I have travelled on the TGV, Shinkansen and the Shanghai Maglev. All these systems work - but maybe not in a capiltalist sense. They are infrastructure, like roads and sewers. They facilitate society.
@@Luke-hm9vhNot spending money on wars may be a theory. When in history has there not been wars going on? Apparently there are about 200 wars and conflicts now going on worldwide and America is involved in half of them.
@@ThranduilGreenleafThis is true. Perhaps the US should turn towards isolationsim and become self-sufficient, uninvolved Fortress America and let the rest of the world defend itself from whatever. We could still profit by continuing to be the world's biggest supplier of weapons. Then we could finance all the infrastructure to our heart's desire.
Reduce a few of the rules that companies building those Interstates have to follow and they'd be a whole lot cheaper to build, and I'm not suggesting a rollback of any safety for quality requirements, just rules like minority ownership of the companies involved and the like.
I am surprised at the lack of mention to Spain, which is the SECOND largest high speed train system in the world, almost doubling the French network in track length, and with some of the most advanced trains out there. It also works quite profitably, with a number of alternative operators having set up shop in Spain, driving down prices and rising use to the point where the only ones losing are the airline companies.
Spain has a population large enough to support high-speed rail in much of the country. You need a good amount of passenger patronage just to justify the high cost of high-speed rail construction on a per kilometer basis.
@@Sacto1654 the Spanish population is much smaller than the French or the German, which are the examples the video is using to show how HS rail has failed. This doesn't mean it couldn't work in a place like the US.
Most private rail lines aren't profitable on their own. If you look at Hong Kong & Japan's private metro systems, they run at huge profits because they develop the land around the stations into mixed-use communities where you can shop, live, and work. That's what actually helps make these rail lines profitable.
The government owns majority of MTRC (Hong Kong’s sole rail operator). Despite most of MTRC’s profit comes from real estate, passenger travel is still profitable. But to me its success is contributed not only by its monopoly status but also by the unique nature in Hong Kong which people rely heavily on public transport to commute and the small (in terms of track mileage) network that makes it highly efficient
It's a lot more complicated. You need dedicated rails for HSR and other rails for freight. You can't have them on the same network... if Europe or Japan allowed mixed rail... their trains would run into major issues.
I live in France and really can't imagine this country without tgv, it would total nightmare to take slower train on route 750km (from Montpellier to Paris) which now is done in just 3,5h or planes with way smaller capacity. Already LGV to Paris is under capacity and last summer 40% of all tgv trains were fully booked. It's not about costs or difficulties, just basic life quality standard (especially with low cost operators and open access competition)
It is slightly different in the uk in that the distances covered by HST in France that make it viable are actually more like London to Glasgow and Edinburgh, so for HST make sense it needs to be rolled out over that distance, Manchester and Birmingham are already served with fast trains that take a couple of hours to run between, Avanti express to Manchester is only 2 hours 3 mins for example
@@peterkorek-mv6rs That is what most Germans say but in my experience it really depends on HOW and WHEN you buy the tickets. They can be very cheap, if you do it correctly.
I love TGVs but what really sucks is that you always have to go via Paris with no real main station that makes it more complicated to transfer. I really hope France considers decentralising the LGVs from Paris by constructing direct tracks or by constructing a central station in Paris.
The Vande Bharat trains are not the High Speed rails being developed by India. They certainly are slightly higher speed than other trains and have better facilities but they run on the same existing network as the other trains. A new dedicated high speed rail corridor is being built between Ahmedabad and Mumbai. It was initially expected to start by 2022 ( coinciding with 75 years of Independence); but now it has been pushed to 2027-28 timeframe. It was delayed first due to land acquisition issues and later COVID but it is still being developed
I say it will take just 5yrs, when you haven't seen the progress you shouldn't comment, the line is about 508km+ california is just 191 km under construction, got that into your head? while cali's hsr is being built in diff phases@@TheKkpop1
One correction. The Vande Bharat express was never a high speed train it’s just another train with better safety features and comfort also it runs on already existing rail network no specific new routes were constructed for that and there are already about 10+ vande bharat trains operational and are successful.The Mumbai - Ahmedabad route that you mentioned is actually a bullet train and is under construction that will be the first operational high speed train in India.
For those out of the loop on high speed rail: The seperate tracks are REALLY important. One reason is that high speed operaton requires huge safety distances, which aren't feasible on most low-speed rails with their amount of switches. Just imagine if cars were so fast and big that traffic lights may only change if the next car is still over 10 km away, because otherwise an incoming car may not halt in time and ram into the crossing traffic. Which is also a reason why the Hyperloop is such a phenomenally stupid idea. To make the operation within a vacuum tube possible without having a leak in one place destroy the entire line, proponents are talking about sectioning the vacuum tube with pressure doors that open for incoming trains... but this cannot be done safely if the trains are actually fast.
@@T33K3SS3LCH3Nif it's an idea already on the table then China will figure it out, hyperloop sounds like a special use system where other lines may not criss cross or link in the traditional sense... But get off and hop onto another maglev that connects to another hyperloop etc to get to your desired destination? But I don't know what hyperloop designers are thinking as I'm not being paid to figure it out, but that's my initial thoughts on the hyperloop vacuum problem that you presented?... Whatever the case maybe, China will figure out if it's feasible or not on a large scale before it writes it off
Montenegro shouId have asked if that road of theirs was profitabIe. China shouId have done the same before buiIding aII that high speed raiI to nowhere. What's their daiIy operating defict these days? 50 miI?
@@V1489Cygni The problem isn't that it isn't profitable. The majority of China's HSR passenger-kms do turn a profit. The problem is that they built too many lines that are too long or serve too few people to be profitable. That being said, it's been found that in spite of the internalized cost, the externalized benefits are enormous. The overall return on investment for the Chinese economy is calculated to be 6.5% b/c HSR economizes over air and car/bus travel, esp in a country where oil is scarce and expensive.
Why is it insane to ask? We live in the Real world.. and it takes Men & Resources to make something work and run... or is this another case of University Socialism combined with Hollywood Utopia speaking here?
@shaider1982 you have no idea. My company spends half a billion a year on just maintenance that is just track, ties, and surfacing. Signals, bridge repair, car repair and engine repair is a billion. You can triple that for hs rail.
@bkondrk I do know to maintain 100 miles of high speed costs the same a year as 33,000 miles of freight. But that is using their cost estimats for that rail they are trying to build in California
There is a misinformation about the Indian case . The vande Bharat train and the Mumbai-ahmedabad bullet train are completely separate projects . vande Bharat is for running semi high speed trains in existing tracks . On the other side the Mumbai-Ahmedabad bullet train line has completed it's land acquisition and will be partially operational around 2027 (hopefully 😅)
So these are two parallel projects 1. Bullet train from Ahemdabad to Mumbai is well under construction now, this is made in partership with the Japanese (320km/h): ua-cam.com/video/aGffpOscWtI/v-deo.html&pp=ygUVZHJvbmVtYW4gYnVsbGV0IHRyYWlu 2. Upgrade of conventional 140km/h track to 180-220km/h which is being done nationwide - Vande Bharat. Indigenous The entier India coverage is wrong as you mixed both into one and took a view on it, nice Also why the hate for high speed rail? Covid does not make high speed rail any less legit, regardless of short term macro economcis. Really weird coevrage on this one.
stop copying it everywhere, stop crying go see the progress video, i can bet you don't even know the total length of that corridor, it's fucking 508km, now go and check what's cali's hsr length is under construction@@TheKkpop1
It's not even that. It's about convincing politicians that you cannot look at it as a money-making venture at all. You must look at it the same way you view public road construction, bridges, and other state-run infrastructure. The infrastructure itself does not make you money, and often loses quite a lot of money instead. But what it does is facilitate the ongoing development of society and you recoup the costs from taxes. As your society develops, you should reasonably be able to collect more money in taxes as the income of citizens increases. The biggest problem is that these returns are not likely to be seen within a single politician's term of office, so it's seen as a wasted effort, since any expenditure without an immediate return on investment is easy to use as an attacking point by their opposition.
People who aren't impressed by HSR has clearly never lived in places with HSR. Also the clip at the 2 minute mark is from Taiwan's 25+ year old automated light rail system that travels through the city of Taipei.
I second this statement!! As an American who lived in both japan and america for years i can completely see the benefit for HSR in the USA me driving from New york to norfolk virgina taking 8hrs to drive while taking the shinkansen from Tokyo to Osaka takes 2.5 hr along with it being more efficient!!!!
@@sazzadhossan9851if you know anything about Norfolk and NYC, you'd know that this would be worse than getting in and out of the airports in those cities. Sure, you can get from one to the other faster using HSR, but what are you doing when you get there? Sitting in gridlock traffic, with an idling engine, just like everyone else. HSR isn't going to do anything to make NYC streets more driveable, and it isn't going to alleviate any of the traffic on the Monitor-Merrimack Tunnel.
Fact Check: Vande Bharat was not meant to be high speed but semi high speed. It is already operational on more than 30 routes. Mumbai-Ahmedabad is high speed rail which is already under construction scheduled to be operational by 2028. It's separate from Vande Bharat. Please check your facts!!
HSR in Indonesia is just a politically sexy project to make the President look good during election. Its expensive with little economic contribution. Solving the massive bureucratic corruption would be more useful, but just not sexy..
@@RedHanded1969In fact, since it opened last October, passengers have continued to increase. And the president has ordered phase two of construction to be carried out at the tip of the island of Java
I love just how convenient and reliable the Shinkansen network is. And looking forward to 2030, when the Hokkaido Shinkansen extension will connect Tokyo with Sapporo in a 5 hour train ride!
Its not going to be that big of a deal, the main benefit is not having to wait at shin-hakodate. The main work is already done (the Seikan Tunnel and the gauge conversion all the way to shin-hakodate), I guess once it is finished it will be a good excuse to visit Japan and especially Sapporo/Otaru again.
@@smalltime0 the trains are usually empty before they arrive to shin-hakodate, which is because the limited express to sapporo is another 4 hours added to the trip, at that point flying is just so much faster. Extending it to turn that 4 hour connection into 1 additional hour on the train will make it competitive to air travel to sapporo, not to mention that Japanese people actually like trains... Even if air travel is cheaper, hopping on the shinkansen is much more favorable to most of the people.
@SherrifOfNottingham adding onto what you said, one of the planned stops is in Kutchan near all the Niseko ski resorts. Niseko gets a lot of international tourists (particularly from China and Australia), so adding better connectivity to there from both Tokyo and Sapporo makes that area significantly more accessible.
Interesting that you didn't mention Turkey. The system is quickly being built and is working rather efficiently there. I know because I usually travel there for business and am fascinated by the Istanbul-Ankara line. Another line connecting the country to Europe via Edirne is almost finished and a fourth one connecting the capital with the Aegean coast is also almost finished as far as I know. The only issue there is that it's also being used for freight travel (like in Germany) so while the trains can go 300+ km/h they are limited to around 250 km/h because of this.
@@SEAZNDragon That is very true. Another great example (albeit on a smaller scale) is the Taiwan high speed system. This too was not mentioned in the video though. I get that it focuses on the problematic ones, but the ones that work fluently could have been mentioned, nevertheless.
I’m sure both projects will eventually get their own videos. Although if the Japan bullet train video (as well as the majority of the videos of on this channel) is any indication I’m sure there are still plenty of flaws to cover. The Turkish rail may take a little longer since parts of it is still under construction and the recent earthquake exposing a lot of infrastructure issues in the country. There maybe an extended wait and see period for that one.
Actually, on India, the Vande Bharat trains are being inteoduced as "semi-high-speed" trains which are more modern than the other existing trains in the country which, if anyone tries to look up, they'll instantly realise how outdated those older trains were and how much this upgrade was needed. They're still in the process of inteoducing more and more vabde bharat trains ofcourse. As for the high-speed/bullet trains, there is a separate line, between Mumbai and Gujrat, that is currently under construction; and last I checked, a significant length out of the total 508 kms (planned) has already been constructed. People can look up online, including here on UA-cam, for weekly/monthly updates of that construction. Other than this one, there are 2-3 more limes in other parts of the country that are in different phases of planning/construction/being approved. So just wanted to point out that Vande Bharat trains are not supposed to be the high-speed/bullet trains. They're "semi-high-speed" trains. The bullet trains, for which the line(s) are under construction, will be separate for those Vande Bharat trains. Those bullet trains, as far as I know, are just supposed to be straight up Japan's Shinkansen.
Shoutout to Andy Byford who saved public transit in Toronto, Sydney, London, and was chairman of the MTA for two years before saying "y'all fucked NY" and left to go fix Amtrak instead
You can thank governor Andrew Cuomo for Byford ditching NYC. Cuomo's micromanaging is well-known for frustrating most of Byford's initiatives. (This is the same governor who wrote a book _crowing_ about his handling of the pandemic in NY, conveniently ignoring his directive shoehorning covid patients into ill-equipped nursing homes, resulting in an estimated 13,000 senior citizen deaths.)
MTA is bad for a reason. Bcos if its good it will other cities create efficient public transport and abandon cars. Automobile & fossil fuel industry cant hv that..
Australia has been trying to get a high speed rail line built from Brisbane to Melbourne for at least 40 years, and it never gets past the planning stage before everyone inevitably decides it’s too expensive and too difficult. Then a few years later, some politician starts talking about it when there is an election and the whole thing repeats.
@@andrewharris3900 we're talking about inter big city hsr on the coast here, not linking every tiny town in the bush. it's only* ~460 km from melbourne to canberra, ~250 km from canberra to sydney, and ~730km from sydney to brisbane *for reference, the paris to marseille route is almost ~700km, and the AU cities mentioned have several times higher population than many of the cities linked by hsr in france e.g. lyon and marseille on the aforementioned route
@@andrewharris3900 look, no one is crazy enough to suggest an HSR from Perth to Sydney. However, an HSR line from Adelaide to Melbourne, Canberra, Sydney, and Brisbane? That's pretty much feasible.
People tend to forget why France built its first TGV line between Paris and Lyon in 1981. The new line was built to relieve pressure on the existing overcrowded classic line than ran through Dijon. Going faster was initially considered a side-benefit. One has to take this into consideration when judging if a HSR project is worth or not.
