Can German Engineering SAVE Amtrak?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 27 พ.ค. 2024
- Compared to European High Speed Rail, Amtrak's reputation is best described as old and slow, as both ridership and government funding has dwindled. But that could all change... thanks, in part... to a $3.4 Billion investment in German engineering and lessons from Deutsche Bahn.
Episode 104 | #germany #usa #train #zug #amtrak #amtraktrain #highspeedtrain #hsr #highspeedrailways #california #expatlife #expatlife #movingabroad #americaningermany #america #livingabroad | Filmed April 7th, 2023
Our Videos on Train Travel:
22 HOURS in FIRST CLASS on AMTRAK SLEEPER TRAIN (Chicago to Texas in Family Suite) - Worth it?
• 22 HOURS in FIRST CLAS...
ÖBB Nightjet: SURPRISING European Sleeper Train (Zurich to Hamburg)
• ÖBB Nightjet: SURPRISI...
Jump to Your Favorite Topic:
00:00 Intro
01:48 The Rise and Fall of the Great American Railroads
06:00 Germany Deutsche Bahn - Rise to Greatness
10:34 California High Speed Rail
11:46 Amtrak Problem 1 : Geography
12:26 Amtrak Problem 2 : Suburban Sprawl
13:28 Amtrak Problem 3 : Missing Public Infrastructure
13:44 Amtrak Problem 4 : Property Rights & Law
14:59 Amtrak Problem 5 : Car Culture
15:42 Amtrak Problem 6 : Networking Problem
16:33 Amtrak Problem 7 : Commercial Freight Railway
17: 39 Germany to the Rescue?
22:14 The Big Question
Other Great Videos on this Topic:
Amtrak’s Genius Plan to SAVE American Rail by @infrachannel
• Amtrak’s Genius Plan t...
The One Tiny Law That Keeps Amtrak Terrible by @Wendoverproductions
• The One Tiny Law That ...
Why Swiss Trains are the Best in Europe by @NotJustBikes
• Why Swiss Trains are t...
GEAR IN THIS VIDEO:
GoPro: amzn.to/3FM0WRr
GoPro Windshield Mount: amzn.to/3sPBiY3
Camera: tinyurl.com/22a5wbe7
Microphone: tinyurl.com/rufut97v
Lens: tinyurl.com/z3k73bv6
Bendy Tripod Thing: tinyurl.com/d4w687pk
Memory Card: tinyurl.com/zy7j54ac
External Hard Drive: tinyurl.com/nmters57
External Hard Drive Backup: tinyurl.com/vduwnaea
Music in Episode: tinyurl.com/BLACKFORESTFAMILY
DISCLOSURE: The links above may contain affiliate links. This means that, at no cost to you, the Black Forest Family may earn a commission if you click through to make a purchase.
📸 Follow us on Instagram for behind the scenes content: @blackforestfam /
✈️ We created our blog to help you learn more about living, studying, working, and traveling abroad! For more information about the content in this video visit ➡️ www.blackforestfamily.com/ ⬅️
📧 Sign up for our Black Forest Family Newsletter email here - www.blackforestfamily.com/fol...
------------------
💳 Here’s our FREE guide to the best southern Black Forest Germany Day Trips: www.blackforestfamily.com/the...
🛵 Our 101 TOP TRAVEL TIPS:
www.blackforestfamily.com/wp-...
------------------
SUPPORT OUR WORK: www.blackforestfamily.com/fol...
FAMILY TRAVEL GEAR: www.blackforestfamily.com/shop/
FACEBOOK: /
------------------
Originally from the Midwest of the USA, we moved to the #blackforest in 2013 and quickly embraced #expatlife. As American expats living in #Germany, things weren't always easy, but we've grown to love our life in Germany. We started this #travelvlog to share our experiences with friends and family, and to help those who are interested in moving overseas! Whether you are interested in moving abroad, working abroad, studying abroad, raising a family abroad, or just want to #traveleurope, we're here to give you a first person look at what lies ahead. 😊🎥🌎
I think the problem with Amtrak is that it's a public service running on private infrastructure, when it should be the other way around.
That leads to the issue when there is a different operator that gives the network owner more money than Amtrak, the public service loses the time slot.
... and ideally both the infrastructure and the traffic should be "public service".
Things have only got worse in Europe every time they've shifted railroad traffic from government owned to private ownership.
infrastructure should always be Public we have so many Problems which our Internet netweork because of Privatisation. Like one company digs up the street to lay down fibre lines. then they close it 2 weeks later the next company comes does the same thing again.
big problem also is that the biggest Company Telecom cant build new lines sometimes because of Monopoly Laws so they have to wait that a smaller company builts a line and then they can build it ............... just imagin if we would do the same thing with water.....
The quality of your videos are exceptional. Visually pleasing and great content. You deserve an award.
Glad you like them! Thank you so much!
The railways in the USA are mostly for freight, considering the distances from coast to coast for passengers travel, which was taken over by airline travel. If you need to travel from NYC to Los Angeles, its by aeroplane today.
Five years ago, I made the change from commuting by car to commuting by public transport. First locally with the S-Bahn to Walldorf, now with long distance service to the Frankfurt region. I made the test of not using my car, but car sharing when I really needed a car, making me question the necessity of a personal car. Now I grant myself the luxury of a BahnCard100 for first class + car sharing as it is cheaper in the end than driving myself - with the added benefit of being driven.
Granted, nothing is perfect with Deutsche Bahn (delays, construction works, etc.), but for me it is still has more benefits. Additionally, this is a very individual decision. My son is an adult and (for example) your children are still very young and you will just need a car for work and daily trips at some point when raising a family. As good as public transportation is in Germany, it is very hard to substitute a car in a family environment, even when living in cities like Stuttgart, Frankfurt, Berlin, ...
Did exactly the same here in the Netherlands. But agree that with children it is a lot harder. Actually my German neighbor uses the train 100 percent, even when traveling between here and Hamburg. (Were he works and also has an apartment) Even though he has a small son.
Train travel has its problems, like you mentioned, but it is still my preferred way of traveling. Fast, clean, comfortable, seeing the landscapes, allowing working while traveling and with easy access.
I live in Austria, with a son, and I have never had a car. We usually get to wherever we want to go with public transport, minimalist luggage and some walking. Very rarely do we take a taxi, rent a car or a truck (with a driver) to take stuff. But we live in a city. In the countryside it is impossible without a car.
Can you please elaborate on the family point, I don't get it. I've grown up without a car.
@@seeibe If you have a family with small children, a car often is the better and cheaper option. However it is very possible to do it with public transport. My nephews LOVE trains, metro, trams, ferries and my oldest nephew LOVES busses to the point he wants to become a bus driver. (My sister send his LOVE for busses to the local bus company, and they send him a shirt, cap, stickers and an official scheduling book the bus drivers use. He was so happy)
My sister has a car because she lives in a rural area where public transport is not as available as here in the Randstad. (Randstad = Amsterdam, Rotterdam, The Hague, Utrecht and anything in between) However they do live a 10 minute walk from the rail station, to get to Leeuwarden or Groningen. But if they want to visit me, that would take 2.5 hours with trains, while it takes 1.5 hours with the car.
@@seeibe Iam very happy to do so. Having kids just changes your schedule. From getting up in the morning, getting to and back from work, spending your free time with your significant other to going to bed, everything is very straight forward and can be planned ahead of time and organised with very little exceptions.
What you experienced, I would have loved to do with my children, but getting one of them to and from Kindergarten and later hobbies just made that impossible in my region. Some spots just aren't reachable by public transport in a sensible amount of time, like the school my son had piano lessons. This roundtrip by bus would have taken over three hours (lesson included) and just was not practical. On the other hand having the lessons at home would have increased costs a lot. This is just one example of many.
