The map you showed about the European rail network only displays the "highspeed" mainline tracks. Obviously there are many more tracks for regional trains.
@@isaacparadis7951 The US has a network length of 293584 Km. The European Union (Not Russia…) has 230548 Km. So the Us has a comparable length, not twice as much. That does not change the fact of the map being misleading.
Its slower, but its way more fun, relaxed and a much nicer vibe than flying. Saves a couple bucks too. Regular on the Amtrak Capitol Limited, Empire Builder and the michigan services here. Ride metra for everything else closer to home. Commute on the L. Barely drive my truck
@@DodgeRaccoon Silver Meteor, Cardinal, and Auto-Train for me. But I have been to as far NW as Seattle, as far East as Boston, NOLA, Birmingham, Chicago, Denver, Glacier National Park, and Yellowstone by private passenger railcar.
@@unconventionalideas5683 Well most parts are owned by amtrak. The rest is owned by Massachusetts Department of Transportation, Connecticut Department of Transportation and Metro-North Railroad. Mass. and Conn. DOT are owned by their states and Metro-North is owned by MTA which is owned by State of New York. So the whole corridor is owned by goverment, some parts by the federal one, some parts by the local one.
Twice as big as european rail network doesnt mean much when you realise that america is 80x the size of most of the countries, and texas is 2x the size of the uk
@stevenroshni1228 But you also have to take in population density. The EU is super dense, while the US has something like 5 acres for every person. Passenger trains just don't make sense in the US.
Why does this matter? Bigger is bigger, why does it matter? It’s a great point that the us has the worlds largest railroad system but it’s all owned by freight train companies
It bothers me when people say shit like that too, like yeah there's been track there for 190 years, doesn't mean it's the same track concrete ties is relatively new to the NEC right though?
@@TheLegoTrainStation Nah a good chunk of the track on some parts of the NEC are quite old. Maybe not 100 years old but definitely looking at half a century and above. But the real point is that even though the tracks might've been replaced, they're still running the same curves and gradients that their predecessors and so it's still not all that conducive to hsr.
the Acela can’t use the “100 year old” tracks because the only area in the US with electrified tracks, that use catenaries, are located in the northeast corridor in which the passenger trains have the right-of-way
That is factually incorrect. There are many places in the US that utilize overhead wire, I can literally look out my back window at one. Acela operates on the track it does because that is what's available in the very dense costal northeast.
Amtrak has right of way in law only. In practice rail companies will just pay the fine and give freight preference. The reason electification has made so little progress is it's an actual investment that cost-cutting corporations balk at because they'd rather chase profit while letting track rot and trains derail.
I believe most of the NEC is owned and operated by Amtrak and there's limited freight service along that. Or if freight runs there, it's going to be off peak times
@@D4cked Good luck electrifying rail with world wide copper shortages. And besides the enormous capital investment of putting up poles and wires, the railroad companies would then have to buy hundreds of new electric locomotives, which cost more than diesel locomotives. The tens of billions spent on that would trickle down through the supply chain and the result would be higher prices on everything you can imagine. Maintenance on railroads is better than you think, but like everything else, things do break. And the number of train derailments is nowhere near what they were just 40-50 years ago. These days, there are around 1,000 derailments a year, the vast majority of which are low speed yard derailments. Back then, there were up to 8,000 derailments per year. Moving freight in timely fashion is what keeps the economy moving. Slow down freight and you have supply chain issues. And depending on what is being moved, a 100 car freight train takes 200 - 400+ semi trucks off of the road. An average of 54,000,000 tons of freight move every day on the rails.
The reason the Acela exists is because the section of track which it runs on is in fact owned completely by Amtrak. Truly, Amtrak is not a bad railroad (their money spending choices are absurd), but they simply have to comply with freight conditions everywhere but the NEC
The NE Corridor from DC to Boston is dedicated to passenger rail only. Acela doesn’t run on freight lines. Also, the track is constantly upgraded, it’s not 100 years old. The speed limit is a government restriction and the fact that too many stops are required.
It's upgraded as per things like positive controls, but there are too many sharp curves that (other than say Camden, NJ + a few other locations) don't allow the acela (gens 1 and 2) to REALLY take advantage of their speed capabilities.
@SpheroJr3289 You are absolutely correct. Especially between New Rochelle, NY, and New Haven, Connecticut, Amtrak shares its rails with at least 2 regional freight services, as well as the Metro North Commuter Rail service. And from New York to DC, you deal with NJ Transit and MARTA.
@@avatarinumyes but they must yield to passenger trains since the freight railroads don’t own the trackage. Others are supposed to by law and while some are good at following the law such as bnsf and up, others disregard it or are outright hostile to passenger trains like cpkc.
But Blanche there are tracks that old, not every track owner has enough traffic to maintain each and every mile.. here in a rural town, there are 2 crossings, between them a siding is formed, which in the 2.5 years I've lived here Iowa Interstate passes through multiple times daily, and not slowing down either, and the nearest I've seen maintenance on any of their tracks is 20 miles away in the vicinity of their yard.
@@chalkylover The Northeast Corridor where the Acela runs was entirely re-tracked aside from some bridges and tunnels between 2000-Present and is actively replacing bridges and building new tunnels. The only grade crossings on the line are a handful in coastal Connecticut. Tracks were upgraded to permit the highest speeds possible, and what limits speeds on the line aside from congestion is track curvature not the infrastructure itself
Actually, quick correction, Amtrak trains have legal priority over any freight service. The problem is that when those two need to pass each other the passing track is too short for the 3 mile long freight train. So what happens is your train either rams into another, or you're forced to wait. With Norfolk Southern's incident in East Palestine, trains have been getting shorter on their tracks, and it's seeming that Precision Scheduled Railroading may be coming to a close. However, I fear that there must be more tragedies such as the East Palestine derailment for the Federal Railroad Administration to finally wake the fuck up and hold class 1 railroads responsible for their dangerous choices.
@@fatboy158 that's been a proposition for a long time, but with how America likes to function, our capitalistic beliefs dictate that there shouldn't be government-run businesses in America. I think the most real solution is for the FRA to finally bring the hammer down and knock these increasingly dangerous operations on the head. Who knows what they're gonna try after one man crews? Removing crossing gates?
The whole reason why American passenger trains are the way they are is because originally the freight railroads operated passenger trains but saw a huge decline in traffic for passengers in the 60s. To stop the railroads going bust, Amtrak came into existence. If passenger trains were more profitable then the freight railroads would’ve kept them operating and had them take priority over freight.