The same thing is true in Japan. The Tokaido Shinkansen was built to handle the rapidly increasing volume of passengers that could not be carried by their narrow gauge rail system. Moreover, speed was intended to be a means of increasing rail productivity, not as a means to attract travellers to passenger trains. Moreover the new HSR system had a huge volume of business on day one of its new service in 1964. And the same thing is true of China, which was dependent on railroads before it commenced construction of its vast high speed rail system.
If it’s between major cities (and that is only place where HSR is being built) you are already where you want to be. In fact it’s a potential plus because you don’t have to deal with parking your care in a busy city adding even more costs. There are many ways to get around in a city besides dealing with the literal worst traffic in the county.
That's true especially in Texas or anywhere in the South. Another factor nobody is mentioning is crime that takes place on public transportation. You take your life in your own hands getting on public transport in the US.
It's true. We've invested about $20 trillion in roads since Ike had his big idea, and something like $70 trillion in cars, but almost nothing in comparison for any other ground trasport. That means you pretty much have to drive.
There’s a mistake in the regarding the Indian rails. Vande Bharat and the HSR are two separate, unrelated projects. HSR is the bullet train line from Mumbai to Ahmedabad that’s been plagued with land acquisition issues. The entire line will be on a new elevated track (or tunnel). Vande Bharat is a semi high speed rail that runs on existing rail tracks. Those have been getting commissioned pretty frequently. A lot of these trains are running below max speed because they require track upgrades (ie smoother banked turns,etc) first. It’s completely separate from the HSR network
@@bubba842 I was less than clear. On one side, Italy had the lines reserved for high speed trains, and is currently building a new one for Lyon in France. On the other, the legacy lines are being upgraded to the same standard so that if a high speed line is for some reason damaged or broken (as it happened a few years ago on the Milan-Bologna high speed line) the damaged portion can be bypassed in a pinch.
Vande Bharat Trains are running on existing tracks which are currently being upgraded. And Bullet Train has a completely different line which tracks are currently under construction and to be opened in 2027.
You got Vande Bharat (semi-high speed on current existing tracks) mixed with Japanese Bullet Trains (HSR) mixed, didn't expect this. Both are different projects, Vande Bharat is an upgrade of exisiting infrastructure while HSR's will connect major cities only on newly constructed dedicated tracks.
It's not just them. Take a look at any proposed HSR in the US and look at whose funding the opposition. In almost every case, Southwest Airlines is a funder. Southwest makes thier money on high volume short haul flights-the kind of flights that HSR kills off. Edit: should have kept watching.
A train ride from Dalls, TX to Orlando, FL takes almost five days, thanks to all the stops along the way. Meanwhile, driving the same distance in a car can be done in 18 hours. It isn't about lobbyists, you dunce. It's about time and comfort. If I don't have to spend days on end, trapped in a train car with people I don't know, I'm not doing it. Beyond that, trains are limited in their mobility. Why would I drive to a trains station, take a train ride that lasts for days, just to rent a car and drive to my actual destination? Why not drive myself, or take a plane that gets me there in mere hours? Trains didn't become the main form of travel in North America because the US and Canada are too large, and have population centers too spread out, for rail to be a viable solution. Even the fastest bullet train is still extremely limited, when compared to the benefits of air and automobile travel.
@@SkunkApe407 NOOOOOOO, the "america is too large" arguement, it's over. I live in a town of 6000 people and our small rural train station is in walking distance of practically everyone despite being mostly low density housing, and that rail network can take you anywhere in the country at faster/same speed as a car depending on where you want to go. It's possible if you don't pave 1 mile wide roads and car parks that are completely hostile to people outside of cars, but unfortunately in America, trains were seen as antiquated by the 50's and decided to tear down the majority of infrastructure that BUILT America. How do you think Americans were able to expand into the interior in the 1800s without cars? Your arguement is the same as if I had said, "look, this road has potholes in and it fucked my suspension, roads are worthless!!! why do we keep building them??" while neglecting the fact that investment, planning, and apathy has lead to such conditions to take place. Things are only shit for a reason.
@@blazikem your hicktown argument is irrelevant when talking about an actual city. Airports and train stations tend to fall OUTSIDE the city limits. I get it. Small town, bad education. You backwoods folk don't do too well with reality. That's why it's small towns like yours that keep the Alt Right and Klan in business.
@@blazikem just to make this very clear for you, I worked for many years as a Land Surveyor. I can tell you, from professional experience, that rail will not ever work as the primary mode of transport in the US. People like you will continue to chase pipe dreams for eternity, but reality will never change. Rail is only viable in places where population density is much higher, with urban centers much closer together. You're an imbecile if you think otherwise.
The issue with transportation projects is that most people who pay for them don't see immediate benefits, and it can take many years for the results to show. This often leads to political debates because nobody wants to fund something that doesn't seem to benefit them right away, and politicians focus on short-term gains.
I don't know where you live but here in the US maintenance is never done adequately so you have to get the money back before the system breaks down. We also tend to build projects in places where there's no chance that they'll ever be profitable but they'll make jobs for some local boss and will have to be subsidized for s long as they last. That way more money can be skimmed off the top.
This is where China and India have an advantage, they can procure funding for the entire project and then build it a lot faster and cheaper. India hasnt completed its first line yet but work is proceeding way faster than on projects like California HSR or the HS2 in the UK. China meanwhile has left the rest of the world in the dust with HSR. Also of course these countries have a ton of corridors that are very viable for HSR because of their network of massive cities.
I've been an avid follower of your channel for quite some time now, and I must admit that I've always appreciated the in-depth and informative content you create. Your ability to shed light on various aspects of global infrastructure projects, including high-speed rail networks, has been truly enlightening. However, I couldn't help but notice a significant omission in your recent video on high-speed rail networks around the world, particularly the absence of the Indonesian bullet train project. I must say that I found this omission rather perplexing, and it raised concerns about the fairness and balance of your content. The Indonesian high-speed rail project is a significant infrastructure undertaking, and its exclusion from your video seemed to perpetuate a certain bias. While it's true that Chinese companies have a notable role in this project, it doesn't mean that the entire endeavor should be discounted or overlooked, especially when discussing high-speed rail systems worldwide. In the interest of presenting a more comprehensive and unbiased view of high-speed rail development, it's crucial to include a project like the Indonesian bullet train. It not only reflects the significant progress that Indonesia is making in the realm of transportation but also demonstrates the global impact and influence of high-speed rail networks. Furthermore, as responsible content creators and educators, it's essential to provide accurate and inclusive information to your audience. I understand that it might be challenging to cover all projects comprehensively due to the limitations of video duration, but this is precisely why it's crucial to exercise diligence in selecting the projects you do cover. Including diverse examples from various regions, even when they have significant Chinese involvement, can help mitigate concerns about bias and offer your viewers a more balanced perspective. I encourage you to revisit this issue in a future video or, at the very least, acknowledge the omission and explain the reasons behind it. This transparency and willingness to address concerns can go a long way in maintaining the trust of your viewers and ensuring that your channel continues to be a reliable source of information. I hope you'll consider these points, and I look forward to seeing more content that provides a fair and comprehensive view of global high-speed rail developments. Your work has been incredibly valuable, and it would be a shame to see it tainted by perceived biases. Thank you for your attention, and I look forward to your future content
It's always the same with high speed rail: The introduction is long and painful, but everyone forgets about that after a year because the results are awesome. And it's usually the same with highways: The construction overruns its time and financial budgets even more, and the result is meh.
I’ve been on that Acela line in the US plenty of times and I had no idea it was even considered HSR! It moves at a very average pace for most of the trip and gets delayed often 😢
The Acela is NOT an HSR. It's not even semi-high-speed. The rolling stock is only rated at a maximum of 125 mph and the tracks are rated for 90 mph in most places with some still having a maximum of 70 mph. There is one short stretch where they do go over 100 mph. Sometimes. Britain had the HS125 Inter City trains running at 125 mph back in the 1970s! Fifty years ago!!! High-speed railway lines are limited to dedicated lines with maximum speed over 300 km/h (185 mph), while semi-high-speed rail can be mixed-use lines with maximum speed ranged in 200 km/h (125 mph)-300 km/h (185 mph). On my last trip to Europe I had breakfast in London, popped over to Paris for a lunch meeting and was back in London for dinner that evening. I've also enjoyed the Chinese train service too. Around 40 Shanghai to Beijing high speed G trains run each day. The distance between is these two cities is 1,318 kilometers (819 miles). The travel time is 4.5 - 6.5 hours and the lowest cost is CNY 553 - 667 (USD 77 - 93) for a second class seat, which are far more comfortable that any Amtrak seat. They are about to increase the speed for some trains so that time will come dorm to 3.5 hours. At that current speed that would mean you could travel from LA to San Francisco AND BACK in even less time!
@@philipgrice1026 If referring to the project California started a few years ago, it now looks like it's going to run out of money way before they can complete even 1/3rd of it. It's both way over budget and in addition the California exodus hit during Covid which means there's not as much future population as projected to spread the cost to. Those cities were basically too far apart; they either should have picked San Diego to LA or alternately Sacramento to San Jose instead as a pilot. (An even better idea would have been for California to wait for a pair of cities in the US North East along Acela to be upgraded to actual HSR first.)
@@philipgrice1026 With a 71:23 gear ratio, the Acela is designed with a top speed of 165 mph (266 km/h) and reaches a maximum speed of 150 mph (240 km/h) in regular service, but only on 40 miles or so of its route.
Wow, thanks so much for the massively informative reply! That's honestly so interesting. I take the train from Philly to Boston pretty regularly and it takes 6-8 hours! I thought that didn't quite sound like high-speed rail.@@philipgrice1026
@@philipgrice1026 it is hugh speed rail, an upgraded high speed line is an existing line thats been upgraded to 125 mph or over, and only one stretch of the line needs to meet this requirement for it to qualify
I recently took HSR in both Japan and Taiwan. The Taiwan HSR follows the Japanese te technology but was about 1/3 cost per ticket. Both are fabulous systems.
@@mudit1 No, bcuz Taiwan enjoys higher per capita GDP than Japan. And Singapore's average after-tax income is 6X higher than the US average. And the average savings of a singaporean is 10,000X higher than the average American's savings. And while the US government is $300-trillion in debt, Singapore has a net surplus of $7-trillion
This was part of the previous video on high speed rail that Simon made that he mentioned during this video. Unfortunately he didn't provide the link to that video.
@vernicethompson4825 What? We may purchase some government bonds as a hedge against poor market performance, but that is definitely not a money maker. Even with the US's lower top tax rate; every dollar not paid into taxes is effective a 35% rate of return. Please point me to investments that average 35% and I will be modifying my entire portfolio. I'm happy to make 9% on average.
@@diggernash1 You are mistaken. 1: The LGV construction cost was mainly covered by income from ticket sales. Income from the LGV access charges have already paid off the construction costs of LN 1 to 5 and Ile de France bypass. They continue to bet quite high in order to subsidize the maintenance of the conventional network. 2: In regard to tax, income tax which is collected from high earners is a small share of government budget. Sale tax paid by everyone is the big earner. The average amount directed towards the TGV has been about $7 per citizen and per year, a sum considered to be pocket change in France.
There are many things that have been declared "DEAD" in the past. And that is easy to understand. With not only existing tech but any tech that is obvious based on existing tech being impractical, it's easy to see there is no way something is happening soon. Humans going to the moon, SSTO rockets, electric cars, artificial intelligence, etc. Hyperloops aren't happening for a decade, for LOTS of reasons. But don't bet there won't be advances that make them make sense in 2050.
It doesn't really have problems so much as certain characteristics that make it better suited for countries that are good at high tech infrastructure projects - something the U.S. (and U.K. and Aus) are really not good at.
I hear some of the costs of building high speed rail, like California HSR or the one in the UK, and think how much conventional rail and mass transit could be built for the same sums.
Three words: Melbourne, Sydney, Brisbane. The first two are currently one of the busiest flight paths in the world and the third ... well you are on a roll!
I've travelled the Shinkansen trains many many MANY times in japan, love them but to be honest here in Australia where I live I doubt even the Melbourne to Sydney High Speed Rail project will ever get off the ground BUT I'd really appreciate "fast enough" rail in its place (and a lot of other places) something significantly quicker than coach buses without needing to be bullet train fast something like say Japan's Special Rapid trains running 130~160kph
Aussies like to talk the walk for years and years, but nothing gets done in the end...currently the state governments in Victoria and NSW are nearly bankrupt, they have no money to fund such ultra expensive and low profit projects. The route from Melbourne to Sydney could easily cost 200 billion dollars.
Support is high in the US for the idea of more rail because the idea is free. Support is lower for the actual rail projects because they cost money and get bad press.
The Vande Bharat is a semi high speed train. On paper it can reach 200 but is only operated at 160. The bullet train project is entirely different from Vande bhatat trains.
Thank Simon for giving us " the bad news first" on High-speed Rail projects, pointing out the initial problems of high cost , land acquisition, etc, but in the end giving a stiriring summary of all its benefits. As far as profitable operation goes, there must be potential 😊or private company Brightline in the U.S wouldn't have recently opened up a busy thriving High-speed rail line Florida.An example of there's proof in the pudding!
Years ago on the US Northeast corridor high speed trains were touted. I do believe they were even purchased . It was found that the carriages needed to tilt in turns but the rails were too close together. It amazed me at the time this did not seem to be known or somehow it was going to be fixed. Currently there will be massive upgrades to this corridor which, hopefully, will facilitate high speed trains between major cities like Boston, NYC and Washington DC.
As someone who enjoyed HSR in Japan, it's nice, but as someone who lives in the US in a country area, it's not really feasible for most of here. Especially for daily travel. One could say it's a bit of a pipe dream to think that it's even remotely feasible for most of the country. And handwaving profitability isn't going to suddenly make them not be giant money sinks.
Most of the country sure. But DC-Baltimore-Philly-NYC-Boston is probably one of the most feasible corridors in the world. San Francisco LA is also feasible though certainly not as profitable due to the lower population density and larger distances.
