[ZZipZZipe]

All this is to say that the vast Indian Railways, even if antiquated in some aspects, still gets the job done, moving more than 6 billion people across almost 40,000 miles of passenger service...and doing so at a price that your average Indian family can afford.

Out of curiosity, what is the cost of airfare and the accessibility of airports throughout India? One of the main reasons passenger rail is at the level it is currently in the US is because air travel was so cheap, easy and fast and to just about anywhere you needed.

And as a link to it, aeronautics is one of the industries the US still leads in.

So, in part of the discussion, are some of the differences between US and other countries is that air travel is so prevalent?

[Fiipolera]

Out of curiosity, what is the cost of airfare and the accessibility of airports throughout India? One of the main reasons passenger rail is at the level it is currently in the US is because air travel was so cheap, easy and fast and to just about anywhere you needed.

And as a link to it, aeronautics is one of the industries the US still leads in.

So, in part of the discussion, are some of the differences between US and other countries is that air travel is so prevalent?

That is what happens when the airlines sell tickets at a loss.

I think the government should increase taxes on gas and invest the money in trains. The problem is the government will just build soccer stadiums.

[Kiariitf]

I think the government should increase taxes on gas and invest the money in trains. The problem is the government will just build soccer stadiums.

How much money from the PA state gas tax went to fund the stadium in Chester? And be prepared to back any statements with proof that isn't just "because I say so".

[Caunnysup]

For the much larger distances to be covered in the U.S., air travel is the way to go as far as travel time is concerned. India is one-third the size of America, and has more than 3x the population, so density dictates the use of trains for the simple reason that there just would not be enough airports to handle all the Indians wanting to travel all over their country. It is also the reason why Mumbai's suburban commuter railway service has one of the highest if not the highest passenger density in the world (per track mile). Not to mention that a lot of the Indian railway network was built out over the last 100+ years, a lot of it by the British, before the independence. The economies are totally different. The new lines such as the Konkan Railway that was built in the last decade, end up costing a whole heck of a lot more. Upgrades cost more now also. Point is that it is somewhat easier and less expensive to run a system that's already been built out to a large extent. U.S. still has the largest trackage in the world, but most of it isn't used for passenger service, because airlines provide faster (and cheaper?) route.

As far as airfare goes, due to a plethora of new airlines and new air services in the past decade, air travel has grown by leaps and bounds in India; competitor airfare is as cheap as $1 for some tickets! Of course, that means that many airlines are losing money right now. But India is one of the fastest growing air travel markets in the world right now:

AFP: India airline market seen set for fastest growth



There are plans afoot in India for HSR service in certain segments, just as China has already gone about it, and Europe certainly has.

For the numbers served, I don't think airlines could come even close to the rails.

[Caunnysup]

inter-city high speed rail in the U.S. probably only makes sense on segments of the east and west coasts.

[Kiariitf]

inter-city high speed rail in the U.S. probably only makes sense on segments of the east and west coasts.

And that's where the money that's been budgeted is going to be spent.

In the long term, connecting NYC/Philly/DC to metro Chicago via high-speed rail makes sense as well.

[Fiipolera]

How much money from the PA state gas tax went to fund the stadium in Chester? And be prepared to back any statements with proof that isn't just "because I say so".

Union Field at Chester - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



If the stadiums generated generated as much money as the state claims then why is the state still footing the bill for future stadiums? Shouldn't the previous stadium pay for the future stadium? Is the soccer team going to pay to fix the bridges since the DRPA helped fund the stadium? Be prepared with proof!!

How much money is the soccer team going to generate after the team goes broke like the Atoms, Fury, and Fever?

[Kiariitf]

Union Field at Chester - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There's nothing there even suggesting that the stadium was funded by the PA state gas tax. Try again.

In fact:

The newly formed Delaware County Sports Authority will pay the county's share of $30 million through taxes from the Harrah's Chester casino. An additional $80 million will be donated by private investors.

[Fiipolera]

And that's where the money that's been budgeted is going to be spent.

In the long term, connecting NYC/Philly/DC to metro Chicago via high-speed rail makes sense as well.

Where did the money budgeted come from?

Where did the soccer stadium funding come from? Is the money for the soccer stadium coming from soccer fans or is it coming from bridge tolls? If the soccer team can carry itself financially then why do they need money from the DRPA?

[Fiipolera]

There's nothing there even suggesting that the stadium was funded by the PA state gas tax. Try again.

In fact:

Wow. Thanks for reposting my the link that I posted.

[Kiariitf]

Where did the money budgeted come from?

Where did the soccer stadium funding come from? Is the money for the soccer stadium coming from soccer fans or is it coming from bridge tolls? If the soccer team can carry itself financially then why do they need money from the DRPA?

Read post #28: $30 million is coming from the tax on the new casino. $80 million is coming from private investors. The budget on the stadium is $115 million.

They're not getting money from DRPA, or the tax on gasoline in Pennsylvania.

[Caunnysup]

adam also brings up the point that air travel is already very prevalent in the U.S. and is often the "incumbent" mode of transportation for certain travel segments. It also stopped being the lap of luxury, to be experienced only by the few-- Southwest Airlines put an end to that way back in the 1970s. So not only is there a lot of infrastructure and jobs dedicated to air travel in the U.S., there is also an expectation of using air travel for certain journeys. For Dallas-Houston travel, Southwest Airlines has flights leaving every half-hour on peak times; total travel time between office to office still might be about 4 hours. A high-speed point-to-point train service could probably cut than by an hour, but is there really so much demand for it?-- Not only would you get tough lobbying from Southwest, you would also get a lot of people complaining about government spending on such a project.