Needing and having a car is a very individual decision and heavily depends on the circumstances. Where we are living now, I could have raised my children without a car (e.g. tram every five minutes in any direction). Where I lived before, which is - ironically - just some 25-ish kilometers out of town, just not possible du to lack of availability. On the other hand they were able to make experiences - and I am generalizing - a "city kid" usually does not make, like milking cows or actually knowing what it means to have meat on the table - our neighbour was a hunter and a farmer nearby was still allowed to slaughter on his farm (25+ years back).
11:51 That is exactly the perfect scenario for high-speed rail!
Large urban masses, far away from each other, make for a great use-case for high-speed rail.
Then, have a regional train connecting every other place - or even buses.
a few points of disagreement:
1. the USA is car-centric because of suburbia not the other way round. Would planners consider public transportation and probably more important mixed use (integrate shops etc into suburbia) while planning, this would be less of an issue.
2. securing land does not seem to be an issue when building new highways or expanding existing ones.
3. the "love-affair" of US Americans with suburbia is quite recent (less than 50 years). In many states it is also inevitable because 90% or more of the land is marked for single family homes only. This can be changed easily by the government.
4. you also have to have a car when traveling from and to the airport, which doesn't seem to be an issue. Also, buildings as multi-story parking garages are a thing
But my biggest point is your assumption, that trains have to operate cost-effective. An error that the German government also made. Public transportation is a public good in the same way as power or water or internet access is. This means at least the infrastructure should be handled and paid for by the government. You could have competing train companies renting and using the infrastructure, if you want to have a market.
Actually, planners and elected officials don’t always drive development decisions with voters checking their impulses to completely reimagine society, the majority of suburban residents even those left leaning do and they see any deviation from single family detached housing and top notch schools supported by local property taxes as a threat to their financial health.
Second, depending on where highways are to be built, there has been considerable opposition to the extent those highway projects have been abandoned and in Boston’s case actually replaced by by an expansion of the MBTA.
Third, the government is in the US is the people and, like the first point, they’ll vote out publicly elected officials that advocate for changes they oppose. The government can’t unilaterally impose things.
Cost effectiveness needs to include all costs and benefits. A person living in rural states gets no benefits from a high speed rail system located hundreds of miles away with no way to access it without driving a car. That person’s view of the cost benefit trade off is going to be very different from some government staff member living in Washington, DC.
@@DisinterestedObserver for the first and third point: elections are overwhelmingly not driven by voter decisions but by money and religious affiliation. This becomes more true the more rural the area becomes. Additionally, even building land, which is still undeveloped, is nearly completely planned for single family housing. And for starters you don't have to get rid of those completely, but include mixed use in terms of small shops, restaurants, schools etc. That would help a lot. Also when developing new areas, plan public transportation already from the start. Integrating them later is nearly impossible.
I have to repeat: suburbia is not the American dream, at least it wasn't before about 50 years ago. Suburbia was mainly driven by lobbyist from car manufacturers (I know this is oversimplified, but still true).
for your second point: of course there is and always will be, but they are still build more easily than railroads.
for your last point: Car dependent suburbia is not cost effective at all. Building and maintaining all those roads is one of the main drivers for debt of American cities. And again, nobody complains of having to drive to the airport with a car.
Additionally I'm not talking about high speed railway only. The whole transportation concept in the USA is bankrupt and needs to be reconsidered completely.
@@DisinterestedObserver so in your example there NEEDS to be ENOUGH government officials in DC to use the system and the voter in "Kansas" will again vote for there farming subsidy ETC
@@hamanime there are a LOT of "TOD" style transit oriented developments starting to pop up on commuter rail lines into major cities trying to be an "old fashioned town" in there own right with higher density and mixed use facing the "down town / transit station" and with lower density and R1 zoning as you move farther away from the "core" TOD area
a lot of it is driven by people WANTING the social aspect of "small town" life and the connections to the JOB centres they "need" to be near
@hamanime
regarding or adding on to your first point: today, yes this would be the case as the typical North Amercian city is pretty much designed around and for the car. Historically however we can see that the car allowed for suburbs to develop in the first place. In the post WW2 economic boom production costs for cars decreased, people's financial situations improved and they were able to purchase a family car. This then allowed people to move further away from the city centre/ their place of work and to chose a location for their house disregarding the possibilty of public transportation. This phenomenon can actually be seen in a lot of European countries as well. Before the private car people lived where they worked and had very short commutes if any.
I used Amtrak, for the last time, about forty-five years ago for a trip from Chicago to Springfield, IL (about 300 Km). Sharing a coach cabin with a troop of noisy, high-energy Cub Scouts. The multi-hour delay for a freight train was unforgivable.
The biggest technical and structural problem with passenger rail in the U.S. is the often poor condition of the tracks, the many railroad crossings, and the priority given to freight.
Amtrak is only a subtenant and is allowed to fill the gaps in the freight train schedule.
I am from the Netherlands (Amsterdam). Living close to the central station, I can take a train easily. I traveled a lot by train. Paris is only 3,5 hours, sometimes I visit friends in München with the high-speed train, I took trains to Italy, Sweden and Denmark. The big advantage compared to flying is that you don't have to be 2 or 3 hours before your trip at the station. I can go to the station only 10 min before and take my reservation seat and I am good. Also it is much more comfortable than a plane. About the USA. What I read for many years is that the infrastructure is a complete disaster. I think that trains are suffering from the same problems, because nobody wants to spend enough money to maintain the infrastructure
One "problem" in the US is the very uneven (and occasionally extreme low) population density (which implies less customers with similar wishes where to go to/from certain ). If the US want to set up a good train system for passengers they would need to concentrate on the urban areas (west coast, east coast) where the usability and advantages can be shown rather easily. Judging by the European development this network will slowly expand from there into the country, first to some big towns and slowly going on from there. But the big problem remains: Suburbia keeps the people from being able to use the trains. I just zoomed into a part of the suburbs from New York and compared it my village on the outskirts of Karlsruhe. In New York there were single houses, one tax shop and one computer assistant shop visible in the area I picked. In my village there were dozens of doctors, bakeries, groceries, banks, communal services, home for elders and so on popping up. Zoning laws cause a lot of difference as Ashton pointed out in another video.
Especially when night trains becomes more and more popular. From NL to Italy, even Autotrains, forget all the bottlenecks
@John Henriks, you and the OP are aware how large the United States (and Canada), right? Building HSR the way you and the OP want across both countries isn't going to be easy, especially considering the environmental and land rights issues (and I say this as a North American [Canadian] who wants to see HSR built.)
@@wora1111 I don't think you need to concentrate on denser areas to have available trains, that'd make things easier and cheaper for sure but as she says in the video key imo is a more holistic solution, which is how most good public transport schemes work anyways. You could have a train station with combinations to a bus or metro line to get you near your more residential areas, but again that's a far bigger work than just trains.
Not Just Bikes, had a good video about this and Brightlines has even proven it. The TSA will still likely screen people with metal detectors and put on their theatre even after everything happens.
Hy, Austrian here. It´s funny that you compare Amtrack with DB. In Europe DB is not known for its outstanding quality and performance. But the whole train topic is still improving on our continent (Europe: no Kangaroos!). The challenge is to fullfill growing numbers and quality expectations of new customers, especially in days of "try to escape carbon subjection". But as in the airline business a lot of customers are disappointed, when they have no contact person in case of trouble because they bought in the internet via intermediary.
Congrats DFF!! Another interresting professional video!
IMHO without "carbon" OR other "external" conditions AIRLINE as an industry HAS gotten far worse and will not improve due to security theater and VERY HIGH costs to run there systems and "built in" obstacles to having a "good" system like air port location and permission to expand
As a German, I had to laugh so hard, that you mentioned "no Kangaroos", just to make sure that Americans don't get confused with Australia.😂
Happy easter from Poland :)
Even if the passenger rail industry was a monopoly, switching to cars is just a worse monopoly that is worse for the environment and for people
If the train is going to cater for sprawling cities where the car is dominant, then you need stations in outer suburbs with ample parking. It is also a good idea to build new lines along the same corridors as existing highways. Due to modern construction methods, tunneling can also be a realistic option.
