HSR Paradise?

[Gilbert B Norman]

This past Tuesday's New York Times reports that the Chinese High Speed Rail System is again gaining traction. Now that the 'bad boys' are in the hoosegow (and somehow they have a way of 'misplacing' keys over there), it appears that it is time to recognize the foresight and societal value to the System they have wrought:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/24/busin ... china.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Brief passage:

• CHANGSHA, China — The cavernous rail station here for China’s new high-speed trains was nearly deserted when it opened less than four years ago.
  
  Not anymore. Practically every train is sold out, although they leave for cities all over the country every several minutes. Long lines snake back from ticket windows under the 50-foot ceiling of white, gently undulating steel that floats cloudlike over the departure hall. An ambitious construction program will soon nearly double the size of the 16-platform station.
  
  Just five years after China’s high-speed rail system opened, it is carrying nearly twice as many passengers each month as the country’s domestic airline industry. With traffic growing 28 percent a year for the last several years, China’s high-speed rail network will handle more passengers by early next year than the 54 million people a month who board domestic flights in the United States.

OK, the question will be raised, particularly by our younger membership, 'why can't we have it here?' With the disproportionate legislative power held by lightly populated regions (hey, how many US Senators hath Montana, how many New York?) it will simply never happen here, where in so much of the USA, transportation means an F-150, Ram, or Silverado. All told, if you would like to have an HSR 'immersion', best break out that Blue pocket sized document, stuff your pockets full of Yen and Yuan, and get ready for 20 fun filled hours on the 777 with 350 of your closest and dearest friends.

[NH2060]

Agreed, it's just not necessary/feasible here in the US with very few exceptions. And even those exceptions won't be true HSR outside of the NEC (with or without the NextGen HSR). And unless someone deems it worth it to spend $$$ to upgrade all grade crossings in certain corridors (i.e. St. Louis-Chicago, Chicago-Milwaukee, Chicago-Detroit,

I gotta say though the Chinese really got it right with their ambitious HSR programme. Same with Japan. If something similar can be done in the Northeast (which might be the only option in just keeping the region mobile and not stranded) then power to the pro-HSR lobby (and Amtrak )

[amm in ny]

CHANGSHA, China — The cavernous rail station here for China’s new high-speed trains was nearly deserted when it opened less than four years ago.

Not anymore. Practically every train is sold out,...

I'm not sure what this is supposed to prove. I would expect the demand on day one for any new transportation mode to be pretty small, unless it is a direct substitute for something that already exists.

Most people (i.e., non-railfans) take trains (or other transportation modes) to get from where they are to where they want to go. They evaluate routes, modes, etc., based on how each choice affects the total trip. The more adventurous (or the more frequent) travellers experiment, and if they discover using, say, HSR helps them get where they're going faster or more conveniently, they'll start talking it up and others will start trying it.

All this takes time.

This is relevant to HSR -- or any kind of rail travel -- in the USA. The trains can be fast and wonderful, but unless they make the entire trip from door to door better from the traveller's perspective, they won't get used.

One big problem with rail in the USA is that getting to the station can be problematic, and getting from the destination station to where you're going is very dicey, unless you have someone to pick you up. Driving to the station only works if there's adequate parking (often there isn't), and public transportation can take 2-5 times as long as driving -- if it exists. I've scoped out a number of trips where I was going from my home in the NYC area to a city that AMTRAK serves, and each time concluded that it was faster and less complicated to simply drive there. And I hate driving. The only times AMTRAK has been the better alternative has been when having my car at my destination would have been a problem (e.g., one time I was going to rent a truck to drive some stuff home.)

BTW, I also fly places, and while flying is always a PITA (especially with all the security theater they have now), the door-to-door trip is pretty straightforward.

[Desertdweller]

New York and Montana, like all states, have two senators each.

The imbalance comes from the representatives.