One point about Southwest Airlines and HSR in the 80s. At that time, because of the Wright Amendment, Southwest was not allowed to fly out of Love Field to anywhere outside Texas, NM, OK, and LA. Wright was trying to basically kill off Love Field in favor for DFW. Had high speed rail cut into their Texas routes it might have been the end of Southwest. So they were trying to survive in an environment where the government already had their hand on the scales.
Here in Texas, HSR seems to make so much sense! Having recently driven the 5 1/2 hours from Ft. Worth to San Antonio makes it (almost) worth the price of airfare. HSR would be even better. However, in a recent news report, I was surprised to see that most of the opposition was from farmers either afraid of losing their property or in some cases (where the tracks would be elevated) afraid of how the noise would affect their livestock. I would have expected more opposition from communities that have invested heavily in "traveller support" but while that was noted, did not seem to be a big concern.
I'm from India and Vande Bharat Express was never introduced as a High Speed Train. It was the train to modernise the existing network and increase the speeds up to 200 Kmph. It's marketed as a Semi high speed train. Track upgradations are going on for this. India has an entirely different High speed rail system under construction which uses Japan's Shinkansen trains. The progress of this project is updated monthly by "National High Speed Rail Corporation Limited" (NHSRCL)'s UA-cam Channel. Anyone can see it.
You got it wrong Vande Bharat and Mumbai Ahmedabad bullet train are two different projects. Vande Bharat is a semi-high speed rail meant to run on existing lines with max speed of around 200Kmph where as bullet trains will all be fresh tracks.
While Luxembourg has a TGV service to parts of France, there is no high-speed rail within the country. They’re building a dedicated line to connect with France, but as far as I know it will have a design speed of 160 km/h.
Personally, i don't even think the notion of HSR turning a profit should be considered on the table. Anyone who asks how it can be profitable should be laughed out of the room, because they're never going to be a source of viable information.
As an Indian and avid rail traveller it makes me feel proud to see the mention of Vande Bharat in this video. I have travelled in Madgaon-Mumbai Vande Bharat and the train is no less than a marvel although little far from world class. More routes have been launched and with more classes too. As a whole it looks really promising. 5:48
uhmm why not mention that planes in US is also heavily subsidized ? clearly a biased idea that trains have to be profitable when the airline companies never could ?
Hi There, we in Croatia with our national railways do not have these worries. We are still stuck in early 20th century wishing to raise our average railway speed from astonishing 58.2 km/ hour :D
this and HSR is a part of INFRASTRUCTURE whats purpose is to SERVE and not to make profit. With a trains, you can book a ticket for 20€ 2 month ahead, or 2 minutes before departure for 100€. Non of them will ruin you financially. But try to do it with airplanes. Also, theres no airplane on routs, what are not profitable. You live there or want to go there? then fuck you - no travelling for you.
Add a very powerful car manufacturers lobby in Germany, a very powerful freighter lobby in Germany that both block rail and high speed rail development into the equation.
@@stusue9733 in EU they pay you and the rest of your property gets more valuable afterwards if it got a better transit. If it is just a viaduct crossing your farmland, then you don't loose much in comparison to what you get paid.
The first TGV locomotive was supposed to use a gas turbine locomotive. But we were in the oil crisis in the 70's, and then came the Mesmer plan: nuclear reactors started to grow like mushrooms. It was decided to swith to an electric locomotive, and it was done fairly easily.
Actually the states of Washington and Oregon and the province of British Columbia are seriously considering a Portland-Seattle-Vancouver high speed rail line. Given how much travel there are between these cities in the air where airports are at capacity and on the highways that badly need expanding I think the region is ideal for true (300 kph) high speed rail. The biggest challenges are bureaucracy, especially as two countries are involved and the rapidly increasing cost of land in the area. However recently the project has started to gain momentum again but even the most optimistic schedules don't see anything operating before 2040 at the earliest.
SoundTrasit, the Seattle area light rail system is behind schedule and grossly over budget even with cuts in its planned network. Whatever amount they tell you a HSR system from Portland to Vancouver, BC will cost, double it, then double it again.
@@aptadpamuI agree with you. Cascadia HSR would be overkill. Faster speed service averaging 75 mph could be a solution IF ridership can rebound and exceed pre-2020 levels. There is population growth in favor of rail passenger infrastructure upgrades.
@@aptadpamu Just as in health care I think the simple way to get high speed rail built is to hire the French government to do it instead of letting our government do it. The job will get done sooner and it will actually work well.
I've taken HSR from London to Frankfurt. Walked from my hotel to the railway station, just 20 minute time for switching from Eurostar to ICE in Brussels then walked to my hotel in Frankfurt. The whole thing took just over 6 hours and it was incredible. I hate going to the airports and wasting time in the terminal, the boarding process is also painful. And business class on flights within Europe is laughable, with the same seats as economy. You get much more comfort on a high speed train.
Brighline is putting the government of California to shame. Hopefully they finish the LA to Vegas high speed rail line to prove that California's high speed rail project is failing due to its government and not the idea itself.
Like you said, turning a profit isn't really the point of high-speed rail but what often gets forgotten is that a functioning rail network reduces costs in other areas such as car infrastructure and the less directly financial cost of human lives in crashes. A large part of car marketing is safety despite them achieving the exact opposite.
34 - semi high speed trains( 160 kmph) 475-semi high speed trains by 2025(160kmph) 8 -Delhi rrts ( 200kmph) Mumbai - pune (350kmph)2025 7 main routes are proposed ( 350 kmph) India is doing great🤝, but not fast enough
Look, when the California HSR project is going to cost US$130 billion, that's a lot of money to spend. Japan took a long time to expand its Shinkansen network because of the need to run long tunnels on many routes and the hideously expensive earthquake mitigation work.
Honshu is about as long as California with 2.5x the population. Every cent spent on high speed rail in the US is basically like setting it on fire. Nobody will choose a train from nowhere to nowhere except for train enthusiasts. People will be taking self driving robotaxis to go from LA to SF long before even the first leg is finished. Once that genie is out of the bottle what little train ridership there is will evaporate.
In fact, some in Japan even question if the cost of the Tōhoku Shinkansen was worth it, especially given the ridership falls off dramatically north of Morioka and the need for very expensive tunneling between Morioka and Aomori even before the Seikan Tunnel.
@@johnsmith-cw3wo Sure, the world would be a better place if we had a lot less freedom. Like Germany for example, where everyday people wish it was 1934.
I recently took a night train from Helsinki to Kemi (it continues to Rovaniemi and Kemijärvi). It wasn't very fast, but I had enough time for a good night's sleep. It was comfortable and very affordable. Highly recommended if you want to travel from Helsinki to Lapland. Just saying that high speed isn't the only decisive factor.
I know California is footing the majority of the bill for California High-Speed rail, but I think Federal money is better spent on local light rail. I think local light rail would better serve people. It would help people get to work, be able to access services, and be able to go to events. And it would attract visitors by making it easier for visitors to get around cities with extensive light rail systems
Agreed. One selling point for CAHSR was to decrease C02 by decreasing car travel. But the vast majority of traffic congestion is traffic within the large metropolitan areas. This money is better used for local, commuter and regional mass transit.
@@richardrose2606 Yeah. I was thinking the same thing. I think that environmentalists and people who favor commuter rail over air travel believe that building inter-city rail, like CHSR, will encourage the development of local light rail. I don't know if that is official US DOT thinking, but I have heard it expressed by some. I would prefer making local light rail the higher priority
@@bradbiesecker162 Right, they're doing it backward. Local and commuter mass transit first, which would increase ridership on the inter-city HSR when it's built because people would not need to rent a car at their destination.
@@richardrose2606 @richardrose2606 And I think part of the reason HSR Is being prioritized over local light rail is a desire to keep up with other countries that already have built HSR, that somehow the US is falling behind because we don't yet have HSR. Indicative of this thinking, I suspect, is that many people when facing opposition to HSR conclude by expressing not more proof for HSR, but unbridled excitement for it and make statements like, "I can't wait to ride high speed rail."
@@richardrose2606 As much as I favor high speed rail in the right markets, I can't help but feel you're right about the desirability of spending federal transportation dollars on urban rail transit. I think a comparative cost/benefit analysis would substantiate your view.
Here is the problem in the US, it would be for city people who want to go to other cities. I’m over an hour from a major city and I have no need or want to go to a city except for maybe a few times a year and then I still have to drive over an hour anyway, I may as well just drive.
Few people realise that railways were primarily built for freight traffic, and in countries where freight traffic has deserted to road, they mostly run at a loss. For example, pre-Covid, ScotRail earned about £390M from passenger fares, advertising, rentals, and everything else, but required a subsidy of £240M. I'm a railway enthusiast, and love what Scotland has done to re-open track, open new stations, etc, but it was reported recently that in these post-Covid days, Scottish rail fares would have to double without subsidy. And that is without High Speed Rail. Actually, traffic would likely reduce so much if fares were doubled that services would have to be cut or fares tripled. I remain an optimist!
Getting your prices undercut by the airline industry is easy, given that I just recently found out how ridiculous their cheapest offers are. Granted, its probably uncomfortable and there might be some more mandatory fees that I don't know of, I recently looked up flights to London (from central Germany) for next months, and a two-way ticket came in under €40. Highspeed train? 120, one way. If I went by car, I'd be looking at about 80 per direction in fuel alone. Don't get me wrong, the ICE trains are a really nice way to travel IF they are on time, which they very often aren't and IF they aren't over-booked which they often are... but the prices are just absurd, and at least within Europe, that seems to be a common problem.
@@davidgoodnow269also many airlines have changed their buisness models to not be transportation companies but banks. Obviously they still provide flights but they make a ton of money off of their rewards/loyalty programs which are basically credit cards, and its enough for them to price their tickets such that only first class is making money and everyone and everything else is just there to fill up space/capacity on the plane.
Flordia just opened its HS Rail from Orlando to Miami. Its been open for a while to West Palm Beach but i just saw a video about it. Top speeds are still only 120mph though i think, the average speed makes it competitive with regional flights to the same destinations as Florida has some of the worst city to city traffic in the nation.
It is not HSR. Maximum speed of 125mph (~200kph) only exists in a short new segment between Cocoa and Orlando Airport and this can be considered as HSR only if it's an upgrade of existing tracks. New tracks must have a speed of, at least, ~155mph (250kph) to be considered as HSR. The segment between Cocoa and West Palm Beach supports up to 110mph (~177kph) but currently it's restricted to 90mph (~144kph). Between West Palm Beach and Miami the top speed is 79mph (~127mph). The ride from Miami to Orlando Airport takes 3h33-3h38 so it has an average speed of ~67mph - Not in any way high speed. As mentioned, the train only reaches Orlando airport, to get to the actual city you'll need to book a ride, get a taxi from the arrival area of Terminal C or take the APM to Terminal A where you'll fine a bus to the city.
I fly out of Terminal C at MCO every week as a pilot. I live in Port Saint Lucie. No station near my house, and when Vero Beach eventually gets a station I’m certain between the expense of parking in Vero and the ticket to MCO, it won’t make any sense in time or money. I call this Brightline Rail the ‘Novelty Line’
Interesting video and from what I know it is mostly accurate, just a detail: in France, it is local and regional train systems that create a deficit, with fast trains lines being the only profitable part of the national rail company. Exemples of economic successes are Paris/Lyon, Paris/ London, Paris/ Bordeau etc but these lines are for the middle class due to the cost of tickets… in order for it to work you need to connect tow rich cities ideally less than 800km away for the whole project to be profitable.
Rode many 1000 km on the high speed trains in China this year, and it's simply amazing! In Sweden we fail to build high speed, and any project is super slow and takes 20 years to complete, so I will be about 60 when the current project to my old hometown will be complete, if it gets completed since the frakking green little men and US warships and bombplanes want to occupy our lands and steal our resources by coercing approval and be afraid while the only one that can help is somehow is not diplomacy but wars... Idiot politicians.
Smaller countries have a big disadvantage for HSR and almost inevitably run into major delays and subsequent cost overruns. China is one of maybe two or three countries that can feasibly get HSR funded and completed quickly
Vande Bharat trains in India, aren't HSR trains. They run on the same tracks with slightly more speed. The true HSR track is under construction connecting Mumbai with Ahmedabad
Apparently Taiwan's HSR is step on, step off and therefore faster and easier than catching a plane with all its security, queues, waiting before and after.
@charlesbruggmann7909 I think that's how it should be everywhere. American airlines and manufacturers have a vested interest and possibly too much influence on transport.
I take short flights quite often. The thing is, it wouldn’t even take high speed rail to displace that. Even 150kmph would be enough. The current train I don’t take goes at about 100kmph 😢
Honestly, being an American citizen myself, I obviously know that I am not, nor have the ability, to speak for the populace at large. However I don’t seem to feel any urgency in demand or even desire for high speed rail. I personally don’t really have much opinion about it from one perspective or the other but here, in the United States, we don’t necessarily fit the proverbial mold so to say on any urgent need for such transportation concerns. We are more laid back in some manner, obviously having the highest GDP on Earth I am not alluding to a lack of monetary losses from a lack of such a fast paced resource to move people geographically speaking. But we have a long tradition, not long from the standpoint of existence , but rather the freedom that comes with being behind the wheel of our vehicles. We love our cars. Don’t get me wrong, rail is an can improve greatly in large metropolitan areas but some people don’t mind driving 45 minutes to work. I might say it’s more of a conceptual view that we hold dear as part of the freedoms we have enjoyed for so many years. I suppose that is why so many people try to become American citizens every single day. Regardless, we are not the only country that has a system where people can live freely. There are many others, but some are just outright absurd and the government system in those particular countries have their thumb down on practically every citizen. But I am getting way way off topic. Maybe one day we will have higher speed rail, but right now things are not as bad with the current system. Although everything needs improvement am I right?
As a german, wishing for highspeed trains feels a bit too much. I'd settle for functioning and reliable regular-speed trains where I live! Alas, the DeutscheBahn will never let anything as ambitious as punctual trains ever come to pass :/
We have high Speed Trains but unlike Japan They Share the rails with Slower trains so they have a lot of Delays. Last time i took an ICE It waited 90 Minutes in a Station because of delays of Other trains.
