😂😎🤣

At this rate I’ll take WHOMEVER comes first!

Really yee’s your haw

To be fair, the highway from Dallas to Houston is incredibly congested and is only expected to get worse. So a relief valve is needed. But yes, Amtrak should try (money will always be the issue as the NEC needs around $135B in order for everything to be fixed or whatever else they want to do) to get the NEC true high-speed rail, with it traveling over 165 mph for at least 45% of the route, and 180 mph for at least 25%, but hey, HSR is HSR

Give it to East Coast, screw the Midwest. I wanna try it first😅

And after that maybe other cities in Texas like El Paso and McAllen. Or cities in neighboring states like Albuquerque, Oklahoma City, Little Rock, and New Orleans.

As an Atlantan, I would love to see ANY high speed rail outside of the NE Corridor take off so we can have a bigger chance of seeing something happening around these parts. Also as a former Tokyoite, I welcome the chance to board an N700 series train in the Lone Star State.

I actually think Texas building high speed rail first is probably best for political discussion. If it's done in California, or the North East, it runs the risk of being a partisan issue, seen as Democrat proposals rather than just transit proposals. So if really successful in Texas, which is also fair because Texas is physically big, but also well populated and spread out in different areas. Also, blue states often have more red tape that drag out such projects.

Oh for sure it could, all the more reason to push for more density and public transit to help improve the numbers!

As a dallasian, I agree

or the bicycle..ohh wait, no regular bikes allowed on Shinkansen!

I mean it was in their master plan as a state support route.

Brightline’s giving Amtrak a run for their money lol

Building out the shinkansen literally bankrupted JR. The government then nationalised JR, transferred all the debts to the government's ledger, and a few years later, privatised the railways again. THAT is why the Shinkansen is profitable today. Or at least, breaking even. China's government dumped a gigantic mountain of money to get their amazing HSR today. But it will take a couple of decades for the ridership to increase, and the debts have to be transferred out to get rid of the interest payments and debt servicing. Only around 2040-50 will China's HSR get to the Shinkansen profitable/break even economic situation. There is no shortcut. Any Texas/US HSR will follow the same pattern. FIFTY years of bleeding red ink before traffic/usage increase to the point that it becomes economically self sustainable. Can the US political system maintain the will to last the distance? This is a marathon. Not a sprint. Would a populist politician decided to kill it 10 years in the future?

@@brucebanana4486 My previous job was at Hitachi to train engineers to work on this system. This system is mostly being built by them, but the Texas courts ruled that it wasn't "public" and therefore couldn't use eminent domain provisions. With Amtrak joining it takes away that argument.

Wasn't their going to be a reboot of king of the hill or was it cancel or something

@@USSAnimeNCC-they are working on one, but the voice actor for Dale passed away unexpectedly about a week ago.

rip his voice actor tho

@@hartstukken. -It was Dale's voice actor that passed away recently, not Hank's. Nevertheless,- may he rest easily knowing he cheered up so many with his iconic lines. EDIT: I misinterpreted the comment I responded to, and thought they were replying to my own comment, rather than the one above theirs. My apologies.

Hank showing his New York City origins, I tell you what.

And this is precisely it wont be done. Airline companies will lobby against it and greedy politicians will kill it.

Wakey wakey it's time for school

I think people outside of DFW or Houston don’t understand just how much travel there is between the two cities. While I don’t travel quite as much as you, I’m in Dallas and have family in Houston and we are back and forth in one or or another at least a few times a year and I travel for work to Houston at least a few times a year. Absolutely hate the drive and refuse to fly for that distance.

I heard it through the grapevine that one of the big reasons this project was stalled was because land rights usage/eminent domain type of stuff. While I feel for people with land that gets “taken” or partially taken with this project, and even for the small towns along the roads from Houston to Dallas bc a lot of them thrive off of the rest stations and business that brings in, there comes a point where the greater good of society comes into play. The HSR will not only be an important milestone in development that has been long overdue, but it will help with climate issues by cutting down in cars (something TX looooves even though its environmental impact is horrendous).

@@AdamM Actually, they might know precisely how much travel is in between Dallas and Houston. Think how much money is pumped into the economies up and down the I-45 corridor by travelers? Buc-cee's, The Peach Store, fast food joints, etc. Putting a high speed rail in that only stops near Huntsville would reduce that commerce. I personally want high speed rail, but the people on the other side are not all idiots and are not coming to the table with empty arguments.