Les

[Frank]

There are certain places in the United States where HSR could thrive. In the Midwest, Northeast, California, and even in the Southeast. The reason why many politicians don't want HSR is because they are not they want to keep the status quo, but they are also paid millions of dollars from lobbying from the oil industry. This doesn't mean that HSR won't happen in the USA; if the California HSR gets off the ground and is successful, maybe states and even politicians will seriously consider it.

[kaitoku]

BTW, I also fly places, and while flying is always a PITA (especially with all the security theater they have now), the door-to-door trip is pretty straightforward.

Door to door for HSR can be pretty straightforward also- HSR stations can have rental car service just like airports (the bigger cities with downtown stations like on east coast we assume have adequate public transit and taxi service).

[amm in ny]

Door to door for HSR can be pretty straightforward also- HSR stations can have rental car service just like airports (the bigger cities with downtown stations like on east coast we assume have adequate public transit and taxi service).

(Emphasis mine.)

But will they (have on-site rental car service)?

Current rail stations don't. There was a survey posted on this site of transit and car rental at various Amtrak stations, and just about every station that supposedly had car rentals turned out to only have listings for off-site agencies that pick up -- but only during their business hours.

As for "adequate public transit" -- even in the NYC area, there are plenty of places you can't get to with public transit. That's why the NYC airports -- all of which have public transit -- have on-site car rental, just like every other airport.

Also, "adequate public transit" doesn't mean transit that can get you somewhere in a reasonable time. When I scoped out a trip to RPI (Troy, NY) from my home by rail, it turned out that the rail trip from Croton to Albany represented less than half of the time for the trip. HSR for that trip would not have made a difference -- driving would still be faster, even if the CRT-ALB leg took no time at all.

This is my point: the devil is in the details. It's never a choice between HSR and, say, air, or driving, in general. It's always a question of whether, for this trip, using a route that involves HSR makes any sense. If the answer ends up being "no" most of the time, then HSR will fail. And I see people handwaving away the details.

[Connection]

There are certain places in the United States where HSR could thrive. In the Midwest, Northeast, California, and even in the Southeast. The reason why many politicians don't want HSR is because they are not they want to keep the status quo, but they are also paid millions of dollars from lobbying from the oil industry. This doesn't mean that HSR won't happen in the USA; if the California HSR gets off the ground and is successful, maybe states and even politicians will seriously consider it.

It has nothing to do with oil lobbying. It's simply impossible to even propose anything without getting reamed by NEPA and it's environmental reviews. NIMBYs will go to any length to make up a reason to oppose trains. One example is that electric cantenary wires would produce unacceptable levels of "visual pollution". Since the green politicians who are vehemently opposed to any reduction in the environmental review process are also the biggest supporters of mass transit there is little hope for change on that.

Usually if a project survives that process, NIMBYs will have been given large concessions. NIMBY appeasement is extremely expensive and can't be underestimated as a cost driver. In California one man demanded an enormous fortune for the acquisition of a few parking spaces for the HSR project.

Another issue is the contracting system. Rail projects generally use 3rd party consultants instead of retaining their own expertise. As a result the project tends to get shafted heavily by the 3rd party consultants and contractors. Of course particularly in New York, mafia involvement in the construction trade means big payouts to organized crime.

[kaitoku]

But will they (have on-site rental car service)?

Well, they had better, if they are interested in providing good customer service. There are car rental agencies at large Japanese railway stations with lots on-site, but then again, intercity passenger railways in Japan exist to provide a first class service while paying dividends to their stockholders, not as benefactors of political largesse.

[millerm277]

As for "adequate public transit" -- even in the NYC area, there are plenty of places you can't get to with public transit. That's why the NYC airports -- all of which have public transit -- have on-site car rental, just like every other airport.

Current major rail stations in the Northeast, are generally right in the middle of the city downtown, with little available land. Where exactly would you put a rental car lot in NY Penn, for example? Airports are by their nature, not located actually IN the city center.

