How do we keep trains a viable travel option in the 20th and 21st century?

A flight from JFK to LAX takes no more than 6 hours, 5 hours being about the average. You are not by any chance implying that a high speed train could make it from NYC to LA in a mere 10 to 12 hours. The highest average speed you can achieve with HSR is just slightly above 150 mph, so it would take at least close to 20 hours to get from NYC to LA even if the entire line was HSR without any exemption. No matter how comfy a train can be, a 20 hour ride would be much more exhausting than a 6 hour transcontinental flight. And if you take a close look at the HSR ticket prices in Europe (at least 20 Eurocents per km), a standard (i.e. non-super-saver) HSR-one-way-ticket from NYC to LA would cost around USD 1.300,-- in the second and USD 2.000,-- in the first class.

I went back and had a look at the post I refered to. It was actually NYC to SF. Average flight time is 6-7 hours. Associated time for travel to airport, security, check in, baggage, etc. takes another 5-7 hours. Train distance is 3k miles with a travel speed, based on TVG averages, estimated at 200 mph. That gives 15 hours. And the ticket price was estimated from shinkansen prices and estimated to be $500-600.
 
I went back and had a look at the post I refered to. It was actually NYC to SF. Average flight time is 6-7 hours. Associated time for travel to airport, security, check in, baggage, etc. takes another 5-7 hours. Train distance is 3k miles with a travel speed, based on TVG averages, estimated at 200 mph. That gives 15 hours. And the ticket price was estimated from shinkansen prices and estimated to be $500-600.

While it is correct, that the top speed of the TGV is slightly above 200 mph, it's only that fast when terrain and routing permit it. Between 2 stations (TGV Atlantique between Paris and Tours) the highest average speed is slightly above 150 mph. To be of any real service trains will have intermediate stops between one terminus and the other every hundred odd miles (Thalys' 185 miles non stop Paris Brussels line is the longest distance without an intermediate stop I know about on HSR), further reducing the average speed to not much more than 130 mph. And for political reasons you will have more stops than necassary because the governor of each state the HSR passes trough will demand at least one, if not several intermediate stops in his state, whether it makes sense or not. Don't believe me? Look up the details for the completely superfluous Montabaur railway station on the Cologne-Frankfurt HSR-line, a mere 13 miles away from the next one in Limburg an der Lahn, just because those 2 small towns are in 2 different german states and non of them was willing to back down. HSTs stopping at both stations are mockingly being nicknamed "fastest trams in the world".
 
A revival of steam engines during the 1970s fuel crisis could have had pretty good results. There were plans for this IIRC.

What exactly did you have in mind? Steam turbines?

No, there was a major steam locomotive development project done by American Coal Enterprises, which is owned and operated by steam locomotive enthusiast Ross Rowland in the early to mid 1980s. Only financial squabbles between Babcock and Wilcox, Burlington Northern and ACE prevented the ACE 3000 design from becoming real. BNSF probably regrets that today.
 
While it is correct, that the top speed of the TGV is slightly above 200 mph, it's only that fast when terrain and routing permit it. Between 2 stations (TGV Atlantique between Paris and Tours) the highest average speed is slightly above 150 mph. To be of any real service trains will have intermediate stops between one terminus and the other every hundred odd miles (Thalys' 185 miles non stop Paris Brussels line is the longest distance without an intermediate stop I know about on HSR), further reducing the average speed to not much more than 130 mph. And for political reasons you will have more stops than necassary because the governor of each state the HSR passes trough will demand at least one, if not several intermediate stops in his state, whether it makes sense or not. Don't believe me? Look up the details for the completely superfluous Montabaur railway station on the Cologne-Frankfurt HSR-line, a mere 13 miles away from the next one in Limburg an der Lahn, just because those 2 small towns are in 2 different german states and non of them was willing to back down. HSTs stopping at both stations are mockingly being nicknamed "fastest trams in the world".

The current top speed for the TGV is 350+ mph (as of 4/3/07). That was the basis for the estimate. Considering that express trains won't be stopping in every little town, and the open spaces in the west, an average of 200 mph was actually on the low side, IMHO. I actually think a 300 mph average could be doable by 2010 ITTL.
 
Keep the US out of WWII and away from military production for the war and you'll solve your problem.

Without the tremendous investment in the automobile and aerospace industries during the war, it's going to take a lot longer for them to ramp up production merely from commercial demand. By the time airlines and automobiles on pre-Eisenhower highways become seriously competitive with trains, the passenger railway network should be well developed enough to have a fighting chance at survival into the 21st century. When High-Speed Rail comes along, it might be seen as an answer to competition from airlines and automobiles.

Of course, the butterflies from such a change would radically alter economic development for the rest of the 20th Century, so it's hard to tell what would happen without more specifics.
 
The sweet spot for HSR is between city pairs of 1 million people 200-500 miles apart, with intermediate stops being at least 100 miles apart. Obviously faster trains competing against congested air routes and highways may push this out to 150-600+ miles. Similarly slower trains competing against a good highway system and fast airports will narrow the sweet spot to perhaps 250-400 miles. But in those bandwidths there are plenty of city pairs around the world where HSR could prove to be a very effective transport option.