A huge reason my wife and I have been on the path to move to Germany, and why we watch your content, is because Germany on the whole has a world class public transit network. We're sick of the car centrality. If you already have a video that heavily focuses on how transit impacts daily life in Germany (more than this one, well done) I'd love get a link. If you don't I'd love to see that.
I just took my first Amtrak trip from Toledo to Chicago last week. The round trip was an hour and a half behind cumulatively.
American here, who moved to Poland. High-speed rail in Poland is excellent and getting better. Soon one will be able to Ake high speed rail from Tallin/Helsinki all the way to Berlin/Waraswa and beyond
The Schweizer Bundesbahn SBB in Switzerland, High quality und top punctuality, expensive but clean, excellent service and deserve the hole country, with the billet we can use most of ship on the swiss lake and the postale bus. In the USA the train and trams was destroy for the interest of the automobile industry in the last century.
Which was lobbied and incentives by the gov't
Complaining about the "deutsche Bahn" is a popular sport in Germany, which unfortunately has little to do with objectivity.
Most people in Germany don't have the means of comparison and have exaggerated expectations.
much like roadways / traffic is a "topic" in USA and are often exaggerated on how BAD the LOCAL road is
Most ppl in countries complain about their railway companies 😊
@@Tedger In many countries, these complaints are quite appropriate, but the Germans are really VERY demanding and quickly annoyed when their personal schedules are turned upside down by a delayed train.
Everything has to go "zack zack" (= fast and trouble-free). 😉
Oh well, depends on what you compare to. I know Swiss and German railway both first hand and, sorry, German stinks. ;-) I have to admit, of the DB I only know a tiny part.
@@thiemokellner1893
The Swiss railway network is around 30,000 km shorter than that in Germany.
Switzerland has around 6,000 fewer stations where passenger trains stop than Germany.
1.5 BILLION fewer people are transported on Swiss trains per year than on German trains.
So the comparison doesn't make much sense.
You mentioned California is building a HSR, which also will connect Las Vegas to the network, but the same company is already running trains in Florida between Miami and Orlando.
Train travel doesn't feel like wasting the travel time for me. It's time I can use otherwise. I can sleep, I can watch Netflix or TH-cam, read, study.
In the car I have to stay pretty focused and only have at most a podcast on.
Another good video. Thank you. And sorry I am late.
Thanks!
Thank You! Sincerely appreciate the support.
I once needed to go one way to NYC from Boston. I firstly checked the train. The frequency, every few hours, meant that there were few seats available, so I’d have to wait a few hours and arrive late at night at my final destination. Then I checked the bus lines. Not only were there plenty of seats available, there were buses leaving every 10 minutes. And for a quarter of the price. The clincher was that, though the bus made a half hour stop, it was still faster than the train. Compared to the fast trains that I rode in Europe, trail in the U.S. is akin to the bottom third world countries, because even in the top third world countries there is better rail service.
Connecting cars and trains?
Build the High Speed Train stations close to airports. These already have parking lots and car rentals. Also, local public transport from the airport into the city becomes more attractive/feasable. I would also assume that the area right beside an airport is not densly populated as the noise problem is already there, so you have space.
If you want to step this up, pass legislation that bans or severly taxes commercial flights between airports that are connected by a high speed train service.
As always, thank you for an insightful video. Hearing Deutsche Bahn presented as a role model feels weird, but then we Germans are probably lacking the right perspective.
Greetings from the Ruhr district!
IMHO no system is "perfect" and every system offers lessons to be learned
The craziest part of it all to me is that despite building its cities and road for the car and and subsidise car travel for the automobile industry, American cars manufacturers are no more competitive than decent public transport nations like France, Germany, Japan and Korea.
I think in my country, American cars are seen as neither as economical as Japanese & Korean ones nor as luxurious & technologically advanced as German ones (except Opel) (other European non-luxury brands are also less common in my country, though less so for VW)
Not only is the quality lower, but the American car companies have failed several times and required huge loans given through tax dollars to continue their failed endeavors. Fords existence confuses me even more given Henry Ford's staunch antisemitic beliefs and support of the Nazi party, plus the poor quality product.
Thank you for a well thought out video. Here are my thoughts.
There is one thing to consider why American industry declined while Germany and Japan grew. World War 2. The allies blew the heck out of the infrastructure of both countries and it had to be rebuilt and America did a lot of that.
Couple that with corporate greed that refuses to maintain its infrastructure and then seek government assistance in fixing the very problems the corporations created.
Another item to factor in. Airlines and passenger planes. Railroads and airplanes competed for customers. Planes could get people to their destinations faster, or they could before airlines also fell to corporate greed.
Finally you have the car culture of the United States. This single factor has reshaped society of not only the United States but of a lot of countries.
When it takes nearly a full day of travel (hurry up and wait) on a plane to make a journey (factor in layovers and other delays), multiple days of train travel for a lot of money, or driving for 2 days AND having transportation at no extra cost at your destination it is not hard to see why passenger trains in the United States have a hard time.
Passenger trains would do very well connecting major metro areas for highly populated areas such as the eastern seaboard or the west coast. There are even some areas of the central US that could benefit from good rail service.
Let's also remember that each industry has an economic interest in making it harder for the others to succeed. Thus it is not about public good but share holder enrichment.
@@tonykyle2655 and outside of "command economies" there is ZERO "global gain" in the equation ONLY personal/shareholder gain
@ Tony Kyle --Wholeheartedly agree with you--and you pointed out the major reasons why the U.S. does NOT have good passenger service, let alone high speed. However, Amtrak IS repurposing its infrastructure and focusing on high density areas that are more likely to garner greater ridership --like the Vancouver, B.C. to Portland, Oregon, corridor, the San Francisco to L.A. (or even all the was to San Diego) run, and, of course, the Northeast Boston to Washington, D.C. corridor (which will never improve until Amtrak owns the entire route). All the lines between the east coast and the west coast exist only to provide a pleasant (mostly) ride through some of the country's most scenic areas--and NOT to move large numbers of passengers across the country.
I live in Berlin, Germany and I use trains everyday for commuting to work and in my freetime .
And also I use trains when I´m visiting friends who live all over the country and I take everytime the Regionaltrains through germany and have everytime good conversations .
The longest rail link is just over 5771.29 miles and passes through different climate zones, but it is not a high-speed line. That was not the case when the route was built. The longest high-speed line is 1553.42 miles long. I translated it with Google, I hope you can understand it.
Thanks for another awesome video! Your videos teach me a lot about my country (Germany), my hometown (Freiburg), and help me to better understand the US, where we are currently living.
This weekend is Labour Day weekend and the weather is going to be great. So we thought it would be a fun idea to make a trip to Chicago. We wanted to take the train, either from Jefferson City or from La Plata, MO, but either train (there is just one suitable train per day) was completely booked. This happened already last year and we will end up taking the car. This is also less expensive. In Germany you can take any train at any time. You might end up sitting on the floor or you might need to switch to a less crowded train but you would still be able to get to where you want to go even if you buy your ticket just 5min before departure. You simply cannot travel spontaneously by train in the US but you need to plan well ahead instead.
Also, we often travel from Columbia, MO, to Denver and the Rockies. Each time we drive through the amazing vastness of Kansas I think to myself “so much flat and empty land, how easy would it be to build a fast train track between Kansas City and Denver and how much fun would it be to travel with it”. And between Kansas City and St. Louis… and from there’s to Chicago… and Nashville… and so on 🥲
Meanwhile tickets for the Shuttle _Tebrau_ train service for the 1km border crossing from Singapore to Malaysia are already sold out for 2024 Chinese New Year (each train can carry only 280 passengers while ~150m people crossed the border via land/sea annually)
Thank you for that nice "Easter Egg" 😊
Happy Easter Days to you !