Individual rights are NOT trumped by the "greater good". The "greater good" is straight out of a Marxist play book.

This is a pipe dream that will never happen in Texas. Most land in Texas is Privately Owned and most will not want to sell their land. Any politician who would support taking the land through imminent domain will be committing career deletion.

I mean, ultimately downtown is basically always better, but this may or may not be an ok compromise

I know nothing about Houston, but when you talk about the Downtown location "having easy access to the medical centre", that makes it sound to me a bit like Paddington Station in London, where the only real trip generator nearby is St Mary's Hospital. Paddington Station has intercity services from Wales and the West of England and the Heathrow Express bringing long-distance passengers into London, plus 3/4 Underground lines and the Elizabeth line Line for local traffic. The long distance passengers aren't going to be going to St Mary's Hospital, they are going to be changing onto the local rail services to get to their actual destination. People visiting or working at St Mary's Hospital will live nearby and arrive by Underground, or by bus.

@RMTransit Houston’s Uptown is in some respects more important than Downtown. Plus, as a city with no zoning and fast construction, as well as an existing pattern of multi-node employment, the station location makes more sense. The city already hosts 3 downtowns essentially (MedCenter, Uptown and Downtown all have their own skylines and Energy Corridor and Westchase/Memorial City also do as well.) You could easily imagine that area with the station growing with a spate of new skyscrapers to add another new live work play district.

​@@RMTransitI agree. I'm just not sure Houston's lowercase-d downtown is really its uppercase-D Downtown.

I lived in Houston only a matter of weeks, so I can't say how important Uptown is relative to Downtown, but I can say that its importance shouldn't be glossed over.

I think pulling it off in a red state like Texas where they like to have less red tape and legislation to work around (usually) in comparison to Blue states, that hopefully it stands a better chance of getting built and showing other states what can be.

Hopefully they can overcome the conservative carpetbaggers who obstruct anything that's actually good.

The 1st is always the hardest to build

@@keeganbrown9967 yes, very much so agree with you. It triggers a multitude of effects that like rolling down a hill, you will just rapidly build moment in the process. I so badly want a nationalized high-speed east to west Canadian line. We just need one capable line that follows our inter-provincial highway. Don't make it private and financially have to compete with airlines. Just have it be a matter a allowing people a rail option for the major cities across the continent, and we wouldn't need to use carbon sources of energy.

They don't have to build an East-West line either. They just need to connect cities along multiple corridors together so people travelling long distance can land in one place and take the train to wherever they need. I just want them to start building local rail networks first even.

Charlie!!! I think high speed rail from Dallas to Houston will allow for fans to travel between games in the two cities faster!

Thanks for watching! I think as with any AirPort if DFW wants to be world class it needs more pt connections!

There's never enough access means to airports! London Heathrow has now 3 : the Underground Picadilly line, Crossrail Elizabeth line and Heathrow Express, a dedicated premium service, each their own price point and different ease and speed of access. Plus probably some link to the future Old Oak Common HS2 station. Paris will soon have 4 to CDG : RER line B, TGV high-speed station on the Paris Eastern high-speed bypass (both currently existing), CDG Express (a direct non-stop city center premium service akin to Heathrow Express expected in 2026 or 2027), metro line M17 (Grand Paris Express, fully automated). And at least 4 for ORY : currently RER B / OrlyVAL (a combo RER plus VAL link) and tram T7, then in spring 2024 metro line M14, followed a couple years later by line M18 and very probably also tram line T10 extension. Plus possibly the proposed Orly TGV station on the future Southern link to the HS bypass. Madrid Barajas airport is already served by Cercanias trains and metro line 8. A high-speed train station is also planned. While Barcelona airport is served by both Rodalies (suburban trains) and metro L9S. One-seat rides and a bunch of alternative routes are a must for airports. Given the economic weight and importance of major airports, redundancy is paramount.

As I recall, the NCTCOG (group of metroplex governments) are pursuing the extension having a stop in Arlington via the I-30 corridor then to Ft. Worth. DFW already has multiple transit connections, while the entertainment district of Arlington has absolutely nothing

@@clarenceoveur2149 That is absolutely by design. Arlington owns large portions of the parking at the stadiums and is completely unwilling/unable to give that revenue up to public transport.