The trouble is that it's based on a premise that getting somewhere faster will actually make a difference and value add to something when it doesn't other than convenience !
If you can manage to get it faster and cheaper to travel between two places, like Spain for example has done, those two economic areas can get linked in a way they werent before. Businesses can reallocate employees between regions more easily so their skills are available where they are currently needed, tourism will increase due to increase in convenience of travel, and people will have less of a barrier to moving for work as its not as difficult to visit back home.
The problem with infrastructure is it starts falling apart the minute you finish building it. So expensive ongoing maintenance is needed and it gets more extensive the older the infrastructure gets as elements become increasing outdated over time.
When it comes to this kind of thing, I wonder what a video on the U.S. interstate and highway system would have looked like in the 50s. Granted, we have a lot more regulation these days for better and worse, but still.
The Interstate System started construction in the late 1950's. It's main purpose was to get heavy truck traffic off the narrow 2 lane US highways that ran thru towns and cities. The US highway system also was dangerous for travelers in automobiles due to the number of vehicles trying to pass slower traffic.
@@billwilson-es5yn I'm well aware. I meant I wonder how much would have been said about how it was so expensive, people resisting the construction because of places it would pass through, etc... We take it for granted and appreciate it now, but I expect a lot of this same stuff could have been said about it at the time.
@@BruceBoyde Everybody that lost land or was going to have the interstate in their backyard complained. Cities complained about being bypassed while other cities complained when it ran thru their undeveloped outskirts where they planned to build new housing and country clubs.
A trend that is overlooked is that regular trains become faster. New trains often can go to 200km/h by default. This is significant cheaper than real HSR.
It is not just about trains. The railway itself has to be designed to sustain high speeds. Yes, the train could reach 200 Km/h (which are not high-speed by modern standards), but the line could be damaged by it.
But can your signals and switching handle it? years ago Victoria got some trains for regional to city that could go 160km/h. most of the country track was restricted to 130km/h or below, and as soon as they hit the suburbs they got stuck behind metro trains, I believe max 80km/h (slower because of stops), as far as I know skyrail didn't add the extra tracks speed it up. 200km/h would be great, I could see all crossing needed to be removed first along with the other upgrades. Between Melbourne to Sydney, approx 950km, (1 of the most used flight paths in the world) 200km/h would be 5hrs (that's if they upgrade the track limited to 50km/h) with a couple of stops not including Canberra detour. Even one planned 250km/h in a bit over 4 hours is too long for a short trip away. Current fastest trains 320km/H = about 3+ hrs.
Too simplistic a point. Yes existing railways can be upgraded to run at higher speeds. All of Britain's trunk lines and the US East coast corridor do this... But..... The issue with this is you blend intercity with commuting and freight and there throttle capacity. The reason HS2 was being built in the UK to relieve all the Victorian rail lines which are at capacity
I live in Luxembourg, I take the High Speed train about 100 times a year to go to France... The tracks in Luxembourg support the train but only at slow speed (I think the max is at 160kph). It takes 20min for the train to go from the capital to the first french city 20km away and it does this in 20 min (60kph on average) So yes, many US states have more HSR than Luxembourg.
We need it not just because of the environment but because of air traffic congestion and safety. There are already hundreds of near misses above airports daily because of air traffic congestion. That will eventually become common collisions if we don't get high speed rail to alleviate air traffic.
@@Stand_By_For_Mind_Control The vast majority of people killed in train accidents are pedestrians or drivers who were struck by a train, this risk is greatly reduced on high-speed railways due to level crossing being avoided at all costs. When you remove deaths that are caused by road vehicles from the statistics trains tend to be safer or as safe as planes.
@@Stand_By_For_Mind_Control You completely miss the point. Today there are hundreds of near misses above airports. In the coming decades if air congestion increases as it has been those near misses will become collisions. Modernizing and replacing old rail track would prevent that and make rail traffic safer. The reason rail traffic is more dangerous is because the rail lines are outdated and just another crumbling part of US infrastructure. Not modernizing the rail system will increase both rail and air accidents. And I am more likely to die while having dinner, swimming, or walking down the street than both air or rail so that's not the point.
@@tommarney1561IKR? I've noticed humorous mispronunciations are increasingly common among a certain kind of content producers who pump out a lot of content. It's like they don't have time to bother learning the correct way to say something.
I think you really need your existing lines to be crowded to dysfunctionality (the way the Tokyo metro system used to be with its passenger pushers at the door) before the compulsion to move to high speed rail kicks in. In the U.S. and here in Australia, it's such a driving/flying culture between cities with so much infrastructure already devoted to those, that high speed rail is more a want than a need and few are in the habit of taking the train between big cities any more.
I mean, you can only dream about a Melbourne-Sydney HSR - it would involve a stupid amount of tunnelling. Canberra/Sydney/Brisbane maybe . QLD rail and Transwa already have rolling stock capable of >200km/hr and sections of track that can accommodate it, it is currently limited to 160km/hr but both have plans to go faster in the near future.
Sadly, I think this presentation confirms once and for all that high speed rail is never, ever going to be constructed down here. Melbourne doesn't even have an Airport Rail Link yet, and its Suburban Rail Loop project, as wonderful as it sounds, seems like more of a pipe dream than anything else. Also, Sydney has no suburban line to its Northern Beaches, nor a line all the way to Bondi (the line stops just a few km short at Bondi Junction). How on earth are we going to be able to fund an interstate HSR when we can't even get the city-centric shit right?
@smalltime0 Why would it involve a lot of tunneling? Much of the way is flat or only has some rolling hills. Look at the Sydney-Melbourne freeway, not a single tunnel along the route as there's no need. Even Sydney-Brisbane isn't much more hilly. Your argument makes no sense.
As a first generation NZer I have travelled on China's HSR it is wonderful, they run on time , clean and fast from my parents city of Guangzhou to central China in About 4hrs 1000kmmy wife city of Wuhan, clean ,efficient, tons of leg room , relax and enjoy the scenery. Don't bother with flying when you arrive in China 😀
Don’t forget the trillion dollars worth of debt for it. Not only do the HSRs in china require subsidies, but the interest only makes it more expensive with time. All that for what can be accomplished with a plane.
@@渡海-q2w HSR is a weakness for China, not a strength. It’s not financially viable and is a symptom of the infrastructure development corruption that is prevalent in China and the belt and road initiative.
What do you offer instead? Hwy's? Mega airports? The biggest railway terminals is way smaller than ordinary airport. One 10 cars trains can take ~600 in different classes. Meanwhile a380, the biggest passenger plane, can take only 500 passengers. If we take 800 passengers a380 in one class, yes, it has more passengers, but if we want to take more people on train we can connect 2 trains and get 1200 passengers express. Oh, i almost said about one deck train if we connect 2 double-deckers we can reach 2000 passengers in one train.
It's true that train infrastructure has a high cost, and HSR even more so. I've once made a study, and you have to count between 12 and 20 EURm per km of HSR rail (in Europe, excluding outliers like tunneling under an existing train station etc...). But, as you said, it's a well-understood technology, and it's also still being improved (new signaling, tilting trains for retrofitting existing rail, rail and rolling optimization...), so it's an interesting field and I wish it glorious days ahead. One of the "issues" that wasn't mentioned in the video: the propaganda, which has been going on for decades, that private investors only should invest in US companies. This makes it harder for the companies in that sector to raise capital, because they're not American, and thus creates the self-fulfilling prophecy of undervaluation. Indeed, companies that build rolling stock, rail-infrastructure, rail-signaling, cable-cars, operations etc... already exist, they're profitable, they're doing great work for humans and the environment. They're just not American and don't get the cultish fanboy treatment à la Tesla. For rolling stock and signaling: Alstom, Siemens Mobility, Hitachi Rail Systems, ABB, CRRC, Stadler Rail, Bombardier, Skoda Transportation, Talgo, CAF, Pesa, Kawasaki Heavy Industries, Hyundai Rotem, Thales etc... For construction and specialized infrastructure: Herrenknecht, Vinci, WeBuild, Bouygues, Garaventa-Doppelmayr, Samsung C&T, Hyunday, Lotte, CRCC, Julius Berger Nigeria, BAM, Strabag etc... For operations, there's many many: DB, SNCF, Renfe, SBB, Trenitalia, Hong Kong MTR, Delhi Metro Rail Corp, Taipei Metro, Japan Railways Group, Metro da Cidade de Mexico, Metrorail (South Africa), Cairo Metro, Namata, Addis Ababa Light Rail, Abidjan Metro etc... People currently don't invest into them cause they're not American. It's time Asia, Africa, Europe, Latam start to value what they have, and invest into real technologies of the future - comfortable, efficient, high-capacity trains (high speed or not), trams and other forms of public transport.
I have travelled on the TGV, Shinkansen and the Shanghai Maglev. All these systems work - but maybe not in a capiltalist sense. They are infrastructure, like roads and sewers. They facilitate society.
America's Amtrak Makes America Great Again.
Public transportation is the correct why our tax should go, no more war
@@Luke-hm9vhNot spending money on wars may be a theory. When in history has there not been wars going on? Apparently there are about 200 wars and conflicts now going on worldwide and America is involved in half of them.
@@davidjackson7281 "America is involved in half of them." might be the issue tbh
@@ThranduilGreenleafThis is true. Perhaps the US should turn towards isolationsim and become self-sufficient, uninvolved Fortress America and let the rest of the world defend itself from whatever. We could still profit by continuing to be the world's biggest supplier of weapons. Then we could finance all the infrastructure to our heart's desire.
Almost every single US Interstate was way over budget and usually way late. It's SOP for large infrastructure projects.
Reduce a few of the rules that companies building those Interstates have to follow and they'd be a whole lot cheaper to build, and I'm not suggesting a rollback of any safety for quality requirements, just rules like minority ownership of the companies involved and the like.
USA doesn't have TRAINS transport, they have a joke instead :D
For the cost of JUST California’s high speed rail the US can maintain the entire highway system across the country
@@Da__goat I would question the price in this case. Someone is pulling your leg really really well!
The US has the global standard for rail freight transport, passenger rail is lacking.
I am surprised at the lack of mention to Spain, which is the SECOND largest high speed train system in the world, almost doubling the French network in track length, and with some of the most advanced trains out there. It also works quite profitably, with a number of alternative operators having set up shop in Spain, driving down prices and rising use to the point where the only ones losing are the airline companies.
Spain has a population large enough to support high-speed rail in much of the country. You need a good amount of passenger patronage just to justify the high cost of high-speed rail construction on a per kilometer basis.
@@Sacto1654 the Spanish population is much smaller than the French or the German, which are the examples the video is using to show how HS rail has failed. This doesn't mean it couldn't work in a place like the US.
You are right this guy mentions Spain in the etcetera. A lot of prejudices towards my country.
@@nachodrdno; he does not mention Spain because Spain is not cool enough for him. Forget about the population.
@@feynman6625nah people forget about Spain hsr it's not that well known for some people
Most private rail lines aren't profitable on their own. If you look at Hong Kong & Japan's private metro systems, they run at huge profits because they develop the land around the stations into mixed-use communities where you can shop, live, and work. That's what actually helps make these rail lines profitable.
I really don't get why a lot of transit agencies are not allowed to venture into real estate.
Pretty land is just about the only profitable thing in Hong Kong nowadays
The government owns majority of MTRC (Hong Kong’s sole rail operator). Despite most of MTRC’s profit comes from real estate, passenger travel is still profitable. But to me its success is contributed not only by its monopoly status but also by the unique nature in Hong Kong which people rely heavily on public transport to commute and the small (in terms of track mileage) network that makes it highly efficient
"mixed-use", there's that r3tarded code. Not everyone wants to live in your 15 minute cities
その通り。
鉄道というものは単なる交通手段の一つとして存在するだけでなく、その町と密接な関係を持っている。
I have ridden both the TGV from Paris to Strasbourg and the Eurostar from London to Paris. Both were awesome and changed my opinion about HSR.
The TGV is nice and high speed rail's still a loser.
Just spend the same cash on improving existing track and rolling stock.
When your connexion time are cut in half that's good. If you want to convince people not yo take the plane you must have a strong proposition.
@@debbest8546
If only it were that simple, you’d have a great point.
It's a lot more complicated. You need dedicated rails for HSR and other rails for freight. You can't have them on the same network... if Europe or Japan allowed mixed rail... their trains would run into major issues.
Paris to London on Eurostar is worth it because there is enough passenger patronage to pay for the construction costs.
I live in France and really can't imagine this country without tgv, it would total nightmare to take slower train on route 750km (from Montpellier to Paris) which now is done in just 3,5h or planes with way smaller capacity. Already LGV to Paris is under capacity and last summer 40% of all tgv trains were fully booked. It's not about costs or difficulties, just basic life quality standard (especially with low cost operators and open access competition)
Stopped watching the channels that Simon used to host. Glad I found him again. 😅
In Germany, its a good alternative to flight if You win >10 000 € monthly and have a secretary who buys the tickets free enough.
It is slightly different in the uk in that the distances covered by HST in France that make it viable are actually more like London to Glasgow and Edinburgh, so for HST make sense it needs to be rolled out over that distance, Manchester and Birmingham are already served with fast trains that take a couple of hours to run between, Avanti express to Manchester is only 2 hours 3 mins for example
@@peterkorek-mv6rs That is what most Germans say but in my experience it really depends on HOW and WHEN you buy the tickets. They can be very cheap, if you do it correctly.
I love TGVs but what really sucks is that you always have to go via Paris with no real main station that makes it more complicated to transfer. I really hope France considers decentralising the LGVs from Paris by constructing direct tracks or by constructing a central station in Paris.
The Vande Bharat trains are not the High Speed rails being developed by India. They certainly are slightly higher speed than other trains and have better facilities but they run on the same existing network as the other trains.
A new dedicated high speed rail corridor is being built between Ahmedabad and Mumbai. It was initially expected to start by 2022 ( coinciding with 75 years of Independence); but now it has been pushed to 2027-28 timeframe. It was delayed first due to land acquisition issues and later COVID but it is still being developed
Yeah, vande bharat is semi high speed rail.
As usual, It may takes 3 decades for India to complete. It becomes obsolete by then....