A new home should be the perfect place to hide Easter eggs and presents 😅
My wife and I took a highspeed train from Amsterdam to London. We decided that we would travel first class. It was great. First class food and a great ride. My first train ride in Europe was from Landstuhl to Copenhagen. I took the overnight train from Mannheim to Copenhagen. Again a fantastic ride. It was a ICE train from Landstuhl to Mannheim. The Mannheim train station has perhaps 20 plus tracks. Trains arriving and leaving ever few minuets. More like and airport. Great way to travel in Europe. Ben
Good job..
"Sie steigen in den Hauptbahnhof ein..." 🤣😋
Thank you. Vielen Dank. The principal of "imminent domain" gives the U.S. government the right to take property, with reimbursement, if it benefits the public.
❤Thank you very much for your informative videos. I learn so much about the USA from your videos!😊👍
Passenger trains are the slowest way to travel intercity in America today. That needs to change. About 100 years ago, around 1920, it took a young Lt. Eisenhower and his army convoy 61 days to travel across the country from DC to San Francisco by Model T trucks and cars. They drove around 12 hours a day over mostly dirt and gravel roads, and pitched and packed camp and slept overnight the remaining 12 hours. You could travel DC to San Francisco by train in less than 5 days then and now. Drivers in the Cannonball run competition can do so in less than 100 hours today. And for those willing to fly in less than 5 hours.
So, when the trains were expanding, they were the fastest way, not the slowest.
Well, not everyone needs to travel across the country, but you will be surprised at how many who do.
The major economic engines in America are on the coasts, Atlantic, Pacific, and the Gulf of Mexico. These economic centers are 1000 to 3000 miles apart. At Amtrak’s average speed around 45 mph, it takes over 20 hours to travel 1000 miles and 60 hours to travel 3000 miles. Flying is on average 10 times faster. Even with HSR averaging 100 mph, twice the speed, we are still talking respectively 5 hours and 30 hours of travel time for these distances. Still too slow.
When the US Postal Service dropped passenger trains to move mail in favor of air mail, passenger trains have been in a downward slope. I do not think a web of HSR trains will ever be possible on a nation wide scale. At best a regional high speed rail network would be possible over much less distances and travel times.
What I find hilarious is that people keep trying to suggest what is good for France or Germany would actually work well in the USA. Just compare the sizes of the respected countries will completely ruin that suggestion. The area (sizes) of these countries are ;
USA
3,796,742 sq mi (9,833,520 km2)
France
643,801 km2 (248,573 sq mi)
Germany
357,592 km2 (138,067 sq mi)
That is like suggesting what is great to clothe a baby is good enough to clothe a fully grown human being. Not going to work well, will it?
VERY FEW travelers FLY coast to coast right now COMPARED to "in region" IE LA to Vegas OR Boston to Detroit NOT NYC to LA
and the cross continent will ALWAYS BE serviced by air travel much like in Europe cross continent is NOT done by train regularly
Always amazes me how well researched these videos are , not sure how you manage to make these along side work, family and a pregnancy!!
As to public transport, I'll use it on occasion (bus or metro) and for an upcoming trip to the UK we are looking into taking the car (or how ironic) on the train through the channel tunnel (so far our son seems to like ferries the most!?).
Some comedian once said (about Dutch public transport) "they'll take you from where you don't want to be and bring you to where you don't want to go" (or something to that effect) as the "last mile" issue is often the downfall of public transport I think.
Anyways happy easter and keep up the great work!!
Ah thank you so much for the compliment. This was a really interesting video to make from a research perspective now that we have better experience using both. Where we live the A3 can be an absolute nightmare - and since its the main route to get to Frankfurt Airport, the ICE here has been a been the best option in (most) situations. We are totally looking forward to trying out more trains in the future - particularly in the UK!
@@TypeAshton Frankfurt is Europe's main traffic hub, so here it's a very good option. The problem is, the current system is EU-planned and Socialist, meaning, it's not a good thing for most of the rest of Germany or even Europe, but only for the center. But Frankfurt would have done something without a state plan, because it's the most suitable option and a no-brainer. The UK system is, sadly, the same Socialist nightmare. If you are in London, OK, but in general it's not good. Many people hoped, that Brexit leads to a Non-Socialist, British system, but it's not in the development.
"They'll take you from where you aren't and bring you to where you don't want to go". The problems are in the first and last mile.
Fares are much lower on HSR in Germany than the NE Corridor. And the new trains will not change that.
I would also like to see Amtrak address their fares - particularly on the longer-distance /overnight trains. We have done overnight trains in both the US and Germany (both with a single room, but not a private bathroom) and Amtrak was over double the price (even more expensive than just buying three one-way plane tickets). I know that there are differences between the two, and we specifically chose it for the experience, but if the goal is getting to increase ridership, making riding more affordable is a great place to start.
@@TypeAshton There is no national policy or goals, only occasional complaints that it is not turning a profit. That is why the NE Corridor fares are very high. People just assume that law makers care about mobility, energy conservation, affordability.
I would happily take rail in the US if it were 1) faster than a car and 2) cheaper than planes. Since neither is true, i don't have the budget to do so since taking an extra day off work is cost
there is the KEY to ANY transit solution it has to be the "best" for MOST people and transit and intercity trains is very "second class" for MOST of the USA
There are some areas in the US suited for HSR, but much of it will have to be done with night trains.
I am from India and we may not have the fastest or fanciest (sic) train coaches, but we transport more than 21 million passengers on Indian Railways on a Daily basis. Most european countries don't even have that much population.
always , speaking of US railroads, the private companies own the tracks, so they decide on who gets the priority on the tracks.
problem is, most of the track is a single-track system with loops at regular intervals for crossovers. earlier, the first train to come to a loop waits till for the second train to come and clear the track.
but with precision railroading (read it as extra-long freight trains), these freight trains just don't fit in loop lines, so it is the passenger trains who have to arrive at a particular loop first.
eg, there is a 100km line with loops at 25, 50 75km mark. one heavy freight train is starting from the west end, a passenger train is from the east end.
if the freight line comes near the 25km loop, where it cannot fit, it will be allowed to proceed and the passenger train may be halted at the 50km mark or even at the 75km mark depending on what the dispatcher decides.
dispatcher is gonna decide what is best for the freight and not the passenger train so most probably the passenger will get looped at the 75 km mark by dispatcher ( it is easier to start stop a passenger train than to stop start a huge heavy freight line.
so now the passenger train idles at the 75km loop line till the freight reaches the 75 mark and passes it.
this creates a delay in passenger train in each crossover coz its the freight trains which get priority over passenger trains
Very appropriate analogy. Indian railway though only semi high speed at the moment still can boast of its capacity (passenger and freight).
First?
My mum often complained about Deutsche Bahn. I got her to recognize that she apllied higher Standards to DB than to private transit companies or highways. The half hour traffic Jam near Pforzheim is just a fact of life while a thirty minute delay makes trains unusable.
I mostly use trains for holiday travel. I live right next to Uni so I commute on foot.
I hate the commercial freight companies. Their terrible practices like Precision Scheduled Railroading, refusing to maintain their tracks, delaying Amtrak trains, are ruining american rail.
UND JETZT ? DUMPFBACKE
i think a large part of that higher expected standard is... that DB actually used to meet that higher standard... before the privatisation drive
mind you - i still prefer travelling by train over other modes of transit
@@SharienGaming ... except few people today actually remember that higher standard. Privatization started on 1994-1-1, that's about 30 years ago, effectively fusing the two existing German state-owned railways (Deutsche Bundesbahn in the West and Deutsche Reichsbahn in the East) (and the changes were pretty gradual). My strongest memory (and I couldn't say from when exactly) is that coming back from vacations, the sleeper train tended to be about an hour late because it waited on lots of other traffic. Oh, and also from even earlier (1980, when I did my 15 months with the Luftwaffe), one Sunday evening waiting for my IC (back when those were red&yellow), and the IC on the other track on my platform was late ... and getting later. By the time I entered my train, I think it was an hour late. It was standing around somewhere in the Cologne/Bonn area, waiting on protesters blocking the tracks.
