Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: B-Chan
When I was in Europe last year I took a high speed train from Brussels to Paris. I was impressed. The train was full, very smooth and quiet and very fast (I think the speed was something like 170 mph). I was able to get to the station about 15 minutes early, go to my platform and the train was loaded in minutes. With the short amount of time in the station, the fact that the terminals are located in the city and the speed of the train it was more than competitive with an airline.

My question is: why don't we have a system likr that here?

10 posted on 08/16/2002 7:16:37 PM PDT by CharacterCounts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]


To: CharacterCounts
My guess: because the trucking and airline industries don't want any more competetion.

I visit Europe regularly (and plan on buying a second home there in the near future). One reason I plan on retiring there is the ease and comfort of travel via their highly developed integrated rail system. Using the ordinary express trains, for example, it becomes possible to live up to 100 miles away from one's place of business in Paris and still have commute times comparable to those found in US cities. For example, I could live in country comfort in the Ile-de-France and easily commute into Paris by RER and Metro -- REGIONAL transit systems. (By using bullet trains such as the EuroStar or TGV, one can live even farther out; London is three hours from Gare du Nord by EuroStar. One could live in Paris, telecommute to the London office on Mondays, Wednedsays and Fridays, and commute in to London for face time on Tuesdays and Thursdays.)

There is no more civilized or comfortable way to travel than by rail. While I'd never advocate the death of the private autombile, I find that commuting by rail is in many ways superior to driving in to work. The trick is to make us cost-conscious American people see how much of the costs of operating an automobile are hidden costs -- and thus pointing out the intrinsic economy of rail transportation.

11 posted on 08/16/2002 7:33:42 PM PDT by B-Chan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: CharacterCounts
My question is: why don't we have a system like that here?

Probably the major reason is track mileage. That's where capital and maintenance costs really add up. The distances in Europe are short hauls compared to what railroads have to cover in the U.S. . . . typically 200-400 km. Here, we're talking thousands of miles of track - even Boston to NYC is about 450 miles of track, and NYC to DC is about the same, IIRC. And that's the NE corridor, which is easy money revenue for passenger service, compared to the long hauls in the rest of the country.

I used to work for a major U.S. RR, and the main line of one of its competitors runs two blocks from our house. I chat with the maintenance crew chiefs while I'm walking the dog, for old times' sake. Just the maintenance on the grade crossing around the corner is staggering. They just regraded, reballasted, poured a new base, and replaced all the ties 40 feet on either side three weeks ago. The signals are tested twice a week with a two man crew. Multiply that by all the gated crossings between Atlanta and Chattanooga . . . on the entire system . . . on the other dozen or so major systems in the U.S. . . . and you're talking about REAL money. (The Paris Brussels high speed line has NO grade crossings at all.)

17 posted on 08/16/2002 8:33:41 PM PDT by AnAmericanMother
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson