That you're a gas industry shill.
Now
piss off before I have to have you banned from this thread.
Wow so you are totally incapable of dealing with the fact that bullet trains are impractical because it takes 50 miles to accelerate one to full speed and as long to decelerate making local travel impossible. LOL if you are so bright you can build one yourself and charge everyone who wants to ride a quarter. So where are the billion wind turbines coming from?
It does not take 50 miles, Even the older trains in Japan can reach their top speed of 170 MPH (270 km/h) in less than 3 minutes, a little over 5 miles. And most of that is at a lower speed, as it is still in the terminal area, and it can not really begin to speed up until it gets to its clear track area.
A lot of countries unlike the US are simply built better for such an infrastructure. The US has the highest rate of private auto ownership in the world, which means in the last 70+ years, "urban sprawl" has meant that you have cities that are now larger than many European countries, all fairly densely packed with no open areas between the cities to put in the rails needed. A visit to much of Europe and Japan, and it resembles Los Angeles before the Second World War. A series of small towns, some even dozens of miles apart with open spaces and farmland between them.
But today, if you start at the Santa Barbara Mountains to the North of LA, the only open space all the way to the Mexican Border is the Marine base at Camp Pendleton. It is now a huge megacity, that covers most of the Southern part of the state. Nowhere to put in such a system, even if they wanted it.
Where there is space there is no one to travel, remember that a hundred billion dollar train has to serve millions of people, you think that there exist such traffic between here and the border. Sheesh wake up
No, I do not miss it.
I am well aware that such a system will never work in the US anymore. Bullet trains missed their window in the US, other than in a few select locations. For most of the country, they would just never work. Ever.
I can see a few possibilities, but there are few. A line from Sacramento to San Francisco would still work, as would extending it to Stockton. But that is about it, purely for access between those cities. Not the state-wide mess they are trying to build now. Los Angeles and Vegas was a very super route, 40 years ago. I think a "high speed" solution between those cities would still work today, but not a "Bullet Train" anymore. Simply because the Indian Casinos in California have sucked up a lot of the business that would have taken it decades ago.
I could also see one in some other areas, like to and from say Seattle and Spokane (maybe extending to Boise then Salt Lake), Miami and Atlanta, maybe even at a stretch from Dallas to New Orleans. But nothing of a scale that most countries have, we simply have city density, geography, and topography that would work against it.
I will admit, I am a life long "rail fan", and love the idea of rail travel. But I am also a realist and a pragmatic person, and see the real issues involved. Is there a place for regional lines? Sure there is, but each decade means less and less as the right of ways are gobbled up by urban sprawl. 40 years ago, you could have built such a train from pretty much downtown LA to Vegas, but not anymore. The same with a plan to go to San Diego. What was 40 years ago still mostly farms and open land is now dense city, no way to run a bullet train through it anymore.
There are not enough travelers between any two American cities to make a near trillion dollar rail system profitable which is why no such system exist.
Who says it needs to be a "trillion dollars"?
The problem is, you are listening to the idiots running the California project. They are morons, creating a system that will fail spectacularly.
Are you even aware that they were once working on replacing the Capitol Corridor with such a line, and the cost was only around $125 million? They were making an offer to buy older trains from Japan, and simply upgrade the existing line between those two cities. Pretty much how the system in Japan evolved. The line was already popular, and until 2019 (COVID) saw an increase in ridership every year, with more trains needed to meet demands.
But Bonehead Moonbeam Brown nixed it, and instead went for the most insane and expensive idea possible. Likely from spending too much time doing headstands in yoga. The original "Northern California Concept" which he took over and crushed was actually a recreation of a line from 100 years ago. And yes, 100 years ago there was actually an electric train system that went from Chico to Sacramento, then all the way to San Francisco (with a spur to Stockton). They were going to make a newer Sac-SF line, which could have been profitable within a decade because they already had the right of ways and ground assets. All it needed was new rails and rolling stock.
Now, they have sunk over $100 billion in a train to and from nowhere, that even if scrapped will never make its money back.
Such a system never needs to cost "trillions of dollars", that is only because of the morons in California. All other cities and states that have looked into it all are considering using existing right of ways, existing lines and stations. And mostly with surplus trains from other countries. Only one was stupid enough to decide to build the entire thing from scratch, and not use assets they already owned.
Again you are lost in the fact that bullet trains are technically feasible. They are not financially profitable and every person who rides the trains would need to fork over 10,000 per ride. This is why the Concord failed, it just used too much fuel and there were not enough riders. You are a communist sympathizer masquerading as a socialist train builder. Your world is a failure and a farce and you will never ride a 300mph American train to no where. I wonder do you even own a car or you just want the government to transport you by rail
Are you aware that the ridership of the Capitol Corridor before COVID was just under 2 million per year? a 168 mile route, that takes just over 3 hours. I knew several people that took it every day to get to and from Sacramento and San Francisco for work. In 2018 they finally had to start their delayed rebuilding project, which is what they wanted to use as a test for a bullet train. They already had to replace all the trains and rails, so why not upgrade it to a bullet train at the same time?
Cost of the rail replacement was around $125 million, double that to $250 million to make it a bullet train, and the time would be cut to just over 1 hour. I have done the SF commute, the last station would have been about 15 minutes north of where I lived. I did either a 90 minute motorcycle ride, or a 30 minute drive to the ferry terminal and a 1 hour boat trip to get there. I would have been glad to drop either one for a 15 minute drive, and about 25 minutes on the train. And the ones that run that system knew it.