@@KaiHenningsen well the original post spoke about their parent - so it was relatively safe to assume that they were old enough to remember those times
but yeah most people today likely only know the way things work today
@@SharienGaming Exactly. Rail is still the best mode of transit, but the German government is doing a bad job with it, mostly by having privatized it. Both statements can be true.
Sadly there's still so much thats been lost in the way of great architecture with stations all over being demolished, connections and right of ways destroyed and paved over with highways and other things, suburbs that compliment cars and not trains and what we have left is outdated, not up to standards, complicated and costly to upgrade and even so nothing that could compare to what the rest of the world has. Of course I wish we could have a system like Europe as a whole has and it would be debatably easier as its one country not several dozen but we've become a very different country that transitioned away from rail and politicians and lobbyists seem determined to keep it that way. We truly could have the best system in the world but those days are so far gone and a lot of our best has been thrown away
Britain had about 40,000 km before they axed it in 1960’s.
Private companies, lobbing for air and car transport. The biggest problemsare freight priority, very slow moving freight and poor tracks.
It is not the trains causing the big issues, but the infrastructure. Network density and amount of service is what creates demand. And the more people use the service, the more tickets are sold.
And Germany put together a network in less than 50 years that is better than what the US managed in 150, the last time they had a war on or near their territory.
It is about the entire picture. A town has good public transport (buses, trams) and a railway station.
From that railway station you can get to major railway hubs where there are high speed trains.
Your destination had good public transport (like Paris, Barcelona, London etc).
Only than there is no need for a car, and people will use public transport.
Living near a railway station will increase the value of your real estate!
I live five minutes walk from one, can only slightly hear freight trains during the night when the wind is from the south and I am awake, when asleep they never have woke me up.With a hub I can get to the center of all Dutch cities, far quicker than it takes to simply find a parking space. Even Schiphol Airport can be reached far quicker by train than by car, so even long distance travel is easy and fast.
I like 1 KM with from a class 1 "heavy" freight line and between my house and the line is a golf course with trees lining both sides and ONE ROW of houses on one side of the street I hear the horn at the level crossings IF I listen and can sometimes here the loco's REV UP and take up the slack
a "HOG" on the main street 1/2 a KM away through houses is MORE annoying
Decrease property value and quality of life*
10:39 Florida has high-speed service running, at this precise moment.
Texas is planning.
California yes, is building - but not yet running.
Have you tried looking at Brightline in Florida?
I regularly use DB/S-Bahn to get to the nearest airport (3 hrs instead of 2 by car, but no parking costs and can use time to be productive) or when flights where cancelled (paid for by Lufthansa). Also, living in Bavaria we've used the car train to Hamburg when holidaying in Scandinavia as it's less stressful than driving 900km, particularly for the children.
Lufthansa Rail & Fly is really great. We try to use it too when possible. It's faster to get to FRA from Freiburg via train most times.
It is funny that the automotive sector lobbied to (a) buy rail companies, (b) buy tram / horse trams in cities, and (c) for the building of the highway system.
At the same time it ended tram service, they used the rail system to move parts and finished cars, and used the public funded highway system as their major showroom for how amazing cars are.
At time went on, Americans have grown dependent on cars, and spending a great percentage of their income on their cars.
This shift is seen even on pop culture, e.g., the TV Series Mad Man, where the main character started going to New York City by train, but at the end he took his car everywhere - and an additional car for his wife to pick-up their children.
I find it fascinating - ironically speaking - than many people use the argument of "large sums of money" being needed to build rail infrastructure, while ignoring the amount of money that was needed to build the current highway system, the money spent on maintaining it, and the money required to refresh it to modern standards.
Let's invest the money on Public Transport, so everyone can have the opportunity to use it.
A person with disability, e.g., vision or mental, shall not be able to go from his home to work?
He, with his limited budget, shall rent a place near his job, so he can go to work everyday.
If he changes his job, he shall move.
This is not a fair system, let alone a good scheme for the environment!
Therefore, we shall unite our effort in bringing Public Transport to every part of the country!
I have two points I would make:
* First, related to the main use of the US rail network for freight, this is connected to something called the Jones Act, which stipulates that commercial ships in US waterways or transiting between two US ports need to be US-built, US-flagged and US-crewed. This has made freight on inland waterways far more expensive than it otherwise would have been, and has made freight trains comparatively more economical. Without the Jones Act, probably a lot of the rail network capacity would probably be freed up for passenger traffic.
* Second, since the US is such a big country, I think the nation would quite benefit from a future passenger rail network that is REALLY fast, far beyond ordinary high-speed rail which usually sits at around 300-350 km/h in Europe. Since the existing rail network is to tied up with freight anyway -- and this does not seem likely to change -- it would in a roundabout way be beneficial to have a technology that forces you to start from scratch. So I would encourage the US to adopt one of the existing systems for trains that use magnetic levitation. The Japanese variant will run at 500 km/h in service and has been tested at over 600 km/h. This is approaching the speed of airliners, which usually sits at 850 - 920 km/h. You don't need 500 km/h speeds to compete with domestic air travel in Europe, but in the US you kind of do.
most of the inland freight goes by TRUCK not rail outside of LARGE BULK type of freight and often LONG DISTANCES that would NOT be covered by inland shipping even without the "jones act"
One of the biggest problems of the german railway infrastructure besides the huge, twenty years investment backlog is the combination of a high construction and population density and the resulting lack of seperate tracks for freight- and passenger trains. Combined tracks and the "big city bottleneck corridors" are the main reasons for unpunctuality .
amtrak needs to realize the new locomotives are horrible. on my trips last year kept cutting off I prayed to get home after delays. But plan on a cross-country trip soon. The USA is more focused on automobiles, buses and planes for travel. far as more tracks being build is a politics problem.
Please let's not forget that not every train is operated by Deutsche Bahn. There are (as of today) 46 other private companies that operate passenger trains in Germany. Some may only operate a single line, some operate an entire small network. Some only operate around a single city, some only connect specific cities, some fill gaps in regional areas. Those other companies are allowed to use the same tracks built by Deutsche Bahn for a fixed fee but some also operate their own regional tracks. There are actual even more companies if you look at freight traffic, but that's a topic of its own. And those private companies are pretty successful and some with little to no subsidies.
As for being on time, in Japan the train has to apology to the customers if the train is late by 25 seconds. When the Shinkansen once arrived 54 second late, that was considered a public shame! If the train is late by over a minute, the train company will shorten the loan of the train driver. The yearly average is that trains are 15 seconds delayed in Japan. As for Deutsche Bahn, only 62% of all trains were considered to be on time in 2022. Every 5th train is more than 6 minutes late, but that's just the yearly average (again, 15 seconds in Japan), considering that 62% are on time and many only late by a few minutes, some must be late by 30+ minutes to even get an average of 6. So there is definitely headroom for improvement, as in Japan trains typically travel way higher distances and often must handle way more passengers a day, the weather conditions are way more extreme (heavy snow in the north during winter, heavy sun and heat in the south during summer, lots of rain and storm in between the rest of the year)
Excellent video. Two points to add. (1) urban sprawl is a problem, but it started as a way to manage unprecendented growth. The US being like Germany with its towns and cities was never in the cards. It was sprawl or something more like India. Only way to keep up. (2) travel is driven by time and cost. Whether in a web or a line, too much point to point demand in the US is over longer distances. At some point, even with high speed, trains lose out to planes on cost and time of travel. In most of the US cities either dont produce enough point-to-point demand or are too far apart. It is a very challenging problem.
Americans will still value the freedom owning a car gives. This may impede the rebirth of the passenger railroad network.