@@jst1man If passenger service was profitable, it would be readily available. Follow the money. US passengers would rather drive (inbred in our genetics) or fly. Trains just don't go to near as many places as the other modes go to. Culture, in this case, is a big factor in the need or desire for trains.
@jst1man I mean, they built/bought the track and holds the balls of the US economy in their palm. You piss them off, they will crush it. Not to mention that are supported by the US Government themselves.
Fun fact! Amtrak is actually supposed to be given priority when encountering freight, *however,* freight consists today are too long for the sidings/bypasses that the freight trains are supposed to wait on, so Amtrak always ends up being _forced_ to wait.
It's actually a congressional act that states freight companies are supposed to prioritize Amtrak traffic. However, Congress doesn't enforce it. One more reason why we need term limits in Congress and campaign finance reforms.
BrightLine is doomed to failure. Nobody rides it anyway, everyone rides their car or flies. Once the investors leave the BrightLine project, the whole system will fail. It's called a "real estate scheme"
FYI Amtrak owns most of the eastern tracks they run. Freight share time one these but are not prioritized. The trouble is that not much of the track is suitable for higher speed. Much of it because of routing, such as proximities to objects, turns are to sharp, and they cross roads instead of going over or under. You cannot do high speed rail that intersect roadways directly for safety reasons.
This guy got most of this stuff wrong. As a Railfan this makes me very annoyed. The northeast corridor is owned entirely by Amtrak and freight is a rare occurrence and the Acela is going 110mph for about 80% of the route
I live by the Roseville yard and have taken Amtrak to Reno and this not true. Same tracks as freight. Same from Emeryville to Sacramento, shared tracks.
for the rest of the world who uses metric: 155mph is *about 250kph* I've heard that most bullet trains these days usually run closer to 300kph, that one train line in China ran 400kph at some point, and the current world record holder for fastest train is the TGV Duplex in France running above 500kph.
Having just taken a bunch of rides in the shinkansen 🚄 bullet train in Japan, I just have to say the US needs a network of these! So fast, smooth, quiet and comfortable. Great alternative to flying and lots of legroom. Going 160 mph on the ground for hours is unreal!
Actually, the vast majority of the Japanese dedicated HSR track is built to the 160 mph standard. So even if the new trainsets can technically go 186, 200, or 220 mph, the track speed is still limited to 150-160 mph. They standardized on that speed so the entire network tends to run at 160 mph with the exception of only a few faster and a few slower lines. And even the new track that they build in Japan these days tends to be 160 mph. For example, their last two HSR projects, as well as the two new projects now under construction are all 160 mph limited. This is all publicly available information, btw. I encourage you to read about it.
@@usernameaeaeaea The freight moves at about the same speed in both countries. The local/commuter trains are faster, but not by much. It's specifically the Shinkansen network that is a good 20-30% faster than the Acela on average. But I feel like a loooooot of US railfans are utterly surprised and even shocked that the Shinkansen is not in fact 300% faster than the Acela. If you look at the top speeds of most Shinkansen lines and their average speeds it becomes more apparent why that is the case. But I still feel like it's important to realize that the Acela exists, it's in the US, and is on par with the average Shinkansen line in terms of both top and average speeds. Misinformation helps no one.
I got stuck for 52 hours on Amtrak in the middle of a polar vortex in The center of Glacier National park because a freight train derailed one car in a tunnel ahead of us. It made my 1 day trip take a week because after the storm hours they sent out replacement workers due to over time,and they then got replaced with another crew. Once it all cleared they sent us on a “replacement” bus that back tracked 4 hours to the closest city to then transfer us to other busses to then take us to Portland. Then we got a hotel room and a cheap breakfast and shuttled onto another train to finish the trip which didn’t go all the way through so had to hop on another 2 busses to finish the trip. Totally week long nightmare for what was supposed to be a 1 day trip.
i remember the one time i tried amtrak and losing a day of travel in the station where i was told the delay was between 45 minutes to 12 hours and we wouldn't know exactly until the minute we boarded
Nah, it can be profitable under the right circumstances, The US just doesn't meet that in many areas. Freight rail can be unprofitable as well, It's not used nearly as heavy in Europe as the number of port cities is much higher allowing quite a bit of bulk transport to be done by ship. The US while having a bunch of port cities, the fact that it is much more rectangular of a country with really ports being possible on about 1/3 to 1/2 of its borders makes a lot of population centers thousands of miles from a port.
@@calvingreene90he Japanese railway is profitable, dutch railway is profitable, swiss railway is profitable etc. Car infrastructure is unprofitable not trains they have literally bankrupted cities like deteoit
@@JimmyJr630 Cities like Detroit are bankrupt because of decades of Democrat missmanagement. Before the democrats took over Detroit was one of the richest cities in the world. Imagine that subsidized railroads making a profit.
I have already answered a similar question on Quora, the reason is simple: the US territory is large and passenger rail connections would be too slow in any case (trains from coast to coast take a week, all the big trains in the past were night trains), it's the reason because you travel between states by plane. A widespread passenger network is expensive and unprofitable; here in Europe we mainly have domestic or short distance trains.
To be fair a much bigger % of Europeans use public transport compared to Americans because it’s more viable, living in America you pretty much need your own transportation to do anything - if I where to take public transportation to get to work, the dmv, a doctors appointment etc.. it would take me a couple hours just to get there. I’ve driven farther everyday for work than the radius of most European countries and I guarantee you most of the materials I needed where transported via railroad at some point along the way.
@@TheLegoTrainStation around 50 minutes if traffic is good, when I worked in Moab I was commuting 7-8 hours per week ‘cause I would travel there and back to SLC to manage other projects.
@@yulfine1688 roughly, it all depends on what it is you do for work so imagine that the average American that transports to the same facility every day still take 1 hour just to get there. I work in construction as a finish carpenter for various job sites around my state, there has been times that it’s taken me 4 hours just to get to work….
Yeah because America is capitalist the companies bought land to make money by transporting things the same way as bus companies and taxi companies are privately owned also you shouldn’t let the American government do anything because they screw it up
When the railroads were first built, if people waited around for the government to take the initiative and build tracks for them, nothing would’ve ever happened.