The other input is the price of oil, should it become expensive the electric HSR will become more economically competitive.
 
The current top speed for the TGV is 350+ mph (as of 4/3/07). That was the basis for the estimate. Considering that express trains won't be stopping in every little town, and the open spaces in the west, an average of 200 mph was actually on the low side, IMHO. I actually think a 300 mph average could be doable by 2010 ITTL.

You are confusing a speed record achieved with by a highly modified (i.e. larger wheels, stronger engines, very few car between the locomotives) train on a specially prepared line (strengthened tracks, increased voltage in the catenary) with approved operational top speeds during normal service, for the TGV that would be 270 to 330 km/h (170 to 205 mph), depending on the layout of the line.

Surely HSR trains will not stop at every small town, but if, say Pennsylvania is expected to subsidise the construction of an HSR line through the state they will demand at least one more stop between Philadelphia and Pittsburg, namely Harrisburg. And there's no way you can build a network of HSR lines without subsidies, at least it has not been done anywhere yet.

An average of 300 mph in normal service is completely impossible with conventional trains, the wear and tear would be excessive (on the record ride of the TGV mentioned by you the collectors sufferd heavy wear, emitting a lot of sparks above the speed of 300 mph). You would need friction-free MagLev technology to achieve such a high average speed.
 
Last edited:
I think you're looking at future history here.
Western civilization is even now gradually moving back to being rail based.
 
You are confusing a speed record achieved with by a highly modified (i.e. larger wheels, stronger engines, very few car between the locomotives) train on a specially prepared line (strengthened tracks, increased voltage in the catenary) with approved operational top speeds during normal service, for the TGV that would be 270 to 330 km/h (170 to 205 mph), depending on the layout of the line.

Surely HSR trains will not stop at every small town, but if, say Pennsylvania is expected to subsidise the construction of an HSR line through the state they will demand at least one more stop between Philadelphia and Pittsburg, namely Harrisburg. And there's no way you can build a network of HSR lines without subsidies, at least it has not been done anywhere yet.

An average of 300 mph in normal service is completely impossible with conventional trains, the wear and tear would be excessive (on the record ride of the TGV mentioned by you the collectors sufferd heavy wear, emitting a lot of sparks above the speed of 300 mph). You would need friction-free MagLev technology to achieve such a high average speed.

Granted I did so. However, note that OTL, maglev trains are already in operation and that JR is set to have a maglev shankansen in operation between Tokyo and Nagoya by 2025. ITTL, I would expect more funding going into R&D for maglev earlier. Even if it did not, trains already exist OTL with average speeds in excess of 200+ mph (see China's CHR - average speed 217 mph), so an average of 200+ mph is most certainly doable.

As for stops in every little town, note the statement wasn't that trains won't stop in every little town, but that express trains won't do so. Yes, there will be in the "little towns" like Harrisburg, but I certainly wouldn't expect every train to stop there. That's why there are locals, expresses, and various flavors therof in the first place.

To take the example of the shinkansen, the one I'm most familiar with, there are 15 stops between Tokyo and Shin-Osaka on the Tokaido line. The Nozomi (fastest express) stops at 4 of them, while there are "semi-fast" and locals that make more frequent stops. I would expect similar service in the US, or even less. I could easily see the fastest expresses for the example of an NYC-SF route stopping only Chicago, Omaha, Denver, and SLC, while the next fastest stops at Philly, Pittsburg, Cleveland, Des Moines, and Sacramento as well, and then a level of service or two between that and the locals. (I could even see a super express non-stop, although that may be a stretch.)

All in all, I still think a 300+ mph average speed HSR network is doable by 2010 ITTL.
 
Taxes

Fuel in Europe is heavily taxed, parking is expensive in cities and new cars are heavily taxed in most countries. That's why lots of people use the train, not only for daily getting to work, but also when they need to go somewere a couple hundred Km away or more.
If the US were going to introduce European style taxes on fuel, trains would be a much more actrative choice for travelling.
Given cheap fuel, parking lots at work and cheap cars, no wonder people drive rather than board the train...
 
First, moving people by trains doesn't pay. You need the train companies to be heavily into freight which would subsidize their passenger lines. To do that you need the trucking unions either broken or much weaker so they don't monopolize inter state freight shipping.
 
First, moving people by trains doesn't pay. You need the train companies to be heavily into freight which would subsidize their passenger lines. To do that you need the trucking unions either broken or much weaker so they don't monopolize inter state freight shipping.
Actually, that's a false statement.

SNCF in France and Acela in the Northeast Corridor of the US are making money, and outcompeting airlines.
 
First, moving people by trains doesn't pay. You need the train companies to be heavily into freight which would subsidize their passenger lines. To do that you need the trucking unions either broken or much weaker so they don't monopolize inter state freight shipping.

I guess that's why all those railway corporations in Japan are all bankrupt. Wait, they're not. Maybe it does pay after all...
 
Top