Talk:High-speed rail

	This Technology related article has been awarded BRONZE status for quality. It's getting there, but could be better with improvement. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Archives for this talk page:

<1>

, (new)

Interstate Rail System

I have an idea. A nationwide HSR network connecting core-based statistical areas (but especially major cities) could be built to help deal with the issues of air travel. -Bigljbigl (talk/stalk) 12:05, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

And who would pay for that?

The Interstate Highway System took 35 years. Tax increases over that time period could pay for it. -Bigljbigl (talk/stalk) 21:30, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

@Bigs First of all, a national high-speed rail network for the U.S. is impractical. High-speed rail can only compete with air travel for distances of 400 miles (640 km) or less. Only hard-core train enthusiasts would take a high-speed train from Los Angeles to New York City, if it even gets built, which is highly unlikely. It makes more sense to build regional networks, for example, in the Midwest with Chicago as a hub. Nerd (talk) 04:49, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

Completely forgot about this. TBH I hate the majority of my internet presence before 2018. 𝔊𝔬𝔞𝔱-𝔈𝔪𝔭𝔢𝔯𝔬𝔯 𝔅𝔦𝔤𝔰 (𝔴𝔬𝔯𝔡𝔰 𝔬𝔣 𝔴𝔦𝔰𝔡𝔬𝔪/𝔞𝔠𝔥𝔦𝔢𝔳𝔢𝔪𝔢𝔫𝔱𝔰) 04:55, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

@Bigs No worries. We all make mistakes. If you are still interested in this topic, please check out the article, new and improved! Nerd (talk) 04:58, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

this page is still wank

aside from the very american centric and pretty weak arguments for HSR (which is odd because im sure hsr would be a boon to the US - this section botches it), the insistence than any all arguments against it is by nature 'wingnut' is just bullshit. i dont believe any tried to list legitimate arguments against. i might try to have a stab at making the arguments section less wank, but it would involve deleting the lot and starting from scratch and i'm not sure its worth the drama. AMassiveGay (talk) 18:35, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Does this site have a deletion request without prejudice (i.e. deleting an article without ruling out to write a new one with the same name)?--Klaksozavr (talk) 21:48, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Yes, or you could just rewrite it section by section without having to go through the AfD business. Wilder^Bicycle 22:08, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi, @AMassiveGay, @Klaksozavr, and @Readymade! I do have plans to improve this article and that for Amtrak. Unfortunately, I'm a little short on time right now so I have not done much. I am the one who put up the "outdated" sign. If you guys have time, I suggest moving the US-centric bits to Amtrak, where they belong.

@AMassiveGay High-speed rails would indeed provide an economic boon to the U.S. and various projects have already been proposed (e.g. Chicago Hub), gone ahead (California High-speed Rail and Texas Central Railway) or even completed (Florida Brightline). The Northeastern Corridor will get a new and faster high-speed train, the Avelia Liberty. Nerd (talk) 00:58, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

High-speed trains vs. airlines

Earlier editors keep claiming that high-speed rail has been decongesting airports. However, if you take a look at the passenger traffic of some of the worlds busiest airports in recent years, this does not seem to be case. Nerd (talk) 00:11, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

In a recent update, I pointed out that high-speed rail in France is not competitive with other modes of transport due to its price. Would not be surprised if this was in the case in other countries as well. (I recently talked to someone who just came back from a vacation in Europe. That person flew everywhere because trains were more expensive. This is, however, anecdotal and so will not be used as a source.) Nerd (talk) 16:39, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

High-speed with a dash (-)

I'm trusting Wikipedia on this one that 'high speed' should actually be 'high-speed'. I could make the change myself (maybe I will later), but I figured I'd just put it here first, for any higher-ranking editors who may be more confident with relocating a page. (っ◔◡◔)っ ♥ Natsuki Marx ♥ (talk) 13:31, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

Why?

Why do we have this? Conceivably one could imagine something - but can see nothing actually in this article.Bob^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 09:50, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

OK, I have stuck a "mission" template on it.Bob^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 15:23, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

I fully agree with you on the "why?" sentiment for the first half of the article @Bob M. While it is well referenced (always nice to see) and clearly written with enthusiasm (which in itself makes the read more enjoyable) I was very confused by lines like "Free WiFi was introduced in 2017 but connectivity is rather poor at the moment due to the many tunnels that the train must go through." in the Taiwan section. That's a neat little factoid, but why should a skeptic care about that? It doesn't analyze or refute anything.

I do feel like it gets into it a bit more in the second half though, after the "Benefits of high-speed rail" heading. And the "Misconceptions about high-speed rails" is particularly missional, in my opinion (tone is better as well. "China has it. And Europe. Therefore it is bad." is a nice bit of snark). We accept that climate change is real and urgently needs to be tackled and if high speed rail is objectively better for the environment then it is liable to become the target of culture war nonsense, as well as lobbying by vested interests. I recall watching an excellent three part documentary called "The Power of Big Oil" by PBS Frontline in which a number of former US politicians talked about being constantly hounded by American companies (including car manufacturing), effectively bullying them into opposing policies friendly to the environment. "Do you have any idea how many jobs will be lost if these green policies are pushed through?" That line in our article about "Unlike high-speed rail, cars bring freedom." is one of the reasons some Americans are hesitant to accept climate change: cars are seen as a part of the American identity. To take public transport is "Un-American" to some. That's a rather silly, anti-science argument - and as such probably deserves to be in our crosshairs.

It's also tangentially related to Elon Musk's Hyperloop - though not so much these days, since the man straight up said it was a scam to sell more cars and he hates public transport. But while there was hype around the Hyperloop most critics countered with "What about high speed rail? It's already pretty good!"

Anywho, we have an article on the Hyperloop itself... and what is missional in this article is tiny. But it is there, fo sho. (Sorry for the big ass response, I napped for 4 hours and couldn't fall asleep again.)

Peace dude. - Rairyu75 (Talk) 05:35, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

A I said at the beginning - we can imagine something tangential to this article which could relate to the mission. But it's nowhere near front and central - it's certainly not what the article is about. Bob^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 06:44, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

@Bob M I actually just realised that we have articles on Amtrak and Rail transportation... the problems are similar to this article.

“”America's second high-speed railway is in Florida. Its first segment, between Fort Lauderdale and West Palm Beach, opened in January 2018.[38] Service to Miami began in May of the same year.[39] Funding for Phase II, which extends service to Orlando, has been approved.[40] This high-speed railway is owned by the private company Brightline. Its rolling stock consists of diesel-electric locomotives (SCB-40) with a top speed of 200 km/h (125 mph) from Siemens; WiFi, power sockets, bicycle and pet-friendly luggage space are available.[41] Besides new and comfortable trains traveling on their own tracks and arriving on time, the Florida Brightline also features modern train stations, and good customer service.[42] In November 2018, Brightline signed a partnership agreement with Sir Richard Branson's Virgin Group, and renamed itself Virgin Trains USA.[43]

That's ugh... well. Do we have a big ol' train geek knocking about the place or something? I wonder if we could smudge them all together into a new "Trains" article? - Rairyu75 (Talk) 07:05, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

It is my impression that some time back there was a new editor (or perhaps two) who thought this would be a great place to start train articles. (Maybe they wanted to start "train-wiki here or something). I suspect that the article High Speed 2 has a similar genesis. But I've not really gone though the difs to confirm. :-) Bob^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 13:20, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Ah! Also, once this starts there is an occasional tendency to justify new articles by saying "Well we have article X on this subject, so article, so article Y on the same subject must be OK too."Bob^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 14:15, 5 February 2024 (UTC)