Why are trainheads so obsessed with the arbitrary distinction of "high speed rail"?
Especially in America where we barely have any passenger rail in the first place. Sure it would be nice to have trains that go fast, but wouldn't you rather first have any trains at all? Insisting that all new passenger rail be "high speed" just makes it exponentially more expensive to build and less likely that anything will ever happen. See picrel.

>>2049428 (OP)
>but wouldn't you rather first have any trains at all?
We do. And they're useless for getting places unless you live along the NEC. We don't really have a use for more Amtrak trains that don't even beat freeway trip times.

>>2049429
In the northeast it would make perfect sense to gradually upgrade the already existing rail network to high speed, like what's happened in Japan and Western Europe.
In other places where that infrastructure doesn't exist, it's silly to obsess over these kinds of details. The Brightline in Florida has been a massive success because they didn't give a damn about being "high speed" and just focused on making the rail network actually exist.

>>2049428 (OP)
Did you really need to make a second thread for this?

>>2049432
>like what's happened in...Europe
Thanks anon I needed a good laugh

>>2049435
Even more credence to my point.

>>2049428 (OP)
it's not the trainheads, it's the "urbanists" who are obsessed. hsr only good for short routes in countries that don't heavily restrict their airspace. tokyo to kyushu or hokkaido? yeah I'm flying that every time. beijing to guangzhou? fly that. commuter/intercity trains are far better uses of infrastructure money and actually possible to build politically in america (see amtrak midwest expansions and track speed upgrades, brightline, la metro, Sonoma marin, caltrain electrification, Dallas, cta rpm) , and sleeper trains are better option for long distance in china being half the cost and not wasting your daylight. and already if you live near 30th st, you can commute to midtown on the acela faster than some in Brooklyn and Queens, so that's one use I can see, but haters will say that's not hsr. would be nice if tokyo had 100mph+ commuter trains like marc, septa, njt, amtrak do, hell even metra hits 79mph coming into the city. I'd live further out if the "express" could go faster than 62mph

>>2049438
There's some truth to this as well. California is home to many, many municipal airports. You have LAX, Long Beach, John Wayne, Fullerton, Hawthorne, Torrence, Santa Monica, Ontario, Riverside, Corona etc and that's all within the same metropolitan area

>>2049438
The first person to build a sleeper train that goes from Penn Station to Orlando is going to drown in money.
There is so much air traffic between the tri-state and Florida and everyone hates going to Newark/JFK.
They could call it the Nightline.

>>2049428 (OP)
At this point in the US as long as we get rail that's faster than interstate speed and able to operate in a timely manner, it will be an improvement. Anything to mitigate the car problem.

>>2049432
>In the northeast it would make perfect sense to gradually upgrade the already existing rail network to high speed,
They've been doing that piecemeal since the 80s

>In other places where that infrastructure doesn't exist, it's silly to obsess over these kinds of details.
A train that takes me somewhere and isn't frequent or reliable (pretty much all Amtrak service outside of the NEC) is useless

>they didn't give a damn about being "high speed" and just focused on making the rail network actually exist.
Then why is Brightline West intent on HSR?

>>2049440
Most people are going to continue to fly to Florida from NYC because spending 2 hours on a plane is just a better use of vacation time than 24 hours on a train. People might ride such a train but it's not going to make a dent in the demand for air travel.

>>2049440
Sadly the predatory auto/airline hegemony will try to do everything to shoot it down before it even starts. I'm hoping for the best though.

>>2049444
>A train that takes me somewhere and isn't frequent or reliable
So? Who said you can't have frequent and reliable rail at more traditional speeds?
>(pretty much all Amtrak service outside of the NEC) is useless
Would making the trains go faster magically want to make people use them more? You're never going to build a train that's faster than a plane. There's no point in taking the train anywhere if you're just going to have to rent a care once you get off.
>Then why is Brightline West intent on HSR?
My guess? To hype up investors. It will definitely help that it's just going to be a straight line through the desert and doesn't have to worry about being part of a larger rail network. But I still have my reservations. It's already impossible to build anything on the west coast, they're not making things any easier on themselves.

>>2049444
>A train that takes me somewhere and isn't frequent or reliable
So? Who said you can't have frequent and reliable rail at more traditional speeds?
>(pretty much all Amtrak service outside of the NEC) is useless
Would making the trains go faster magically make people use them more? You're never going to build a train that's faster than a plane, and there's no point in taking the train anywhere if you're just going to have to rent a car once you get off.
>Then why is Brightline West intent on HSR?
My guess? To hype up investors. It will definitely help that it's just going to be a straight line through the desert and doesn't have to worry about being part of a larger rail network. But I still have my reservations. It's already impossible to build anything on the west coast, they're not making things any easier on themselves.

cali needs to upgrade their existing amtrak routes desu, considering how scenic and important the surfliner route is, they should just double track it first and run regular local services in different corridors.

>>2049445
I'm not talking about the vacationers man, I'm talking about the snowbirds. Not people who will be in Florida for 6 days but people who will be there for 6 months.

>>2049451
If you're spending 6 months in Florida you'll want your own car. Snowbirds won't be taking the train down.

>>2049452
Someone who owns two homes is generally wealthy enough to own two cars. And of course there will be intermittent travel to New York and back, there always is.

>>2049453
>Someone who owns two homes is generally wealthy enough to own two cars.
Bold assumption made by someone who has never owned a car, but if your business model is dependent on geriatrics who will use it 2x a year, it might not be feasible.

>>2049450
Did you forget about CAHSR in a CAHSR thread?

>>2049454
>Bold assumption made by someone who has never owned a car
It's not an assumption it's basic math.

>>2049456
Can't wait for school to start again

>>2049432
>>2049449
>>2049444
Pretty sure that part of the Brightline airport connection is technically HSR since it runs at 125 mph/200 kph, owing to both straight track and no grade crossings, but that's a relatively short distance compared to the slower portion along the Atlantic Ocean where it shares the network (albeit with its own trackage) with the freight lines.

Trying to build an entirely new network is nearly impossible, you need to have upgrades of some additional track and make some compromises in grade crossings and you'll still have rail. Texas Central Railway made the mistake of trying to plot out an entirely new right of way (part of it being parallel to major power lines) and all the ROW required; what they should've done is upgraded existing railroad tracks and share it with Union Pacific, then add just 17 miles of track and lease it from TxDOT so it sits between the lanes. Now you have a complete track from Houston to Dallas and can add Houston suburban stations, College Station, Waco, suburban Dallas, and Dallas.

>>2049428 (OP)
>Why are trainheads so obsessed with the arbitrary distinction of "high speed rail"?
Autism and other mental illness.

>>2049428 (OP)
>Why are trainheads so obsessed with the arbitrary distinction of "high speed rail"?
Like anon said it's not trainheads but urbanists, particularly the astroturfed developer shills and their mindless cattle followers. By slapping arbitrary definition on it you can extract so much more money from it, often without doing much at all.

>>2049479
>125 mph/200 kph
I'd consider anything between 160 and 240 kph only "higher speed rail" and not proper HSR.

>>2049501
right, the tokaido shinkansen wasn't hsr

>>2049533
The Tokaido Shinkansen was built in the 1960s, you can't apply the same standards over half a century in the past when HSR was only just being defined as a proper concept. Nowadays it runs at 285 kph.
Do better.