of thought a modern supersonic jet is just using lift and drag...

Just like the Wright brothers did...granted that was...what...1901?

New engines. Faster designs. New fuel sources. New times.

[Bette Noir]

142. 1903

[YOY]

144. Thanks!

I always get it mixed up. I was close.

[Greyhound]

165. And we're reaching the limits of that basic design as well. As for trains,

as long as we have a solid wheel running along a track, overcoming that friction requires the greatest fraction of power. A more slippery body and more efficient engines are great, but pushing several hundreds or thousands of tons of mass along a track imposes a pretty strict limit on the technology, barring some major breakthrough in physics.

I'm not deriding (:rofl:) trains, merely saying that if we are really going to make the kind of investment that any significant implementation of high speed rail requires, why not take the next step and remove it's biggest limitation.

[YOY]

169. You mean Maglev?

I would be all for that. THere still is no single generally accepted and well thought of design. The German one is having problems though as is the Chinese. Still some kinks in the general usable design. Methinks (just conspiracy thinking) that our Military Industrial Complex and it's extensive study on Rail Guns might have some solutions there...

[Greyhound]

171. It seems the most promising to me, but I'm not an engineer.

I know the power consumption is significant but the lack of friction, I think, would be such a huge advantage that I believe it comes out much better.

I read a paper some years back that talked about this as a mode of transport and the barrier at that time was high temperature superconductors. Well we have that now and since I'm not getting my flying car or commercial travel to space or any of the other really cool 21st century stuff, I at least want a really high speed mode of travel that doesn't entail destroying the biosphere or taking a 26 hour tour around half the nation to go 1,000 miles!

Putting trains in underground tunnels in a near vacuum with magnetic levitation and propulsion virtually removes any speed limit. Imagine a LA to NYC express trip of an hour and a half. We could do it if we just decided that we wanted it.

[benEzra]

179. Actually, by far the greatest drag is aerodynamic.

Steel wheels on steel rails aren't much less efficient at speed than maglev is, but aerodynamic drag is immense at high speeds. Maglev in evacuated tunnels would be a quantum leap forward, though.

[csziggy]

54. That's because they still are not running the Sunset Limited since

The bridge was knocked out and the train fell into the bayou. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bayou_Canot_train_disaster

I wanted to take the train out of Tallahassee to NO, then to Chicago, then to Seattle, but since that accident Tallahassee has no passenger train service. To take the train, I'll have to drive to NO and leave from there, or to the East Coast, take the train north and connecting lines west from somewhere in the NE.

If the Sunset Limited were running, it would be a straight shot from Jax to NO, then north to Little Rock.

[question everything]

16. Couple of months ago we traveled thought Italy

and train was the way we did it. Nice, modern, comfortable, nice restaurant and, I think, nice rest rooms (did not use them).

We need to start getting used to the idea of traveling by train, the way it is in several cities and in the Northeast corridor. And this should take care of your concerns, even if the trains are not high speed ones.

[AwakeAtLast]

19. If there was rail from Indy to Chicago I would actually visit Chicago

Driving from Indy to Chicago, which should take 3 hrs. or so, can take upwards of 5 hours if there is major construction and/or heavy traffic. Wait, who am I kidding? There's always construction and heavy traffic on that route.

I am totally behind high-speed rail!

:kick:

[caraher]

28. There is rail from Indy to Chicago!

Not "high speed" and only once a day, but it does exist! Leaves Indya at 6:30 Eastern and arrives in Chicago at 10:35 Central. Return trip leaves at 5:45 and returns just before midnight.

I've taken Amtrak from Crawfordsville to Chicago and it's the same train... works well for me!

[AwakeAtLast]

152. I don't think it is something to count on

The last time I wanted to take it, it had been discontinued. I will look into it again, thanks!

[caraher]

158. it's a little confusing

There's one train that only runs 1 day a week that starts in Indy; most days there's a train that originates out east. So it can look like there's no train if you only check one of those two routes.

I hope you get to visit the Windy City soon!

[Motown_Johnny]

20. the problem is all the stops along the way. If we had a 'hub and spoke" system

like airlines have then you could nave a non stop train from one major city to another. Then you would need to take some local form of transportation to your final destination (maybe rent a car).


I have taken that same train ride a couple of times but honestly I would rather fly. Because of the time difference you land in Chicago half an hour before you leave Detroit. Also flying over Lake Michigan is always nice.

I am big on rail and think it should be able to replace these small flights but not under the current system. We need high speed rail and a high speed attitude toward it.

[tritsofme]

21. Can you imagine our traffic situation in Chicago if we hadn't torn down all the interurban

railways by the 60s?

The CA&E the North Shore, sure would have come in handy today.

[ejpoeta]

22. my daughter took the amtrak on the way back from albany. it took 4 hours.

she enjoyed it and it was a good experience. as far as it being late... is it any worse than an airplane? i think a high speed rail would be a good thing. and i would support it.

[notadmblnd]

23. I took the train from Detroit to Chicago about eight years ago

I still refer to it as the train ride from hell.

My son who was 4 at the time, was into trains and wanted to ride one. Me being an indulgent mother said, "why not?" We left the train station in Pontiac about 7 in the morning and got to Chicago during the evening rush hour.

On the way, we could not get off at the frequent stops, the conductor said that Amtrack had people waiting in the bushes to catch them getting off schedule and that the passengers were responsible for the trains being late. It seemed; just as soon as you got going, you had to stop for 10 or 15 minutes for some reason or another. It was a rainy day and the conductor kept saying things like "have a nice dreary day!" My son slept during most of the trip and while I had my sister along for company, we were to aggravated and annoyed about the frequent stops and the fact we couldn't step off the train, that we mostly bickered.

Needless to say, I rented a car for the ride home.

[GKirk]

24. Just curious

why did you want to step off the train? How long did they stop for, what could you do in that amount of time?

[notadmblnd]

27. The stops lasted from between 5 ans 20 minutes

and as the OP said, the food was atrocious and over priced. We weren't aware that we could take a picnic on board. It would have been nice if we could have gotten off the train simply to stretch our legs or get something reasonably priced to drink. These things weren't made aware to us (that we would be prisoners on the train or that we could bring our own food) before buying the tickets. It it had, then I would have booked a much shorter train trip. Maybe from Pontiac to Royal Oak.:shrug:

[GKirk]

42. To be fair there are lots

of things a first time traveler isn't going to know about whether the mode of transport is train plane or ship.

