Honestly, I'm just happy this adds frequency in Florida and on the Chicago <-> Pittsburgh routesIt's called the Floridian
> The Floridian will offer Traditional Dining service thank godNothing worse than a long-distance amtrak route where you only have access to the flexible dining menu.
What's the point of trains in florida? Aren't they considered "woke" and therefore outlawed under the de santos regime?
>a new temporary route>Amtrak is temporarily combining the Capitol Limited and Silver Star trains to create the Floridian due to the upcoming East River Tunnel Rehabilitation Project in New York.so temporary means for a while? full journey takes 46h30m from Chicago to Miami.
>>2019634Florida has the only (currently operating) non-amtrak high-speed rail line in the country. Brightline.
>>2019640Not high speed
>>2019644It is highspeed for the US. If you want to get technical it's "higher-speed" rail which is usually defined as intercity rail with operating speeds between 90-125mph."High speed" rail in the US is defined as 110mph+ so Brightline's maximum operating speed of 125mph would meet that definition.Acela is "high speed" rail, but in the vast majority of its route it only travels at ~80-90mph on average with only a single area of track around 45-50 miles in length where they can actually hit 140-150mph. Brightline is on the low-end of high speed rail, but i'd personally say it qualifies. Birghtline west (LA to Las Vegas) is supposed to hit 150-200mph.
>>2019638Yeah, it's not that special, but it is nice that you don't have to change trains. I really want to try taking it this spring.
>>2019634>outlawed under the de santis regimeFunny how if a train line isn't allowed to vacuum disproportionate tax dollars it's equivalent to being "outlawed".It's like how DeSantis made some rule about not reducing lanes for bike lanes without some sort of study and /n/ went ballistic
>>2019644It's fast, it's inter-city, it's close enough that getting persnickety about definitions of high-speed aren't really needed. Yammering on about grade separations etc is best left to dull, overbearing Youtubers imo
>>2019646>Birghtline west (LA to Las Vegas) is supposed to hit 150-200mph.They just showed off their concept of a "luxury lounge" car they want for that route.
>>2019684I don't remember anything like that but then again I generally try to filter/ignore anything mentioning flyover states like florida. My mistake for not hiding this thread immediatelyt. from civilizatio/n/
>>2019708I hate it, but it's also what I'd expect from anything labeled "luxury". In fifteen years that style will have aged like milk, but it is quite fashionable today.
>>2019730Yeah it might not even look like this in the final design.
>>2019684>Funny how if a train line isn't allowed to vacuum disproportionate tax dollars it's equivalent to being "outlawed".All passenger train lines are getting subsidies through. Amtrak, Brightline, Sunrail, Tri-rail, all of them. I can't imagine any of these being viable without it.
>>2019735And they SHOULD be given subsidies, cheap high speed rail increases the economic mobility of the region as a whole. People can more easily expand their job market area they're able to commute to and obviously the rail lines themselves provide plenty of jobs for the local communities. The idea that transit systems HAVE to earn a profit is dumb, freight trains 1.5-2.5 miles long are always going to earn more than passenger rail service will earn, but it doesn't provide the same economic benefits to the communities, it only benefits the large corporations that can take advantage of that freight line and potentially a few of the larger businesses in the region will be able to utilize the advantages of that freight line. Which does provide some local economic growth, but nowhere near the type of broad economic benefits you see from cheap passenger rail service.
>>2019736Go away commie.
>>2019745It should be a public service. Not everything should be, but passenger rail service? 100% should be subsidized. Just like the highway system and many other things in our country.
>>2019735passenger rail getting subsidies is no different than your taxes paying for the highway system
>>2019644Anything above 120 KM/H is high speed.
>>2019790>no different than your taxes paying for the highway systemYeah, if the highway system only consisted of one or two major highways, half of the budget went to administration costs, only had certain times when it was open, and had a $40 toll.