It won’t probably go at 300kph in Houston metro are though

It’s very frustrating that the NE corridor doesn’t have some 200 mph sections

@@RMTransit fastest zone is a short stretch of track in rhode island and new jersy where trains run at 150mph, but the ancient infrastructure is well... ancient. Trains literally crawl through tunnels

I’m so excited!!! Can’t wait to take a train from the suburbs of Dallas then to Houston!!

@@DavionWest you can have breakfast in Dallas, spend the day in Houston and then head home to Dallas for dinner! It’s awesome!

Airplanes get you from one airport located miles from the city center to another airport miles away from your final destination. Trains get get you from the heart of one city into the heart of another without TSA lines, long boarding processes or extensive taxiing and takeoff delays. You just get on, go, get there, and get off....

I pray this project is never completed as it will almost certainly make things worse in Dallas.

Y’all don’t get too excited. Amtrak is “exploring partnership” and has only committed to handling the ticketing as well as helping them apply to a couple grant opportunities. Texas Central is pretty much dead after the whole executive team quit a few months ago.

Wouldn't that be a little on the expensive side for the average person? How expensive is a Shinkansen ticket from Tokyo to Osaka?

@@NickCorruption Like $80 each way. And it's almost certainly going to be more expensive and less reliable here in America

@@NickCorruption It will never be built in Texas because over 90% of the land in Texas is privately owned. They will never be able to convince enough of the land owners to sell the land required to build it. Remember all high speed rail needs a buffer zone of a couple of miles on each side of the track for safety reasons. Any politician that backs this will have to support taking or forcing a sale of the land required for it via imminent domain and that will kill their political career.

Good stuff but them $50+ one-way tickets are not for everyone.

@@EileenTheCr0w @NickCorruption Discounted tickets can be purchased at ticket shops as well; the other thing that isn’t being told is because the constant pressure of the Shinkansen is there, it’s pretty easy to get competitive prices in airplane tickets and even cheaper highway bus tickets between the two places; I’d expect the same thing to happen with any city pair in the US served by HSR too

This right here. Republicans need better ways to efficiently travel too.

A Missouri to Utah route would be a great thing as well.

It’ll be poorly managed and heavily monetized

There's too much red tape and NIMBYism in the large liberal states to get things like this built. Ironically the environmental reviews block things that would help the environment, like this and renewable energy. For red states, they only need their disregard for their constituents to be stronger than their love for big corporations

Not familiar with the California rail project are you?

Yep, they are. There is a train game that I play on. I was talking to one of the regs about Texas Central and he said that they are not even a company anymore. Texas Central took his friend to court over eminent domain laws. They didn't even show up to court and his friend won by default. As far as Amtrak, we shall see.

If this is needed Amtrak wouldn’t need to get involved.

@@shadowchaser3836 Just because something is needed doesn't mean that it'll happen without government aid.

@@IBeforeAExceptAfterK if you are correct, that is depressing. The greatest advancements take place where the people are freer and the government restraints are least.

@@shadowchaser3836 I think you'll find that the free market is extraordinarily bad at creating things with high capital investment costs. Especially if the creator/owner is unlikely to directly profit from it. The collective benefits of investing in infrastructure more than pay for the cost of construction, but since you're unlikely to recoup those costs through ticket sales most investors won't bother. The interstate highway system would likely not exist had the government not paid for it (or would be nothing but toll roads if it did), and few can argue the benefits it has provided. The US's rail network only got private investment because they were granted large parcels of land around their tracks which they sold to people who built railway towns. I mean no offense when I say this, but I get the feeling you haven't put much thought into your libertarian views. What does it mean to be freer, and what do you mean when you say government restraints are least? By a purely literal interpretation, you are advocating for complete anarchy, which I suspect isn't your intent. Which negative liberties (that is, freedom _from_ something) are worth sacrificing positive liberties (that is, freedom _to_ something) for, and vice versa? One could argue that constructing a high speed rail line grants freedoms that people would otherwise lack (freedom of movement, freedom of choice) at the expense of people's freedom from taxation. Your truism is nice, but it isn't reflective of the complexities of the real world.

Source? Would be super cool, but my quick Google didn't turn up anything for dallas to fw

Awesome

I bullet train with 20 miles? Why not building a subway? I believe you're dreaming or don't know what define a HSR.

We already have the TRE. What would be the point of a 200mph train to run 20 miles?

Hmm maybe they mentioned it as a proposed connection to the main bullet train line, which would be fantastic! If they're gung ho about improving transit in the destination cities that means this project would be even more successful. Improving all transit is the key to success.