Thank God. The US would never have grown the way it did without private capital building our railroads. Even if the government was competent, it didn't have even a tiny fraction of the money required. Lots of the early funding came from London, ironically enough
@@robertmoffett3486im like 80% sure most our rail was built because of goverment subsides that gave a large swath of land surrounding the rails to the companies that built them. Basicly paying them to build rails
Most Americans nowadays would prefer airplane to travel, let's say LA to New York. Tho, if I was there, I would prefer trains just for countryside sightseeing.
This is incorrect. The acela actually reaches speeds of over 110 mph 80% of the route. The other 20% is penn stations, and station approaches. Also, 80% of the US Freight Shares it’s stock with Amtrak.
@@railworksamerica what is a regular train? High speed rail (which is what Amtrak is attempting to do) in most other countries easily reach speeds of 180-200 mph
Acela operates on the NE corridor that is mostly owned by Amtrak, many other lines are owned by commuter transit authorities like MTA or NJDot. The NE corridor has a lot of stops and stations and parts of the line host a lot of commuter trains but fundamentally this is a 150 year old railroad designed originally to go about 30 mph that was supersonic back then so the only way to go 150 for the whole route would be to build any entirely new railway. Good luck with that.
Not to mention most of the us doesn’t have the population density to support rail networks or bus networks. Which is why most of America has private cars
You can justify hsr and good passenger rail in every single one of the US’s metropolitan areas. The Texas triangle, Great Lakes region, pretty much the whole east coast, the front range in Colorado, So Cal La and Vegas etc. we have cars because of the way our govt and planners choose to build our infrastructure, low density car dependent towns connected by highways and roads. We drive because we literally have no other choice the majority of the time.
1) that map is misleading as it shows only a few high speed trains, and no regional trains 2) all European train networks are integrated between nations 3) this covers a landmass that is bigger than the entire US surface area 4) many train operators service in multiple countries 5) people that take the train ALSO own/drive a car, you choose what's more convenient, train can be much quicker 6) the fact that US train travels sucks is purely political decisions, not circumstances
Um actually your wrong, the Acela does not use freight tracks it uses the northeast corridor, which is owned by Amtrak. The real problem is the freight company’s don’t care about passenger trains and they refuse to upgrade infrastructure.
Yes, the new Alstom Avelia Liberty is actually a French TGV M that can easily reach 320 km/h (200 mph). But the Alstom Avelia Liberty will only reach that speed in France because France has high-speed lines that are capable of 320 km/h (200 mph). Sadly the Alstom Avelia Liberty can never reach a speed of 320 km/h (200 mph) in the USA because there are simply no high-speed lines in the USA yet that are capable of such high-speeds. And i'm afraid that the USA will still have no proper high-speed lines before the year 2050.
The freight explanation is /mostly/ accurate until you reach the Acela part. The Acela runs entirely within the Northeast Corridor, one of only a few sections in the entire country Amtrak owns the rights to. The only section that is not owned by Amtrak is between New Rochelle NY and New Haven CT owned by MTA Metro-North Railroad/ConDot
Well the Northeast Corridor which the Acela runs on is entirely owned by Amtrak. So freight is a rare occurrence and happens in a few small stretches of the corridor most with low passenger frequency.
Well, actually, Metro-North just runs on it between Grand Central in New Haven. Metro north only owns the portion between New Rochelle and Grand Central. So Amtrak still owns it.
I rode the Korean high speed rail. It doesn't have to compete with freight. Out of a 3 hour journey it only went high speed for about 15 minutes. The rest of the time it just lumbered along. And it stopped many times to load. I figured out that if we had taken the taxi we could have gotten to our destination faster.
It's complete garbage. Most trains are very slow. Something constantly breaks, and they can't handle even a little weather. HS2 is nowhere near finished, and train tickets are so expensive between cities most people choose to fly, say London to Edinburgh
the US track sits at 220k km where the European Union alone, not the "whole of Europe", you know that is half the size of the us and it sits at 208k km which means it has almost twice as many tracks as the us relative to its size.... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_rail_transport_network_size
It's also not just the length that matters, but what you do with it 😉. In the US there are way less train stations compared to Europe, where you can go pretty much everywhere by train and don't have to drive another few hundred kilometres from that station. But yes, there are also problems in Europe, for example the German railroad network is overdue 20 years regarding renovations.
Honestly Amtrak is hated on too much. I hear so many people complain about it, but having ridden only on JR and CRH all my life, I expected a lot worse when I tried it out for myself. Most foreigners are pleasantly surprised by the NEC, with service going at 110 - 120 mph most of the way between DC and NYC. Some station enhancements, reliability upgrades, and track straightening and the US honestly has a very solid piece of rail infrastructure they can be proud of.
It's genuinely mindblowing to be the generation that inherited the privatized infrastructure and tegularly find out how we basically stopped building infrastructure in North America in the 80s and sold away our assets.
Fastest train in the us is 155mph on short distances - In China, Magkev goes 268mph - In Japan it goes "only" to 200mph - In France, TGV does Paris to Marseille at 200mph for the 500 miles of it...
Freight companies are actually legally required to prioritize passenger trains over their own freight trains. However, the only way this can be enforced is if the attorney general sues the offending freight rail company, which never happens.
This is because 99.959% of commuters in the United States would rather take a car, plane, or even a bus than a train. Unfortunately, there just isn't enough demand for long distance inter city passenger trains in the US to make it profitable.
You should mention the cargo trians are legally required to yield to passenger trains but this rule goes unenforced. We literally handicapped our own rail network
In USA unlike in India, cities are well connected by Expressway, people love to drive. Those who don’t want to drive will take an airplane it’s cheaper than passenger train.
It makes sense. Why invest in something that isn't going to benefit you? Private companies have no reason to invest in passenger train infrastructure over freight train infrastructure, and the government is too busy spending my tax dollars on foreign interventions to build or maintain any national passenger railway infrastructure.
Menwhile Brazil: you only get freight railroads in some places, trucks and buses can do the rest of the work (spoiler: they do but for twice the price)
The problem with speed of rail is the length of trains and number of operators not the amount of rail there is no need to build a parallel train network
All you need to do is look at the 1970's. Passenger rail was part of the Private rail networks but because of how bad the money was in Passenger rail and the terrible economy at the time, Passenger rail nearly went extinct. Amtrak was only created because the government felt there was still a Major Need for Passenger rail. Amtrak is basically the USPS of Railroads
That’s the most simplified European railroad map I have ever seen
Basically he only showed the routes which enable 200kmh+ aka the ones suited for the full speed amtrak
@@tf3655well that only makes his point even weaker why would he do that
@@tf3655england should be basically fully covered then.
