A more rail-oriented US

[Alon]

Technically the POD is somewhere in the late 1890s, but it's a TL about the 20th century.

https://twitter.com/alon_levy/status/1177938487062007816

In OTL, there's a strict separation of urban and suburban rail in North America (unlike in Germany, or Japan); even today there's a culture in favored quarter suburbs of New York that urban rail is for the poor and well-off suburbanites only take commuter rail and only at rush hour, and this was even more intense in the Mad Men era.

The upshot is that if New York had not built urban rail separate from suburban rail and instead built a combined system, as was proposed multiple times in the 1880s and 90s, the urban rail network would look pretty similar to OTL's, but the postwar view of what modern transportation is like would have been different enough to result in German-style transport politics (i.e. cars-and-trains, not just cars). The TL has US transit mode share bottoming at 20%, whereas Germany's bottomed in the teens, but the US has bigger metro areas than Germany and started building freeways later.

 

[Expat]

Do you have any thoughts on how this would effect mid-century “urban renewal” projects? Are these decisions mitigating tear-downs for freeways, or giving them a broader coalition, as they make way for new rail connections, too?

 

[marathag]

US hit peak Rail trackage in 1913, it had been consolidation of Routes ever since medium sized Class 1 Railroads ate the smaller ones by 1929, then Mergers after the '60s.
Only way to change that, is a major gutting of the ICC

 

[kernals12]

Why is there such nostalgia for railroads? I don't see anyone wishing for typewriters to return. Or are we soon going to hear that these trains are going to be powered by steam?

Automobiles offer far more flexibility and convenience than trains could ever feasibly offer. Airplanes offer speed and safety far beyond even the greatest trains.

Frankly, with the exception of New York, there are no American cities that need rail. Buses can do the job just as well and at much lower cost.

Also, paradoxically, the US moves a much greater share of its freight by rail than Europe. Speaking of Europe, passenger rail is only still viable there thanks to massive government subsidies.

 

[marathag]

Why is there such nostalgia for railroads? I don't see anyone wishing for typewriters to return. Or are we soon going to hear that these trains are going to be powered by steam?

Thing is, while the US has the worst passenger Rail of any developed country, it also has the best rail freight on the planet

 

[kernals12]

Thing is, while the US has the worst passenger Rail of any developed country, it also has the best rail freight on the planet

Nobody needs to go by train anymore. We have aluminum tubes that can cruise through the stratosphere at 500 mph.

Freight rail still works because cargo doesn't need to be moved quickly and the weight makes taking it by air prohibitively expensive.

 

[Alon]

Do you have any thoughts on how this would effect mid-century “urban renewal” projects? Are these decisions mitigating tear-downs for freeways, or giving them a broader coalition, as they make way for new rail connections, too?

So... I think urbanists today conflate 3 distinct projects that happened around the same time, and had different constituencies; I know I made that mistake around 2010 or so.

1. Road construction outside urban areas, e.g. the Pershing map and the US Highway network.
2. Freeway construction within cities.
3. Urban renewal, consisting of demolishing slums (or neighborhoods that used to be slums but were gentrifying, like the Village) and replacing them with cultural or government centers (like Lincoln Center or SF Civic Center), commercial buildings, or high-rise housing projects.

The interests pushing for #2 and 3 were urban. Until around 1939, it was illegal to spend federal road money within cities because the point was to connect different cities, and under pressure from urban legislators the law was amended to give some of the road funding to cities, which used it to build early freeways because they already had high-quality paved roads and the only way to increase capacity was grade separation. Moreover, there were interests pushing #3 that weren't particularly enthusiastic about cars, e.g. Lewis Mumford.

The upshot is that in the ATL, there's no way to change #1 - the interests pushing that were so embedded in US social relations that it's arguably ASB to make that not happen with any POD postdating US independence. #3 probably stays as in OTL as well, due to a different set of interests; I'd place the latest plausible POD for changing that somewhere during Reconstruction. #2 can plausibly change, but in the ATL as I'm defining it, it only changes lightly, e.g. the bridges are built with two-track railways in addition to the many road lanes (the GWB was built with provisions for such a railway, but the space ended up used by more road lanes).

