Why cant The U.S. make a rail system like this?

[dogmush]

High speed trains between major cities?[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acela_Express]Acela [/ame] We can, and did 9 years ago. Our top speed is limited by the need to use existing tracks, but it's still pretty quick. There's a VERY limited market for this kind of travel in the US, and land to build dedicated tracks on is both hard to find, and expensive.

 

[lokilightning]

because of the pussification of America. Somebody, somewhere would find a way to sue. Noise pollution, air pollution, the wrong people getting the contracts, etc, etc...

 

[95oRANGEcRUSH]

actually it all stems back to the early 1900"s when the auto industry decided to lobby against trolley cars and rail systems, with government action they soon had their way. You can thank your domestic auto maker for that.

QFT. Trolley systems were actually killed entirely in part due to GM pushing large buses as a means for transport. Look where that got us.

 

[swoosh_stang]

QFT. Trolley systems were actually killed entirely in part due to GM pushing large buses as a means for transport. Look where that got us.

You are completely partially correct.

 

[swoosh_stang]

The culture in the US doesn't lend itself to transportation by rail anymore.

In China most people going more than a mile or two, travel using mass transit.

 

[95oRANGEcRUSH]

You are completely partially correct.

:read:

 

[SVT4ME]

I rode the shinkansen a few times in Japan and the ride was so smooth. The dinning car has a speedo in the corner showing the rate of speed. It was always around 280 the entire trip. Morioka to Tokyo which is almost half the length of the country.

 

[aaandht]

Made in China? It'll be busted in a year. China manufacturing has piss poor tolerances. With something of this nature, the negligence will end in disaster.

 

[CobraBob]

In the U.S. we rely much more on air transportation when traveling longer distances. In China and some other countries they rely more on rail transportation. I'll tell you one thing, I wouldn't be exactly thrilled with traveling 210+ mph on a train.

 

[WireEater]

It's all cool until that things goes off the track.

 

[matab14]

There has been talk of a high speed rail connecting Chicago and Minneapolis/St.Paul. It would travel around 110 mph.

I can say at this point it is defiantly much more than "talk" Can't go into a lot of details but the gov is taking bids on new designs and what not....:coolman:

 

[LS2GTO]

They can do that because the path between those cities is pretty much straight and little elevation changes I believe. I doubt that 200mph train is taking many turns and going up and down hills.

Good luck making a rail anywhere on the east coast straight enough to handle 200mph trains. Do you realize how many turns a train has to make around here to avoid houses, towns, highways etc? No way they can have it go that fast with so many turns.

Now if we were talking a train like this in the soutwest/midwest where it's flat and there are no houses, towns or highways for miles then yes it's possible. But with the population density of major cities it's literally impossible to make a rail so straight that it can sustain 200mph trains.

 

[B-O-B'03]

If they had a high speed rail triangle between Dallas <-> Houston; Dallas <-> Austin and Austin <-> Houston I think people would use it.
I know I would, driving down 35 blows and Amtrak to San Antonio took 11 hours.

I doubt the airline lobbies would ever let it happen though.

-Brian