The biggest problems to train travel in the US is density and distance. If I want to take a train from Hamburg in northern Germany to Munich in the south , almost the full length of the country (825km) it is just a few hour train ride. If I want to take a trip from Boston to Los Angeles full length of the county (4171 km) that's a 4 day trip by train or a 6 hour trip by plane, which do you think most American's would pick. Europeans just do not understand how BIG the USA is and how spread out the people are. When you ask an American how far away somewhere is they state it in hours of travel time and Europeans state it in distance traveled. A short trip for and American is 2 hours that's like going from one end of Germany to the other.
The USA doesn't need a system of long-distance high-speed rail, what we need is high-speed corridors. Airlines can handle the long distance but no one should want to fly from NY to DC or to Boston or want to drive those trips. I live in NJ, and I'm planning a day trip to NYC on a weekday. I plan to drive to Secaucus Junction about an hour from my home before switching to NJ Transit for the last 15 min train ride to Penn Station. I could drive to NJ Transit closer to my house but I would actually be on the train longer if I did.
i think you missed one keyfactor - most of the property for the existing railroad tracks int he US belong to private freight companys like BNSF or Union Pacific, and not to Amtrak afaik.
In opposite to Europe where most of the existing railroad tracks belong to the state (at least in germany)
I would also say thank you for your videos. Defently the most fact based one out there on YT and also entertaining. Your videos ride the fine line of enteraining some one and getting the info across. I like that a lot.
Maybe a video toppic to cossider in the future is to make a video about the "vereins"culture in Germany. Have nothing found on YT that describe this topic well for a non german / european.
happy eastern
Yes. Private rail infrastructure is tricky because it's usually not profitable and therefore the owners tend to neglect it. Britain learned that the hard way and eventually re-nationalised much of the network while keeping operations private.
Born and raised in California so I can guarantee that the high speed rail will double in cost and be half of the length. And most people won't care enough to use it.
in analysis and details who should ever beat you?
either you both bring it to the point and put more salt and more and more salt in our wounds.
yes, we are neither than perfect, never wanted to be.
jonathan, i was a colleague long time ago, who knew you, when you were young.
i had no doubt you make your way.
i am not surprised you did, germany, schwarzwald was your thing.
we knew, this american, younf inovative guy will make his way.
and he/you did.
i would now never call you du - german - but sie, informal, since we didn't meet for many years.
for me, jon is a gift to anybody. ashton, you are queen, and you don't even know it.
hands up.
your old colleague, being proud of you so much, being german.
Trains are the best way to travel after ships. Traveling by train is an adventure in itself. I love looking at the scenery running through the window. And despite the propaganda, it's much safer than flying.
I've had delays on trains in Germany and Austria that are at the worse end of Amtrak performance. 4hrs 28 minutes in one case.
If you go base on the size of the country Britain had the biggest railway network until it was axed in 1960’s.
The Biggest problem in the USA is Frieght takes preference over Passengers until that changes you could have the Best of European Trains in the USA and they would still take be behind the Frieght Trains.
Public roads and highways are subsidized too even when accounting for gas taxes. We should subsidize rail at least as much as car infrastructure, because rail is much more green and energy efficient.
Haven't finished the video yet, so maybe it will come up, but: Easy fix for america for the problem of too may cars, and needing a car at the destination: cartrains. You park your car in the back, get out, board the train, get to your destination, get back back into tge car, drive on.
Also eliminates the need for big parking lots
it is an "interesting" solution for SOME corridors like the "Texas triangle"
the CHR project is NOT one of them IMHO as it is dense METRO to DENSE METRO both where cars are NOT IDEAL and TAXI/UBER is often a BETTER option due to parking / congestion
In order to understand how to change U.S. transportation policy vis a vis trains and cars one must have a firm grasp of the policy that was implemented by Robert Moses. Such a discussion would take a *very* long time.
German (or Japanese) engineering to replace aging Amfleets (and other old rolling stocks) and engines of Amtrak is just one aspect of changing American perception of rail travel, what needs to be done are improving (and replacing) rail infrastructure (including adding electrification of the key routes near and around big cities) and complete nationalization of the railways. By nationalizing railways, passenger trains can get the right of way instead of freight trains. Taxpayer money can cover maintenance of infrastructure while the labor needed to run things are guaranteed and provided through unions.
This has also proven to not work in the U.S. The U.S. government tried some nationalization, failing like anything the government touches. If they can't run public housing, they certainly can't run a railroad. The government also screwed up Contrail. Also, Amtrak's right of way is ignored because placing a short 10-car passenger train into a siding is far easier than a 2-mile-long slower-moving freight train. Plus, that freight train then may block road crossings by doing so where Amtrak won't.
Also, electrification was in place in the U.S., especially by "The Milwaukee Road." We also have some electrified train routes in the U.S. now. Even here in Chicago. But they are also far more labor-intensive and expensive to install and maintain than diesel-electric trains.
Also, America's freight rail network is profitable, unlike European passenger trains. Right now, people can spend their money on something other than a rail system. The U.S. taxpayer already subsides the airline industry and highway network. So taxpayers are going to want to avoid funding another massive transport system.
Also, for Amtrak to be successful it can't share the same tracks as freight. If it wants to be on time, it needs its own dedicated track.
@@GalaxyFur the "failure" of US govt "projects" is follow through funding often the first thing to get "cut" is public housing and transit when a NEW government takes office due to different priorities likely campaign promises
so the only way AMTRAK will get a nationalized rail system is if there is LONG TERM VOTER interest in it and likely there wont be for a long time and also most proposed HSR systems are on NEW rail right of ways OR disused roads like "Brightline" in Florida OR the TEXAS TRIANGLE
The picture shown here 12:24 is of Houston. Not Dallas
To your questions: I have been "commuting" by train for 20 years over a distance of 500km+ by Deutsche Bahn. I have seen it all. From AC no more working, cars not operable, a door sprung open at 125km/h, accidents with cars and people, trains ending way before my destination, ferry rides with taxi cabs over 200km (I denied that offer and took a hotel instead), a multitude of hotel stays when the last train has left the station before my connecting train arrived. The worst was a train that supposedly run on time but never appeared in the station. So I had to find a hotel on my own.
So my wishes were:
A guaranteed connection when I had to take a local train. I don't mind to be late if I get there at all. But being stranded in a big city when a congress or demand has taken up all affordable hotel rooms (there was one at 300 Euros in a posh hotel available according to my app) and the service desk plainly told me that I am on my own is one of the worst experiences.
Second wish to get reliable information about connecting trains, where to disembark in order to have assistance available.
Third to have a little mercy by Deutsche Bahn with their customers (victims). There is a rule that you get up to 80 Euros in compenstion for accommodation resp. transport. But if you are to only person needing transport on a cab over 125km they put you in a hotel room instead you geeting you to your home. And then they get you only to your train station and not yout house proper. But if you do frequent travels there will be more oocasions when Deutsche Bahn saves money by putting a group of passengers bound for the same general direction into one cab. Then you, being the one with the longest ride, have to endure all the intermediate stops that the other passengers will get off before you eventually get home.
There are so many stories. Don't even get me started.
I'm a train geek 😊
As long as Amtrak neither owns its tracks nor enforces its legal priority rights, service will remain frustratingly slow (because of the poor condition of the tracks) and delay-ridden (because of having to wait for cargo trains). Example: while there are approx. 200 daily flights between airports in LA and the SF Bay Area (plus many thousands of cars, and even some bus services, incl. Germany's Flixbus!), there is just one passenger train per day, Amtrak's Coast Starlight, and it takes 12 hours to travel the 400 miles (640km), assuming there are no delays... For comparison, 120 years ago the very same trip - albeit operated by the company which also owned the track, Southern Pacific - took only 10 hours.
When the Deutsche Bahn introduced the ICE, they claimed "2x so schnell wie das Auto, halb so schnell wie das Flugzeug", "twice as fast as a car, half as fast as a plane". This is a quite attractive slogan. And in the US, it would be possible to say "3 times faster than a car", due to the speed limits. A country like the US would also be well suited for the Transrapid, a magnetic train which is even faster, but did not make it in europe. The reason for that was the existing railway system and the resistance against introducing a brand new system.