@@Les_MeilleursMCFCyeah
In Europe, trains stop at many places and have to avoid mountains etc. and that's why they can't go that fast
The map you showed about the European rail network only displays the "highspeed" mainline tracks. Obviously there are many more tracks for regional trains.
It’s especially awful at showing all the regional trains in the UK. It barley shows any
Well yeah but it’s still a fact that the US has twice the size of europes rail network
@@isaacparadis7951 The US has a network length of 293584 Km. The European Union (Not Russia…) has 230548 Km. So the Us has a comparable length, not twice as much. That does not change the fact of the map being misleading.
@@isaacparadis7951 And I rewatched the short and noticed that this “fact“, that the Us network would be twice as long is just plain wrong.
@@isaacparadis7951And the US is way bigger than the European Union.
I take the train every chance I get. Not afraid to fly at all, I just really enjoy a train ride, seeing the scenery and so on.
Yeah I agree, it's a different vibe ✨
Its slower, but its way more fun, relaxed and a much nicer vibe than flying. Saves a couple bucks too.
Regular on the Amtrak Capitol Limited, Empire Builder and the michigan services here. Ride metra for everything else closer to home. Commute on the L. Barely drive my truck
You should come to Europe, most countries railway systems here are really good and they can bring you everywhere
@@ElliLavender Yes, so I hear. But unfortunately, travel is not financially feasible for me. If I win the lottery, though, you may expect me.
@@DodgeRaccoon Silver Meteor, Cardinal, and Auto-Train for me. But I have been to as far NW as Seattle, as far East as Boston, NOLA, Birmingham, Chicago, Denver, Glacier National Park, and Yellowstone by private passenger railcar.
I believe the Acela is actually one of the few services that runs on entirely amtrak-owned rails which is why it's one of the most reliable
A lot of it is not Amtrak owned, but belongs to various commuter railroads.
@aimeesanders680 i don't understand your good high speed rail language
@@unconventionalideas5683 3/4 of the northeast corridor rail is owned by Amtrak.
@@unconventionalideas5683 Well most parts are owned by amtrak. The rest is owned by Massachusetts Department of Transportation, Connecticut Department of Transportation and Metro-North Railroad. Mass. and Conn. DOT are owned by their states and Metro-North is owned by MTA which is owned by State of New York. So the whole corridor is owned by goverment, some parts by the federal one, some parts by the local one.
Twice as big as european rail network doesnt mean much when you realise that america is 80x the size of most of the countries, and texas is 2x the size of the uk
Europe is more public transit, people can hop off the train and not need a car
@stevenroshni1228 But you also have to take in population density. The EU is super dense, while the US has something like 5 acres for every person. Passenger trains just don't make sense in the US.
Europe is roughly the same size as the lower 48.
that's why no one in the us travel by trains. atleast I have not done that nor that I have seen one. apart from big metros.
Why does this matter? Bigger is bigger, why does it matter? It’s a great point that the us has the worlds largest railroad system but it’s all owned by freight train companies
“The Acela will run along tracks that are 100 years old”
**shows Acela tracks with concrete ties and welded rail**
It bothers me when people say shit like that too, like yeah there's been track there for 190 years, doesn't mean it's the same track
concrete ties is relatively new to the NEC right though?
@@TheLegoTrainStation I think they were put in within the past 20 years, so yes relatively new. I could be wrong though.
@@cmilburn26Yes, the upgrades started in 2009
@@TheLegoTrainStation Nah a good chunk of the track on some parts of the NEC are quite old. Maybe not 100 years old but definitely looking at half a century and above. But the real point is that even though the tracks might've been replaced, they're still running the same curves and gradients that their predecessors and so it's still not all that conducive to hsr.
@TheLegoTrainStation you ever heard of the track of theseus?
He also doesn't realize most of our rail infrastructure is so old it can't handle high speed rail
Funny you think it can even handle regular traffic.
No, Trains are communism
@nicholasdean3467 *Looks at multiple train derailments a year because of this very reason*
That is no excuse
@@manukinggames9770That ain’t excuse, just an explanation. Obviously, it’s not as if new high speed tracks can’t be built.
the Acela can’t use the “100 year old” tracks because the only area in the US with electrified tracks, that use catenaries, are located in the northeast corridor in which the passenger trains have the right-of-way
That is factually incorrect. There are many places in the US that utilize overhead wire, I can literally look out my back window at one. Acela operates on the track it does because that is what's available in the very dense costal northeast.
Amtrak has right of way in law only. In practice rail companies will just pay the fine and give freight preference. The reason electification has made so little progress is it's an actual investment that cost-cutting corporations balk at because they'd rather chase profit while letting track rot and trains derail.
I believe most of the NEC is owned and operated by Amtrak and there's limited freight service along that. Or if freight runs there, it's going to be off peak times
@@D4ckedwrong
@@D4cked Good luck electrifying rail with world wide copper shortages. And besides the enormous capital investment of putting up poles and wires, the railroad companies would then have to buy hundreds of new electric locomotives, which cost more than diesel locomotives. The tens of billions spent on that would trickle down through the supply chain and the result would be higher prices on everything you can imagine.
Maintenance on railroads is better than you think, but like everything else, things do break. And the number of train derailments is nowhere near what they were just 40-50 years ago. These days, there are around 1,000 derailments a year, the vast majority of which are low speed yard derailments. Back then, there were up to 8,000 derailments per year.
Moving freight in timely fashion is what keeps the economy moving. Slow down freight and you have supply chain issues. And depending on what is being moved, a 100 car freight train takes 200 - 400+ semi trucks off of the road. An average of 54,000,000 tons of freight move every day on the rails.
Bro finna Get humbled by us rail fans real quick💀💀
I came for the comment section🍿I’m not even a railfan but even I know y’all are quick to put BS in their place 😂
My oneplus 5T is finna be 5 years old in january 2023. Damn china phone finna last forever.
MOTHERFRICKINTRAINNNSSSSS
You guys are railing him down, damn
@@keycrafter7471 nice pun lol
The reason the Acela exists is because the section of track which it runs on is in fact owned completely by Amtrak. Truly, Amtrak is not a bad railroad (their money spending choices are absurd), but they simply have to comply with freight conditions everywhere but the NEC
*ICE laughing noises*
No, Trains are communism
except for the metro north portion between NYC and New Haven
@@CouchPotator I believe you are correct
'Absurd' is the other way to say steered I guess😅
Fastest train in USA: 155 mph
Every other train in Europe: hold my beer
Japan: Hold my sushi.