As far as Boeing and the whole airplane industry goes, I think most of their new growth is going to be coming from Asia anyway, though their "base" market is still going to be North America and Europe, especially for the new planes...the installed base of older generation planes that need to be replaced is gigantic, and if there is going to be even close to a 1:1 replacement ratio, Boeing and its suppliers are looking at being in business for a long time, and would certainly hate to see competitor modes of transportation emerge in some business travel sectors.

[fkjghfg]

xxx

[ZZipZZipe]

Read post #28: $30 million is coming from the tax on the new casino. $80 million is coming from private investors. The budget on the stadium is $115 million.

They're not getting money from DRPA, or the tax on gasoline in Pennsylvania.

I do believe DRPA gave $10 million for the stadium, but to the original point, bridge tolls are not gas taxes.

[Fiipolera]

I do believe DRPA gave $10 million for the stadium, but to the original point, bridge tolls are not gas taxes.

. Union Field at Chester is a soccer-specific stadium in Chester, Pennsylvania that is currently under construction. It is the planned home of Philadelphia Union, a Major League Soccer club, and the Philadelphia Independence of Women's Professional Soccer.[2][3] The project is the result of combined commitments of $30 million from Delaware County and $47 million from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Back to the original point. A soccer stadium is not bridge maintenance. Government wastes money. Bridge tolls, gas tax, whatever.

[Kiariitf]

.

Back to the original point. A soccer stadium is not bridge maintenance. Government wastes money. Bridge tolls, gas tax, whatever.

Actually, the "original point" was about high-speed rail in China.

Do you have anything to say about that?

[M_Marked]

inter-city high speed rail in the U.S. probably only makes sense on segments of the east and west coasts.

and chicagoland/great lakes region.

adam's point isn't entirely accurate, of course, many factors influenced development of our transportation network. In europe deregulation of the air industry is more recent. OTOH, airlines haven't found it particularly fruitful to challenge HSR service (where HSR service has been launched, air service is generally reduced around 70% AFAIK). air service between less travelled points in Europe has never been better. also, AFAIK, one of the things that finally killed budd was inconsistent orders by government run agencies (that had taken over passenger rail). It's less clear whether dumping the NEC's passenger service was good for the Pennsy.despite the railroads accounting, splitting up costs in a railroad is complicated. moreover, the feds made it as difficult as possible for railroads to change with the times. abandonments were highly regulated as were prices, often without regard to the economics of the situation. it is speculated that had the staggers act been passed ten to fifteen years earlier, there'd still be a pennsy today.

air service today is much cheaper than it was pre-deregulation, passenger rail is still managed in a dysfunctional model. government monopolies who are ultimately run by political cronies rather than people with a transportation background or directive. that's largely true for transit was well as intercity rail.

[ZZipZZipe]

adam's point isn't entirely accurate, of course, many factors influenced development of our transportation network. In europe deregulation of the air industry is more recent. OTOH, airlines haven't found it particularly fruitful to challenge HSR service (where HSR service has been launched, air service is generally reduced around 70% AFAIK).

Well, keep in mind I said "one of" and didn't give it all the credit. It's a mighty tough sell saying that a cheap 2 hour flight to Chicago doesn't hurt 12+ hour train to Chicago.

moreover, the feds made it as difficult as possible for railroads to change with the times. abandonments were highly regulated as were prices, often without regard to the economics of the situation. Sort of like the auto industry and dealerships now?

air service today is much cheaper than it was pre-deregulation, passenger rail is still managed in a dysfunctional model. government monopolies who are ultimately run by political cronies rather than people with a transportation background or directive. that's largely true for transit was well as intercity rail. And yes, other reasons why passenger rail is the way it is today in the US.

[M_Marked]

Well, keep in mind I said "one of" and didn't give it all the credit. It's a mighty tough sell saying that a cheap 2 hour flight to Chicago doesn't hurt 12+ hour train to Chicago.

that's change, of course, rather than proof that rail is the way it is today because of it. for better or worse, the pennsy realized in the 1920's that speed was the future of passenger rail. it's worth noting that averaging 245 mph, the train between nyc and chicago would be more like 3 hours I believe.

And yes, other reasons why passenger rail is the way it is today in the US.

yes, the government has been a total failure in this regard. they've dodged what they should be doing (a balanced overall transportation policy/framework) and botched what they shouldn't be doing (micromanaging certain pieces).

[ZZipZZipe]

that's change, of course, rather than proof that rail is the way it is today because of it. for better or worse, the pennsy realized in the 1920's that speed was the future of passenger rail. it's worth noting that averaging 245 mph, the train between nyc and chicago would be more like 3 hours I believe.

yes, the government has been a total failure in this regard. they've dodged what they should be doing (a balanced overall transportation policy/framework) and botched what they shouldn't be doing (micromanaging certain pieces).

Well, that was sort of what I was saying. While a good chunk of passenger rail problems are from the government managing it, some of it was also inevitable due to market changes with air travel.

Did rail have the tech to get to Chicago from Philly in 3 hours back in the 60s and 70s?

I am sure part of it is cyclical. Even if not for the government, there would still have been a stage where air travel would cut into rail ridership. Now, with the craziness of security checks, cost of fuel, cost of airports, delays, etc. rail has a window to make in roads again.

Of course, that is assuming passenger rail in the US was run by a group of people motivated to make a profit as opposed to being run by a group of people commissioned with just making sure rail is on life support.

Ultimately I think if you had a profit motivated passenger rail company, you would end up with a healthy competition between them, air and bus.