>How come we don't have a Bullet Train yet in the US
because amerifats cannot into reason and prefer driving big cars which consume a big amount of fuel
America, fuck yeah! pic related

High speed trains work in Europe and Japan because those areas are rather dense population wise.

America is a lot more open. Combined with decades of car based planning, everything is kind of diffused.

Really advanced trains may work in certain areas such as Bos-Wash, but overall the investment isn't really worth it.

>>328662
I agree. High speed trains will work in the Eastern US and a few other places with shorter distances between cities like maybe in California or Texas. But taking a train from Chicago to Los Angeles is something for tourists and there will never be the any reason to spend billions in order to go faster.

>>328662

>Combined with decades of car based planning

You pretty much summed it up right there. The problem is that when the auto-mania phase started in the early twentieth century you guys went all-out apeshit with it and never looked back. Now 99% of America's infrastructure is built around cars and the whole concept of fast, comftorable, efficient and effective public transportation is just not understood let alone desired by a good portion of Americans, despite it being vastly superior to a completely car based infrastructure. The rest of the world on the other hand skipped the auto-mania phase and went straight to the public-transportation phase. That's why you see such awesome public transport there while you see gas-guzzling SUVs and those old hunks of rusting metal the 'Murikans call "trains" across the Atlantic/Pacific.

There are many factors at work here, some have been aforementioned. The United States used to have the most extensive railway system in the world. However, when car companies started becoming large in the states, they bought and tore-down railway lines. The unstated goal was to cripple the railway system and force the switch to autos.

Today, US railway infrastructure sucks and it is difficult to see the benefits of it. However, without demand, who is going to spend billions to overhaul the infrastructure? No company is willing to take the risk. At the same time, the American preference towards small government means that most Americans wouldn't want to see thier government dictating such a large infrastructure project. So, the topic of improved rail in the US is a chicken-and-egg problem.

Bullet trains compete with airlines, not cars. Stop comparing them to cars. Nobody commutes by bullet train.

That's not necessarily true. Bullet trains are not exactly the class of airlines. They don't travel quite as fast, have more stops, but don't have as much security or always have reserved seating. So they are out of the price range of a daily commute, but may be in the range of a weekly commute.

The other part of the equation is that bullet trains are only one piece of a transit infrastructure supported by many local trains. This is part of what differentiates these trains from airlines, and which the US severely lacks.

Yes it would be cheaper OP, although there is an initial investment in the infrastructure which takes time to pay back

But keep in mind the original Interstate Highway System cost 650 billion in adjust dollars
And today the trust fund that is suppose to maintain it without costing taxpayers a cent in fact falls short to the tune of 10 billion every year, which Congress must top up with transfers from the general fund

>>328662
>High speed trains work in Europe and Japan because those areas are rather dense population wise.
false premise
North East, Mid West, California, Texas, etc
These places have the same distances and population centre densities
>>328664
>But taking a train from Chicago to Los Angeles
who ever suggested a cross country high speed train?
quote and cite them
>>328668
It was not a consumer decision
It was a deliberate putsch on the part of the auto industry to force people out of public transportation and into cars by shutting down inter-urban railways and city streetcars
>>328705
>have more stops
no they dont
they depart Paris and arrive in Lyons without ever having a stop in between

The answer is to just make more efficient vehicles that get 40 miles per gallon or better. it can happen.

The trains are great. Is important to have both: cargo trains and passenger trains.

>>328758
doesn't solve freeways finite capacity

>>328757
>>have more stops
>no they dont

There are direct HS trains, but it is also advantageous to have multiple stops on a HS rail line. Unlike airplanes, stopping at a station does not cost as much time on the schedule as does landing, docking, and taking off again. Obviously it won't be as many stops as on a slower train line.

>>328782
>but it is also advantageous to have multiple stops on a HS rail line.
no its not, it slows it down
run a seperate service to that stop

Because Americans are stupid and they love their cars. LOL

>>328763
Freeways have far higher capacity than railways do, EVEN WITH the pathetic average of 1.1 persons per vehicle.

>>328810
Not only that, but the braking losses when stopping from such high speeds are horrendous. The Shinkansen gets around it (somewhat) with regenerative braking, but all other bullet trains' efficiency goes down the shitter when they revert to a stop-and-go schedule.

>>328822
The trains aren't stopping at stations a couple km apart. I'm talking on the order of 50-100km at least. And it does make sense. If you want to talk about braking loss, look at an airplane. Why else do you think there are different express classes even for the Shinkansen. Regenerative braking curbs much of the losses, converting the speed directly to electricity.

Besides, why would you limit high-speed rail to only non-stop service? Sure, you can do non-stop service, but that would put it in a red-water battle with airlines, and take away the advantages it has over airlines in stopping.

>>328820
What is your source for this claim?
You had better get it and quote and cite it because you are about to be school.