Maglev 600 km/h and a plane have 900 km/h it’s just 300 different between maglev and plane
Even Indonesia has train that is faster.
Really? Hungary: *exists* 😅
@@esphileeAmerica doens't need passenger train , they prefer flight ✈️ American company and govt see railway as slow and outdated technology
@@maruti5281But maglev is fastest train and most sophisticated than even aeroplanes.
The NE Corridor from DC to Boston is dedicated to passenger rail only. Acela doesn’t run on freight lines. Also, the track is constantly upgraded, it’s not 100 years old. The speed limit is a government restriction and the fact that too many stops are required.
Fun fact the NEC was made the pennshlvania railroad
It's upgraded as per things like positive controls, but there are too many sharp curves that (other than say Camden, NJ + a few other locations) don't allow the acela (gens 1 and 2) to REALLY take advantage of their speed capabilities.
NEC isn’t passenger exclusive. Locals do share the trackage
@SpheroJr3289 You are absolutely correct. Especially between New Rochelle, NY, and New Haven, Connecticut, Amtrak shares its rails with at least 2 regional freight services, as well as the Metro North Commuter Rail service. And from New York to DC, you deal with NJ Transit and MARTA.
@@avatarinumyes but they must yield to passenger trains since the freight railroads don’t own the trackage. Others are supposed to by law and while some are good at following the law such as bnsf and up, others disregard it or are outright hostile to passenger trains like cpkc.
Train tracks in the US are not 100 years old. They're rejuvenated and rebuilt regularly.
But Blanche there are tracks that old, not every track owner has enough traffic to maintain each and every mile.. here in a rural town, there are 2 crossings, between them a siding is formed, which in the 2.5 years I've lived here Iowa Interstate passes through multiple times daily, and not slowing down either, and the nearest I've seen maintenance on any of their tracks is 20 miles away in the vicinity of their yard.
They were built 100 years ago. Maintained sure but not built for high speed wail . Lots of crossings aren’t even marked or barricaded .
I agree with you. The narrator himself said that over $800B was invested in the tracks, which undermines his own point of the tracks being old.
@@chalkylover The Northeast Corridor where the Acela runs was entirely re-tracked aside from some bridges and tunnels between 2000-Present and is actively replacing bridges and building new tunnels. The only grade crossings on the line are a handful in coastal Connecticut. Tracks were upgraded to permit the highest speeds possible, and what limits speeds on the line aside from congestion is track curvature not the infrastructure itself
Then why do they have so many wooden sleepers? Concrete sleepers are the standard yet the US is full of them everywhere.
People be mad that freight trains are so prevalent yet complain when e-commerce stores don't have 1-day delivery...
1 day delivery almost never uses trains anyways trucks are the main way companies deliver stuff
@@fedcen You need some way to ship around product. You can't use a truck to go from stock to customer if nothing is in stock.
@@fedcenfreight trains and trucking are the two most prominent ways goods are transported around..
Or their local gas station runs out of gas 😂
Nobody's mad that freight trains are prevalent, they're mad that passenger trains aren't EQUALLY PREVALENT.
Actually, quick correction, Amtrak trains have legal priority over any freight service. The problem is that when those two need to pass each other the passing track is too short for the 3 mile long freight train. So what happens is your train either rams into another, or you're forced to wait. With Norfolk Southern's incident in East Palestine, trains have been getting shorter on their tracks, and it's seeming that Precision Scheduled Railroading may be coming to a close. However, I fear that there must be more tragedies such as the East Palestine derailment for the Federal Railroad Administration to finally wake the fuck up and hold class 1 railroads responsible for their dangerous choices.
this! i really hope they decimate this dumb concept as soon as possible.
Nationalize the railroads
@@fatboy158 that's been a proposition for a long time, but with how America likes to function, our capitalistic beliefs dictate that there shouldn't be government-run businesses in America. I think the most real solution is for the FRA to finally bring the hammer down and knock these increasingly dangerous operations on the head. Who knows what they're gonna try after one man crews? Removing crossing gates?
@@fatboy158no.
Let's be honest, that "incident" seemed planned and intentional.
The whole reason why American passenger trains are the way they are is because originally the freight railroads operated passenger trains but saw a huge decline in traffic for passengers in the 60s. To stop the railroads going bust, Amtrak came into existence. If passenger trains were more profitable then the freight railroads would’ve kept them operating and had them take priority over freight.
And I'm willing to bet whatever public transit funding the government does supply gets pocketed because "lol taxes bad"
Still doesn't stop the fact that the freight lines are still a monopoly.
@@jst1man If passenger service was profitable, it would be readily available. Follow the money. US passengers would rather drive (inbred in our genetics) or fly. Trains just don't go to near as many places as the other modes go to. Culture, in this case, is a big factor in the need or desire for trains.
@jst1man I mean, they built/bought the track and holds the balls of the US economy in their palm.
You piss them off, they will crush it.
Not to mention that are supported by the US Government themselves.
possibly, but it still wouldnt work due to lobbyist and the intentional monopoly overtaking the country that car companies did.
Fun fact!
Amtrak is actually supposed to be given priority when encountering freight, *however,* freight consists today are too long for the sidings/bypasses that the freight trains are supposed to wait on, so Amtrak always ends up being _forced_ to wait.
It's actually a congressional act that states freight companies are supposed to prioritize Amtrak traffic. However, Congress doesn't enforce it.
One more reason why we need term limits in Congress and campaign finance reforms.
@@miller014How much more do you want to pay for of your stuff?
This is why private passenger train companies like brightline in Florida are laying their own tracks and seeing massive success.
No, Trains are communism
Lol...no. It only goes between West Palm and Miami. The rest is "planned". "Planned" isn't success.
BrightLine is doomed to failure. Nobody rides it anyway, everyone rides their car or flies. Once the investors leave the BrightLine project, the whole system will fail. It's called a "real estate scheme"
FYI Amtrak owns most of the eastern tracks they run. Freight share time one these but are not prioritized. The trouble is that not much of the track is suitable for higher speed. Much of it because of routing, such as proximities to objects, turns are to sharp, and they cross roads instead of going over or under. You cannot do high speed rail that intersect roadways directly for safety reasons.