9:23 🎶 And I beliiiiiiiieeeeve that „there is WiFi“ in the ICE! And I beliiiiiiieeeve that it‘ll be functional for more than 2 minutes at a time! And I beliiiiiieeeeve 🎵
The biggest problem for high-speed rail in the US is that the tracks are under the control of private corporations. In Germany the rails (track bed, rails, sleepers, switches, etc.) all belong to the federal government and are all universally maintained at a given standard. The US is all over the place with maintenance and repair. You can't do high-speed rail when the tracks are not properly controlled for quality and maintenance.
Agreed. And it's not just high speed rail, but freight as well. The companies that own the tracks have virtual monopolies that conform instead of compete. It's still nice that 40% of long haul freight in the US is done by train, because the carbon footprint is an order of magnitude lower than trucks (even with diesel engines). But only the most profitable routes get the most maintenance, and the removal of multiple lines to go single line ties up the passenger rail traffic for hours at a time. I am 100% for nationalizing all the tracks and right of ways and leasing them back to those rail lines and future rail lines, which would force good faith competition, and allow for necessary upgrades, dedicated passenger lines, and electrification.
In the USA automobile manufacturers and oil companies were buying up rails and shutting them down.
True. But that was local transit, streetcars (trams) and such.
GM IE the biggest (at one time) car builder was one of TWO US locomotive makers and Chrysler designed the "modern" rail suspension used today on "heavy" rail
the American car makers had ZERO ISSUE with "heavy" rail like they had NO "issues" with motor-coaches GM built most of the "classic" greyhound coaches before MCI stepped up
@@danielcarroll3358 a LOT of the TRAM-systems town down were money loss operations and massively underfunded for YEARS and in SOME cases the DIESEL COACHES GM offered were BETTER then the BADLY maintained systems town down
the BIG "issue" was CITIES NOT BUYING MORE GM TDH coaches and EXPANDING the service but letting the systems continue to degrade even with the "low cost" TDH motor-coaches
without MAJOR FUNDING the streetcar system would have degraded WORSE then the BUS based transit system that "lost" to the motorcar and the "FREEWAY/suburb" DREAM
so 100% guilty of "destroying" streetcars but NOT PUBLIC TRAINST
there are actual studies done that SHOW when the GM "new look/ fishbowl" transits replaced the 40s era old style bus RIDERSHIP increased due to the "modern" bus and the better ride it offered over OLDER vehicles and the same is true when coaches replaced ratty streetcars
and the same is true when new Metro rolling stock replaces "old" ones
people will use the "NEW" over the "old"
What people don't realize about California HSR is that there's no alternative. It has to be done and it has to succeed. Highways are clogged at all times and the airspace is among the busiest in the world. It's clear that there's a *lot* of unmet demand for travel along that corridor. Trains are the only viable mode that's left and they have to be high speed to be competitive so people actually use them.
The problem is its 100 billion dollar cost, and if it will really capture the amount of people it says it will from cars and planes. New studies have shown that it will not, and thats not even to mention speed.
Planes can achieve the same goal of transit between the cities in about an hour, meanwhile it takes 3 and a half hours for the train to do so, which is a huge gap in time.
@@blackhole9961 You still need time to get to the airport, getting your car parked, getting through security check...so from 1h it gets 2h and more. At least I can use the time on a train for effective work thankfully to more space, better online connection...
@@janvozniak1235 you have to do the same exact thing with rails too.
Drive to the train station
Arrive early
Get parked
Go through security
Board
Also the amount of time it takes to get to a plane or train before boarding doesn’t really matter that much if we equalize their departure times.
Plane departs LA at 12pm arrives at SF at about 1pm.
Train departs LA at 12pm and arrives at SF at around 3:30pm.
The plane even has enough time to make a return flight and still beat the train before it arrives to its destination.
@@blackhole9961 if planes are so amazing and solve all problems, why are the highways congested around the clock? You obviously missed the part that there's no alternative to the train. There's clearly demand for more trips, but all other modes are at capacity.
And don't fool yourself. Trips don't start and end on airport runways. Pure time in transit without any externalities is irrelevant. Unlike airports, train stations are located in city centers, close to where people live and work. If I want to get on a train I just go to the station and hop on, no checks required. The California HSR website states that they want the experience to be much less intrusive than air travel.
@@jfolz there are A LOT of factors when it comes to highway congestion from the design of the highways themselves to how bad drivers are.
Is air travel really that congested, or just directly between LAX and SFO.
Both metropolitan areas do have reliever airports to choose from.
Trips also don’t start and end at train stations. A train station being located in the city center (CBD or downtown) in Americas case would be useless for those who don’t live or work downtown (so the overwhelming majority of the population). As I stated before you have to get to the train station somehow just like the airport and most people are going to live 20-40 minutes away from either of those two things.
Checks are probably going to be required to some degree to ensure the safety of passengers. Even Amtrak does have airport TSA level security for some of their stops. You wouldn’t want some would be domestic terrorist or mass murderer to just freely walk on the train with nothing stopping them would you?
Happy Easter! This was a nice surprise because yesterday only I had a social media conversation with an American friend about railways in the USA - a couple of minutes after my last reply, I found you dig deep into the topic! Thanks.
And now: 3, 2, 1... let German railway customers moan. DB bashing is a beloved sport.
Enjoy your Easter holidays!
One of the main contributors to poor on-time performance outside the NEC is precision scheduled railroading. With the class 1's cutting corners to maximize profits, they've cut employees by over 30% and have run trains in excess of 10,000 feet. These long trains no longer fit in the passing sidings which forces the Amtrak trains to wait in the sidings instead of the freight trains. Another product of PSR is lack of maintenance. Their infrastructure is falling apart forcing maintenance of way to put tons of speed restrictions all over the place, further slowing down passenger trains.
I see High-Speed trains in the US more as an option to flying, than carless travel. With much smaller footprint than an airport and fewer personnel than planes, it is the cheaper and faster alternative to short flights and long drives. People don't seem to have a problem driving to or from the airport, so why should they have a problem at a train station?
The idea of regional train service in the u.s. today is a step too far. If an inner-city traffic concept works without, or with fewer cars and there are trains for medium- and long distance traffic, then only the field in between, where cars play out their advantages, can be approached. In Germany its the same idea, in bavarian uban sprawl everyone uses his or her car, until you can’t park in the big city.
I consider me to be in a very comfortable position, as I don't need a car for my daily life. Everything is walkable for work and grocery shopping and if I have to get around to friends or the gym, I can take the bus or "Regionalexpress". I don't even own a car. Not even a bicycle.
And all my vacation...i either rent a car or take the train. Or maybe go by airplane.
But as my company supports the new "Deutschlandticket" that every one gets for 49€, I only have to pay 34,90€, so it is very likely for me to take bus or train.
The way the U.S. was built isn't sustainable. We have to start somewhere. We really need a massive spending bill that gets our national rail network on par with our national highway system. First step is to move cargo off the highways and onto rail. Trucks are clogging highways and this would be a great way to bring in revenue to a new network. Short term it would also reduce maintenance costs on highways. Use cargo to fund a lot of the national buildup. Then build passenger rail lines along side the cargo lines. These would have to be double tracked each, electrified, with no at grade crossings. it is doable but not if we cheap our way through this. Spend like we did on highways. And just a reminder -- highways are heavily subsidized just like the railroad will be.
Ashton; Faster rail travel in the USA (even just on the Boston - Washington, DC corridor) is technically almost impossible to achieve.
1. CONRAIL, the freight railroad owns all the tracks. They are old, rickety, and the distance between signals - the signal block - which limits train speed is from the late 1800's. Then you still have lots of grade crossings which all inhibit increased speed.
2. To straighten tracks; improve the roadbed; requires a dedicated high speed passenger rail line - with no freight trains. That is almost a total impossibility to achieve in the USA.