@@TheKkpop1say this after 5 years
I say it will take just 5yrs, when you haven't seen the progress you shouldn't comment, the line is about 508km+
california is just 191 km under construction, got that into your head?
while cali's hsr is being built in diff phases@@TheKkpop1
Vande Bharat are IC trains no? 200kph top speed?
One correction. The Vande Bharat express was never a high speed train it’s just another train with better safety features and comfort also it runs on already existing rail network no specific new routes were constructed for that and there are already about 10+ vande bharat trains operational and are successful.The Mumbai - Ahmedabad route that you mentioned is actually a bullet train and is under construction that will be the first operational high speed train in India.
For those out of the loop on high speed rail: The seperate tracks are REALLY important. One reason is that high speed operaton requires huge safety distances, which aren't feasible on most low-speed rails with their amount of switches. Just imagine if cars were so fast and big that traffic lights may only change if the next car is still over 10 km away, because otherwise an incoming car may not halt in time and ram into the crossing traffic.
Which is also a reason why the Hyperloop is such a phenomenally stupid idea. To make the operation within a vacuum tube possible without having a leak in one place destroy the entire line, proponents are talking about sectioning the vacuum tube with pressure doors that open for incoming trains... but this cannot be done safely if the trains are actually fast.
@@T33K3SS3LCH3Nif it's an idea already on the table then China will figure it out, hyperloop sounds like a special use system where other lines may not criss cross or link in the traditional sense...
But get off and hop onto another maglev that connects to another hyperloop etc to get to your desired destination?
But I don't know what hyperloop designers are thinking as I'm not being paid to figure it out, but that's my initial thoughts on the hyperloop vacuum problem that you presented?...
Whatever the case maybe, China will figure out if it's feasible or not on a large scale before it writes it off
now there are more then 50 vande bharat trains is running in India and target is 400 by 2028
We never ask if a road is profitable, the fact that we even ask for rail is insane
Montenegro shouId have asked if that road of theirs was profitabIe.
China shouId have done the same before buiIding aII that high speed raiI to nowhere. What's their daiIy operating defict these days? 50 miI?
@@V1489Cygni The problem isn't that it isn't profitable. The majority of China's HSR passenger-kms do turn a profit. The problem is that they built too many lines that are too long or serve too few people to be profitable. That being said, it's been found that in spite of the internalized cost, the externalized benefits are enormous. The overall return on investment for the Chinese economy is calculated to be 6.5% b/c HSR economizes over air and car/bus travel, esp in a country where oil is scarce and expensive.
Why is it insane to ask? We live in the Real world.. and it takes Men & Resources to make something work and run... or is this another case of University Socialism combined with Hollywood Utopia speaking here?
@@annoyboyPictures Because of externalities
Spoiler Alert road are not profitable
As a railroad worker people have no idea how much maintenance is required to keep these running. Just building it is only half the battle.
But, compared to roads, I think it is lower.
@@shaider1982 And electric trains dont give people cancer like exhaust emissions.
@shaider1982 you have no idea. My company spends half a billion a year on just maintenance that is just track, ties, and surfacing. Signals, bridge repair, car repair and engine repair is a billion. You can triple that for hs rail.
And probably quintuple it for maglev.
@bkondrk I do know to maintain 100 miles of high speed costs the same a year as 33,000 miles of freight. But that is using their cost estimats for that rail they are trying to build in California
There is a misinformation about the Indian case . The vande Bharat train and the Mumbai-ahmedabad bullet train are completely separate projects . vande Bharat is for running semi high speed trains in existing tracks . On the other side the Mumbai-Ahmedabad bullet train line has completed it's land acquisition and will be partially operational around 2027 (hopefully 😅)
So these are two parallel projects
1. Bullet train from Ahemdabad to Mumbai is well under construction now, this is made in partership with the Japanese (320km/h):
ua-cam.com/video/aGffpOscWtI/v-deo.html&pp=ygUVZHJvbmVtYW4gYnVsbGV0IHRyYWlu
2. Upgrade of conventional 140km/h track to 180-220km/h which is being done nationwide - Vande Bharat. Indigenous
The entier India coverage is wrong as you mixed both into one and took a view on it, nice
Also why the hate for high speed rail? Covid does not make high speed rail any less legit, regardless of short term macro economcis. Really weird coevrage on this one.
Curry Curry for me as I phone call scam dumb western nations, some curry Muncher prob in a phone call center, curry curry curry.
Thanks for the clarification.
It's quite reasonable to expect this may take 3 decades for India.
stop copying it everywhere, stop crying
go see the progress video, i can bet you don't even know the total length of that corridor, it's fucking 508km, now go and check what's cali's hsr length is under construction@@TheKkpop1
The problem is not HSR, it's the ability of a country to manage a large scale infrastructure
It's not even that. It's about convincing politicians that you cannot look at it as a money-making venture at all. You must look at it the same way you view public road construction, bridges, and other state-run infrastructure. The infrastructure itself does not make you money, and often loses quite a lot of money instead. But what it does is facilitate the ongoing development of society and you recoup the costs from taxes. As your society develops, you should reasonably be able to collect more money in taxes as the income of citizens increases. The biggest problem is that these returns are not likely to be seen within a single politician's term of office, so it's seen as a wasted effort, since any expenditure without an immediate return on investment is easy to use as an attacking point by their opposition.
People who aren't impressed by HSR has clearly never lived in places with HSR.
Also the clip at the 2 minute mark is from Taiwan's 25+ year old automated light rail system that travels through the city of Taipei.
It obviously wasn't high-speed rail!
I second this statement!! As an American who lived in both japan and america for years i can completely see the benefit for HSR in the USA me driving from New york to norfolk virgina taking 8hrs to drive while taking the shinkansen from Tokyo to Osaka takes 2.5 hr along with it being more efficient!!!!
Good observation. And the high speed in Taiwan is actually very impressive.
@@sazzadhossan9851car go vroom.
@@sazzadhossan9851if you know anything about Norfolk and NYC, you'd know that this would be worse than getting in and out of the airports in those cities. Sure, you can get from one to the other faster using HSR, but what are you doing when you get there? Sitting in gridlock traffic, with an idling engine, just like everyone else. HSR isn't going to do anything to make NYC streets more driveable, and it isn't going to alleviate any of the traffic on the Monitor-Merrimack Tunnel.
Fact Check: Vande Bharat was not meant to be high speed but semi high speed. It is already operational on more than 30 routes. Mumbai-Ahmedabad is high speed rail which is already under construction scheduled to be operational by 2028. It's separate from Vande Bharat. Please check your facts!!
Indonesia just completed their first HSR, hopefully it'll be the good catalyst for more expansions of HSR in SEA region.
HSR in Indonesia is just a politically sexy project to make the President look good during election. Its expensive with little economic contribution. Solving the massive bureucratic corruption would be more useful, but just not sexy..
@@RedHanded1969In fact, since it opened last October, passengers have continued to increase. And the president has ordered phase two of construction to be carried out at the tip of the island of Java
@@RedHanded1969 I disagree with your comments.
@@RedHanded1969 2024 will be last year for jokowi be president and hsr 40 trips/day now because of high demand
@@RedHanded1969why does the president need to look good during the election if he isn't even one of the candidates.
I love just how convenient and reliable the Shinkansen network is. And looking forward to 2030, when the Hokkaido Shinkansen extension will connect Tokyo with Sapporo in a 5 hour train ride!
Its not going to be that big of a deal, the main benefit is not having to wait at shin-hakodate.
The main work is already done (the Seikan Tunnel and the gauge conversion all the way to shin-hakodate), I guess once it is finished it will be a good excuse to visit Japan and especially Sapporo/Otaru again.
They will also extend Hokuriku Shinkansen from Kanazawa to Fukui and Tsuruga by March 2024.
@@smalltime0 the trains are usually empty before they arrive to shin-hakodate, which is because the limited express to sapporo is another 4 hours added to the trip, at that point flying is just so much faster. Extending it to turn that 4 hour connection into 1 additional hour on the train will make it competitive to air travel to sapporo, not to mention that Japanese people actually like trains... Even if air travel is cheaper, hopping on the shinkansen is much more favorable to most of the people.
Now imagine if that hsr train could pull freight!
@SherrifOfNottingham adding onto what you said, one of the planned stops is in Kutchan near all the Niseko ski resorts. Niseko gets a lot of international tourists (particularly from China and Australia), so adding better connectivity to there from both Tokyo and Sapporo makes that area significantly more accessible.
Interesting that you didn't mention Turkey. The system is quickly being built and is working rather efficiently there. I know because I usually travel there for business and am fascinated by the Istanbul-Ankara line. Another line connecting the country to Europe via Edirne is almost finished and a fourth one connecting the capital with the Aegean coast is also almost finished as far as I know. The only issue there is that it's also being used for freight travel (like in Germany) so while the trains can go 300+ km/h they are limited to around 250 km/h because of this.
Unfortunately a transport project being on time, on budget, and no major issues is rare. The failures are more numerous.
@@SEAZNDragonthe more important that we talk about the examples that worked out and find out what they might have done better...
@@SEAZNDragon That is very true. Another great example (albeit on a smaller scale) is the Taiwan high speed system. This too was not mentioned in the video though. I get that it focuses on the problematic ones, but the ones that work fluently could have been mentioned, nevertheless.
I’m sure both projects will eventually get their own videos. Although if the Japan bullet train video (as well as the majority of the videos of on this channel) is any indication I’m sure there are still plenty of flaws to cover.
The Turkish rail may take a little longer since parts of it is still under construction and the recent earthquake exposing a lot of infrastructure issues in the country. There maybe an extended wait and see period for that one.
@@direnius and interestingly, the Taiwan HSR is being extended as of the moment.
Actually, on India, the Vande Bharat trains are being inteoduced as "semi-high-speed" trains which are more modern than the other existing trains in the country which, if anyone tries to look up, they'll instantly realise how outdated those older trains were and how much this upgrade was needed. They're still in the process of inteoducing more and more vabde bharat trains ofcourse.
As for the high-speed/bullet trains, there is a separate line, between Mumbai and Gujrat, that is currently under construction; and last I checked, a significant length out of the total 508 kms (planned) has already been constructed. People can look up online, including here on UA-cam, for weekly/monthly updates of that construction.
Other than this one, there are 2-3 more limes in other parts of the country that are in different phases of planning/construction/being approved.
So just wanted to point out that Vande Bharat trains are not supposed to be the high-speed/bullet trains. They're "semi-high-speed" trains. The bullet trains, for which the line(s) are under construction, will be separate for those Vande Bharat trains. Those bullet trains, as far as I know, are just supposed to be straight up Japan's Shinkansen.
One small tidbit: 508 kms have not been "constructed" yet. Just a small bit has been constructed.
@@Raj-gr6dy Yea, my bad, 508 is the total length, if I'm not mistaken.
@Raj-gr6dy Around 200 Km of the viaduct has been completed, which is longer than many HSR systems on the world. @@Raj-gr6dy
Germany had trains with the same max speed in 1929!
German steam trains hit 200kph... in 1935
@@Arltratlo good job you want a medal or something
Shoutout to Andy Byford who saved public transit in Toronto, Sydney, London, and was chairman of the MTA for two years before saying "y'all fucked NY" and left to go fix Amtrak instead
He's already fixing Amtrak and so far he is doing a good job
He’s a good apple that one
That man is a transit legend.
You can thank governor Andrew Cuomo for Byford ditching NYC. Cuomo's micromanaging is well-known for frustrating most of Byford's initiatives.
(This is the same governor who wrote a book _crowing_ about his handling of the pandemic in NY, conveniently ignoring his directive shoehorning covid patients into ill-equipped nursing homes, resulting in an estimated 13,000 senior citizen deaths.)
MTA is bad for a reason. Bcos if its good it will other cities create efficient public transport and abandon cars. Automobile & fossil fuel industry cant hv that..
Australia has been trying to get a high speed rail line built from Brisbane to Melbourne for at least 40 years, and it never gets past the planning stage before everyone inevitably decides it’s too expensive and too difficult. Then a few years later, some politician starts talking about it when there is an election and the whole thing repeats.
Australia is too big and too sparsely populated. Not worth the investment cost.
We should build it a great expense then just lease it to transurban for 200 years.
@@andrewharris3900 we're talking about inter big city hsr on the coast here, not linking every tiny town in the bush. it's only* ~460 km from melbourne to canberra, ~250 km from canberra to sydney, and ~730km from sydney to brisbane
*for reference, the paris to marseille route is almost ~700km, and the AU cities mentioned have several times higher population than many of the cities linked by hsr in france e.g. lyon and marseille on the aforementioned route
@andrewharris3900 the majority of the Australian population is concentrated on the east coast, within 100 km from the coast
@@andrewharris3900 look, no one is crazy enough to suggest an HSR from Perth to Sydney. However, an HSR line from Adelaide to Melbourne, Canberra, Sydney, and Brisbane? That's pretty much feasible.
People tend to forget why France built its first TGV line between Paris and Lyon in 1981. The new line was built to relieve pressure on the existing overcrowded classic line than ran through Dijon. Going faster was initially considered a side-benefit.
One has to take this into consideration when judging if a HSR project is worth or not.
The same thing is true in Japan. The Tokaido Shinkansen was built to handle the rapidly increasing volume of passengers that could not be carried by their narrow gauge rail system. Moreover, speed was intended to be a means of increasing rail productivity, not as a means to attract travellers to passenger trains. Moreover the new HSR system had a huge volume of business on day one of its new service in 1964. And the same thing is true of China, which was dependent on railroads before it commenced construction of its vast high speed rail system.
A big problem in the US is once you get to your destination is that to get around is to rent a car.
If it’s between major cities (and that is only place where HSR is being built) you are already where you want to be. In fact it’s a potential plus because you don’t have to deal with parking your care in a busy city adding even more costs.
There are many ways to get around in a city besides dealing with the literal worst traffic in the county.
@@AL-lh2ht Ehhh From Houston to Dallas? You've never lived in either city if you think you can get around without a car.
That's true especially in Texas or anywhere in the South. Another factor nobody is mentioning is crime that takes place on public transportation. You take your life in your own hands getting on public transport in the US.