While I certainly agree rental cars are a good idea at some stations, the reality is that you are certainly never going to see it at right at stations in a big urban center. A partnership with whatever the most accessible car rental companies are would be a good idea, with directions on how to get there easily. (Presuming said urban center has a good public transport system).

[ExCon90]

I would think about the only possibility at a rail station in the center of a city would be space in a parking garage. In Philadelphia I believe rental cars are parked in the parking garage connected to the station by a covered pedestrian bridge; the rental counters are in the station proper, but I don't know how late they stay open, never having rented a car there. I think customers would be impatient, particularly late at night, at having to go through a time-consuming process to get behind a wheel, although the process might be just as time-consuming if a rental lot is located off-airport and you have to wait for a van.

[amm in ny]

Current major rail stations in the Northeast, are generally right in the middle of the city downtown, with little available land. Where exactly would you put a rental car lot in NY Penn, for example? .

Where do Hertz and Avis put their Manhattan rental car lots? (That's a rhetorical question, BTW.)

There are lots of parking lots all over Manhattan, especially west of 8th Avenue. There are construction projects all the time. (Construction seems to be NYC's #1 industry) Not to mention parking garages. There are plenty of sites where rental cars could be parked that are closer to NYP-Amtrak than most airport rental car facilities are to airport (arrival) terminals. It's not the lack of space, it's that rail planners' thinking stops at the door to the station.

And that's my criticism of USA rail planning in general and HSR planning in particular. USA long-distance rail networks are conceived and planned as limbless trunks, where the missing "limbs" are the connections between the passengers' ultimate origin/destination and the railway stations. The absence of rental car "solutions" are only one symptom. Putting railway stations in the middle of nowhere and then not providing adequate parking is another (I'm thinking in particular of my native town -- Richmond, VA -- where Amtrak moved from a site right on the major city bus lines to a site with no public transportation and with less parking than before.)

It seems to me that rail planners' and rail boosters' minds are still stuck in the days when the only alternative to rail was the horse-drawn cart (on dirt roads), and people took the train even when it was a pain to get to and from the station, because the alternatives were even more inconvenient.

However, the advent of the private car and of high-speed highways has made driving your car easier than using even the fastest train for distances up to a few hundred miles, and air travel is integrated into a door-to-door transportation "solution" whose convenience for virtually all longer-distance trips leaves rail in the dust. The only people who still take the train are those who don't have cars or who happen to be making those trips where rail is competitive in terms of time and convenience. In other words, it's a niche business. And it doesn't look like anyone in the USA is interested in making it anything more than a niche business. (Cf.: BOS-PHL traffic, which we are told, is not a market Amtrak is going after.)

[David Benton]

Why would anyone in their right mind want to rent a car in Manhattan anyway??? .
Surely anyone looking to travel anywhere other than Lower Manhattan by rental car would get off at a prior stop anyway.

[merrick1]

There is an Avis location on 31st Street directly across from Penn Station. It is in a parking garage. Just take the escalators up to the old taxi driveway and cross 31st Street.

[SouthernRailway]

How soon we forget:

US freight railroads lead the world in market share (and efficiency and profitability). They don't cost taxpayers (net) one cent.

We may not be #1 in passenger rail, but we are #1- by a long shot- in freight rail. Freight rail carries 40% of US freight, and that has a much larger impact on the economy than HSR systems have, which carry at most maybe 5-10% of intercity passengers.

Plus, we DO have HSR. It's small in scope, but we have it. The Acela is faster than "HSR" trains in plenty of countries, such as the Dutch and Swedish HSR trains, Fyra and the X2000.

And we're way, way, way more advanced than our northern neighbor. Via is about like Amtrak was in the late '70s, is "dying", according to David Gunn, and there is no HSR at all.

And if having larger-scale HSR means (1) living in a Communist country like China where the desires of the population can be ignored, and their property can be confiscated, or (2) living in somewhere like France, where you're taxed to death (and I know, as I have lived, studied and worked there), I'd choose what we have.

(Sidenote: there are plenty of rental car locations in Manhattan; they are in parking garages.)