Agreed. Corpus Christi to El Paso, through San Angelo, could be a promising eventual expansion as well

@@everettduncan7543 maybe long in the future but i would hesitate to say that needs to be HSR. HOWEVER Amtrak at minimum needs to electrify that route (or use better diesel rolling stock than they have now) and have more than one train a day from san antonio to el paso

@@everettduncan7543that would be amazing. El Paso needs to be more connected to central Texas.

there no High speed rail in the world that break even, you ready for your property tax to triple for high speed rail?

@@jtr789310 have you heard of land value taxes?

That’s the logic

Honestly, with the current state of the US rail network, the only way for AMTrack to become viable is to build their own rail routes. US Freight companies own the US rail lines and have no incentive to maintain the lines with concern for passenger travel. In fact, they have been known to discontinue rail lines that have no them even if the routes were useful for passenger services. The failure of AMTrack outside of the NE can mostly be blamed on said freight companies.

This will never happen in Texas. No politician will back this because it will end their political career. Over 90% of the property in Texas is privately owned. Attempting to take land or forcing a sale via imminent domain will not go over well at all. Texans are more than willing to spill blood to keep their property so they can hand it down to their children.

What’s it called? Interested in that. I’ve taken the TRE before. Wish it was express with no stops or maybe just at DFW

@@AdamM just high speed north texas, they currently are planning a stop at the arlington entertainment district for some reason, even though personally i think that an entire city ran by corrupt car lobbyists shouldn’t have a rail stop unless they fix their own city.

@@aviewer6299 thanks 👍

Not only cheaper but also need much much better local transit. Otherwise build train stations with 1000+ parking spots. Way to bandaid one problem with another problem. 😂

*Fort Worth There's already the TRE that goes from Ft. Worth to Dallas and back, and TEXRail to DART Orange Line, which connects to the Airport but makes it a longer ride.

It’s amazing how bad the connections to Houston’s airport are right now on transit

the only reliable and affordable way to IAH is by Uber which is an amazing $70- $80 from downtown, relying on atm buses you will always miss your flight whilst driving and then parking your car is also expensive. HHouston has no viable or reliable public transport to either Airport really is astonishing.@@RMTransit

​@@RMTransitAgreed, but a slight ray of sunshine through the clouds: they have issued a bond to pay for extending the light rail system to Hobby Airport.

I didn’t know they were getting new trains in Taiwan!

Nice! Taiwan is using the older 700 series. The N700S ( or rather, the N700-I as that's what they brand their international version ) is a fantastic proven train and you can't afford to screw up trains in America. Go with tried and true... experiment with hyperpoop or whatever later.

Haha, thank you

High speed rail will be useless if the destination doesnt have public transit and/or is walkable. But houston is like the worst place ever in terms of that soo...

San Antonio has been pushing economically infeasible light-rail for a long time. They previously instituted a permanent tax for the board which just sucks up the tax money every year. Nothing but bureaucracy. If anything will be built and actually run, taxes will be increased out the wazoo and the board and government will expand exponentially. I wish these things could be built without the government getting so bloated over the money instead of applying it to the projects.

This is the sensible response. We need Houston city traffic solutions, not this project.

They might be ok with it if they add stations and thus access. We need more stations and the buy in that will generate, even if that requires a slower local high speed service. However that is what Japan does and that's what gets the buy in so we probably should as well. So we would need 4 tracks for local and express trains.

The current station is planned about 25 miles east of CStat which sucks, there is a shuttle planned between the university and the station, but I would've liked to see a station in BCS proper.

I would like to see a College Station Station.

Revenge of the station

@@timothystamm3200 Too many stops will kill the project. Amtrak service near me stops every 40 miles or so and makes taking the train to the nearest major city (Chicago) take longer than driving. Eminent domain the land and force the people off of it, that's the only way it's going to happen.

There is already traffic on i 45 if you don’t leave before 10 am. I and a lot of people would rather take a train than sit in traffic in the middle of nowhere

@@thejokerking9268 I know! I’m with you. The person who wrote the letter to the editor at one point claimed there wouldn’t be large enough ridership to justify it. I call bullshit on that and the rest of their arguments. Having a HSR system would definitely help offset the traffic. He also adds that you have to park your car and get a rental at the destination. I’d assume many people would just use rideshare or have family/friends pick them up. The only true downside I see are the people with homes in the path of the line and I hope they get a fair deal out of it. Aside from that, why not help ease traffic, and modernize our transit a bit?