[notadmblnd]

53. I'm not argueing that. I just told my experience

It was eight years ago. However, the experience has not made me anxious to do it again. But if it's any consolation, I refuse to fly too. I guess if I can't get there by car, I don't need to go.:shrug:

[Strong Atheist]

97. Welcome to DU!

:toast:

[tabbycat31]

43. I took at 13 hour amtrak from Raleigh to NYC

and there was a 30 minute stop in DC. I didn't get off the train, but most who did were smokers who had a cigarette

[create.peace]

58. a smoker? just as glad she doesn't ride! the cranky people

are welcome to fly, b-bye

[Captain Hilts]

25. Dedicated track would do the trick. nt

[Sal Minella]

29. Indeed. I suspect the French Bullet Trains don't have to stop to let freight trains

take the right of way......

The anti-rail sentiment of the old GM/StandardOil/Firestone criminal collusion lives (they bought up all the electric rail cars in cities and ripped up the tracks in the 'forties and 'fifties).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_streetcar_conspiracy

[Captain Hilts]

30. With dedicated track and more over/under passes, current railstock can go 150mph easily. nt

[Greyhound]

34. Not with our currently inadequate rail-beds.

This is one area where we do need to look forward.

We have the technology, we can build him stronger, faster, better...

[Sal Minella]

40. Indeed. Riding Amtrak from Omaha east, we hit a section in southern Iowa

where the train rocked back and forth (side to side) so furiously I was sure we were going to tip over or derail entirely. The staff in the dining car stopped serving anything and disappeared while we went through that section.

I was not surprised a year or so later to hear a train had derailed in southern Iowa.

[Greyhound]

51. Bingo! Check #31 & #50 n/t

[Captain Hilts]

48. The track, not the trains, is the problem. nt

[Greyhound]

50. Exactly. And if we have to go to the trouble and considerable expense to

rebuild it, why not go with a better technology that has a longer life expectancy, especially now when the economy needs the boost anyway?

[NickB79]

121. What better technology are you speaking of?

Sorry, but I can't tell in this thread if you're poo-pooing trains altogether, or advocating European/Asian-style bullet trains?

[Greyhound]

125. I think mag lev is the way to go, but there are several currently viable alternatives.

The problem with high-speed rail, as I understand it, is that our rails are not up to the task and would have to be rebuilt from the beds up. Another issue with rail is simply the physics, wheels on rails are horribly inefficient and require so much energy and we're approaching the limits in overcoming that inefficiency.

OTOH, trains are far more efficient than trucks for moving large quantities of heavy stuff over long distances, but here we have the problem of too few rails going too few places, and their old and usually neglected.

Either way, we need massive development and improvement of our national infrastructure, and that is one of the very best ways of stimulating the economy.

[Grinchie]

135. What happens to Maglev when there is no external power?

I know that the Japanese trials use wheels prior to liftoff, but aren't the tracks just more electromagnets requiring electrifictation?

I also disagree that "Wheels on Rails are Horribly inefficient". Once you get the mass up to speed, it should stay there. The only thing affecting efficiency at that point is friction, drag and gravity.

Also another thing never mentioned with Maglev is the ability to start moving on an incline. I know that loaded big rigs can become stuck if they stop on a hil, because the clutch would tear off if they tried to get rolling again. If they are in a vehicale that cannot be backed up with jacknifing, they they need to dismantled the combination to clear the road.

I like the idea of Maglev, but it it'd still too expensive for the Japanese to implement, then what makes you think that the Petroleum Addicted Marica Corporation would have any better luck?

At this point, KISS seems to be the order of the day.

[Greyhound]

163. No power, no lev. But this is no different than the potential problems with

any transportation. On board battery back up would be one simple solution to avoid sudden stops.

There are several methods available for the propulsion itself, but this is all just speculatory fantasy right now, as is any significant implementation of high-speed rail.

What has to happen is that we need to make a decision and a long term commitment, and that is beyond the capabilities of any of our politicians today. We would never go to the moon, build the interstate highway system or Boulder Dam today, because nobody really wants to do great things any more.

Just look at the response to the very simple idea of painting roofs white that was made a couple of weeks ago. It doesn't matter that it is easy and cheap and would save billions, it's a change and nobody wants to commit to it in case something goes wrong or it gets turned into a joke.

[Orrex]

73. Yes! Bionic trains are the answer!

[Greyhound]

164. If only I knew how type that sound...

LOL!:rofl:

[Orrex]

167. You mean the fttt-tt-tt-tt-tt-tt one?

Love it!

[Puzzler]

64. No, the French high speed trains do not have to stop for freight trains...

... because no freight trains use the high speed tracks, none. These were, and are new rail lines built for one purpose. Freight goes on the older routes. Most are designed for 300kph operation (some for 320kph). The only exceptions to the passenger trains are the high speed mail trains, that operate at the same speed as the passenger trains (they are "TGV" sets too).

[XOKCowboy]

26. Train from Milan to Florence...

You could set your watch by this train. Arrived within a minute of it's scheduled arrival and left within a minute of it's departure time. We had several stops in cities on the way, also right on time. The restrooms weren't spotless but not filthy either. They even had a cart with everything from snacks to wine/beer/soft drinks/coffee come around every few minutes. This was not a high speed train but it was way cheaper than flying and the trip was completely satisfying both ways.

Yes we need improved rail service here.

[onethatcares]

37. yep, the Italians have the trains down to a science

we went from Aviano to Venice, an overnighter and it was a surprise to me how efficient it was. The bar car was great and that little snack cart, well, it was ok.

Only problem I had was late at night the porter came around asking for tickets after every stop.

[Greyhound]

31. Rail's too expensive, go Mag-lev.

Faster, cheaper, more efficient, and uses almost no petroleum products (unless electricity source is oil and even then it is far less).

[Initech]

33. High speed rail would completely rejuvinate the economy

In Europe the trains run alongside LCC airlines and no one says anything about it.

[keep_it_real]

35. Unless U.S. terminates the fed and prints its own money it will never happen

the US of America just does not have the money; the US of A is broke; bankruptcy is in America's future; prepare.

[AllieB]

36. I'll be on the Amtrak tomorrow from Boston to NJ

and you're completely right. It beats flying in the Northeast corridor anyday!

[and-justice-for-all]

38. make those magnetic lift high speed trains...nt

[blue_onyx]

39. Yes, we need to put plans into action now

This would not only update our transportation infrastructure but also put thousands of people back to work. Michigan has plenty of empty factories and unemployed people to build the trains.

