Clicketyclack  
The Big Engine That Couldn't     

   Why does Japan have bullet trains and the U.S. can't? 

   A week ago, we wrote about the $2.5 billion that Washington offered to Florida a decade ago. Actually, it was $3.5 billion, which California eventually accepted ($2.5 billion awarded to date). 
 

Conception

   California now says current plans for the project would cost too much and take too long. Estimates for the bullet train between San Fran and LA have risen from $33 billion...to $45...to $77...with no secure financing plan.

   The Golden State is in serious debt. What were they thinking to begin with?

   How many passengers at what ticket prices would it take to recover $77 billion, plus operating costs? For what ultimate benefit to the country at large? 

   The U.S. Dept. of Transportation will not award the final $1 billion, and wants the $2.5 billion already awarded reimbursed. The state, which has sued the Trump administration 46 times, says, "no way." 

   There are 12 high-speed train systems around the world. Why can't the U.S. do this?

   Answer: lawsuits, engineering problems, geological obstacles, bureaucracy, and delays that lead to inflated costs. U.S. costs are higher to begin with, and our environmental laws are stricter. Connecting cities must be densely populated. 

   If a rail system was built, and if trains were full, rail travel - even though powered by petroleum - would be less costly per passenger mile than air travel, with fewer emissions. 

   But right of way, rails, bridges, tunnels, huge parking lots etc. are not in place, while airports are thriving. Air travel gave us something we never had. We already have high speed......emissions notwithstanding.

      Jimmy (operator of a local Lionel system in Pennsylvania, 1946-1952)