Brightline doesn’t run in their own tracks in Miami, big chunks are shared by FEC Railway
This guy got most of this stuff wrong. As a Railfan this makes me very annoyed. The northeast corridor is owned entirely by Amtrak and freight is a rare occurrence and the Acela is going 110mph for about 80% of the route
"As a railfan" - 🤓
@@biglad112ok lil bro
@@biglad112alright kiddo, give it a rest😂
@@AAGul luuul someone got pissyy
@@biglad112Aww, the widdle kid is thinking they're clever :)
The real issue rather than the speed is that the routes are weird and the trains don’t go everywhere like the roads
I know in CA amtrak has the right of way. And the tracks are not 100 of years old they are all state of the art and really well maintained
... and how is that high speed train going 😂
I live by the Roseville yard and have taken Amtrak to Reno and this not true. Same tracks as freight.
Same from Emeryville to Sacramento, shared tracks.
State of the art? Have you ever been to europe?
Wait I get it, crime is "art" in California
@@alclay8689We’re richer than your state, cry.
Europe: 155mph?💀💀
Asia: only 245 mph
for the rest of the world who uses metric: 155mph is *about 250kph*
I've heard that most bullet trains these days usually run closer to 300kph, that one train line in China ran 400kph at some point, and the current world record holder for fastest train is the TGV Duplex in France running above 500kph.
@@regulate.artificer_g23.mdctlsk yep but European high speed trains run at 300kph
@@danhillier8374 sometimes more than that (320kph) hence why I said "closer to 300kph"
@@regulate.artificer_g23.mdctlskalmost all of China's high speed rail is above 300kmph with a substantial above 350.
Having just taken a bunch of rides in the shinkansen 🚄 bullet train in Japan, I just have to say the US needs a network of these! So fast, smooth, quiet and comfortable. Great alternative to flying and lots of legroom. Going 160 mph on the ground for hours is unreal!
China also has fast trains😭
@@idontknowwhattowritelol yeah, which most of them is basically knock-of foreign trains
It will never happen because Airline companies
India bullet train project is 70 percent completed , it will be open by 2026
India is going to plan 8 or more routes across whole india
it's up to 155 miles per hour. *laughs in japan*
Actually, the vast majority of the Japanese dedicated HSR track is built to the 160 mph standard. So even if the new trainsets can technically go 186, 200, or 220 mph, the track speed is still limited to 150-160 mph. They standardized on that speed so the entire network tends to run at 160 mph with the exception of only a few faster and a few slower lines.
And even the new track that they build in Japan these days tends to be 160 mph. For example, their last two HSR projects, as well as the two new projects now under construction are all 160 mph limited.
This is all publicly available information, btw. I encourage you to read about it.
@@TohaBgood2that still means japan's usual train speed is as much/faster tham america's fastest
@@usernameaeaeaea The freight moves at about the same speed in both countries. The local/commuter trains are faster, but not by much. It's specifically the Shinkansen network that is a good 20-30% faster than the Acela on average. But I feel like a loooooot of US railfans are utterly surprised and even shocked that the Shinkansen is not in fact 300% faster than the Acela.
If you look at the top speeds of most Shinkansen lines and their average speeds it becomes more apparent why that is the case. But I still feel like it's important to realize that the Acela exists, it's in the US, and is on par with the average Shinkansen line in terms of both top and average speeds. Misinformation helps no one.
I’d take slow American train over Pervy Jap train where you can’t even use your phone
@@TohaBgood2Japan passenger trains go 320KPH fyi aka 200mph
The government screwed over the railroads when they had their own passenger service. The northeast corridor was owned by the PRR
I got stuck for 52 hours on Amtrak in the middle of a polar vortex in The center of Glacier National park because a freight train derailed one car in a tunnel ahead of us. It made my 1 day trip take a week because after the storm hours they sent out replacement workers due to over time,and they then got replaced with another crew. Once it all cleared they sent us on a “replacement” bus that back tracked 4 hours to the closest city to then transfer us to other busses to then take us to Portland. Then we got a hotel room and a cheap breakfast and shuttled onto another train to finish the trip which didn’t go all the way through so had to hop on another 2 busses to finish the trip. Totally week long nightmare for what was supposed to be a 1 day trip.
I believe it.
Sounds like you lived the 1987 film; Planes, Trains, and Automobiles 😅😅😅😅😅
Looking at your map, Scotland only has two train stations? You might need to check that 😂😂
Some guy in the comments said that these were only the high speed tracks
*UK vs US high speed trains*
Japan: Hold my sushi..
i remember the one time i tried amtrak and losing a day of travel in the station where i was told the delay was between 45 minutes to 12 hours and we wouldn't know exactly until the minute we boarded
You need specialized tracks to go faster for longer
I don't care how bad Amtrak is. It's not my fault they had cool locomotives and paint schemes.
Freight rail is profitable passenger rail is usually unprofitable.
Nah, it can be profitable under the right circumstances, The US just doesn't meet that in many areas. Freight rail can be unprofitable as well, It's not used nearly as heavy in Europe as the number of port cities is much higher allowing quite a bit of bulk transport to be done by ship. The US while having a bunch of port cities, the fact that it is much more rectangular of a country with really ports being possible on about 1/3 to 1/2 of its borders makes a lot of population centers thousands of miles from a port.
@@nicolivoldkif9096
When well subsidized passenger rail can be profitable.
@@nicolivoldkif9096
The freight rail is severly hampered by government policies to support the highly subsidized passenger service.
@@calvingreene90he Japanese railway is profitable, dutch railway is profitable, swiss railway is profitable etc. Car infrastructure is unprofitable not trains they have literally bankrupted cities like deteoit
@@JimmyJr630
Cities like Detroit are bankrupt because of decades of Democrat missmanagement. Before the democrats took over Detroit was one of the richest cities in the world.
Imagine that subsidized railroads making a profit.
As a railfan of the US, this is very true I have seen passenger trains on CSX and other railroads so yes this I very true.
I have already answered a similar question on Quora, the reason is simple: the US territory is large and passenger rail connections would be too slow in any case (trains from coast to coast take a week, all the big trains in the past were night trains), it's the reason because you travel between states by plane. A widespread passenger network is expensive and unprofitable; here in Europe we mainly have domestic or short distance trains.
Freight train tracks are not as smooth either. The rough tracks partially inhibit passenger trains from going faster.
Amtrak is the best travel experience. Bring back the full sunset limited!
