I am troubled by many of the arguments around high-speed rail.

Yes, I'm for it -- and have traveled on high-speed trains in Europe.
Yes, I can understand the "anything is better than nothing"
argument -- but it is also terribly shortsighted. If you want
to have something great -- go all the way and build something great.


What I find the most strange of all is the argument that "we're not
Europe." This appears to be the "not invented here" argument against
using well-established technology developed elsewhere in the world.

Yes, there are substantial differences between railroads in the U.S.
and Europe -- and I can talk or write about these at great length --
but there are also more similarities than many people
are willing to admit.

Look at some of the countries other than France, Germany, and Japan
(the major pioneers in high-speed passenger rail) that are building
or that have built their own high-speed lines. There are at least a
dozen of these countries by now. They are buying off-the-shelf
technology, rather than trying to reinvent the wheel.


One of the reasons the Acela is such an energy hog is that, while it
looks superficially like a version of the French TGV, it was really
designed from scratch -- and much much heavier than the TGV --
which led to the various teething problems. (Look at the number of
engines/power cars ratio to passenger cas on European HS train sets.)

Some of the countries have combined technology from different sources.
For example, on Spain's high-speed lines, the trains are based on
French TGV technology, while the signal system is based on the German
LZB standard -- not the French system.


The Frankfurt-Cologne ICE line in Germany has grades of over four
per cent -- and the electric trains can handle that just fine.

More electrification will come to American railroads again anyway.
There are simply too many arguments in favor of it. Not only can
electric motive power better handle grades and required accelleration,
but it is about the only thing that makes sense for getting sufficient
track capacity in long tunnels.

And, of course, electricity can be produced from many difference
sources/fuels, making electric propulsion much more adaptable to
changing economic conditions.


The issues of the long tunnels (Moffat, Cascade, Flathead) that need to
be vented after each train has fallen somewhat below the radar with
recent reductions in traffic. But, at some point, when traffic picks
back up, these choke-points in the national network will have to be
looked at again.

There are numerous places in the U.S. where great operating efficiencies
could be gained by having new longer tunnels, at lower elevations than
the existing tunnels. This has been the trend in Europe, which now has
some of the longest railroad tunnels in the world -- with the U.S. being
way down the list.


"We're not Europe" is not a sufficient answer to the question of why
the U.S. has not built real high-speed passenger rail lines.

-- Ernest