>there are 2 mainlines from Miami to WPBTIL
>>2019906I was on a train that ran over a woman on that stretch of track. She was getting off a commuter train as we (amtrak) were heading through on the center track without stopping at the commuter station, she (wearing headphones) walked right out into the center track after getting off the commuter train without looking for an oncoming train, we must've been doing at least 35-40mph at the time which for a train takes awhile to stop, so yeah she got cronched by the train.Oddly enough that was the 2nd person in 24 hours our Amtrak train had killed. The evening before just outside of Richmond VA a homeless man jumped in front of the train. Both times were 4-5 hour delays as the police have to show up, do their investigation and remains collection. Thankfully after the 2nd person was killed, we knew roughly how long it would take for the delay having just experienced it the evening before, so we asked our car attendant (we were in a private bedroom) for a bottle of maker's mark and some glasses.Overall would kill via train again.
>>2019895Exactly like WSDOT car ferries then. The only reason the federal highway system isn't similarly awful is economies of scale. Passenger rail was better when it was private.
>>2020039>Passenger rail was better when it was privatePassenger rail was entirely a losing venture when it was private, basically ANY railroad that dropped passenger service for freight earned $$$. Which is why they all did.
>>2020040That was due to obscene overregulations.
>>2020043Lol, no, no it wasn't.The highway system in the 1950s basically cemented it, coupled with the manufacturing boom from WWII that started pumping out cars in the 1950s for the growing number of American families and their baby boomer kids which were living in suburbs further from rail lines, passenger rail was never going to make a serious come back at that point.No amount of deregulation is going to bring back PRIVATE passenger rail service outside of the super niche sight seeing rail tours and shit. If passenger rail service is EVER going to work in the US it needs to be subsidized.
>>2020045>>2020040explain how multiple countries have profitable private passenger railways then?
>>2020048Because they aren't the US?The only place passenger rail service makes economic sense is the northeast corridor between DC and Boston and MAYBE a highspeed line for LA-Seatte-Vancouver. The rest of the country is simply too far-flung and there is not a large enough regular passenger level to sustain a profitable DAILY service. Hell, even 2-3 times a week isn't profitable, and less convenient, so a lot of people never even take the existing passenger train service Amtrak.Proper highspeed rail between major metro areas COULD be profitable in the very long term, but the initial costs would need to be subsidized or you're basically never gonna earn money on it.
>>2020048Where exactly is passenger rail profitable?You have the example of Spain where especially HSR is profitable, after the government built the HSR lines and charges low enough tolls for its usage that operation is profitable, but it doesn't recoup the investment or maintenence cost.You have the example of Japan where train companies make money from all the businesses around the trains but not the trains themselves.Passenger railway is extremely difficult to to make profitable. Not impossibilitat, but you need ideal conditions.On that note, weren't US private railways obligated by law to provide passenger service back in the day?
Washington to Pittsburgh direct? I never would’ve thought of that.
>>2020045Government switched their funding from trains to highways and subsidized oil. The market responded. If government funded less highways and stopped subsidizing oil, people would drive less and take trains more.
>>2020052>On that note, weren't US private railways obligated by law to provide passenger service back in the day?Yes and the moment they weren't they started flipping to freight, earned larger profits and bought out the smaller passenger lines and then converted THOSE to freight and continued with the cycle until most passenger rail service was gone.
>>2020079>bought out the smaller passenger linesThere was no such thing as "passenger railroad" in those days. They were just railroads. You're just some stupid little psuedo commie that wants to spend someone else's money so you can ride trains.
>>2020052>weren't US private railways obligated by law to provide passenger service back in the day?Yeah, and the passenger trains were only profitable when they were also hauling mail on them.
>>2019630Yet another line to be held up by tax payer money. Sad!
>>2020104Are you retarded?There were railroads that operated passenger lines, saying they were "just railroads" makes you look dumb as hell
>>2020124>saying they were "just railroads" makes you look dumb as hellThey were though
>>2020124They all operated both, comrade.
>>2020141>>2020131Yes, because as discussed, they were LEGALLY required to.The ones that kept their passenger rail service after the legal mandate was dropped got bought up by the ones who switched to freight only.
>>2020181What was your point here?
>>2020182The point is without a legal mandate for passenger rail, or subsidies to support passenger rail, there is never going to be profitable private passenger rail service in the US.Without subsidies, they'll just run freight and earn more $$.