Freight is legally supposed to give priority to passenger rail but the law is basically ignored.
Uhhhhh No no it's not.
@@roguedragondraksis9114 You're simply wrong. Look it up. Rail Passenger Service Act of 1970
FINALLY...a straightforward answer. Thank you.
To be fair a much bigger % of Europeans use public transport compared to Americans because it’s more viable, living in America you pretty much need your own transportation to do anything - if I where to take public transportation to get to work, the dmv, a doctors appointment etc.. it would take me a couple hours just to get there. I’ve driven farther everyday for work than the radius of most European countries and I guarantee you most of the materials I needed where transported via railroad at some point along the way.
Damn how long is your commute?
@@TheLegoTrainStation around 50 minutes if traffic is good, when I worked in Moab I was commuting 7-8 hours per week ‘cause I would travel there and back to SLC to manage other projects.
@TheLegoTrainStation the average America spends roughly an hour to commute one way..
@@yulfine1688 roughly, it all depends on what it is you do for work so imagine that the average American that transports to the same facility every day still take 1 hour just to get there. I work in construction as a finish carpenter for various job sites around my state, there has been times that it’s taken me 4 hours just to get to work….
@@devincook3246 oof most people are picky about their commute usually I try to keep mine within 30 minutes but that's not possible for most people.
privately own railtrack??
That's the most American thing i hear today
Yeah because America is capitalist the companies bought land to make money by transporting things the same way as bus companies and taxi companies are privately owned also you shouldn’t let the American government do anything because they screw it up
When the railroads were first built, if people waited around for the government to take the initiative and build tracks for them, nothing would’ve ever happened.
@@baileyharrison1030it’s like that even today! The government has always been a day late and dollar short for any project.
Thank God. The US would never have grown the way it did without private capital building our railroads. Even if the government was competent, it didn't have even a tiny fraction of the money required. Lots of the early funding came from London, ironically enough
@@robertmoffett3486im like 80% sure most our rail was built because of goverment subsides that gave a large swath of land surrounding the rails to the companies that built them. Basicly paying them to build rails
Most Americans nowadays would prefer airplane to travel, let's say LA to New York. Tho, if I was there, I would prefer trains just for countryside sightseeing.
This is incorrect. The acela actually reaches speeds of over 110 mph 80% of the route. The other 20% is penn stations, and station approaches. Also, 80% of the US Freight Shares it’s stock with Amtrak.
110 is still comically low lmao
@@hehehehaw1682it’s better than what regular trains do, only 79
@@railworksamerica what is a regular train? High speed rail (which is what Amtrak is attempting to do) in most other countries easily reach speeds of 180-200 mph
@@hehehehaw1682 Any train that amtrak runs that isn’t the Acela or northeast regional
@@railworksamerica Amtrak is not exactly the gold standard we should be shooting for
I love that you snuck a picture of the Utah Railway in the video. My grandpa used to be a diesel mechanic for them.
Acela operates on the NE corridor that is mostly owned by Amtrak, many other lines are owned by commuter transit authorities like MTA or NJDot. The NE corridor has a lot of stops and stations and parts of the line host a lot of commuter trains but fundamentally this is a 150 year old railroad designed originally to go about 30 mph that was supersonic back then so the only way to go 150 for the whole route would be to build any entirely new railway. Good luck with that.
Not to mention most of the us doesn’t have the population density to support rail networks or bus networks. Which is why most of America has private cars
You can justify hsr and good passenger rail in every single one of the US’s metropolitan areas. The Texas triangle, Great Lakes region, pretty much the whole east coast, the front range in Colorado, So Cal La and Vegas etc. we have cars because of the way our govt and planners choose to build our infrastructure, low density car dependent towns connected by highways and roads. We drive because we literally have no other choice the majority of the time.
1) that map is misleading as it shows only a few high speed trains, and no regional trains
2) all European train networks are integrated between nations
3) this covers a landmass that is bigger than the entire US surface area
4) many train operators service in multiple countries
5) people that take the train ALSO own/drive a car, you choose what's more convenient, train can be much quicker
6) the fact that US train travels sucks is purely political decisions, not circumstances
Sure the map might be misleading, but the US does have the largest rail network
Amen.
"all European train networks are integrated between nations"
*Cries in (S)pain*
Um actually your wrong, the Acela does not use freight tracks it uses the northeast corridor, which is owned by Amtrak. The real problem is the freight company’s don’t care about passenger trains and they refuse to upgrade infrastructure.
Tell us how the railroad companies should upgrade infrastructure.
There is actually a new high speed train for Amtrak reaching speeds of about I think 180
Amtraks new trains are suppost to hit 180 after infrastructure upgrades are made, when they first begin service they will only go 160
Yes, the new Alstom Avelia Liberty is actually a French TGV M that can easily reach 320 km/h (200 mph). But the Alstom Avelia Liberty will only reach that speed in France because France has high-speed lines that are capable of 320 km/h (200 mph).
Sadly the Alstom Avelia Liberty can never reach a speed of 320 km/h (200 mph) in the USA because there are simply no high-speed lines in the USA yet that are capable of such high-speeds.
And i'm afraid that the USA will still have no proper high-speed lines before the year 2050.
The freight explanation is /mostly/ accurate until you reach the Acela part. The Acela runs entirely within the Northeast Corridor, one of only a few sections in the entire country Amtrak owns the rights to. The only section that is not owned by Amtrak is between New Rochelle NY and New Haven CT owned by MTA Metro-North Railroad/ConDot
Well the Northeast Corridor which the Acela runs on is entirely owned by Amtrak. So freight is a rare occurrence and happens in a few small stretches of the corridor most with low passenger frequency.
Except the Metro-North part of the line.
Well, actually, Metro-North just runs on it between Grand Central in New Haven. Metro north only owns the portion between New Rochelle and Grand Central. So Amtrak still owns it.
@@3catfirephotography374 then why have I seen signs saying that you are entering metro north territory? In New Haven and New Rochelle
@@trainfanatic7768 Well, probably for when CT rail ran on the line. And for New Rochelle it’s probably for the rare she has six shared assets train.
The MBTA owns everything from South Station to the MA/RI line.
155MPH => 249.448km/h
In malaysia if we have hsr kl-singapura we can get more that 380km 😎
@@afizi1213 I once overruns train in Czech Republic
I rode the Korean high speed rail. It doesn't have to compete with freight. Out of a 3 hour journey it only went high speed for about 15 minutes. The rest of the time it just lumbered along. And it stopped many times to load. I figured out that if we had taken the taxi we could have gotten to our destination faster.