People do this when flying, why not with trains as well. Why do we have to hold HSR to a higher standard than planes? Just take the train and rent a car until better public transport options are available.

@@highway2heaven91 I'm just saying Houston area transport sucks ass. The majority of people who travel from Dallas to Houston and vice versa aren't flying, they're taking their cars. If people are going to not take their cars in favor of this rail system they'll need to update their public transit.

@@paulsbunions8441 There are a lot of people who use their cars to drive around town all the time, but don't like driving long distances. Especially older people for whom road fatigue is a really big issue. People in this group are probably already choosing to fly rather than drive for such trips, and if the train station is a shorter drive from home than the airport, they would be excellent candidates for choosing the train option. Of course, the many people who are road warriors will continue to drive, and that's fine. The train doesn't need to win over everybody, just enough people to sell enough train tickets to keep the train running.

The Post Oak dedicated Rapid Bus line was built in a way that at some point it could be turned into light rail. But unfortunately the plan to link it to the planned light rail line along Richmond has to go before voters again. There's been discussion on another light rail line that would run along the Washington St. Corridor which would link the HSR station to downtown.

@@paulsbunions8441 I’m not disagreeing with you on the fact that Houston’s transit is abysmal for a city of its size but to put the onus on Houston’s public transit system to make HSR feasible is completely ridiculous. People still drive even though they can fly as well, so what would be the difference? Once again, why do we hold HSR to a higher standard? If we build HSR first, then maybe it’ll hold Houston’s feet to the fire and they’ll expand the transit system. What reason would they have to do it if we’re just talking about it and it’s not there.

I live in Houston. That would be so nice .

Agreed

There's also the fact that California HSR has a bunch of regional rail improvements rolled into it (or at least it's supposed to have them), and that doesn't really work with a standalone Shinkansen-style system

@@samlerman-hahn2674 Agreed. Our HSR situations couldn't be more different. Texas is only starting its urbanization boom. They have no intercity rail network. They're essentially starting from scratch and are enjoying the clean sheet planning freedom and low costs associated with that. The Texas Triangle is also entirely flat, which lowers costs even further. If Texas Central Railway takes off, it will define how they develop forever. California's urbanization boom is already over. We actually have an intercity rail network, or more accurately, what's left of what used to be a world class network that only recently started receiving some TLC from Sacramento. It's really hard building new stuff in places with other stuff already built there, and we have to tunnel through mountains to connect our population centers, so HSR will always be expensive to build here. We've been steadily improving our Amtrak regional lines and local commuter lines for 30 years now, and CAHSR will be the big, beautiful, and expensive bow that ties it all together into a statewide rail network. As a Californian, I'm a little conflicted. I'm disappointed that Texas Central is getting more federal attention than CAHSR and as a result our rival state will probably get the glory of having HSR before we will. On the other hand, the Texas project always had more economic potential anyway and is the more politically beneficial of the two for the current administration to support. So I will be cheering for my fellow rail fans in the Lone Star State... through clenched teeth.

CAs system has huge huge cost overruns and has been partially 'bailed out" by the US tax money - not my cup of tea.

Hope you enjoyed it!

@@RMTransitI did! You did a great job breaking it down. I hope this gets completed soon! Then it can show California to hurry up!!!

Which project is this? Honestly I have no problem with highways getting built as long as HSR gets built too. The state government and the airlines should just embrace the fact that they have competition instead of just trying to eliminate it. It’s not true capitalism if you’re just trying to eliminate the competition all the time. It actually gets closer to communism/socialism when these people act this way.

@highway2heaven91 Just look up the new TxDOT project, over 100 billion to be put into interstates. I do disagree with highways in cities but enjoy them for intercity travel. I just hate that the state does actively work against rail and non air and road transport.

Yes I dont think that is insurmountable. N 700s built in the US the way other Japanese manufacturers have done.

Nippon Sharyo used to have a factory in Illinois. Maybe this project could reopen it.

@@Bbq7272 First time there is an accident with fatalities, the Japanese will get razzed by the politicians in the US. It won't matter who is to blame, the public will see it as a foreign hoodwink and go sour on HSR and/or any stuff from abroad.

I think that Canadian and US oil companies have contributed to the resistance. For them, every drop counts.