If having to rent a car once you get to your destination city were the largest problem then no one would travel by airplane
It's true. We've invested about $20 trillion in roads since Ike had his big idea, and something like $70 trillion in cars, but almost nothing in comparison for any other ground trasport. That means you pretty much have to drive.
Cars are usually more expensive for the society and way worse for the environment.
But outrageously profitable for the ultra-rich.
There’s a mistake in the regarding the Indian rails. Vande Bharat and the HSR are two separate, unrelated projects.
HSR is the bullet train line from Mumbai to Ahmedabad that’s been plagued with land acquisition issues. The entire line will be on a new elevated track (or tunnel).
Vande Bharat is a semi high speed rail that runs on existing rail tracks. Those have been getting commissioned pretty frequently. A lot of these trains are running below max speed because they require track upgrades (ie smoother banked turns,etc) first. It’s completely separate from the HSR network
Right now, every single one of Italy's railways are being upgraded to support high-speed trains in a pinch.
Not upgraded but new lines being built. If you don't build new lines then your not helping with capacity.
@@bubba842 I was less than clear.
On one side, Italy had the lines reserved for high speed trains, and is currently building a new one for Lyon in France. On the other, the legacy lines are being upgraded to the same standard so that if a high speed line is for some reason damaged or broken (as it happened a few years ago on the Milan-Bologna high speed line) the damaged portion can be bypassed in a pinch.
Vande Bharat Trains are running on existing tracks which are currently being upgraded.
And Bullet Train has a completely different line which tracks are currently under construction and to be opened in 2027.
You got Vande Bharat (semi-high speed on current existing tracks) mixed with Japanese Bullet Trains (HSR) mixed, didn't expect this. Both are different projects, Vande Bharat is an upgrade of exisiting infrastructure while HSR's will connect major cities only on newly constructed dedicated tracks.
Yes, the oil and car lobby is powerful. That is why high speed train struggles.
It's not just them.
Take a look at any proposed HSR in the US and look at whose funding the opposition. In almost every case, Southwest Airlines is a funder. Southwest makes thier money on high volume short haul flights-the kind of flights that HSR kills off.
Edit: should have kept watching.
A train ride from Dalls, TX to Orlando, FL takes almost five days, thanks to all the stops along the way. Meanwhile, driving the same distance in a car can be done in 18 hours.
It isn't about lobbyists, you dunce. It's about time and comfort. If I don't have to spend days on end, trapped in a train car with people I don't know, I'm not doing it.
Beyond that, trains are limited in their mobility. Why would I drive to a trains station, take a train ride that lasts for days, just to rent a car and drive to my actual destination? Why not drive myself, or take a plane that gets me there in mere hours?
Trains didn't become the main form of travel in North America because the US and Canada are too large, and have population centers too spread out, for rail to be a viable solution.
Even the fastest bullet train is still extremely limited, when compared to the benefits of air and automobile travel.
@@SkunkApe407 NOOOOOOO, the "america is too large" arguement, it's over.
I live in a town of 6000 people and our small rural train station is in walking distance of practically everyone despite being mostly low density housing, and that rail network can take you anywhere in the country at faster/same speed as a car depending on where you want to go.
It's possible if you don't pave 1 mile wide roads and car parks that are completely hostile to people outside of cars, but unfortunately in America, trains were seen as antiquated by the 50's and decided to tear down the majority of infrastructure that BUILT America.
How do you think Americans were able to expand into the interior in the 1800s without cars?
Your arguement is the same as if I had said, "look, this road has potholes in and it fucked my suspension, roads are worthless!!! why do we keep building them??" while neglecting the fact that investment, planning, and apathy has lead to such conditions to take place. Things are only shit for a reason.
@@blazikem your hicktown argument is irrelevant when talking about an actual city. Airports and train stations tend to fall OUTSIDE the city limits.
I get it. Small town, bad education. You backwoods folk don't do too well with reality. That's why it's small towns like yours that keep the Alt Right and Klan in business.
@@blazikem just to make this very clear for you, I worked for many years as a Land Surveyor. I can tell you, from professional experience, that rail will not ever work as the primary mode of transport in the US. People like you will continue to chase pipe dreams for eternity, but reality will never change. Rail is only viable in places where population density is much higher, with urban centers much closer together. You're an imbecile if you think otherwise.
The issue with transportation projects is that most people who pay for them don't see immediate benefits, and it can take many years for the results to show. This often leads to political debates because nobody wants to fund something that doesn't seem to benefit them right away, and politicians focus on short-term gains.
I don't know where you live but here in the US maintenance is never done adequately so you have to get the money back before the system breaks down. We also tend to build projects in places where there's no chance that they'll ever be profitable but they'll make jobs for some local boss and will have to be subsidized for s long as they last. That way more money can be skimmed off the top.
This is where China and India have an advantage, they can procure funding for the entire project and then build it a lot faster and cheaper. India hasnt completed its first line yet but work is proceeding way faster than on projects like California HSR or the HS2 in the UK. China meanwhile has left the rest of the world in the dust with HSR. Also of course these countries have a ton of corridors that are very viable for HSR because of their network of massive cities.
I've been an avid follower of your channel for quite some time now, and I must admit that I've always appreciated the in-depth and informative content you create. Your ability to shed light on various aspects of global infrastructure projects, including high-speed rail networks, has been truly enlightening.
However, I couldn't help but notice a significant omission in your recent video on high-speed rail networks around the world, particularly the absence of the Indonesian bullet train project. I must say that I found this omission rather perplexing, and it raised concerns about the fairness and balance of your content.
The Indonesian high-speed rail project is a significant infrastructure undertaking, and its exclusion from your video seemed to perpetuate a certain bias. While it's true that Chinese companies have a notable role in this project, it doesn't mean that the entire endeavor should be discounted or overlooked, especially when discussing high-speed rail systems worldwide.
In the interest of presenting a more comprehensive and unbiased view of high-speed rail development, it's crucial to include a project like the Indonesian bullet train. It not only reflects the significant progress that Indonesia is making in the realm of transportation but also demonstrates the global impact and influence of high-speed rail networks. Furthermore, as responsible content creators and educators, it's essential to provide accurate and inclusive information to your audience.
I understand that it might be challenging to cover all projects comprehensively due to the limitations of video duration, but this is precisely why it's crucial to exercise diligence in selecting the projects you do cover. Including diverse examples from various regions, even when they have significant Chinese involvement, can help mitigate concerns about bias and offer your viewers a more balanced perspective.
I encourage you to revisit this issue in a future video or, at the very least, acknowledge the omission and explain the reasons behind it. This transparency and willingness to address concerns can go a long way in maintaining the trust of your viewers and ensuring that your channel continues to be a reliable source of information.
I hope you'll consider these points, and I look forward to seeing more content that provides a fair and comprehensive view of global high-speed rail developments. Your work has been incredibly valuable, and it would be a shame to see it tainted by perceived biases.
Thank you for your attention, and I look forward to your future content
It's always the same with high speed rail: The introduction is long and painful, but everyone forgets about that after a year because the results are awesome.
And it's usually the same with highways: The construction overruns its time and financial budgets even more, and the result is meh.
I’ve been on that Acela line in the US plenty of times and I had no idea it was even considered HSR! It moves at a very average pace for most of the trip and gets delayed often 😢
The Acela is NOT an HSR. It's not even semi-high-speed. The rolling stock is only rated at a maximum of 125 mph and the tracks are rated for 90 mph in most places with some still having a maximum of 70 mph. There is one short stretch where they do go over 100 mph. Sometimes. Britain had the HS125 Inter City trains running at 125 mph back in the 1970s! Fifty years ago!!!
High-speed railway lines are limited to dedicated lines with maximum speed over 300 km/h (185 mph), while semi-high-speed rail can be mixed-use lines with maximum speed ranged in 200 km/h (125 mph)-300 km/h (185 mph).
On my last trip to Europe I had breakfast in London, popped over to Paris for a lunch meeting and was back in London for dinner that evening. I've also enjoyed the Chinese train service too. Around 40 Shanghai to Beijing high speed G trains run each day. The distance between is these two cities is 1,318 kilometers (819 miles). The travel time is 4.5 - 6.5 hours and the lowest cost is CNY 553 - 667 (USD 77 - 93) for a second class seat, which are far more comfortable that any Amtrak seat. They are about to increase the speed for some trains so that time will come dorm to 3.5 hours.
At that current speed that would mean you could travel from LA to San Francisco AND BACK in even less time!
@@philipgrice1026 If referring to the project California started a few years ago, it now looks like it's going to run out of money way before they can complete even 1/3rd of it. It's both way over budget and in addition the California exodus hit during Covid which means there's not as much future population as projected to spread the cost to. Those cities were basically too far apart; they either should have picked San Diego to LA or alternately Sacramento to San Jose instead as a pilot. (An even better idea would have been for California to wait for a pair of cities in the US North East along Acela to be upgraded to actual HSR first.)
@@philipgrice1026 With a 71:23 gear ratio, the Acela is designed with a top speed of 165 mph (266 km/h) and reaches a maximum speed of 150 mph (240 km/h) in regular service, but only on 40 miles or so of its route.
Wow, thanks so much for the massively informative reply! That's honestly so interesting. I take the train from Philly to Boston pretty regularly and it takes 6-8 hours! I thought that didn't quite sound like high-speed rail.@@philipgrice1026
@@philipgrice1026 it is hugh speed rail, an upgraded high speed line is an existing line thats been upgraded to 125 mph or over, and only one stretch of the line needs to meet this requirement for it to qualify
I recently took HSR in both Japan and Taiwan. The Taiwan HSR follows the Japanese te technology but was about 1/3 cost per ticket. Both are fabulous systems.
maybe ticket price is affected by per capita income?
@@mudit1 No, bcuz Taiwan enjoys higher per capita GDP than Japan. And Singapore's average after-tax income is 6X higher than the US average. And the average savings of a singaporean is 10,000X higher than the average American's savings. And while the US government is $300-trillion in debt, Singapore has a net surplus of $7-trillion
Taiwans is strange. its a mshmash of Japan and Europe
@@mudit1 When something is cheaper than operating cost, it's usually funded by something else...like tax or other revenue sources.
Typical opinion of an American: We can't do it, so the rest of the world won't be able to do it either. And if they do, it's a failure.
He's a Brit. HSR2 has been changed from a hope to a failure by a few successive governments' wavering commitment.
A megaprojects on how the French built their TGVs and made a success of it would be good.
This was part of the previous video on high speed rail that Simon made that he mentioned during this video. Unfortunately he didn't provide the link to that video.
By injecting ridiculous amounts of tax dollars, disproportionately collected from high income earners.
@@diggernash1 In other words, from the same people who make money from investing in it! So they get back more than what they gave in taxes!
@vernicethompson4825 What? We may purchase some government bonds as a hedge against poor market performance, but that is definitely not a money maker. Even with the US's lower top tax rate; every dollar not paid into taxes is effective a 35% rate of return. Please point me to investments that average 35% and I will be modifying my entire portfolio. I'm happy to make 9% on average.
@@diggernash1 You are mistaken.
1: The LGV construction cost was mainly covered by income from ticket sales. Income from the LGV access charges have already paid off the construction costs of LN 1 to 5 and Ile de France bypass. They continue to bet quite high in order to subsidize the maintenance of the conventional network.
2: In regard to tax, income tax which is collected from high earners is a small share of government budget. Sale tax paid by everyone is the big earner. The average amount directed towards the TGV has been about $7 per citizen and per year, a sum considered to be pocket change in France.
Recently took the train from Dalian to Beijing. Worked well.
Also taken the Lausanne - Paris TGV many times over the years.
I just came from China, and zooming at 305kph on both bullet train and maglev is amazing! 🤩
I hope you were in either business or first class as in economy the loud voices and smell of instant noodles is too much.😂
The Maglev goes up to 431km/h. I've been on it. Crazy fast.
Stop lying
@@The_king567 lying about what lmao
@@asdkotable trains
Hyperloop is DEAD.
Hyperloop is a joke. Too small and not efficient enough
it was never alive in the first place imo. It was always a bad idea.
There are many things that have been declared "DEAD" in the past. And that is easy to understand. With not only existing tech but any tech that is obvious based on existing tech being impractical, it's easy to see there is no way something is happening soon. Humans going to the moon, SSTO rockets, electric cars, artificial intelligence, etc. Hyperloops aren't happening for a decade, for LOTS of reasons. But don't bet there won't be advances that make them make sense in 2050.
The only reason anyone ever bring up the zombie corps of infant hyperloop is to cluster it with maglev to be able to ignore the maglev facts.
Where did you hear that?
Forget high-speed rail for a second, just the regular passenger train going from Tampa to Orlando would be fantastical.😂
Beautiful train on the thumbail! 😍
I do hope HSR gets rid of all its flaws 1 day
It’s already happening, as a solution they are getting rid of the HSR itself.
It doesn't really have problems so much as certain characteristics that make it better suited for countries that are good at high tech infrastructure projects - something the U.S. (and U.K. and Aus) are really not good at.
Lost me when the ridiculous Hyperloop concept was mentioned.
I hear some of the costs of building high speed rail, like California HSR or the one in the UK, and think how much conventional rail and mass transit could be built for the same sums.
Three words: Melbourne, Sydney, Brisbane. The first two are currently one of the busiest flight paths in the world and the third ... well you are on a roll!
I've travelled the Shinkansen trains many many MANY times in japan, love them but to be honest here in Australia where I live I doubt even the Melbourne to Sydney High Speed Rail project will ever get off the ground BUT I'd really appreciate "fast enough" rail in its place (and a lot of other places) something significantly quicker than coach buses without needing to be bullet train fast something like say Japan's Special Rapid trains running 130~160kph
Now see, that would actually make sense.
Aussies like to talk the walk for years and years, but nothing gets done in the end...currently the state governments in Victoria and NSW are nearly bankrupt, they have no money to fund such ultra expensive and low profit projects. The route from Melbourne to Sydney could easily cost 200 billion dollars.
Support is high in the US for the idea of more rail because the idea is free. Support is lower for the actual rail projects because they cost money and get bad press.