You lie
“America is the greatest country”
bro looks like a off brand ray william Johnson 💀
Bro really did him like that 😂😂
Canada: Hold my beer
Canada has ALMOST 0 passenger train capacity especially when compared to like, anywhere in Europe
@@fezii9043I think you've forgotten of VIA number 1 (The canadian) Its the worlds longest and highest capacity passenger train in the world..
@@fredericdebilly2431Nope that would be some random train in Russia.
As someone who lives in the UK, i can say that our rail network is pretty good, its 95% passenger train and 5% freight!
It's not; I've used it.
@@colinmontgomery1956 bro it's got rlly good coverage of the UK, And they r fast what u on about?
It's complete garbage. Most trains are very slow. Something constantly breaks, and they can't handle even a little weather. HS2 is nowhere near finished, and train tickets are so expensive between cities most people choose to fly, say London to Edinburgh
@@CloudmasterGaming , so, here is one of your own citizens attesting to what I have stated.
@@ultravires.Bro went to the Island of Sodor
the US track sits at 220k km where the European Union alone, not the "whole of Europe", you know that is half the size of the us and it sits at 208k km which means it has almost twice as many tracks as the us relative to its size....
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_rail_transport_network_size
It’s called leasing, it’s when a company leases the rights to run their trains on another railroads tracks
It's also not just the length that matters, but what you do with it 😉. In the US there are way less train stations compared to Europe, where you can go pretty much everywhere by train and don't have to drive another few hundred kilometres from that station.
But yes, there are also problems in Europe, for example the German railroad network is overdue 20 years regarding renovations.
I'm not American but I guess building a high speed rail network over such a big territory isn't worth the cost when people can just fly.
We need to renormalize riding trains in the United States
Honestly Amtrak is hated on too much. I hear so many people complain about it, but having ridden only on JR and CRH all my life, I expected a lot worse when I tried it out for myself. Most foreigners are pleasantly surprised by the NEC, with service going at 110 - 120 mph most of the way between DC and NYC. Some station enhancements, reliability upgrades, and track straightening and the US honestly has a very solid piece of rail infrastructure they can be proud of.
It's genuinely mindblowing to be the generation that inherited the privatized infrastructure and tegularly find out how we basically stopped building infrastructure in North America in the 80s and sold away our assets.
Fastest train in the us is 155mph on short distances - In China, Magkev goes 268mph - In Japan it goes "only" to 200mph - In France, TGV does Paris to Marseille at 200mph for the 500 miles of it...
Germany actually has the same problem. Sharing tracks with freight trains that are prioritised over regional traffic.
What he didn't say that every single passenger train Railway loses huge amounts of money every year and has to be funded by taxes.
An average Indian semi bullet train is more faster than an american one.
In america, most people fly. As a railfan it is pretty depressing
Why when trains should be a lot cheaper? I couldn't even find a train from NYC to Boston, so we had to drive 3 hours.
Probably due to the fact that the US has less population density
It's because they don't want their trains accidentally ramming into towers
Freight companies are actually legally required to prioritize passenger trains over their own freight trains. However, the only way this can be enforced is if the attorney general sues the offending freight rail company, which never happens.
I have gone on a Amtrak train and bc freight trains get priority we were waiting for 45 minutes for the freight train😂😭
Amtrak has trackage rights to all of it
This is because 99.959% of commuters in the United States would rather take a car, plane, or even a bus than a train.
Unfortunately, there just isn't enough demand for long distance inter city passenger trains in the US to make it profitable.
You should mention the cargo trians are legally required to yield to passenger trains but this rule goes unenforced. We literally handicapped our own rail network
Why is it “crazy” that freight rail companies are private? Passenger rail companies should be private too. It would probably be a lot better that way
War on drugs?? More like war on public transport
I the US, Rail is for freight. We have aircraft for passenger traffic.
Being dependent on a Car and therefore Big Oil isn't my idea of freedom.
I see, you’re what I call a “smart reasonable person”.
I won’t use a train until they stop homeland security from harassing the passengers
Actually on railings that are rented by AmTrak the AmTrak trains are high priority as they have to pay to simply exist on the line.
Share?
“Hey look! There’s a freight tra-“
**Crashes because it’s “sharing”**
What if in an alternate timeline, all of America was clean, crime-free, walkable, and futuristic(including bullet trains)?
For everyone else, 155 mph is approximately 249.4 kph
In USA unlike in India, cities are well connected by Expressway, people love to drive. Those who don’t want to drive will take an airplane it’s cheaper than passenger train.
It makes sense. Why invest in something that isn't going to benefit you? Private companies have no reason to invest in passenger train infrastructure over freight train infrastructure, and the government is too busy spending my tax dollars on foreign interventions to build or maintain any national passenger railway infrastructure.
Here’s a bit of British Railway history, we were the inventors of Railways
Bro forgot that most of America's Railways are unusable
So basically, if you have less time to travel then you have to courier yourself to your destination. 😅
And railroads thinking PSR is a good business model
Menwhile Brazil: you only get freight railroads in some places, trucks and buses can do the rest of the work (spoiler: they do but for twice the price)
This is also why the subways exist in America
We absolutely need more trains, it’ll help get the terrible drivers off the highways and decrease traffic deaths (theoretically)
We have complete opposite in India. Thats why logistics cost is freaking 14 percentage
Oh, wow! After five minutes of research I found this; the Liberty avelia is technically a high speed train.
I always wondered this as a kid growing up in America. Why do we rely so heavily upon cars for transportation when we have so many trains?
The problem with speed of rail is the length of trains and number of operators not the amount of rail there is no need to build a parallel train network
It’s due to cost and safety issues why high speed trains don’t have public interest
All you need to do is look at the 1970's. Passenger rail was part of the Private rail networks but because of how bad the money was in Passenger rail and the terrible economy at the time, Passenger rail nearly went extinct. Amtrak was only created because the government felt there was still a Major Need for Passenger rail. Amtrak is basically the USPS of Railroads
Europe was has 10 times more rails by space then US 💀
The only problem with this is that the Acela runs on the very few portions of track that Amtrak actually owns, not the freight railroads
The vast majority of the Northeast Corridor where the Acela operates is owned by Amtrak.
@@FFred-us9tw exactly my point