Perhaps eventually if the demand is there

​@@RMTransit if it gets built between DFW/Houston, it will be.

id imagine itd be the "third leg built" once the main line between Dallas and Houston is built. and "San Antonio - Austin - Dallas"

@@RMTransit I mean instead of how you did it. The junction where the Dallas to Houston line meets the Austin line could be near the midway point and a big triangle junction could be constructed making use of existing infrastructure. They could also add a station in the middle of nowhere as a Junction station.

San Antonio to Austin definitely needs rail services for sure. I think this would happen before a San Antonio/Houston leg.

*but kudos to Amtrak for finally having some strategic freedom. If we're allowed to send an ask for Christmas: - Get state/local partners, Metrolink, Brightline, CAHSR to agree to some plan to electrify and extend the Antelope Valley Line to Bakersfield by building a tunnel through the Tehachapis. - Improve the corridor to allow high frequency service San Joaquins run directly to LAUS Metrolink runs all the way to Bakerfield (or mirror Amtrak service beyond) Brightline serves LAUS and San Bernadino, could become an interim operator on CAHSR as well - Bakersfield could be a pretty important interchange (I guess Palmdale as well). Santa Clarita *COULD* be, if they just built the Sepulveda line as a Metrolink service...but it's a Metro project, so they can't conceive of doing that 🙃would just need a squeezed in line along the Harbor Sudvision (or, I can't recall which one is still available...?) and you can get inter-city rail service practically to LAX from a good chunk of the region.

Definitely, there should be more coordination with Amtrak and local transit agencies on where the best location for HSR stations should be.

@@highway2heaven91 “BuT tHeY dOn’T nEeD tO bE iN UrBaN cEnTeRs!” *but they should totally be 100% separated from any other services. No one anywhere successfully operates hsr in mixed corridors.

I think the third leg would ideally go HoustonAustin with the option to continue to San Antonio. It’s slightly shorter as far as added rail goes, and with the first phase partially traveling the US-290 corridor, an extension along that route would be even shorter still. Even the intercity busses in the state know this is a good option as services like Megabus have routes that do this-a direct HoustonSan Antonio route via I10/US90 only makes sense if you are connecting to the western suburbs of Houston like Katy and Richmond (which is not the case with this project).

good comment. I would suggest using electric hire cars at all stations, rentable by the hour or day for return back to the station, a bit like the bike hire system.

@@roballen3281 I agree that carshare services (essentially what you're describing) would be a great idea, we need more of those. There's only a few carshare spots in all of DFW at the moment.

@@roballen3281 But with the cost and inconvenience of dealing with that, and paying for expensive train tickets each way... why not just drive? Cause the total trip time will MAYBE take you an extra 30 minutes to an hour? I know people that go from Dallas to Austin Frequently and none of them would willingly take a train instead of their car.

That's also the most natural way to build TxHSR to me, +1 for this, though I also see a branch north of Waco to also allow for a Fort Worth connection with this suggestion.

Much appreciated

It would be nice to see them rebuild the Houston Grand Central Station there (the remnants of which are still easily describable on the north side of the POST) or to resurrect the Houston Intermodal Transit Center (the current location of the much smaller Burnett Transit Center and a UH parking lot).

It can go the way that Seoul and most European cities did - traveling through Palmdale back to the old railway right-of-way, then go straight towards Union Station.

Not going to a major city in the first phase is IMO a major problem

@@ianhomerpura8937 The only downside is that this line has no catanaries, not to mention the line at Tehachapi Pass is limited for freight use (one of the reasons the San Joaquins doesn't go all the way south of LA, in fact). Then again, I remember the IOS is planned to run on diesel first before switching over to electricity.

​@RMTransit There was zero chance CAHSR was ever going to get statewide approval if they started in either LA or SF first. From a purely technical perspective, yes, the LA to SD segment probably should have been built first, but nobody north of Bakersfield would have voted for that. Despite the handwringing, starting in the central valley was a smart compromise that allowed the project to get started and move past the point of no return. Also, considering how trains work (they need a continously uninterrupted track for the entire route) you need to build that segment anyway for SF to LA, so why not do central valley first?

@@RMTransit Fresno and Bakersfield are major cities. Not big enough to make HSR viable long term without connecting to the coast, but they should suffice as a concept demonstrator to muster up support and funds to reach SF or LA. Please do a video on CAHSR next. It's only fitting after you've covered Texas Central.

They really could just get on board with this instead of trying to kill projects like these all the time.

Texas has amended its Constitution 517 times, that can always be done again.