[Wednesdays]

41. K&R

:kick:

[roody]

44. I've ridden Amtrak a number of times, and 45 minutes

late is a GOOD day. I love rail travel.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

45. You want to see train travel?

Go to Japan.

The Shinkansen "bullet" trains leave Tokyo westbound literally every five minutes from about 6AM to 10PM. The fast ones stop only at Nagoya and Kyoto before arriving at Osaka. The slowest ones stop at any combination of about ten smaller cities on the way. You can go from Fukuoka on the southern island of Kyushu to Tokyo (over 700 miles) in about 5.5 hours, and that's downtown to downtown.

You can also travel north to Hachinohe, near the top of the main island of Honshu in a little over 3 hours, to the west coast city of Niigata and to Nagano, the winter Olympic city, in less than that. The network of Shinkansen trains is continuously expanding and being modernized. The line shuts down between midnight and 6:00AM to allow repairs and inspections.

The trains run on dedicated tracks, which are welded together for smoothness and kept perfectly level (0% grade) through the use of tunnels and elevated tracks. The tracks that run through snowy areas can be electrically heated.

The first line (Tokyo to Osaka) opened in 1964. In all that time, not one passenger has died, so it's an incredibly safe form of transportation.

As if that weren't enough, there is a regular spider web of slower trains, both public and private, throughout the country. I once took the long way around to a certain sight that I could have reached faster by private train, but I wanted to use my JR Pass to save money. I ended up on a train that functioned as a school bus, taking high school students from the nearest large town to little villages, and as a shopping shuttle.

Anybody who wants to see what trains can do (and what they used to do in this country) should go to Japan.

Even the UK, which is supposed to have some of the worst trains in Europe, is miles ahead of us.

[Pacifist Patriot]

81. That's probably the sad part about my experience.

I adored the trains in England which made me a figure of curiosity for the Brits. I have no doubt they were utterly convinced of my insanity. It's all relative.

[harmonicon]

103. same here

I've live in the UK for two years now and still love the trains. They're not like German or Swiss trains, but they're far better than Amtrak. Train travel here is great. I can go from my small city to London in 3 hours with one change - about 200 miles. Glasgow, which is a little further, was 4 hours with one change, and 5 taking the scenic route down the Scottish coast. Man, it's great. I got so used to riding trains that it seemed logical to take the train the last time I was in the US from my parents' house to Chicago, where friends live: what should have been a 5 hour trip turned into 7 or 8 hours. It was a complete nightmare. The US doesn't need high-speed rail, just any sort of functioning rail system would do wonders.

[Grinchie]

137. I agree, once you take advantage of British Rail, you're spolied for life

When you get home, you expect at least a basic equivalency of skill on the part of the operators of Amtrak, but it doesn't exist. AMTRAK is the first offspring of Grover Norquist, solwly drowning in the bathtub.

[awoke_in_2003]

154. "they were utterly convinced of my insanity"

We're convinced of it, too :hi:

[Pacifist Patriot]

160. There is that.

:)

[DaveinJapan]

87. All true

Japan has the train thing maxed out, that's for sure.

One tiny correction to Lydia's excellent comments...I'm pretty sure the "Nozomi" (the fast ones) trains also stop in Yokohama as well.

It was explained to me that Yokohama and Kyoto were the reasons that Maglev wasn't practical for this busiest of train routes in Japan (Tokyo - Osaka). A train running ONLY from Tokyo to Osaka might be quite a bit quicker, but it makes no economic sense to leave out the gigantic cities of Yokohama and Kyoto which lie right outside the two megalopolis cities...therefore with all the acceleration/deceleration time required, maglev isn't much of a time saver at all.

So, maglev isn't always the answer I guess is my point. :p

(just ask the Chinese lol)

[Strong Atheist]

98. Welcome to DU!

:toast:

[DaveinJapan]

172. Thanks! n/t

[sarcasmo]

46. The sad thing is I live near Grand Rapids and to take a train to the D I have to go through Chicago.

If this country updated the rail system, I wouldn't have to drive the two and a half hours to the D to see family, no excuse for our shitty rail system.

[votingupstart]

47. i really wish that if would get funded and moving

i wanted to do the DC to Atlanta trip a couple of times but the route has been sold out on weekends and the price was almost what i fly for

[LibDemAlways]

55. Years ago Amtrak ran passenger service between LA and

Las Vegas. It took about 10 hours because the train kept having to let freight trains go by. That service is long gone and now the only way a person can get between the two cities is by air, car, or bus. Freepers' heads explode when a high speed rail line is mentioned between the two cities, but given the population boom in Vegas the past couple of decades and the clogged, dangerous highway between the two cities, high speed rail service would be a damn fine idea and would be extremely popular.

I, too, hope I live long enough to see something done about the sad rail situation in this country.

[create.peace]

60. they run a connecting bus, from williams i think, i was sitting with a woman who got off there.

[Grinchie]

138. Thats because freepers depend on Rush Filling the hours of idle time

With his BS Rhetoric, hypnotizing the driver and passengers of the Car into Conservatives.

[XOKCowboy]

59. This a great place to re-post this video about how GM systematically killed public trans in America

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x321159

Part 2 is also in Political Videos. It's worth watching.

[Grinchie]

153. Thank you so much for the Link!

This video is a wonderful example of the ongoing descent into Corporate hell.

P.S.

Taken for a Ride is available in the full length version in Goggle Video, since the Youtube version is missing parts 3 4 and 5

As I watched this film, I almost broke down to tears when I saw how poorly treated the old railcars were at the end. I recently determined that Corporate America and Globalization has taken my rights away by limiting what tools I can buy, which indirectly limits what products I can fabricate for myself. The destruction of Transportation is just another facet of this trend in our lives. The overall destruction of the old railcars destroyed any trace of the techniques, tools and skills used to build them in the first place, and as time goes on, the knowledge will be lost as people die out, and interest in the old ways get buried in the memory hole.

One has to recall that these old streetcars were built with amazingly primitive technology, yet for the most part, rival anything we could produce today with robotics and materials. Yet, they were manufactured using wood from primeval forests, crafted by hand and machine, and assembled into functioning conveyances.

As they note, reproducing these systems today is almost unthinkable, and the criminals at GM get to go off and despoil the next batch of suckers in a developing nation somewhere.

It's not like they weren't found guilty of criminal intent, since the Government went after them, but again, the shield of Corporate unaccounability shines bright in the case of National City Lines, GM and the other destroyers of our society.

The film presents the PR marketing material used by GM very well, and now that I am immune to this sort of drivel after being suckered in by it for most of my life, it made me ill watching it.

