[alexeisadeski3]

Even in Europe the cost is ludicrous relative to the gain.

Additionally, any convenience gained by the user - relative to flight - is almost entirely due to security differentials. Harmonize security and those travel times fall in line right quick.

Apply a tiny fraction of HSR costs to speed up air travel security instead, and you'll see far greater rider convenience increases and save incredible amounts of money.

[dragonwriter]

> Harmonize security and those travel times fall in line right quick.

The security differential in the US is based in large part on the fact that airplanes can (a) be diverted by hijackers to alternate destinations, and (b) be used as weapons against arbitrary targets.

Since the risks aren't the same, why would you aim to harmonize security, except as a pure subsidy to the airline industry?

[melling]

Can you provide the numbers to back up your statement? I realize on most other sites it's ok to so the cost is ludicrous, but here it's better to provide the numbers so other people can evaluate.

[alexeisadeski3]

http://www.calwhine.com/lessons-from-spains-bullet-train-the...

http://reason.com/blog/2011/06/10/bullet-train-brings-americ...

[melling]

Thanks. Now we can address what you've said because clearly you are wrong, even from your own articles. This doesn't make it sound like train transportation is ludicrous.

"The busiest high-speed lines in the world are capable of making money, Bel said, including those between Paris and Lyon, where about 25 million people ride the French TGV trains each year, and the Japanese Shinkansen trains between Tokyo and Osaka, which draw about 130 million riders a year."

As for Spain, they've spent $60 billion dollars since 1980. That's less than one high-speed rail train in California and they've got almost 2000 miles of track.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AVE

We should dig up some other sources. They site that you provided doesn't seem like it's a great source. It doesn't say how much money is actually lost. Simply that it's not profitable.

[computer]

Here in Europe rail is mostly used for commuting and shorter distances in general. Especially in smaller countries. That part of rail is not competing with flying in any way.

[alexeisadeski3]

HSR is usually for longer distances, "light rail" for shorter.

Long distance rail competes with plane, light rail with autos.

[dragonwriter]

> Long distance rail competes with plane, light rail with autos.

Heavy rail at the distances for which HSR routes are planned in the US (such as California HSR) competes with autos more than air travel.