Never going to have one for a good reason
The Vande Bharat is a semi high speed train. On paper it can reach 200 but is only operated at 160. The bullet train project is entirely different from Vande bhatat trains.
Thank Simon for giving us " the bad news first" on High-speed Rail projects, pointing out the initial problems of high cost , land acquisition, etc, but in the end giving a stiriring summary of all its benefits. As far as profitable operation goes, there must be potential 😊or private company Brightline in the U.S wouldn't have recently opened up a busy thriving High-speed rail line Florida.An example of there's proof in the pudding!
Years ago on the US Northeast corridor high speed trains were touted. I do believe they were even purchased . It was found that the carriages needed to tilt in turns but the rails were too close together. It amazed me at the time this did not seem to be known or somehow it was going to be fixed. Currently there will be massive upgrades to this corridor which, hopefully, will facilitate high speed trains between major cities like Boston, NYC and Washington DC.
As someone who enjoyed HSR in Japan, it's nice, but as someone who lives in the US in a country area, it's not really feasible for most of here. Especially for daily travel. One could say it's a bit of a pipe dream to think that it's even remotely feasible for most of the country. And handwaving profitability isn't going to suddenly make them not be giant money sinks.
Most of the country sure. But DC-Baltimore-Philly-NYC-Boston is probably one of the most feasible corridors in the world. San Francisco LA is also feasible though certainly not as profitable due to the lower population density and larger distances.
One point about Southwest Airlines and HSR in the 80s. At that time, because of the Wright Amendment, Southwest was not allowed to fly out of Love Field to anywhere outside Texas, NM, OK, and LA. Wright was trying to basically kill off Love Field in favor for DFW. Had high speed rail cut into their Texas routes it might have been the end of Southwest. So they were trying to survive in an environment where the government already had their hand on the scales.
Here in Texas, HSR seems to make so much sense! Having recently driven the 5 1/2 hours from Ft. Worth to San Antonio makes it (almost) worth the price of airfare. HSR would be even better. However, in a recent news report, I was surprised to see that most of the opposition was from farmers either afraid of losing their property or in some cases (where the tracks would be elevated) afraid of how the noise would affect their livestock. I would have expected more opposition from communities that have invested heavily in "traveller support" but while that was noted, did not seem to be a big concern.
Dear Simon, Uh-cell-uh....not Ah-keel-ah (Acela) 😂😂😂😂 Still love ya and the knowledge you bring😊
I'm from India and Vande Bharat Express was never introduced as a High Speed Train. It was the train to modernise the existing network and increase the speeds up to 200 Kmph. It's marketed as a Semi high speed train. Track upgradations are going on for this. India has an entirely different High speed rail system under construction which uses Japan's Shinkansen trains. The progress of this project is updated monthly by "National High Speed Rail Corporation Limited" (NHSRCL)'s UA-cam Channel. Anyone can see it.
I'm a big fan of fast rail - especially as a way to ease in to the more complex HSR projects. Going fast rail first is a smart move.
You got it wrong Vande Bharat and Mumbai Ahmedabad bullet train are two different projects. Vande Bharat is a semi-high speed rail meant to run on existing lines with max speed of around 200Kmph where as bullet trains will all be fresh tracks.
"The United States has one high speed line. The Akeela Train"... The what?... Oh, he means Acela (ahk-sell-uh, like the first bit of "accelerate").
Maybe he’s thinking of the wolf leader Akela?
people say uh-sell-uh. no ahk
While Luxembourg has a TGV service to parts of France, there is no high-speed rail within the country. They’re building a dedicated line to connect with France, but as far as I know it will have a design speed of 160 km/h.
Personally, i don't even think the notion of HSR turning a profit should be considered on the table. Anyone who asks how it can be profitable should be laughed out of the room, because they're never going to be a source of viable information.
I live in the US and I would settle for inter-city/state rail, high speed or not.
Most under 1000 km / 600 mile flights should be replaced with fast passenger rail
Gross
That already exists in the Northeast and Midwest as Amtrak has a pretty good network for those regions.
As an Indian and avid rail traveller it makes me feel proud to see the mention of Vande Bharat in this video. I have travelled in Madgaon-Mumbai Vande Bharat and the train is no less than a marvel although little far from world class. More routes have been launched and with more classes too. As a whole it looks really promising. 5:48
It's a semi high speed train but this youtuber saying it as High speed train which is misinformation
uhmm why not mention that planes in US is also heavily subsidized ? clearly a biased idea that trains have to be profitable when the airline companies never could ?
Hi There, we in Croatia with our national railways do not have these worries. We are still stuck in early 20th century wishing to raise our average railway speed from astonishing 58.2 km/ hour :D
well you are coolest slavs instead..
The biggest enemy of HSR in the EU are the total lack of taxes on kerosine fuel .... and subsidies on them at the same time.
this
and HSR is a part of INFRASTRUCTURE whats purpose is to SERVE and not to make profit.
With a trains, you can book a ticket for 20€ 2 month ahead, or 2 minutes before departure for 100€. Non of them will ruin you financially. But try to do it with airplanes. Also, theres no airplane on routs, what are not profitable. You live there or want to go there? then fuck you - no travelling for you.
Add a very powerful car manufacturers lobby in Germany, a very powerful freighter lobby in Germany that both block rail and high speed rail development into the equation.
Well that and when they want to put the rails through your house.
@@stusue9733
funny, theres no problems, when gov extends 10 line high way to 12 lines
@@stusue9733 in EU they pay you and the rest of your property gets more valuable afterwards if it got a better transit. If it is just a viaduct crossing your farmland, then you don't loose much in comparison to what you get paid.
The first TGV locomotive was supposed to use a gas turbine locomotive. But we were in the oil crisis in the 70's, and then came the Mesmer plan: nuclear reactors started to grow like mushrooms. It was decided to swith to an electric locomotive, and it was done fairly easily.
Actually the states of Washington and Oregon and the province of British Columbia are seriously considering a Portland-Seattle-Vancouver high speed rail line. Given how much travel there are between these cities in the air where airports are at capacity and on the highways that badly need expanding I think the region is ideal for true (300 kph) high speed rail. The biggest challenges are bureaucracy, especially as two countries are involved and the rapidly increasing cost of land in the area. However recently the project has started to gain momentum again but even the most optimistic schedules don't see anything operating before 2040 at the earliest.
A system like Brightline would best serve the PNW and could be operatonal by 2030 and faster than a car.
SoundTrasit, the Seattle area light rail system is behind schedule and grossly over budget even with cuts in its planned network. Whatever amount they tell you a HSR system from Portland to Vancouver, BC will cost, double it, then double it again.
@@aptadpamuI agree with you. Cascadia HSR would be overkill. Faster speed service averaging 75 mph could be a solution IF ridership can rebound and exceed pre-2020 levels. There is population growth in favor of rail passenger infrastructure upgrades.
@@aptadpamu Just as in health care I think the simple way to get high speed rail built is to hire the French government to do it instead of letting our government do it. The job will get done sooner and it will actually work well.
Thank you, Simon. High-speed rail is the way to go right now.
It's not. It's a terrible bad idea
It’s a great idea! You think building roads is more cost effective?
@@Spaceman719 Well that depends .. but even if it isn´t, roads isn´t the only option.
@@matsv201where are you from?
@@casnub5484 why would that matter.
I've taken HSR from London to Frankfurt. Walked from my hotel to the railway station, just 20 minute time for switching from Eurostar to ICE in Brussels then walked to my hotel in Frankfurt. The whole thing took just over 6 hours and it was incredible. I hate going to the airports and wasting time in the terminal, the boarding process is also painful. And business class on flights within Europe is laughable, with the same seats as economy. You get much more comfort on a high speed train.
I love the trains in Japan. They are fast, reliable, affordable and just about everywhere. The high-speed trains are the best I've ever been on.
Meh...
They are as you say in the big cities, but the moment you step out of Tokyo, Osaka, Nagoya and the like a car is
Spain gets similar speeds but with like 3 or 4 times lower fares, so I wouldnt say its that affordable.
Welded rail only on High Speed lines? No sir: Standard and widespread practice where track is replaced, in the UK
Brighline is putting the government of California to shame.
Hopefully they finish the LA to Vegas high speed rail line to prove that California's high speed rail project is failing due to its government and not the idea itself.
Indonesia completed WHOOSH🇲🇨😁
Shoutout to Morroco achieving the first line of Africa!
Pretty sure South Africa did
Like you said, turning a profit isn't really the point of high-speed rail but what often gets forgotten is that a functioning rail network reduces costs in other areas such as car infrastructure and the less directly financial cost of human lives in crashes. A large part of car marketing is safety despite them achieving the exact opposite.
34 - semi high speed trains( 160 kmph)
475-semi high speed trains by 2025(160kmph)
8 -Delhi rrts ( 200kmph)
Mumbai - pune (350kmph)2025
7 main routes are proposed ( 350 kmph)
India is doing great🤝, but not fast enough
Brightline is now 200 kmph.
Look, when the California HSR project is going to cost US$130 billion, that's a lot of money to spend. Japan took a long time to expand its Shinkansen network because of the need to run long tunnels on many routes and the hideously expensive earthquake mitigation work.
Honshu is about as long as California with 2.5x the population. Every cent spent on high speed rail in the US is basically like setting it on fire. Nobody will choose a train from nowhere to nowhere except for train enthusiasts. People will be taking self driving robotaxis to go from LA to SF long before even the first leg is finished. Once that genie is out of the bottle what little train ridership there is will evaporate.
@@vimmentors6747 oh God... another libertarian Elon Fanboy.
US $130 billion😲 just for 1300km hsr route?
In fact, some in Japan even question if the cost of the Tōhoku Shinkansen was worth it, especially given the ridership falls off dramatically north of Morioka and the need for very expensive tunneling between Morioka and Aomori even before the Seikan Tunnel.
@@johnsmith-cw3wo Sure, the world would be a better place if we had a lot less freedom. Like Germany for example, where everyday people wish it was 1934.
I recently took a night train from Helsinki to Kemi (it continues to Rovaniemi and Kemijärvi). It wasn't very fast, but I had enough time for a good night's sleep. It was comfortable and very affordable. Highly recommended if you want to travel from Helsinki to Lapland.
Just saying that high speed isn't the only decisive factor.
I know California is footing the majority of the bill for California High-Speed rail, but I think Federal money is better spent on local light rail. I think local light rail would better serve people. It would help people get to work, be able to access services, and be able to go to events. And it would attract visitors by making it easier for visitors to get around cities with extensive light rail systems
Agreed. One selling point for CAHSR was to decrease C02 by decreasing car travel. But the vast majority of traffic congestion is traffic within the large metropolitan areas. This money is better used for local, commuter and regional mass transit.
@@richardrose2606 Yeah. I was thinking the same thing. I think that environmentalists and people who favor commuter rail over air travel believe that building inter-city rail, like CHSR, will encourage the development of local light rail. I don't know if that is official US DOT thinking, but I have heard it expressed by some. I would prefer making local light rail the higher priority
@@bradbiesecker162
Right, they're doing it backward. Local and commuter mass transit first, which would increase ridership on the inter-city HSR when it's built because people would not need to rent a car at their destination.
@@richardrose2606 @richardrose2606 And I think part of the reason HSR Is being prioritized over local light rail is a desire to keep up with other countries that already have built HSR, that somehow the US is falling behind because we don't yet have HSR. Indicative of this thinking, I suspect, is that many people when facing opposition to HSR conclude by expressing not more proof for HSR, but unbridled excitement for it and make statements like, "I can't wait to ride high speed rail."
@@richardrose2606 As much as I favor high speed rail in the right markets, I can't help but feel you're right about the desirability of spending federal transportation dollars on urban
rail transit. I think a comparative cost/benefit analysis would substantiate your view.
Here is the problem in the US, it would be for city people who want to go to other cities. I’m over an hour from a major city and I have no need or want to go to a city except for maybe a few times a year and then I still have to drive over an hour anyway, I may as well just drive.
Few people realise that railways were primarily built for freight traffic, and in countries where freight traffic has deserted to road, they mostly run at a loss. For example, pre-Covid, ScotRail earned about £390M from passenger fares, advertising, rentals, and everything else, but required a subsidy of £240M. I'm a railway enthusiast, and love what Scotland has done to re-open track, open new stations, etc, but it was reported recently that in these post-Covid days, Scottish rail fares would have to double without subsidy. And that is without High Speed Rail. Actually, traffic would likely reduce so much if fares were doubled that services would have to be cut or fares tripled. I remain an optimist!
Getting your prices undercut by the airline industry is easy, given that I just recently found out how ridiculous their cheapest offers are. Granted, its probably uncomfortable and there might be some more mandatory fees that I don't know of, I recently looked up flights to London (from central Germany) for next months, and a two-way ticket came in under €40. Highspeed train? 120, one way. If I went by car, I'd be looking at about 80 per direction in fuel alone. Don't get me wrong, the ICE trains are a really nice way to travel IF they are on time, which they very often aren't and IF they aren't over-booked which they often are... but the prices are just absurd, and at least within Europe, that seems to be a common problem.
Airlines are cheap to fly on because of government subsidies, 60% and up!
@@davidgoodnow269also many airlines have changed their buisness models to not be transportation companies but banks. Obviously they still provide flights but they make a ton of money off of their rewards/loyalty programs which are basically credit cards, and its enough for them to price their tickets such that only first class is making money and everyone and everything else is just there to fill up space/capacity on the plane.
Flordia just opened its HS Rail from Orlando to Miami. Its been open for a while to West Palm Beach but i just saw a video about it. Top speeds are still only 120mph though i think, the average speed makes it competitive with regional flights to the same destinations as Florida has some of the worst city to city traffic in the nation.
It is not HSR.
Maximum speed of 125mph (~200kph) only exists in a short new segment between Cocoa and Orlando Airport and this can be considered as HSR only if it's an upgrade of existing tracks. New tracks must have a speed of, at least, ~155mph (250kph) to be considered as HSR. The segment between Cocoa and West Palm Beach supports up to 110mph (~177kph) but currently it's restricted to 90mph (~144kph).
Between West Palm Beach and Miami the top speed is 79mph (~127mph).
The ride from Miami to Orlando Airport takes 3h33-3h38 so it has an average speed of ~67mph - Not in any way high speed.