>>2020185We already knew that
>>2020188apparently not... >>2020043
>>2020190What does that have to do with what you were talking about
>>2020197>he's actually retardedlollmao evenEither you're too retarded to read a 4chan thread, or you're so retarded you think you're providing something insightful with retarded posts like >>2020141 Either way, no point continuing here when you don't have the mental capabilities to handle basic discussion while staying on topic.
>>2020198I accept your concession.
>>2019708millenium station floor lol
>>2019634Maybe poke your head out of the propaganda bubble.
So how do we make the rail feel safe? Because my Amtrak experiences made me pro automobile.
>>2020252Pay to be in the private first class cars.dedicated first-class passenger meal times and the dining car separates the coach cars from the sleepers, so you never even have to interact with the riff-raff if you don't want to.First class tickets also come with lounge access the day of departure, though smaller stations wont have lounges, the larger stations do (NYC, DC, Chicago, etc)
>>2020270And ill still get murdered as i step off the train. No thanks
>>2020278Why are you showing metro pictures as if they are representative of Amtrak?Also that sounds like a personal problem, if you can't figure out how to safely walk around Union station in Chicago/NYC/DC you probably couldn't figure out how to walk down any US city street safely.
>>2020279>Why are you showing metro pictures as if they are representative of Amtrak?Because its the same experience.>you probably couldn't figure out how to walk down any US city street safely.This confirms you don't actually use amtrak much if at all
>>2020280I've probably used Amtrak more than you.I've been riding in the NEC since 2004 fairly regularly and have done more than 6 cross-country amtrak trips.
>>2020281Outside the NEC he's got a point. People do foul things in/to the coach class restrooms.
>>2020281And how many amtrak stations would you let a girl travel to alone after sunset?
>>2020313any of the major ones, NYC, DC, Boston, etc.Like I said, if you that scared of a well lit, well traveled, well policed busy train station, how the fuck do you manage to walk down the average city street without shitting yourself?Do you concealed carry? I can think of nothing else that might assuage your fear of strangers in the city.
>>2019708>>2019733Ngl I love this but my main critique is the lighting. It's WAAAAY too bright. Need some moody, darker lighting, especially at night. I'd definitely use this a time or two though.
>>2019859Km/h or MPH? If the former, that's hilariously slow
>>2021417A couple times I took the train from my hometown to college. There were several sections where the train never got above 30 MPH and with the rocking side to side, it felt like I was on a ship in stormy seas.
>>2020313F L Y O V E RLYOVER
>>2019634>any politician I don't like is a regimeKill yourself
Amtrak needs to focus more on regional intercity rail. There needs to be more than one train from Buffalo to Boston for example.
>>2024507The argument>hurr durr murrica too bigis dumb for this reason. Ofc long distance doesn't make much sense, but there's a lot of regional trips that would be competitive.But it's always lile that when you have a centralised administration, they look at the big picture and just shrug it off because they don't really care or bother to do that kind of micromanagement.Maybe there could be an easier way for the states to order amtrak to offer more regional service, while only paying for a small part of the cost and the rest being paid for through Amtrak. As in basically Amtrak provides the service so that it's "free" (or subsidised) for the states, and that way the states are less hesitant to have rail service provided (all of this subject to some regulation so that there's not suddenly a barrage of uneconomical train service getting ordered).
>>2024507>>hurr durr murrica too bigThat isn't what they're saying. It's really quite disingenuous to suggest that america would be well served building HSR between lubbock and branson.
>>2024536> As in basically Amtrak provides the service so that it's "free" (or subsidised) for the states, and that way the states are less hesitant to have rail service provided (all of this subject to some regulation so that there's not suddenly a barrage of uneconomical train service getting ordered).Except Amtrak IS paid by taxpayers.
>>2024536long distance makes just as much sense as short distance trips... The most major issue is you need decent transit at any destination otherwise you are better off driving there
>>2024507they can't unless the states pay for it
>>2024570>Long distance makes just as much sense as short distance tripsNo it doesn't lol. Baltimore to New York, for instance, is about three hours and while a plane is going to be shorter (one hour), over a longer period a train is less of a deal. New York to Los Angeles is six hours by plane but by Amtrak you're looking at a 70 hour minimum.