3. In the late 1960's United Aircraft designed and built the Turbo-trains. The aim was to increase speed over the rough roadbed, and give the passengers a comfortable ride. The idea was, if you can get more riders, then you earn more profit, which then allows the railroads to make the next round of improvements. Canadian National RR ran Turbo-trains between Toronto and Montreal; AMTRACK ran them between Boston and Washington. When AMTRACK, instead of buying more Turbo-trains, bought French trains for these routes, United Aircraft ended the Turbo-train program.
I remember the turbo-trains in Montreal Canada
I think you answered all your questions correctly
Short answer: no. The main problems of US passenger rail are not technical but regulatory. Even the more technical problems are there because of regulations.
A big issue for trains in the USA is that the Western USA is mountainous. The very reason that trains are more energy efficient than trucks and cars makes them difficult for them to go up and down grades that cars can go with no problem. If you look a map and compare highways to train tracks you will see that roads travel in a straighter line and trains often need to tunnel through mountains that cars can simply drive over. This adds cost and more importantly time. The 500 mile proposed route between LA and the Bay area is a lot longer than the 380 mile drive distance or the 340 flight distance.
Don't forget that in the railroad savvy countries in Europe the taxpayer contributes. Seeing a railtrack as public infrastructure like highways. The French SNCF needs subsidies. Deutsche Bahn gets paid for doing local and regional services.
Many car centric voters would like the same as in the US - especially on the right and far right. They also liberalized buses which use cheap drivers on taxpayer funded roads to offer slow but very cheap service - taking much profits from the long distance rail Service.
If public transport is done poor it does not help commuters. Than it is a system that picks you up at a spot you can't reach and it will bring you at a spot you don't want to be.
So it should not only be trains but is should be a combination of all public transports and the world has many examples that should open the eyes in countrie like us or canada.
One prominent point is always that it should be affordable to the general public.
Nice Video, but what Train Station is that at 15:47?
There is an Berlin S-Bahn, Tramtracks but the Buses aren't yellow so they can't be from the BVG, so werer is that ?
That's an aerial view of the train staton at Potsdam.
@@TypeAshton thx
I have hearing problems and I find background music over the commentary difficult.
Hi Ashton. Happy easter!
We live near the sea in the south of the Netherlands and we prefer travelling by train going on holiday. It will take us from the coast to the Alps within 10 hours over about 1000 km. Even with a fast car that is hard to beat. Secondly the cost is not that much more and you arrive at your destination well rested, and fed. For example it will cost us (in first class!) no more than 400 euro round trip for the both of us.
What is not to like about riding a train at speeds over 270 km per hour and enjoying a glas of wine and a meal.
No more long(er) distance travel for us by car within Europe, because this is more enjoyable.
going by train, you can only go where a train goes.
provided you do not live at a train station and don´t spend your vacation at one, there´s always the problem of the first and last mile(s).
even if you solve this by bus or taxy, you are then basically grounded at you destination.
and what about hobby equipment, when you are o vacation (surf board, dive gear, canoe etc etc)
and if you have a car anyway, why pay for it staying in your garage while you take the train?
I am happy it works for you, but going on vacation by train would never be an option for me. I could only imagine a train for a regular commute (however, my way to work is almost walkable/definitely cyclable, anyway)
Distance is a lot greater in the US than in Europe. Distance = $$. Cost is cheaper in the open plains, but as you said the suburbs costs are high. I'm in CA and no one seems to want the high speed rail. Even those that pushed it are now not really supporting it. The initial locations are in places like Bakersfield - Nobody wants to go to Bakersfield! :)
On the other hand, High Speed Rail works at its best where it can cross vast distances without slowing down.
And Germany gave away the technology for really fast trains to China, when I'm not mistaken. And it is CO2-neutral, I think. I mean the Transrapid. In comparison to this the ICE is slow.
I like the ICE but i might be a lil bit biased, since i work as a dispatcher :)
Have you try the Maglev trains in Germany, I will like to ride those.
There are none.
A forgotten historical fact why railways in Europe developed so much: Wars! Every country made efforts to move troops fast in direction of the enemy. This was not necessary in USA. BTW - when do you bring out a video of the Pipeline? ;-)
You can see that even today in the Russian invasion of Ukraine. As soon as the rail transport got disrupted, the Russian logistics plan for moving personnel and material fell of the rails (pun intended).
The current rail map is far far smaller than it used to be. Before the interstates sucked up all the infrastructure money the US east of the Rockies, was just as rail dense as Europe.
I would have thought that one of the main restrictions on train travel in the USA is the sheer size of America, if people are wishing to travel between main cities then even high speed trains are relatively slow. So as the aviation industry developed after the 1920s or so and aircraft became much faster and reliable - then obviously passengers moved over to flying. Not many people can afford 3-4days to travel coast to coast, when an aircraft can make the trip in 4-6hrs or so.
The east coast region is relatively densely populated though - comparable to Germany, France, or Spain. Having a proper HSR network (or any rail network at all) would work really well there.
@@faultier1158 True. But I think that HSTs are only better/quicker than aircraft of journeys up to about 400miles or so (other distance units are available). If a train stops every, say 50-60 miles for passenger stops, then the average speed will rapidly drop and the journey time increase.
Its why the HS2 line currently being constructed here in the UK is largely a waste of money. The distance between UK cities simply are far enough apart to get much advantage of HST.
HS2 will increase passenger capacity rather than speed.
Over 400miles or so, the time penalty for flying - having to travel to the airport, security/check in time can then be made up for by the higher speeds of aircraft. So aircraft are faster than train in total journey times.
@@jjsmallpiece9234 I think the time advantage for rail is out to about 500 miles/800km. There are many US cities that are within those sorts of distances.
Where stations are too close together it is possible to have the high speed train only stop at some of the intermediate stations. One train A CD F, next AB D EF, then have a slower stopping train that leave just after the fast train.
@@johnclements6614 Using the UK as an example, a journey of 500 miles is approximately London to Aberdeen, If flying takes a total time of 4hrs - with airport security etc, trains take about 7 1/2 hr, Factor in train stops, I can't see even a high speed train beating 4hrs or even close to that. Remembering the UK government in its great wisdom is only currently building HS2 to Manchester, less than 1/2 the distance.
I can't see capitalist America spending billions of $ on rail upgrades for marginal benefit for the east coast cities.
@@jjsmallpiece9234 You seem to be confusing a proposed high speed line with existing lines and air travel including getting to the airport.
A new high speed line will go faster than an old line.
Sparsely populated areas can be served by buses no problem. BRT and automated metro can serve US cities properly.
No Buses cannot serve sparsely populated regularly like a city. Im afraid you don't know what rural America is really like or how it is designed (ill give you a hint, it's nothing like those little villages you find in every other country on the planet where everyone is close together)
Metros actually cannot serve American cities properly due to their very design and nature. This very video points that out clearly.
American cities barely have the density for Buses as it is and most people still take cars.
I travelled daily by train into NYC for work (from NJ). So trains are not something that frightens me. But to go be train to someplace other than NY, or Washington DC or what have you is not practical for US destinations like Los Angeles. The trip would take days so travel would take up most of a vacation. And then what? You still need to rent a car when you reach a destination (other than one in one of the few cities with well developed public transit). The best option would be to develop trains where they are effective - at least for now. Cities like Wash DC, Chicago, Boston, New York are cities that tolerate public transit. For the rest - the US was developed based on the automobile.
German engineering is already helping to save Amtrak. The Siemens Mobility ALC-42 is replacing all the now-aging GE Genesis locomotives over the next several years.
Too bad the Siemens Mobility ALC-42 locomotives are not reliable and keep breaking down. They are extremely unreliable in winter weather. And the Venture cars from Siemens also keep breaking down. The doors don't work and the water system is contanimated with lead!
Amtrak should have gone with Stadler instead, as they well know for building rolling stock that is winter proof