US hit peak Rail trackage in 1913, it had been consolidation of Routes ever since medium sized Class 1 Railroads ate the smaller ones by 1929, then Mergers after the '60s.
Only way to change that, is a major gutting of the ICC

Yeah, but the point isn't branch consolidation, it's what happened in urban areas. Britain for example had the Beeching Axe, but in London nothing was removed and the regional rail network there keeps growing, even if it's not as well-integrated as in the big German or Japanese cities or in Paris.

Why is there such nostalgia for railroads?

I live in Berlin and used to live in Stockholm and Paris. It's not nostalgia; it's an efficient way to get around the city. Note that I'm picking a POD specifically to nudge New York in the direction that Berlin and Tokyo took.

Thing is, while the US has the worst passenger Rail of any developed country, it also has the best rail freight on the planet

No, it doesn't, and Americans need to stop clinging to that myth. Everywhere with long overland distances and heavy freight, there's a lot of freight rail traffic: China, Russia, Canada, Australia, Sweden, Switzerland, the US, India. China actually beats the US on ton-km per route-km while also beating every major European country on passenger-km per route-km (only Japan beats China on the latter, at least among big countries, and I don't think even Switzerland beats China).

 

[marathag]

No, it doesn't, and Americans need to stop clinging to that myth.

Last numbers I saw, it was US, then Russia, then China for ton-miles of goods moved.

 

[Carl Schwamberger]

I'm unsure of the numbers so there may not be anything to it, but placing the entire cost on the user for each mode of transportation & effectively avoid subsidies direct and indirect. ie: Passengers via the airlines pay for the full cost of airport construction and the navigation/regulatory network. No cities or local governments assembling a package of local taxes, bonds, and Federal grants to build mega airports for the aircraft to flock to.

Similarly automobile owners pay via tolls, vehicle taxes, fuel taxes the actual cost of road construction and maintenance, and regulatory/safety oversight. I suspect the actual efficiencies in transportation would be revealed and traffic patterns be different than OTL.

Of course this runs against a strong underlying socialist streak in the US. The practice of government subsidizing start up capitol costs and operating cost for popular activities is heavily ingrained in the US economy & culture.

Last numbers I saw, it was US, then Russia, then China for ton-miles of goods moved.

Wonder where we look these numbers up.

 

[kernals12]

I'm unsure of the numbers so there may not be anything to it, but placing the entire cost on the user for each mode of transportation & effectively avoid subsidies direct and indirect. ie: Passengers via the airlines pay for the full cost of airport construction and the navigation/regulatory network. No cities or local governments assembling a package of local taxes, bonds, and Federal grants to build mega airports for the aircraft to flock to.

Similarly automobile owners pay via tolls, vehicle taxes, fuel taxes the actual cost of road construction and maintenance, and regulatory/safety oversight. I suspect the actual efficiencies in transportation would be revealed and traffic patterns be different than OTL.

Of course this runs against a strong underlying socialist streak in the US. The practice of government subsidizing start up capitol costs and operating cost for popular activities is heavily ingrained in the US economy & culture.



Wonder where we look these numbers up.

Putting the total cost on the backs of users would pretty much kill off rail.

 

[marathag]

Wonder where we look these numbers up.

For 2017, has the Russian on top with 2491876, US with 2445132, and China with 2146466 million ton-km goods transported.
https://data.worldbank.org/indicato...st_recent_value_desc=true&start=2017&view=bar

 

[Laqueesha]

Butterfly away the Mississippi River.

Why is there such nostalgia for railroads? I don't see anyone wishing for typewriters to return. Or are we soon going to hear that these trains are going to be powered by steam?

Preach, brother!

 

[Salvador79]

Why is there such nostalgia for railroads?