[Horse with no Name]

62. I hate to fly

but I would love to ride a high-speed rail.
I just hope that IF they become reality, they aren't overregulated and become overly intrusive like flying is.

[ClayZ]

63. I love trains! K and R

[cyclezealot]

65. Love trains. Me too.

On a LA, CA. trip to Oregon. The train was 11 hours late.. Mostly because of the fact , tracks are owned by freight lines. They get priority . That is not the fault of trains themselves. It's the fault of the nations' laws and customs.. Once, enroute to Oregon . One time the train was held up by a frieghter changing tracks for about one hour.
What needs changing are the naion's laws and a public call to support trains.
When I take the train. I am in no hurry. So the train was 11 hours late. Big deal. IT's still better than the hassles of flying.

[DaveinJapan]

89. Big deal?

I'm sorry, but 11 hours late IS a big deal. It's bigger than a big deal, it's pretty pathetic.

And when you're talking THAT horribly late, the hassles of flying don't seem quite so bad honestly.

A long time ago, my girlfriend and I travelled from Boston to Ft. Lauderdale via Amtrak (broke college kids..that was the best deal we could find). I'll admit the first 8-10 hours were kind of fun and exciting, but at some point it just felt like we were sitting still more often than we were moving (I suppose we were sitting on a side rail waiting for freight trains or whatever..but anyway it was pretty darned annoying). The journey was scheduled for 25 hours, we arrived in 28 (a "mere" three hours late). The conductor told us that was considered "a good day".

That's pathetic. It really is. No wonder people don't take trains, when the system is so jacked up it's simply not worth the risk. For a vacation traveller, hours late might be no big thing. But if they REALLY want to prosper they need BUSINESS travelers as well and for such folks arriving hours late is a non-starter.

[cyclezealot]

136. It's a much the fault of freighters ' disrespect

for train passengers. As it is Amtrak.. For someone who hates flying and does such only when I have to.. ( and I was in no big hurry.) It was ok.. 11 hours of looking at the scenery going thru the Cascades was worth it.. Not that I wish Congress, would not rectify the problem.

[Ken Burch]

66. And i'm guessing that the worst part was waiting for the train leaving Chicago at 60mph

to pass by you on the way to the story problem

:sarcasm:

Seriously, you're right. The stimulus plan should include a major rehabilitation of the American rail system, with as much high speed rail as possible.

[Revanchist]

67. I looked into taking the train a few times

But I could always find a flight for less and it takes a third of the time to reach my destination. I've taken the train for short trips (Providence to Boston and back) but for the most part a flight just winds up to be the cheaper alternative.

[Strong Atheist]

101. Belated Welcome to DU!

:toast:

[DFW]

68. The food on the German ICE trains is decent,

The food on the EuroStar and Thalys isn't too good, but they are fast and rarely late.

One thing the OP didn't quite get right--London to Paris is 213 miles, not 250 miles or longer, and
they make the trip in 2:15 for the fastest ones. Even so, they still beat our primitive offerings by far.

In passenger train travel, we are half a century behind Europe and Japan.

[marmar]

71. Not according to the mileage calculator.....You sure you're not thinking about air miles?

n/t

[DFW]

72. I stand corrected--air miles it was

The rail journey is indeed 306 miles. The fastest time of 2H15 (after completion
of the new high-speed UK tracks in 2007) cut 20 minutes off the previous travel time
of 2H35 for the Eurostar.

The TGV makes Paris-Bordeaux in 3 hours, the German ICE makes Düsseldorf-Frankfurt in
ninety minutes (less if you're going to Frankfurt airport), and the Thalys makes the
run from Brussels-Zuid to Paris Nord in an incredible 80 minutes.

It would cost us as much as it would to wage a small war to modernize our own rail system,
and it seems like a far better investment.

[NewJeffCT]

69. I was in Italy & France two months ago and

had good experiences on their train systems. We used the rail system to get from Rome to Florence, then to Venice, then to Milan and then to Nice. Nothing was ever more than 1-2 minutes late if that. If a train was scheduled for 3:11 PM, you could look up at 3:11 and the train would be sitting there already, or else there was a flashing light saying "arriving in 1 minute" (in Italian)

The day I got back from Rome, I had to take a train from Penn Station in NY to Hartford, CT to get home. (I would have to switch trains in New Haven) At 5:30pm, the 5:38pm train to Hartford was on time. I was supposed to arrive in Hartford around 8:00pm. A minute or two later, it was listed as "Standby"... it was still on "Standby" 30 minutes later and ended up leaving Penn Station 45 minutes late.

For some reason, about 10-15 minutes out of Penn Station, the train paused for about 10 minutes with no explanation. Finally, we got into New Haven about an hour late, though they held the connecting train for the people on our train.

The train then proceeded North from New Haven, but once it reached Wallingford, CT, it had to stop again. The reason being given was that there was only a single track going North-South and it was already occupied by a southbound train, so we had to wait for it to pass, and wait, and wait and wait. Nearly an hour again. (If we had left NYC on time, we would have missed the southbound train)

So, I arrived in Hartford about 2 hours late - after being maybe a total of 5 minutes late in 10 days in Europe.

[Trailrider1951]

75. Thanks for supporting rail in America

Riding Amtrak is fun and relaxing, way better than flying or driving, even with its flaws. If you don't want to pay the outrageous prices in the snack car, just bring your own. You can carry on any food or drink you want. Also, PSA here: our rail lobbying organization is the National Association of Railroad Passengers (NARP). A membership includes e-mail news about how our present congress and president are working to upgrade passenger rail in our country. Also, a membership gets you a 10% discount on Amtrak. Well worth joining! Disclaimer: I am a member.

[high density]

76. Amtrak as it is today generally seems too slow and costly to be a decent competitor

Even with the massive hassles of air travel, I'd rather spend six hours dealing with that instead of taking a train that likely costs more and often takes at least three times as long, if not longer. Even Amtrak's star 'high speed' route, the Acela, falls behind air travel in both cost and time.

[Pacifist Patriot]

83. It's the cost that I find prohibitive.

The routes I need with some regularity (Orlando to DC and Orlando to NYC), are sometimes less expensive by rail than air, but usually not. However, when I factor in time the comparison always tips in air's favor. I would spend more time on a train if rail were slightly less expensive and time on the train wasn't ten times the length of a flight.

I think Florida would be an excellent experiment in high speed rail with just four major runs.