The problem is that you are thinking like the morons that are running the California project. You are looking at huge projects, and missing the fact that smaller ones do not have to be that expensive. They were once looking at similar routes in Southern California, but urban sprawl and topography have cancelled all of those plans. They were looking at a similar system from Boston to DC, but once again urban sprawl eventually killed it.
"Bullet Trains" do not have to go "300 miles per hour", they do not have to go 1,000 miles or more. We already have people that take trains hundreds of miles every day, that is nothing new. The CC was going to have a top speed of around 150-180 mph, that is the speed of most bullet train routes. Not "300 mph". And I can promise you that if it was possible, I could name 100 or more cities that could do that easily, if not for other factors.
Primarily urban sprawl and topography. Not because the people would not use it. You need a very wide right of way to run such a train, and not many places still have a rail right of way wide enough to run them safely at more than 60 miles per hour anymore. And cities like LA have the very topology working against them. That city is a collection of almost a dozen little valleys, impossible to run such a system through.
Now if they had built one 4 decades ago, I have no doubt it would still be in use today. But as I said, they missed the boat and now it is to late.
Dude your friends have no life, a 3 hour ride to work is 6 hours round trip not counting time to the train on each end so your friends traveled 7 hours per day and worked 8 hours for a 15 to 16 hour day, with 8 hours of sleep they had no life. You need to stop pretending and act your age, whatever that really is. Not that your post is real because a 3 hour ride or 168 miles is .93MPM or 55MPH. God you are stoopid, is this a government retard alert test. Some train, is Fred Flintstone pushing it with his feet? No one travels 7 hours per day, not anyone alive anyway
Welcome to living in California. Which is why I no longer live there. I left LA in 2003, moved to the Bay area in 2012, left there in 2015, and left the state for good in 2020. I will never live there again.
But no, I am not kidding. When you work in say San Francisco or Los Angeles, you have to decide to make a tradeoff. Do you spend most of your income on rent, maybe living in an apartment or in a not so great area of town in exchange for being close to work? Or do you do a long commute and live in a nicer area.
About half of those I worked with in SF were locals, and walked or biked to work. Where $3,000 a month gets you a loft apartment without a parking space. Me, I lived in Fairfield. Where for less than that I had a nice 4 bedroom house in the suburbs. When I lived in LA, most of my time I lived in Lancaster. Yet I worked near LAX, over 100 miles away. Once again, did I live close and rent a place in a crappy neighborhood, or live and commute where I could afford to own my own place in a nicer neighborhood?
And you can see this growth in LA over the decades. When I was a baby and my parents moved to the San Fernando Valley from the Long Beach area, that was the "suburbs". By the time we left in the mid-1970's, that was Simi Valley. When I returned in the early 1980's, it was the Santa Clarita Valley. By the 1990's, it was the Lancaster-Palmdale area in the Mojave Desert. In 1995 I lived on the most northern road in Lancaster, Avenue I. Today, my son and father in law live on Avenue E. Each letter is a mile apart, so even though I have never been there, I know that is 4 miles North of where the city used to end. And when they hit Avenue A, that is literally the Kern County Line, there it becomes Rosemond (and people already commute from there), just a few miles outside of Edwards Air Force Base (yes, where the Space Shuttle landed).
This is a where around LA, it is common for an 800 square foot 2 bedroom bungalow to cost around $1 million. And if you can do the 2-4 hour commute, you could own a 3 bedroom 2.5 bath 1,600 square foot house for around $650,000. Feel free to ask anybody else in here that has ever lived in LA, San Francisco, or other major metro area in the last 20 years. I knew people in Connecticut that did similar trips via train to New York, and that is also nothing new. The "New York Dream" of owning a house in Connecticut has been around for decades, even I Love Lucy featured that towards the end. Ricky made it big, they moved to Connecticut, and he commuted back to New York to work.
Hell, Allan Sherman even immortalized it in a song way back in 1963.
Now I have a big office at the end of the hall,
With very fancy carpeting from wall to wall
I keep my mouth open and I keep my ears shut,
And I've got a little palace in Connecticut
And yes, 3 hours each way. What, how fast do you think most trains run in the US? 55 is their speed limit in most places, the rails can't handle them going any faster. They do better in many ways because there is no traffic, and you can sleep or read on the trip. But really now, government conspiracy? I can tell you have just never had to make those choices because you never lived in a big city.
But tell you what, feel free to listen to the LA traffic someday, say on KFI. You can stream them for free, and have a map open in front of you. When I first moved back to LA in the 1990's, State Route 14 (north edge of LA city to Palmdale-Lancaster) was still a 2 lane freeway in each direction. Now it is 4-5 lanes in each direction, and traffic during rush hour is 20 mph on average. They are already planning yet another widening within the next decade, estimates are it will decrease to 10-15 mph by then. Where in the hell do you think all those people are going to and from?
It was the same decision I made when I took the boat to SF instead of my bike. The time was about the same (if I had been a car that would have been a 2+ hour commute), but I could relax on the boat. Even have a drink on the way home if I wanted, as they actually had a bar on it. No trying to find a parking spot that would have cost me $40 a day (it was only $10 as I used a motorcycle), living in a much nicer area than the hellhole that is San Francisco.
You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. I already said, and it is a fact that the Capitol Corridor pre-COVID was about to pass 2 million riders a year. Who in the hell do you think was taking it? People like me, who liked the higher income of jobs in San Francisco, but were unwilling to live there. Want out of the mess of the Bay Area, better be prepared to commute 100 miles or more.