Speaking as a railroad friend and nostalgic, I'd say there are cultural as well as rational/political reasons.
Rationally, rail transport is much more ecologically sustainable, so much more rail transport and much less car and air transport would be a very important contribution to stopping climate change.
Culturally, I must concede that I love both the social / public nature of public transportation, and then railroads are also associatively linked to the heyday of industrial progress in the Western world, which was a horrible age in many ways, but also the golden age of the labour movement (and it was particularly strong among railroad workers). Being a socialist leftie myself, those are things I am very much emotionally attached to. As for the public nature: I know there are many people who view it just the other way round (they don't like to sit next to smelly or aggressive other people, or have to stand because it's so crowded, or whatever), but I, for one, think public transportation wonderfully combines individuality and community. It allows urbanity, which allows us to break out of restrictive small rural communities (which I really don't like, having grown up in a village) - and not just for people who are old enough, young enough, rich enough etc. to be able to drive a car -, so it fosters individuality (the car does, too, but with the given restrictions), and at the same time, it fosters ephemeral communal experiences, too, curtailing some of the more extremely lonesome traits of modern urban life. When I'm on the train or tram to work in the morning, I can read my newspaper or mobile, look at other people, hear them talk, sometimes if I'm incidentally meeting someone I know, I can talk to them, too, and when the train is late, we're in this together, we can all complain about the railroad operators together. When I'm just as late because I'm stuck in a traffic jam, I have to react to what goes on around me all the time, I can't relax, I don't see or hear other people except as potential danger factors who might want to overtake when I want to change lanes or whatever, and everyone of us is shouting out our anger at the traffic jam alone in their car, blaming the others for being there and crowding the motorway, or for driving inappropriately... really, this is a cultural issue, but it reflects the difference between some of the aspects of modern life which I like vs. some of those which I despise.

 

[kernals12]

Speaking as a railroad friend and nostalgic, I'd say there are cultural as well as rational/political reasons.
Rationally, rail transport is much more ecologically sustainable, so much more rail transport and much less car and air transport would be a very important contribution to stopping climate change.
Culturally, I must concede that I love both the social / public nature of public transportation, and then railroads are also associatively linked to the heyday of industrial progress in the Western world, which was a horrible age in many ways, but also the golden age of the labour movement (and it was particularly strong among railroad workers). Being a socialist leftie myself, those are things I am very much emotionally attached to. As for the public nature: I know there are many people who view it just the other way round (they don't like to sit next to smelly or aggressive other people, or have to stand because it's so crowded, or whatever), but I, for one, think public transportation wonderfully combines individuality and community. It allows urbanity, which allows us to break out of restrictive small rural communities (which I really don't like, having grown up in a village) - and not just for people who are old enough, young enough, rich enough etc. to be able to drive a car -, so it fosters individuality (the car does, too, but with the given restrictions), and at the same time, it fosters ephemeral communal experiences, too, curtailing some of the more extremely lonesome traits of modern urban life. When I'm on the train or tram to work in the morning, I can read my newspaper or mobile, look at other people, hear them talk, sometimes if I'm incidentally meeting someone I know, I can talk to them, too, and when the train is late, we're in this together, we can all complain about the railroad operators together. When I'm just as late because I'm stuck in a traffic jam, I have to react to what goes on around me all the time, I can't relax, I don't see or hear other people except as potential danger factors who might want to overtake when I want to change lanes or whatever, and everyone of us is shouting out our anger at the traffic jam alone in their car, blaming the others for being there and crowding the motorway, or for driving inappropriately... really, this is a cultural issue, but it reflects the difference between some of the aspects of modern life which I like vs. some of those which I despise.

That's not inherent. Cars and planes have been gettting more and more fuel efficient, hence producing fewer carbon emissions. And with electrification on the horizon, that problem will disappear entirely.

 

[AJE]

That's not inherent. Cars and planes have been gettting more and more fuel efficient, hence producing fewer carbon emissions. And with electrification on the horizon, that problem will disappear entirely.

It is inherent. Steel wheels on steel rails will always have less friction than rubber wheels on pavement, hence the same power plant will move more mass on rails than it will on roads (certainly much more than on aircraft). That's why so much freight gets moved by rail, and its CO2 emissions per ton-km are lower than most other forms of land or air transport.

 

[Devvy]

Before I start; rail is never going to be mass popular in the US. It's too big and too low-density populated. I'm not arguing that rail will suddenly sweep the country and you'll all be suddenly queuing at ticket machines. Not happening.