N-S EAST COAST Miami to Jax: Stops in Ft. Lauderdale, West Palm Beach, Melbourne, Orlando, Daytona Beach and St. Augustine

N-S WEST COAST Pensacola to Naples: Stops in Panama City, Tallahassee, Gainesville, Ocala, Orlando, Tampa and Sarasota

NE-SW Jax to Naples: Stops in St. Augustine, Orlando, Tampa and Sarasota

NW-SE Tallahassee to Miami: Stops in Gainesville, Orlando, Melbourne and Fort Lauderdale

Years ago the voters approved a high speed rail plan in the state but I think the legislature killed it. Nothing's happened at any rate.

[B Calm]

77. Did Amtrak stop in Climax, Michigan? See what you're missing

by not driving on I-94. . .

[marmar]

78. Not in Climax, not in PawPaw, not in Hell.......

:silly:

[Pacifist Patriot]

79. Last fall I explored the midlands by rail out of Birmingham, England.

First of all, Birmingham City Centre is a great place to be based for holiday despite what the locals will tell you. Three train stations in City Centre, a 7 day Heart of England Rail pass and you can see a great deal of the country. I went to Stratford, Worcester, Shrewsbury (scrapped plans for Hereford in favor of a behind-the-scenes private tour of Villa Park and could have done more if I'd had a few more days).

The trains were mostly on time, fairly clean, and more importantly, the train stations were walking distance to anything I wanted to see. Granted, I did plan much of my trip based on stations near places that interested me.

The Virgin train from Birmingham to London was fantastic.

The problems with rail in this country are numerous.

We need dedicated rail.
High speed rail.
Refurbished stations.
Conveniently located stations.

Gee, sounds like a recipe for creation of a wide range of skilled jobs to me! This is an entire industry that has been neglected.

On a side note, I'd like to see more Auto Trains and would love to see the current one go all the way to New England rather than stop outside of DC.

[karynnj]

146. My daughter and a friend are currently using

a 5 day flexible pass (one day was added to the std 4 day pass as a promotion). They spent a week in Kent with family friends including days going into London, then took the train and buses to various cities in Cornwall, devon and Wales, finally up to Scotland for a week.

She was raving about the trains and buses (as well as the UK itself) when we last spoke to her.

[boomerbust]

80. I would visit Chicago

If there was high speed rail Green Bay to Chicago.

[B Calm]

82. Taking the train from GB to Chi compaired to driving, it's already high speed

[tomreedtoon]

84. What do you hang on to underneath the rail cars?

I'm assuming that this is the way you travel on trains, hanging onto the undercarriage like a hobo. Because the United States does not have any passenger rail worth riding.

The last time I took a train anywhere, I was in a car with no air conditioning, sweltering hot, unable to sleep, no dining car, no "snack car," no freaking ANYTHING. Riding in the undercarriage would have been an improvement, and cheaper.

And with the coming collapse of the American economy, it's unlikely you'll be able to find a moving rail car you can sling yourself underneath for that dirty ride across country. But of course the railroad detectives will still show up to beat the crap out of you.

[Capt. America]

85. My wife stopped taking Amtrack from Cleveland to South Bend to see her family...

...because they were consistently 4 HOURS late. Remember, it only takes 4 hours to drive from Cleveland to South Bend. In an attempt to keep her business, Amtrack would give her a free trip after every time it was 4 HOURS late. However, the train would repeatedly be 4 HOURS late. After several "free" trips, she decided she just could not take it any longer and stop using the train.

I would love high speed rail, but I think you will need new management at Amtrack or allow for competition with private passenger rail companies.

[marmar]

86. "allow for competition with private passenger rail companies"

Like the airlines? ..... That's worked out so well.

[YOY]

92. New management is not the problem. Lack of funding is.

This dog is starved and then kicked for being too skinny.

We do our best but the reason of lateness is due to non-ownership of the rails. The freight rails own the rails in many cases but are supposed to let passenger through as priority. If they do not they are supposed to be fined.

They usually do not let the passenger have priority. They non-the-less are not fined or do not pay.

[Capt. America]

106. I did not know of the heirarchy system on the rails. Thanks for telling me. So,

it seems that the only reasonable way to implement high speed would be to lay all-new, separate highspeed tracks, which would cost tens of billions of dollars in a country that is running MASSIVE deficits. Hmmm. I'm guessing high speed may have been an option in 1999, when there were still surpluses. Forget it now.

[YOY]

109. And those infrastructure improvements put people to work.

Cutting military spending back to where it should be would fix everything.

Of course that would mean stopping both ridiculous wars and cutting back on the new military bases and ultra-embassies we are installing everywhere as well.

[Ignis]

123. "Cutting military spending" ... HERESY!

Burn the heretic! We must defend ourselves from the invading Iraqi hordes who threaten our borders with their great Navy!

[YOY]

128. Wif da boxcuttaz and da kalishnakofs!

Betta start an armz raze ter compeet wif dat levul of teknolojee!

[Grinchie]

155. You forgot "Freedom Isn't Free"! You Hippy!

I always tell them I was "Born Free".

[Ignis]

159. "And if you don't throw in your buck 'o five, Who will?" (nt)

[Capt. America]

168. We would be vunerable unless we continue to outspend the rest of NATO, Russia, and China combined...

[Gormy Cuss]

111. No, a short term solution at much lower cost would be to give scheduled passenger service priority

on existing beds after looking for existing rail that can be refurbished and used for dedicated passenger service and use these improvements to encourage and expand passenger service. Without high-speed systems we could still deliver much better rail service in much of the country. Any large metro-to-metro trip of 150-400 miles should be easier and more convenient on a train than by plane. In the Northeast corridor there has long been a thriving train service from Boston-NYC-DC with stops at major points in between. It's not highspeed service but it is fast and convenient enough to keep a steady clientele. The difference in travel time between trains and planes for the Boston-NYC or NYC-DC segments is minimal now.

Even if we wait for the federal budget to be back in the black there's no reason to continue starving the existing rail system --it's infrastructure.

[Recursion]

112. Well, an even *better* solution...

... is to run a traffic simulation program, develop schedules that don't produce conflicts, and make the passenger and freight rails stick to them.

[Gormy Cuss]

124. One would think that would be easy enough to do..

and cost-effective.

[HillWilliam]

88. My partner and I were watching History Channel's "Extreme Trains" one night

and thought we'd love to take the new bullet train from DC to Boston. He looked over at me and said, "well, if we're going that far, why don't we rent a car in Boston, go up to Vermont and get married?"

Well, that set off a flurry of investigation. After 13-1/2 years, he finally said yes and by-damn I wasn't letting THIS slip by. For two solid weeks, prowling Amtrak's site and making multiple phone calls, I found that there just isn't any practical way to get from Danville, VA (or Greensboro, or Raleigh, or Durham) to connect with the Acela without an overnight in DC. Okay, so I checked out no less than three alternative lines, each with declining degrees of satisfaction. Each requires at least two connections and at least two layovers. The shortest layover was 5 hours and the longest was 13. If we had to spend an extra day no matter what, we opted to spend it at the B&B in VT. Plus, we're flying from RDU for half the fare.

We wound up deciding to fly to Boston and drive to Vermont anyway. Even though there's a train that ends up not more than a couple of miles from the bed-and-breakfast where we'll be married, we'll arrive a day earlier and less hassled by flying rather than struggling with the bizarre-ass train schedules and connections.

The good news is I'm still getting married!!

I lived in Germany for 2-1/2 years and took the trains everywhere. For nearly 4 years, I commuted to work in Chicago from Hyde Park to Rosemont. Never thought a thing about US train service SUCKING so. I don't know what fantasy had me believing the US had anything anywhere near comparable. We've got a long, long, long way to go. Oh, and I did send off a flurry of emails to my congresscritters. I doubt that it did any more good than to get it off my chest, but at least I feel better for having spoken up. (More room out than in, I suppose.)

[OneGrassRoot]

91. Congratulations!!!!

:toast: :bounce: :woohoo:

[Tikki]

96. Yeah...Congratulations..

A Summer Wedding...sounds grand...

Tikki

[HillWilliam]

104. Actually, we've set the dates for November

else I'd be a bigger groomzilla than I already am :D We'll be legally married in VT on November 16th, fly back on November 17th, then we're having a Holy Union and Nawth Ca'lina pig-pickin' BBQ party with friends on November 21st (that Saturday). If there's anything worse than planning one wedding, it's planning two. What was supposed to be a small gathering at our house has sort-of snowballed, the more people found out we were finally doing the deed. There's no frickin' etiquette for these things yet, either; who walks when, with whom; who stands where... and there's always the universal joy of seating arrangements, figuring out which bits of family are speaking and which aren't this week.

I think the increasing guest-list is due to the promise of pulled-pork barbecue and home-made veggie dishes, m'self :rofl:

Still, it would have been lovely and just a bit romatic to have taken the train. The leaves in NC would just be at or off-peak and we could have enjoyed a taste winter before returning home. I've driven that corridor many times and if you stay away from the cities, it's a beautiful trip. I really would have like to have neither flown nor driven it this time.

[Tikki]

118. Yay...a Winter Wedding...

Couldn't be more spectacular...snow and all...

Tikki

[Bette Noir]

148. Congratulations.

May you have many years of happiness together.

[MisterP]

174. a fellow student of mine from Colombia says he was almost made physically ill by OCTA

(Orange Co., CA, buses)--especially after recent budget cuts that made some buses run every 45 or 60 minutes. It can take 2 hours to travel 15 miles (I'm not kidding) and almost no routes use the freeways.
mass transit's always the first to go

[YOY]

90. The Freights are supposed to financially compensate us when this happens.

They almost always do not.

I am sorry you weren't late. I take that route sometimes to see my parents. It has the aforementioned problems.

If not HSR we need SOLELY DEDICATED RAILS.

[CrispyQ]

93. I love trains.

When I was a kid my mom & I would go from Ft. Collins to San Diego via train 2-3 times a year. I took a few trips to Montana via train, too. And then came James West & his custom cars. Oh my. ~sigh

[MindPilot]

99. Amtrak's website should be

www.youcannotgetherefromhere.com

The train is a lot of fun IF you are there for the journey not the destination. I once rode the the train from DC to San Diego which takes four days. Realistically, unless the purpose of your trip is a long train ride, who's got that kind of time to spend on getting from point A to point B?

In most situations, train travel as it currently exists is not practical.

And in all the plans and speculation about improvements in rail service, it looks like the western US is being completely ignored.

[HillWilliam]

170. Perzakkaly. I spent two weeks fiddling with schedules and routes

and finally gave up. We really were counting on a train trip as part of the adventure. There are four different named lines that "could" get us from northern NC to central VT, but the damnable start and end times with the body-bending layovers and connections really discourage anyone from considering trains as a viable means of long-distance transportation.

They could really fix that if they had the will. The web site is almost impossible to read and the connections are just awful. For example, the airlines will not present a connection that you can't make. If you try to make a trip on Amtrak's site, they'll give you a connection that leaves three hours before you arrive on the train that brings you the connection point. :wtf: is the point of that?

To be sure, you have to be crafty on airline sites as well to get cheap fares with sane arrival and departure times. But those sites are navigable and they won't present a connection you can't make. But in about 10 minutes, I had a pair of tickets on AA from RDU to BOS for a total of $350 round for the both of us. Plus, we're leaving and arriving at reasonable times where we can have brunch on the way out and dinner when we arrive at our destinations. And we have a whole day to ourselves at the B&B. One of the owners is a concert violinist, so I'm bringing my fiddle so we can jam for a day.

Now there's a good reason to put up with airports for one day each way -- it's a temporary inconvenience and we're on our way. When I come home, I'll have a ring on my finger and a piece of legal paper.

[pleah]

100. K&R

[WoodyD]

105. I take the Empire Builder

several times a year. Last trip was just last week. The train was an hour late but it still beats flying all to hell. I upgraded to a roomette, which was quite comfy. The upgrade includes all meals in the dining car, plus a wine and cheese tasting, which was fun. I could drive the route in 12 hours. The train takes 13 but it's cheaper and much more relaxing than driving. You can get some good deals on tickets if you watch for the weekly specials on the Amtrak website.

[stubtoe]

107. Only 45 minutes late?

It can run from 3-8 hours late here on the left coast.

[wryter2000]

108. Big thumbs up here!

I sometimes take the train that runs from Emeryville, CA to Chicago. (I only take it to Reno, but someday...sigh...all the way.) It runs hours and hours late because of the *^)(*() freight trains.

I have lunch in the diner car. It's great fun, and the food is pretty good. I haven't had the same sad, sad experience with the snack car you have. The seats are big and comfortable, and the Amtrak personnel are a delight.

I love trains, and I hope VP Biden can do something to fix them.

[ecstatic]

113. How much did it cost?

So far I'm kind of turned off by your adventure... Slow with overpriced vending. Sounds about as pleasant as a trip on Greyhound.