As mentioned, the train only reaches Orlando airport, to get to the actual city you'll need to book a ride, get a taxi from the arrival area of Terminal C or take the APM to Terminal A where you'll fine a bus to the city.
I fly out of Terminal C at MCO every week as a pilot. I live in Port Saint Lucie. No station near my house, and when Vero Beach eventually gets a station I’m certain between the expense of parking in Vero and the ticket to MCO, it won’t make any sense in time or money. I call this Brightline Rail the ‘Novelty Line’
Lmfao 😅 😂😂. Pathetic
@@AL5520so what it’s still a high speed rail get over it
Interesting video and from what I know it is mostly accurate, just a detail: in France, it is local and regional train systems that create a deficit, with fast trains lines being the only profitable part of the national rail company. Exemples of economic successes are Paris/Lyon, Paris/ London, Paris/ Bordeau etc but these lines are for the middle class due to the cost of tickets… in order for it to work you need to connect tow rich cities ideally less than 800km away for the whole project to be profitable.
It appears to be riddled with inaccuracies. Not really surprising TBH.
The Himalayan snowpiercer has shown to not only be highly profitable, but also capable of sustaining life on it's yearlong mission around the planet.
Rode many 1000 km on the high speed trains in China this year, and it's simply amazing! In Sweden we fail to build high speed, and any project is super slow and takes 20 years to complete, so I will be about 60 when the current project to my old hometown will be complete, if it gets completed since the frakking green little men and US warships and bombplanes want to occupy our lands and steal our resources by coercing approval and be afraid while the only one that can help is somehow is not diplomacy but wars... Idiot politicians.
Smaller countries have a big disadvantage for HSR and almost inevitably run into major delays and subsequent cost overruns. China is one of maybe two or three countries that can feasibly get HSR funded and completed quickly
Vande Bharat trains in India, aren't HSR trains. They run on the same tracks with slightly more speed. The true HSR track is under construction connecting Mumbai with Ahmedabad
Apparently Taiwan's HSR is step on, step off and therefore faster and easier than catching a plane with all its security, queues, waiting before and after.
@Goalsplus
It takes just over 3 hours by TGV from either Geneva or Lausanne to Paris (not quite 550km. Faster and less hassle than taking the plane.
The host did not acknowledge the Taiwan High-Speed Rail, which has been operating, without a fatality, at 300 kmh, since 2007.
@charlesbruggmann7909 I think that's how it should be everywhere. American airlines and manufacturers have a vested interest and possibly too much influence on transport.
I take short flights quite often. The thing is, it wouldn’t even take high speed rail to displace that. Even 150kmph would be enough. The current train I don’t take goes at about 100kmph 😢
160km/h is the standard for regional rail here in Germany (except for hilly areas and inside cities)...
Honestly, being an American citizen myself, I obviously know that I am not, nor have the ability, to speak for the populace at large. However I don’t seem to feel any urgency in demand or even desire for high speed rail.
I personally don’t really have much opinion about it from one perspective or the other but here, in the United States, we don’t necessarily fit the proverbial mold so to say on any urgent need for such transportation concerns.
We are more laid back in some manner, obviously having the highest GDP on Earth I am not alluding to a lack of monetary losses from a lack of such a fast paced resource to move people geographically speaking. But we have a long tradition, not long from the standpoint of existence , but rather the freedom that comes with being behind the wheel of our vehicles. We love our cars. Don’t get me wrong, rail is an can improve greatly in large metropolitan areas but some people don’t mind driving 45 minutes to work. I might say it’s more of a conceptual view that we hold dear as part of the freedoms we have enjoyed for so many years. I suppose that is why so many people try to become American citizens every single day. Regardless, we are not the only country that has a system where people can live freely. There are many others, but some are just outright absurd and the government system in those particular countries have their thumb down on practically every citizen.
But I am getting way way off topic. Maybe one day we will have higher speed rail, but right now things are not as bad with the current system. Although everything needs improvement am I right?
As a german, wishing for highspeed trains feels a bit too much. I'd settle for functioning and reliable regular-speed trains where I live! Alas, the DeutscheBahn will never let anything as ambitious as punctual trains ever come to pass :/
Right? It's not reasonable to expect a rail network to go from coal to hsr in a decade...baby steps is the way to go 😊
except their regional trains are pretty punctual. Still alot of improvement necessary overall but the majority of trains are punctual.
Dont you guys already have HSR?
Germany has high speed trains
We have high Speed Trains but unlike Japan They Share the rails with Slower trains so they have a lot of Delays. Last time i took an ICE It waited 90 Minutes in a Station because of delays of Other trains.
The trouble is that it's based on a premise that getting somewhere faster will actually make a difference and value add to something when it doesn't other than convenience !
If you can manage to get it faster and cheaper to travel between two places, like Spain for example has done, those two economic areas can get linked in a way they werent before. Businesses can reallocate employees between regions more easily so their skills are available where they are currently needed, tourism will increase due to increase in convenience of travel, and people will have less of a barrier to moving for work as its not as difficult to visit back home.
The problem with infrastructure is it starts falling apart the minute you finish building it. So expensive ongoing maintenance is needed and it gets more extensive the older the infrastructure gets as elements become increasing outdated over time.
When it comes to this kind of thing, I wonder what a video on the U.S. interstate and highway system would have looked like in the 50s. Granted, we have a lot more regulation these days for better and worse, but still.
The Interstate System started construction in the late 1950's. It's main purpose was to get heavy truck traffic off the narrow 2 lane US highways that ran thru towns and cities. The US highway system also was dangerous for travelers in automobiles due to the number of vehicles trying to pass slower traffic.
@@billwilson-es5yn I'm well aware. I meant I wonder how much would have been said about how it was so expensive, people resisting the construction because of places it would pass through, etc... We take it for granted and appreciate it now, but I expect a lot of this same stuff could have been said about it at the time.
@@BruceBoyde Everybody that lost land or was going to have the interstate in their backyard complained. Cities complained about being bypassed while other cities complained when it ran thru their undeveloped outskirts where they planned to build new housing and country clubs.
A trend that is overlooked is that regular trains become faster. New trains often can go to 200km/h by default. This is significant cheaper than real HSR.
It is not just about trains. The railway itself has to be designed to sustain high speeds. Yes, the train could reach 200 Km/h (which are not high-speed by modern standards), but the line could be damaged by it.
But can your signals and switching handle it? years ago Victoria got some trains for regional to city that could go 160km/h. most of the country track was restricted to 130km/h or below, and as soon as they hit the suburbs they got stuck behind metro trains, I believe max 80km/h (slower because of stops), as far as I know skyrail didn't add the extra tracks speed it up.
200km/h would be great, I could see all crossing needed to be removed first along with the other upgrades.
Between Melbourne to Sydney, approx 950km, (1 of the most used flight paths in the world) 200km/h would be 5hrs (that's if they upgrade the track limited to 50km/h) with a couple of stops not including Canberra detour. Even one planned 250km/h in a bit over 4 hours is too long for a short trip away. Current fastest trains 320km/H = about 3+ hrs.
Too simplistic a point. Yes existing railways can be upgraded to run at higher speeds. All of Britain's trunk lines and the US East coast corridor do this... But.....
The issue with this is you blend intercity with commuting and freight and there throttle capacity. The reason HS2 was being built in the UK to relieve all the Victorian rail lines which are at capacity
The curves. Trains will tip over going that fast on most tracks.
@@nunya___ easy solution, tilting trains, british rail developed them in the 70s
I live in Luxembourg, I take the High Speed train about 100 times a year to go to France... The tracks in Luxembourg support the train but only at slow speed (I think the max is at 160kph).
It takes 20min for the train to go from the capital to the first french city 20km away and it does this in 20 min (60kph on average)
So yes, many US states have more HSR than Luxembourg.
We need it not just because of the environment but because of air traffic congestion and safety. There are already hundreds of near misses above airports daily because of air traffic congestion. That will eventually become common collisions if we don't get high speed rail to alleviate air traffic.
Just make traditional passenger rail more relevant again.
Well if safety is your primary concern you'd be shocked to learn then that you're far more likely to die in a train crash than a plane crash.
@@Stand_By_For_Mind_Control In India maybe... But high-speed trains have a very high safety record.
Like planes, they are extremely safe.
@@Stand_By_For_Mind_Control The vast majority of people killed in train accidents are pedestrians or drivers who were struck by a train, this risk is greatly reduced on high-speed railways due to level crossing being avoided at all costs. When you remove deaths that are caused by road vehicles from the statistics trains tend to be safer or as safe as planes.
@@Stand_By_For_Mind_Control You completely miss the point. Today there are hundreds of near misses above airports. In the coming decades if air congestion increases as it has been those near misses will become collisions.
Modernizing and replacing old rail track would prevent that and make rail traffic safer. The reason rail traffic is more dangerous is because the rail lines are outdated and just another crumbling part of US infrastructure.
Not modernizing the rail system will increase both rail and air accidents. And I am more likely to die while having dinner, swimming, or walking down the street than both air or rail so that's not the point.
I'm totally gonna call the sad US line the Akeela from now on
That belongs in the Mispronunciation Hall of Fame! 😄
@@tommarney1561IKR? I've noticed humorous mispronunciations are increasingly common among a certain kind of content producers who pump out a lot of content. It's like they don't have time to bother learning the correct way to say something.
I think you really need your existing lines to be crowded to dysfunctionality (the way the Tokyo metro system used to be with its passenger pushers at the door) before the compulsion to move to high speed rail kicks in. In the U.S. and here in Australia, it's such a driving/flying culture between cities with so much infrastructure already devoted to those, that high speed rail is more a want than a need and few are in the habit of taking the train between big cities any more.
Can only dream of HSR connecting Brisbane-Sydney-Melbourne.
I mean, you can only dream about a Melbourne-Sydney HSR - it would involve a stupid amount of tunnelling.
Canberra/Sydney/Brisbane maybe .
QLD rail and Transwa already have rolling stock capable of >200km/hr and sections of track that can accommodate it, it is currently limited to 160km/hr but both have plans to go faster in the near future.
Sadly, I think this presentation confirms once and for all that high speed rail is never, ever going to be constructed down here. Melbourne doesn't even have an Airport Rail Link yet, and its Suburban Rail Loop project, as wonderful as it sounds, seems like more of a pipe dream than anything else. Also, Sydney has no suburban line to its Northern Beaches, nor a line all the way to Bondi (the line stops just a few km short at Bondi Junction). How on earth are we going to be able to fund an interstate HSR when we can't even get the city-centric shit right?
@@eddielong8663 Sydney also had the genius idea of building metro tunnels that don't accommodate the double decker trains
@smalltime0 Why would it involve a lot of tunneling? Much of the way is flat or only has some rolling hills. Look at the Sydney-Melbourne freeway, not a single tunnel along the route as there's no need. Even Sydney-Brisbane isn't much more hilly. Your argument makes no sense.
@@ThePatriot-gm1fg thats not how HSR works, you can build freeways pretty much anywhere with close to minimal grading
As a first generation NZer I have travelled on China's HSR it is wonderful, they run on time , clean and fast from my parents city of Guangzhou to central China in About 4hrs 1000kmmy wife city of Wuhan, clean ,efficient, tons of leg room , relax and enjoy the scenery.
Don't bother with flying when you arrive in China 😀
Don’t forget the trillion dollars worth of debt for it. Not only do the HSRs in china require subsidies, but the interest only makes it more expensive with time. All that for what can be accomplished with a plane.
@blankface5052 you have nothing to worry about china it already has 47k kms of hsr line so far and while you are under your basement.
@@渡海-q2w HSR is a weakness for China, not a strength. It’s not financially viable and is a symptom of the infrastructure development corruption that is prevalent in China and the belt and road initiative.
What do you offer instead?
Hwy's? Mega airports?
The biggest railway terminals is way smaller than ordinary airport. One 10 cars trains can take ~600 in different classes. Meanwhile a380, the biggest passenger plane, can take only 500 passengers. If we take 800 passengers a380 in one class, yes, it has more passengers, but if we want to take more people on train we can connect 2 trains and get 1200 passengers express. Oh, i almost said about one deck train if we connect 2 double-deckers we can reach 2000 passengers in one train.
It's true that train infrastructure has a high cost, and HSR even more so. I've once made a study, and you have to count between 12 and 20 EURm per km of HSR rail (in Europe, excluding outliers like tunneling under an existing train station etc...).
But, as you said, it's a well-understood technology, and it's also still being improved (new signaling, tilting trains for retrofitting existing rail, rail and rolling optimization...), so it's an interesting field and I wish it glorious days ahead.
One of the "issues" that wasn't mentioned in the video: the propaganda, which has been going on for decades, that private investors only should invest in US companies. This makes it harder for the companies in that sector to raise capital, because they're not American, and thus creates the self-fulfilling prophecy of undervaluation.
Indeed, companies that build rolling stock, rail-infrastructure, rail-signaling, cable-cars, operations etc... already exist, they're profitable, they're doing great work for humans and the environment. They're just not American and don't get the cultish fanboy treatment à la Tesla.
For rolling stock and signaling: Alstom, Siemens Mobility, Hitachi Rail Systems, ABB, CRRC, Stadler Rail, Bombardier, Skoda Transportation, Talgo, CAF, Pesa, Kawasaki Heavy Industries, Hyundai Rotem, Thales etc...
For construction and specialized infrastructure: Herrenknecht, Vinci, WeBuild, Bouygues, Garaventa-Doppelmayr, Samsung C&T, Hyunday, Lotte, CRCC, Julius Berger Nigeria, BAM, Strabag etc...
For operations, there's many many: DB, SNCF, Renfe, SBB, Trenitalia, Hong Kong MTR, Delhi Metro Rail Corp, Taipei Metro, Japan Railways Group, Metro da Cidade de Mexico, Metrorail (South Africa), Cairo Metro, Namata, Addis Ababa Light Rail, Abidjan Metro etc...
People currently don't invest into them cause they're not American. It's time Asia, Africa, Europe, Latam start to value what they have, and invest into real technologies of the future - comfortable, efficient, high-capacity trains (high speed or not), trams and other forms of public transport.