>The carrying capacity of a freeway lane is roughly 1800 vehicles per hour, or 2000 people per hour given average vehicle occupancy of 1.11 passengers. A typical six-lane freeway therefore carries up to 12,000 people per hour in both directions.
>A double-track suburban railway, meanwhile, can easily support one train movement every three minutes in each direction without straining its capacity. A six-car train can carry around 1000 passengers before reaching crush conditions. Thus the rail line can carry at least 40,000 people per hour in both directions, and perhaps more depending on the signalling system and vehicle design.

Fucking told.

>>328833
a train to Marseilles does not stop at Lyons
it stops at Marseilles
other services go to Lyons

>Play Train Sim 2012

>Acela
>Scenery
>OH GOD GRAY, GRAY EVERYWHERE

>HST, ect
>Bushes, Trees, green
>Green, Green and peaceful everywhere

>BUT THE US ISnT GRAY ONLY
>Besides shitty deserts?

Fuck the US bro

>>328835
Having multiple types of schedules on the same track eats capacity for what amounts to novelty. As your passenger demand grows, you're forced to standardize. Because you have a good portion of your demand coming from the stations in between, that standard is not a direct express.

Transit is not ideal as point-to-point service like the direct express is. Car is the ideal point-to-point service. Transit is ideal serving lines where passenger demand from multiple point to point trips combines.

>>328833
Because stopping causes trains to loose time, with no stops or minimal stops you can ride at maximum speed for a vast majority of the route (or why it takes the Northeast Regional 4.5 hours to go from NY to Boston, and the HIGH SPEED Acella 3.15 or so, because the Regional makes EVERY LOCAL STOP besides the commuter stops in New York/CT/Massachusetts

>>328649
>wouldn't be cheaper and faster all around?
Not necessarily. You aren't taking into account the cost of building and maintaining tens of thousands of miles of track and other infrastructure (at least), most of which will never even see anything approaching capacity.

>Wouldn't building the infrastructure create a employment stimulus like it did when we were building freeways and highways in the 30's and 50's?
That's not how the economy works.

>This whole thread
>High speed trains compared with cars
>NOT high speed trains compared with aircraft
What. The. Fuck.

it is not viable in a country as large as america
sure euros and japos and the koreans can do it even the chinese

but in america where the car is king who the fuck is going to ride the train?

they are trying to build a highspeed rail in cali right now LA to San Fran

and it looks like a total money pit atm

totally government funded it hasent even started yet and its billions of dollars over budget

the people who advocate this system say yeh oh yeh raidership will payback the bill in no time

but srsly guys its all bullshit america is about convenience why the fuck would you buy a 100$ high speed train ticket when u can buy a 70$ plane ticket and be there in half the time>>?

it hasent been build in america because there is no demand for it....

i came from south korea and lived in japan for a while and their public transport is da best driving sucked too small

but ive been in the USA for a couple of years LA to be exact and guess what everyone drives no one walks if you try to use the public transport its full of homless people just sleeping subway dosent even go anywhere useful so yea if the demand is there it will come and there really is no demand here

I just hate how their is no public transportation where i live. If i want to go to my friends house it would take me 3 hours to get there. Mainly because you arent allowed to walk on the highway, so i have to take all these weird back road routes.

To take a buss there i have to walk 2 miles to the bus hub and then take a 2 hour bus ride with 2 transfers, so if a bus is running late and i miss the connection i have a 45 minute wait. when i do arrive i then walk 5 miles.

To drive there it takes 15 minutes...

So yea this is a VERY common occurrance in the USA. And its not like our roadways are safe either. Hell i live in minnesota where the bridge collapsed. The entire infastructure of america is decaying and rotting away and nothing is being done. The whole thing is unkempt from roads, bridges, sewer system, electric grid, levies, dams, and railways and probably a lot more that i dont know about.

I would love to have better train service but there is little that can be done. The one good thing is when i do get to my friends house its a 5 min car ride to the metrolink then a 45 minute ride into minneapolis right next to a good concert venue. Its a lot better than trying to find a parking spot somewhere. But it is a 25 min + weight between each train.

Because we don't want phallus shaped trains.

>>329033
>but srsly guys its all bullshit america is about convenience why the fuck would you buy a 100$ high speed train ticket when u can buy a 70$ plane ticket and be there in half the time>>?
>convenience
train departs and arrives city centre
planes at an airport out in the middle of nowhere
now which one is more convenient?
and for 100-400 miles, flying is a bit of a joke

>>329033
>and guess what everyone drives no one walks if you try to use the public transport its full of homless people
they tore up the Red and Yellow Cars decades ago and have willfully built the city against public transportation
>subway dosent even go anywhere useful
two too short lines gee no wonder

>>329038
so that means an area needs a variety of bus routes
gee whoda thunk it

>>329038
I hear claims like this from Americans and I think it must be from the auto industry, routes can simply not be that convoluted
they aren't where I live

also, buses=/=trains moron

>>329064

>Buses=trains

Murifat who's never ridden a train in his life detected. Or perhaps, Murifat who's only ridden a subway? I can't tell.

>>329073
"=" =/= "=/=", moron.

>>329073
he lives somewhere with insufficient bus transportation, and what there is seems to be ludicrously put together
obviously there is no rail