[marmar]

114. $52 roundtrip.....less than half the cost of a plane ticket, EXCLUDING the $15 bag fee

:thumbsup:

[femrap]

115. I think, for starters, we

need to just save the rails we used to have...such as from Cincy to Columbus to Cleveland. It wouldn't cost as much and we need to get cars off the road and provide decent affordable transport for regular folks. Later, sure...let's go high-speed. But let's use what we already have for now. OK?

[catchnrelease]

119. Several years ago

I took the Amtrak from LA to Seattle to visit friends. Had always wanted to travel by train and this was my chance. As others have mentioned, the passenger train had to stop many times to let the freight trains to pass through. The train itself was great...clean, comfortable, and the food was neither worse nor more expensive than other venues. (Unless of course you brought your own.) The bad news was that in both directions we were 6 hours late. Since people at both ends were picking me up it was really bad, having to keep calling and saying we were still hours away. Both times arrived close to midnight.

On the way back South, at one point we had to stop for hours while waiting for a freight train ahead of us to replace a wheel that had fallen off (!!). And going through the Central Valley, the temps were over 100, and apparently the train could not travel over 10 mph for safety reasons. Something to do with the rails being or becoming too hot. On this trip there was a group that was traveling to the Southern US, and they were going to miss the connecting train at Santa Barbara. So, when we arrived there, an Amtrak bus was waiting to take them to a place where they would meet a connector. Then, a few stops later in Oxnard, we had to wait while the train employees tried to find an elderly man that was supposed to meet his family at that stop. He was not on the train, and I think they figured out that he got off and went on the bus with the tour group! In the end, my train stopped in LA and those of us that were supposed to go on to stations farther along the line were put on buses to get us there. Overall it was a nightmare, but I can't really blame "my" train for the bulk of it.

Also, my daughter and her family live just a 3 hour drive from me, in San Luis Obispo, and I would LOVE to be able to take the train up there instead of driving, but that trip takes 5 1/2 hours, almost twice the time. I guess it's due to all of the stops at the little stations in between. (I realize there's no way to fix that.) And the way the schedules run, I'd have to take an extra day off work to be able to work out getting up and back and actually have time to visit.

I do wish we had a better rail system in this country, I'd use it in a heartbeat.

[Romulox]

120. A TOURIST line like Chicago to Detroit would be a waste.

Amtrack works in the NE because it provides COMMUTER service.

[marmar]

162. Chicago-Detroit is also big business travel route....High speed rail would be.....

..... a welcome alternative for biz travelers as well. Amtrak is the NE serves that same function - it's not really a commuter line. THe big NE cities have their own commuter rail services.

[Romulox]

175. Detroit to Ann Arbor makes sense. Detroit to Chicago does not, imo.

Add Kalamazoo, Lansing, Grand Rapids and Chicago later if the line is sustainable (I have grave doubts that it will be.)

[marmar]

176. The current Amtrak Detroit-Chicago route is tremendously successful....

.... the trains are perpetually full. Service enhancements can only make them fuller.

[Romulox]

177. In what measure is it "successful"? Is it self-sufficient?

Does it take significant pressure off of I-94? Does it get many people to work and back? Does it allow people of modest means to find work in more places without worrying about their car breaking down?

If the purpose of a public rail system is to provide a pleasant alternative to tourists, I guess that's one kind of success. I thought the point was to provide viable public transportation options that people will actually use in their day to day lives. To get to work and come home, for example.

[marmar]

178. Yes it's self-sufficient.....

High-speed rail is not meant to be a local public transport system, it's meant to be an intercity travel system to get people out of cars and off planes. There's a massive amount of point-to-point business and leisure travel between Detroit and Chicago (more than 40 daily flights each way, and goodness knows how much auto travel) that would love to see high-speed rail on the route. A 2-hour trip on HS rail would be shorter than a trip on a plane, factoring in the airport check-in and commute times.
Nobody's arguing the need for enhanced local public transit, but that's not the purpose of high speed rail. That's a different discussion entirely.

[Romulox]

180. Fair enough. HSR sounds like a worthy SECONDARY priority, in that case.

Most public transportation expenditures should be focused on where they can do the most good.

With the longstanding discussion of the Detroit to Ann Arbor "light rail" line stalled, it's hard to imagine getting behind public money for a Detroit to Chicago line that *isn't even supposed to* address the glaring overall public transportation deficiencies in the region.

[defendandprotect]

122. They've done all they can to destroy Amtrack . . . mass transportation is the enemy!

There was a time when the trains provided a luxury way to travel -- for everyone.

Not recently, however!

[Freddie Stubbs]

126. Amtrak combines the unpleasantness of Greyhound and the expense of flying

[Yes We Did]

129. Um... no.

Are you kidding me? Have you ever taken Amtrak? Let me tell you, it's a ton better than a bus, and it's roughly half the price.

[Yes We Did]

127. I take the same train 5 or 6 times a year...

And while High Speed Rail is a great idea... I must say I enjoy the trip... all 5 1/2 hours of it. But yeah.. 45 minutes late is about standard. My last trip was twice as late though...

[Grinchie]

130. Reminds me of the 6 hour one way trip from Auburn, CA to San Jose, CA

Many years ago, I took advantage of Amtrak to get to a job site to configure network equipment.

I would catch the 5:00 AM train in Auburn, CA, arrive 1.5 hours later in Sacramento, a 40 mile journey and transfer to the 7:00 AM SF Bound train, which would then amble through the state until it arrived in San Jose at 11:00AM.

It was great for me, because I could study with my laptop on the Train, and not be bothered with driving. Most of my colleagues could not sit still long enough to tolerate the incredibly inneficient supposed waste of time, but when I arrived, I was well rested, ready to work, and didn't need to cool off for 2 hours after a harrowing rush hour battle on the congested freeways.

It was clear that Amtrak was making the schedule as unpalatable as they could in regards to people that need to get to work at 9:00AM, so they were losing thousands of passengers daily due to the silly schedule. If you had the ability to set your own working hours as I did, and were smart enough to take advantage of the amount of free time it gives you without worrying about driving, then train travel is the way to go.

The only major problem was staking out an AC Outlet that were sparsely placed in the cars, as the regular bankers and other well to do would seek those tables like ducks on a june bug.

High speed rail is great and all, but it doesn't make any difference if the train loiters in the station for 15 to 20 minutes at each stop. I'd be happy with a 45 mile an hour top speed, but they rarely ever maintain even that on Amtrak.

