I was wondering if the people of this forum had Ideas as to how our nation might go about building an efficient National Public Transportation System. If you have ideas, or comments, or whatever, just put them up here.

__________________
~John Locke

Discuss the Issue, Not the Poster

"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not everyone is entitled to their own facts"
-Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan

"Great thoughts speak only to the thoughtful mind, but great actions speak to all mankind."
-Teddy Roosevelt

Here's my ideas

• Using Mag-Lev trains connecting all Major American cities
• Would connect with preexisting local public transportation systems such as D.C.'s Metro or NYC's Subway
• Consist of 3 north-south lines and 6 east-west lines

North/South lines

1. Western Line: Seattle, WA to San Diego, CA
2. Central Line: Bismark, ND to Austin, TX
3. Eastern Line: Agusta, ME to Miami, FL

East/West Lines

1. Northern Line: Detroit to Seattle
2. North Central Line: New York City, NY to Portland, OR
3. Mid-Continental Line: Washington DC to San Francisco, CA
4. Southern Line: Charleston, SC to Los Angeles, CA
5. Gulf Coast Line: Miami, Fl to Austin, TX
6. South West Line: San Diego, CA to Austin, TX

There are obviously some flaws in the plan, for example: Where does the money come from? or How do we secure the land necessary to build it? However, there are also some pro's to building a National Public Rail System (NRPS). For one, it would increase jobs, encourage people to use public transit and subsequently reduce carbon emmissions. A ticket would be cheaper and the mode of transit greener than an Airplane, it would boost the area economies wherever there are stations. etc...


Anyone else have any ideas as to how this project, or a project of your own should be funded

__________________
~John Locke

Discuss the Issue, Not the Poster

"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not everyone is entitled to their own facts"
-Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan

"Great thoughts speak only to the thoughtful mind, but great actions speak to all mankind."
-Teddy Roosevelt

I don't disagree with this. I think it is something that I personally would like to see. Don't know how useful or necessary this would be but I would like the possibility. The bigger problem is with local transportation and the lack of efficient public transit. Where I live, medium sized city, 200,000 and we have very little public transit.

As for funding it, I don't know how it would be done. You can stop funding highways then that could be diverted to rail construction. Don't know how well that would fly in Washington. But, if we make it a priority then it would similar to what happened to the interstate program of the 1950s.

Yeah definately, about local public transportation. I'm working with my congressman Rep. Frank Wolf to improve the Metro right now. The house is trying to secure funds to exted the Orange line out to Dulles Airport and I'm all for that bill. It will probably be tacked onto the next public transit bill.

__________________
~John Locke

Discuss the Issue, Not the Poster

"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not everyone is entitled to their own facts"
-Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan

"Great thoughts speak only to the thoughtful mind, but great actions speak to all mankind."
-Teddy Roosevelt

While I would love to see a good Public Transport System in the United States I think the country is just too big to make it a success.

Rail transportation in Europe is generally very good. I can do the 450 miles from the centre of London to the centre of Edinburgh in about four hours. There is about one train an hour in each direction throughout the day.

It's much faster than driving and costs less (with gas at the equivalent of 10 bucks a gallon).

On the other hand, if I want to do the 400 miles from the centre of San Francisco to the centre of Los Angeles, there is one train per day which takes 12 to 15 hours, gets stuck behind freight trains, stops at every small town all the way down to Los Angeles. I can drive it there and back in the time the train takes, at less than half the cost even at today's gas prices.

Even if a train could run cross country at 125 miles an hour it would still take 30 hours to get from Los Angeles to New York.

The only place that trains really work in the United States is on the Washington DC to Boston Northeast corridor and as local rapid transit systems.

It's a real pity, but I cannot see it happening in the US.

A sad mistake that the US made in the 1950's was to abandon trains. Since then, every private railroad company has failed with the exceptions of CSX (cargo and freight) and Amtrak (passenger) both of which are sponsored by the government to keep them in business. It is said that Mag-Lev trains can travel at speeds in excess of 200 mph. If that is so, it would significantly reduce travel time and reduce the impact on our enviornment. Obviously, there are more benifits than I have time to list here.

If gas prices continue on this upward trend, then I wouldn't be surpirsed if trains gain more popularity.

__________________
~John Locke

Discuss the Issue, Not the Poster

"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not everyone is entitled to their own facts"
-Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan

"Great thoughts speak only to the thoughtful mind, but great actions speak to all mankind."
-Teddy Roosevelt

Excellent topic and well thought out possibilities. Unquestionably, public mass transit will become increasingly important in the coming years. In practical terms, only a radical shift to mass transit may delay or prevent a virtual implosion of far flung surburbs and allow for the continuation of commercial overland shipping. A beginning would be to shift funding of highways to the rebuilding of our conventional rail system. It could be that the "Rails to Trails" of recent years may have to be reversed to trails to rails. There are numerous other options that should be explored.

Excellent question and suggestions. Mass public transit will play an increasingly important role as the nation and world adjusts to a less conventional energy intensive future.

In terms of funding new mass transit, It seems shifting money from building new highways to resurrecting rail transportation would be a good option. The U.S. automotive industry was able to grow, in large part, because the government built the highway system. The government has subsidized our car culture since its inception in the early 20th Century. Now it is time to shift to a much more energy efficient mode of transportation.

I hear you there, would love to see a national transportation plan with high speed rail systems.

Opps, sorry for the double post. I didn't think the first had gone through.

All great ideas.

One thing I believe is that there has to be a regional component to it as well e.g Tulsa to OKC, San Antonio to Dallas, Chattanooga to Knoxville, Knoxville to Nashville, Birmingham to Atlanta, etc.

I think in order for a nationwide rail system to work, some sort of hub-and-spoke system will be necessary. Speaking from my observations, there is a LOT of traffic between Knoxville and Nashville and between Memphis and Nashville, and between Chattanooga and Nashville. By allowing for those regional concerns, I think you take a lot more fuel and carbon out of the mix than if you concentrate on long, nationwide lines. I drive between Knoxville and Atlanta far more often than I drive from Knoxville to Oklahoma City.

As to the question of ROW acquisition, the government already owns a lot of it. Put it in the medians of interstate highways where possible. Some of those medians are 1/4 mile wide.

The money can come from a variety of sources: taxes, fares, even some freight. These high-efficiency trains cost far less to operate than their diesel-electric cousins, so costs should be far less than Amtrak or airlines.

__________________
Tax & Spend > Borrow & Spend

I reject your reality and substitute my own.

Every feeling you've ever felt can be found in the works of Beethoven, Bruckner, Mahler, and Wagner.