My personal opinion is that Americans are no different to the rest of the world. They look for the most convenient mode of transport between two points, which you calculate by some extrapolation of variety of factors; how quick is it to get where I'm going, how reliable is it (not just will it turn up, but what happens if I miss a time slot), how comfortable is it (not just the seat, but what can I do in it), and how much does it cost. Almost always the car wins in the US for short distances, and the plane wins for long distances.

However, I think there are niche areas where rail could be a lot more competitive in the US. Journeys which would take in the 1.5hr to 3hr segment are ripe for rail; they are long enough to justify making a trip to a station, long enough train can win on speed, but not too long that the plane becomes the winner. Journeys of approx 100 miles to 300 miles. The problem is the separation of rail services in the US (local subway, urban commuter rail and long distance inter-state) makes joined up journeys impossible as you need a variety of tickets. On top of that, none of the services are particularly convenient or comfortable to use, so the car inevitably wins unless you're going somewhere like NYC where traffic is terrible and parking can be difficult.

Suggestions:
- Joined up rail operations (ie. all New England & New York rail operations operated by a single body, rather than a multitude of them (OTL you have LIRR, Metro-North, Amtrak, MBTA rail). Don't have a nationwide operator, have several regional ones (we can argue about what the optimum sized region is, but the principle stands). Even in London, we have a mainline trains are run by a swathe of different companies, and then the Underground is run by another, but the same ticketing system and price model works no matter which service you use.
- Make train timetables easy to remember (same minutes-past-the-hour every hour), and make the trains shorter and more frequent. Nobody will use the NYC Subway if there's only a train every 30 minutes.
- Target the routes you can actually reach your targets on, rather then political headlines. The US government structure is partly to blame for this, but that's not rail's fault. Why NJ and NY can't work closer together on things like rail makes my head explode; there's some easy wins there for cost-savings and passenger benefits (in particular access to Newark Airport).
- And finally, make the trains actually comfortable to travel on. AC power outlets or USB power outlets, in-train wifi, seats aligned with windows to look out of, actually comfortable seats. Make it so people can actually read a book on the train or watch youtube (with headphones!), so people actually enjoy travelling by train rather then it just being most convenient.
- Infrastructure maintenance & improvements. I don't mean electrifying, but look up how many bridge speed restrictions there are on the Acela route between DC and NYC. There's no point in having a 160mph train if it has to slow to 15mph every now and then because of a speed restriction over a bridge. Maintain the damn thing; it's more efficient to fix the route to allow 100mph operations end to end, then have a nice headline speed of 160mph that's possible for 2 miles before the rest of the route is at 40mph. Politicians don't get a nice shiny thing to open, but the end effect for passengers is far better, and is more energy efficient (so cheaper to operate).

PS: Amtrak is a money sink because it's forced to operate a network of completely pointless cross-country routes because individual states don't want to "lose their Amtrak services". They are a completely money loss and should be slashed. Focus efforts on where passengers actually want to use a service in large numbers, but the US political system isn't set up for that.

 

[Kevin Lessard]

Speaking as a railroad friend and nostalgic, I'd say there are cultural as well as rational/political reasons.
Rationally, rail transport is much more ecologically sustainable, so much more rail transport and much less car and air transport would be a very important contribution to stopping climate change.
Culturally, I must concede that I love both the social / public nature of public transportation, and then railroads are also associatively linked to the heyday of industrial progress in the Western world, which was a horrible age in many ways, but also the golden age of the labour movement (and it was particularly strong among railroad workers). Being a socialist leftie myself, those are things I am very much emotionally attached to. As for the public nature: I know there are many people who view it just the other way round (they don't like to sit next to smelly or aggressive other people, or have to stand because it's so crowded, or whatever), but I, for one, think public transportation wonderfully combines individuality and community. It allows urbanity, which allows us to break out of restrictive small rural communities (which I really don't like, having grown up in a village) - and not just for people who are old enough, young enough, rich enough etc. to be able to drive a car -, so it fosters individuality (the car does, too, but with the given restrictions), and at the same time, it fosters ephemeral communal experiences, too, curtailing some of the more extremely lonesome traits of modern urban life. When I'm on the train or tram to work in the morning, I can read my newspaper or mobile, look at other people, hear them talk, sometimes if I'm incidentally meeting someone I know, I can talk to them, too, and when the train is late, we're in this together, we can all complain about the railroad operators together. When I'm just as late because I'm stuck in a traffic jam, I have to react to what goes on around me all the time, I can't relax, I don't see or hear other people except as potential danger factors who might want to overtake when I want to change lanes or whatever, and everyone of us is shouting out our anger at the traffic jam alone in their car, blaming the others for being there and crowding the motorway, or for driving inappropriately... really, this is a cultural issue, but it reflects the difference between some of the aspects of modern life which I like vs. some of those which I despise.