Also, the state of the Rails varies wildy all over the state. The condition of some sections of track are so bad, they cannot go over 30 miles per hour without rattling the train to pieces. It is so variable, I'm sure that experience means knowing where the bad patches are and to slow down accordingly.

I love the train, I hate the management, and Bush did more than his share to help drive another nail into rail travel rotting corpse.

But hey! Hawaii just got a new 3 billion dollar Nuclear Fast Attack submarine! Yay! The second one in two years! Hurray, we are saved from <Insert Annual Military Boogeyman Here>!

[PretzelWarrior]

133. I'm your 70th REC! Way to go! I am in Portland, OR and wholeheartedly agree

We must get high speed rail in these corridors that actually could use it. I-5 needs less traffic in our area between Portland and Seattle. I would love to see more money and more attention around any kind of mass transit upgrades. But connecting large metro areas is by far the weak link here on the West Coast.

Let us keep telling our newspaper editors, our elected officials, etc. that this is our priority.

I also rode the St. Pancras to Gare du Nord high speed through the chunnel. I also rode public transit in London, Paris, Rome, etc. I thoroughly enjoyed the overnight train from Paris to Milan and my train travel all throughout Italy.

WE MUST BRIGN THIS TO OUR COUNTRY.

[Bette Noir]

139. Seconded.

I was so disappointed when I found out the high-speed line from LA to Vegas was imaginary. A lot of people commute on that route, and there are a lot of truckers who continue on to Salt Lake City. Traffic on that route is unbearable some days. A decent rail line there would save a lot of trouble for thousands of people.

I travel, several times per year, from Los Angeles to Portland. It's 1,000 miles, and I drive. It takes 17 hours. I'd rather do that than go to an airport at each end.

[rhett o rick]

143. You live in the United States, what did you expect. nm

[madmom]

145. My daughter did a round the country tour on Amtrak several years ago. She

started in Toledo Ohio went to Chicago,Flagstaff, LA, Portland Oregon, then back home. She did this in a span of about a year. She vows she will do it again when she's out of school. She LOVED it.

[MrScorpio]

149. That's more than driving time, and I drive to FREAKING DUPAGE COUNTY!

Rail should faster

[Control-Z]

150. I took the All Aboard Amtrak

some years ago with my three children. We started in So California and took the southern route through to New Orleans. Then to Florida and up the east coast to North Carolina where we stayed to visit family for the holidays. Husband (who couldn't take the time off work) flew to NC for the actual holiday. After almost 2 weeks there (one at my sister's in Jacksonville, the other at his sister's in Apex) we all took the train to DC. Husband flew back to California from DC. The kids and I took the train to Connecticut. We spent almost a week there, then went on to New Hampshire for another 5 days. We took the northern route back to So California, from New Hampshire through Chicago.

It was a blast. We had a sleeper car the entire trip, except for the short trains up the coast when we stopped and stayed over.(N Carolina, DC, Ct, New Hampshire). There were other families staying in the sleepers right next to us so the kids had friends to play with. We had most of our meals in the Dinner Car, which was always set beautifully for meals, and offered a variety of items. If we weren't up for the social aspect of dining we ordered room service. The kids played games, colored, even took their naps. I read or napped with them.

It was by far one of the best trips I've ever taken, and relaxing. No airport baloney. None of the stresses of driving tired, taking turns behind the wheel, trying to sleep in the passenger seat. We got a chance to see the country in a way that just isn't possible by car. It was amazing right from the first night, when we ate in the dinner car while the sun was setting over the desert. It felt magical, like a Disneyland ride.

The fare was almost exactly the same as air travel would have been, and it included every stop we made, every train we rode, the sleeper cars, and all meals.

Other than a delay between New Hampshire and Chicago, and a killer migraine (another story all by itself), the train was on time and a delight.

Edit: a typo

[grantcart]

151. amazingly the ad you see when going to this post before logging in is for a Europass on

Europe' train system

[Ex Nihilo]

156. I would love

to have a viable train service in the US. I just wonder how they will overcome the size of the country and the low density of population all over it. That seems to be Europe's main advantage is that they are relatively smaller with their population much more bunched up. Also, how will you pay for it because all of the maps of proposed routes I have seen leave out much more of the country then they cover and it will be a hard sell to use tax dollars for something that will be 0 benefit to so many.

[Ernest Partridge]

157. No contest.

For those who have never travelled by rail in western Europe
and Japan, this argument is endless.

For those who have, there is no argument at all.  I know. 
I've had the good fortune of travelling by rail from Osaka to
Kyoto, Paris to London, and St. Petersburg to Florence.  The
only foreign rail service comparable to the dreadful US
system, I found, was the Russian Trans-Siberian RR.

When comparing air vs. rail, one should compare downtown to
downtown (including surface travel to and from the airports). 
If so, then even today in the US, it's a close comparison. 
With high-speed rail, it's no contest.  Travel time by air vs.
rail from Washingto to NYC is a toss-up.  With high-speed
rail, a four-hour trip from NYC to Chicago would beat air
travel (downtown to LaGuardia to O'Hare to downtown).  Not to
mention the enormous savings in energy costs and atmospheric
pollution.

So why no high speed rail?  It's no mystery.  Big Oil and Big
Auto killed the passenger railroads and successfully lobbied
for the interstate highway, post WWII, and have continually
opposd public investment in passenger rail service. 
(Socialism!)  But now, with the auto industry in ruins and GM
effectively owned by the US public,  with the public alerted
to the global energy crisis, and with the enormous advances in
rail technology (thanks to the aforementioned Japanese and
Europeans)  the time is ripe for a renewal of US passenger
rail service.  (But with the corporate lobby-ocracy still in
place, don't bet on it!)

Not convinced?  Do yourself a favor and take a trip on the
Japanese bullet train, or the "Chunnel" train from
London to Paris.

Case closed.

Ernest Partridge
www.crisispapers.org
www.igc.org/gadfly

[earth mom]

161. Huge Kick for those of us on the West Coast who want to travel to the East Coast

but hate to fly!

:kick:

p.s. sorry too late to rec!

[EFerrari]

166. My mom and I spent a whole summer bumming around Europe by train.

If only we could have that kind of a system here.

[mnhtnbb]

173. I love trains. Going to CA in Sept for 40th HS class reunion and we're

going to ride the train from Solana Beach to LA and then LA to San Luis Obispo to visit friends/family
after the reunion.

We were in Italy in March and the train rides between Venice/Florence/Lake Como/Venice were very pleasant.