tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4446280611707537140.post5578043146031970233..comments2014-04-01T15:32:20.593-05:00Comments on The Chicago Architecture Blog: Midwest High Speed Rail: Part 3: How Fast is Fast?Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4446280611707537140.post-63815624903705485422010-01-20T18:06:48.657-06:002010-01-20T18:06:48.657-06:00I think the regional approach is the correct one b...I think the regional approach is the correct one because as you noted in your Chicago to NYC and Chicago to LA calculations, the United States is huge. Especially when compared to some of the other countries we are attempting to emulate.Zach Hoffmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12298711197358288127noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4446280611707537140.post-76846707698192082652010-01-20T15:35:50.870-06:002010-01-20T15:35:50.870-06:00The Kalamazoo route doesn't actually go throug...The Kalamazoo route doesn't actually go through Lake Michigan, that's just a stylistic shortcut necessitated by my lack of Photoshop skills.<br /><br />The idea of a high-speed link to New York seems like a no-brainer to me, and it was brought up at a recent meeting. But the people behind the HSR plan think that's a long way down the road for a few reasons. Among them, the cost of the infrastructure, and the lack of political will. The theory is that if people get used to using HSR on a regional basis, there will eventually be the political will to make it work on a nationwide scale.<br /><br />Of course, part of the problem is also the distance involved. I just checked American Airlines, and Chicago to New York is 2:15. A train would have to go more than 317MPH continuously to beat the plane. Of course, trains only beat planes in downtown-to-downtown comparisons, so add 45 minutes on each side of the plane trip and the time to beat is actually 3:45. At a distance of 800 miles (an estimate, because it's not going to be a straight shot) the train would have to average 213MPH. That's really the very top end of what's currently running in Europe and faster than Asia. And in Europe, it's only in bursts -- not continuous. <br /><br />Perhaps by the time the technology improves to help bridge the kinds of city distances that are typical in the United States, America will be ready to make that investment. But not just yet.<br /><br />(If the fastest currently available train were to make the route, and it was completely straight it would still take more than eight hours to travel between Chicago and Los Angeles.)Editorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05175439499515200515noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4446280611707537140.post-8595313712693214952010-01-20T15:10:07.276-06:002010-01-20T15:10:07.276-06:00I really hope HSR becomes a reality for the midwes...I really hope HSR becomes a reality for the midwest. The easier, faster and more economical we make it for people to get in and out of Chicago, the more inclined they will be to visit our fair city. Curious, the Chicago to Kalamazoo line seems like it goes across (under) Lake Michigan. Was this done for ease of viewing, or do they plan to actually go through the lake??<br /><br />It would be nice to see a HSR line from Chicago to New York. I wonder what speed they would have to attain to make it competitive with air travel?Chicago Danhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01389007391089353385noreply@blogger.com