Save your breath. Kernal12 won’t be satisfied until everyone lives in endless rows of houses that are too big for them, waste their weekends maintaining a yard they don’t use and spend hours of their day gripping a wheel and staring at taillights alone in an SUV. If you don’t want that you’re either a snobbish elitist, irrelevant minorty or both.

 

[kernals12]

Save your breath. Kernal12 won’t be satisfied until everyone lives in endless rows of houses that are too big for them, waste their weekends maintaining a yard they don’t use and spend hours of their day gripping a wheel and staring at taillights alone in an SUV. If you don’t want that you’re either a snobbish elitist, irrelevant minorty or both.

I live in suburbia, and I'm here to tell you that it's awesome. You can go to work or the store without walking through the elements or waiting for a tram. The street by my house is silent and kids feel safe playing in them. Is it any wonder so many Americans live like this? And you can tell that a lot of the people who bash "urban sprawl" shouldn't knock it before they try it.

 

[kernals12]

Speaking as a railroad friend and nostalgic, I'd say there are cultural as well as rational/political reasons.
Rationally, rail transport is much more ecologically sustainable, so much more rail transport and much less car and air transport would be a very important contribution to stopping climate change.
Culturally, I must concede that I love both the social / public nature of public transportation, and then railroads are also associatively linked to the heyday of industrial progress in the Western world, which was a horrible age in many ways, but also the golden age of the labour movement (and it was particularly strong among railroad workers). Being a socialist leftie myself, those are things I am very much emotionally attached to. As for the public nature: I know there are many people who view it just the other way round (they don't like to sit next to smelly or aggressive other people, or have to stand because it's so crowded, or whatever), but I, for one, think public transportation wonderfully combines individuality and community. It allows urbanity, which allows us to break out of restrictive small rural communities (which I really don't like, having grown up in a village) - and not just for people who are old enough, young enough, rich enough etc. to be able to drive a car -, so it fosters individuality (the car does, too, but with the given restrictions), and at the same time, it fosters ephemeral communal experiences, too, curtailing some of the more extremely lonesome traits of modern urban life. When I'm on the train or tram to work in the morning, I can read my newspaper or mobile, look at other people, hear them talk, sometimes if I'm incidentally meeting someone I know, I can talk to them, too, and when the train is late, we're in this together, we can all complain about the railroad operators together. When I'm just as late because I'm stuck in a traffic jam, I have to react to what goes on around me all the time, I can't relax, I don't see or hear other people except as potential danger factors who might want to overtake when I want to change lanes or whatever, and everyone of us is shouting out our anger at the traffic jam alone in their car, blaming the others for being there and crowding the motorway, or for driving inappropriately... really, this is a cultural issue, but it reflects the difference between some of the aspects of modern life which I like vs. some of those which I despise.

Okay, but why rail specifically? Buses offer all of that for a much lower cost.

 

[marathag]

Save your breath. Kernal12 won’t be satisfied until everyone lives in endless rows of houses that are too big for them, waste their weekends maintaining a yard they don’t use and spend hours of their day gripping a wheel and staring at taillights alone in an SUV. If you don’t want that you’re either a snobbish elitist, irrelevant minorty or both.

Or someone who wants people to have a choice to live that way, rather than everyone on the Left who obviously want everyone to live in Brutalist Archologies with private transportation banned
/s

Seriously though, who gets to decide on square footage for your place of residence? Your wallet or some apparatchik?