This has already been litigated to filth. All of the attempts to block it in the TX Legislature failed. And the Supreme Court of Texas ruled in favor of allowing Texas Central to use eminent domain for land acquisition. This all happened before the Covid shutdowns.

TxDOT will not stop till the entire state is nothing but a wasteland stuffed with asphalt and concrete.

Didn’t know that this was a consideration with Dubais rather unique viaduct design

President Biden installed everyone on the board for Amtrak.

I believe the proposed NE Maglev has a top speed of 315 MPH. Way faster than any existing high speed electrified rail system. This would reduce the current Acela 3 hour trip from three hours to under 1 hour.

This is true too, I don't think the train will even see much use if it's built.. but if it does catch on it would hurt so many small towns along that path.

Imagine if Texas Central goes all the way to POST Houston.

If it's economically viable,..,.. why hasn't the free market built it? Especially when interest rates were near zero? I see a lot of comments on how "this would be cool". If it's so cool, why wasn't it done long ago? As a DFW-ite,... I'm not so sure. I have personally been involved in the project management of some of the DART light rail lines in the DFW area. 1. Nobody likes these things running through their neighborhoods. 2, When they're complete and ridership is checked,.. there's usually about 2 people per car even during rush hour. 3. Obviously this is another potential money pit,.. because if it was economically viable, the free market would already be all over this.. And I doubt anybody who thiks it would be cool understand the financials and what having the federal government involved would do once again to their pocket books. Warren Buffett owns a couple of freight railroads,.. why isn't he involved in this? He has over $100 billion sitting on the sidelines waiting for the impending economic tsunami coming as a result of the horrendous fiscal policy of the current administration. 4. Anytime anything has to be subsidized by the federal government,... it's going to do nothing but add to the deficits and debts and the eventual destruction of the country at this point.. Just 3 years ago in 2019 the government was spending 50% less than it is now. In 2019 the federal government outlays were a little over $4 trillion with about $3.5 trillion in tax receipts. Now the government is spending about $6.5 trillion with about $4.5 trillion in receipts. These are ballpark numbers,.. but not far off. Yes, Trump added $7 trillion to the debt, most of it added in 2020 as a result of the pandemic. The GDP fell by 30% when the deep state decided to shut down the country and the economy. But unfortunately , this insane senile ole joe admin and the demcorats have continued to unnecessarily spend 50% MORE in 2021, 22, 23, 24,.. (all of it deficit spending adding trillions to the debt each year),...years after the pandemic is over,...... than was spent the year before the pandemic started,... and we're not even in a recession. When Trump left office, the economy was growing at 6% with under 2% inflation. These multitrillion dollar deficits and interest payments on the debt, let alone repaying the principal on the debt, has the US on the road to bankruptcy. Janet Yellen just announced that in addition to the over $1 trillion in treasuries she's already issued as of the first half of the year,.. she'll need to issue another $1.9 trillion more in treasuries the last quarter of this year. And this inflationary deficit spending is diametrically opposed to the Fed's efforts to reduce inflation,.. the inflation caused by the deficit spending the senile ole joe admin continues do like drunken sailors. We're currently $33 trillion in debt (with a GDP of about $22 trillion, that's an ~150% debt to GDP ratio) and growing by about $2 trillion each year now. All for far left vote buying pork. This is why foreign countries are selling their US treasuries and forming a new BRIC's currency to replace the dollar as the world reserve currency. This is why food, energy and rent have doubled This is why mortgages are double what they were a few years ago. This is why first time home buyers can't afford a home. If the high speed rail was absolutely 100% funded by the free market and it take all of the risks,... then it might be cool. But another reason to put US tax payers further in hock.. is not cool.

I think a line from NYC to Washington would make more sense, not that a line from Houston to DFW shouldn't be accomplished...

Japanese summers are humid and hot just like Central Texas. It is definitely is a little bit hotter here but not by as much as you'd think.

100%! CAHSR has challenges, but it’s not that bad! They’re just now starting to build momentum

Also, pragmatism because building inside-out has a higher sunken cost ratio (i.e. the line is missing out its full potential if it isn't connected to the major cities) than outside-in ("there is quite a lot of demand from Fresno to the Bay and Bakersfield to LA, I'm sure there will be none in-between, let's use our power to finally stop this project for good!").

I'm confident that funding will start to flow as soon as people see a video of a train with an American flag painted on the outside blow through downtown Fresno at ~240mph during testing in 2028/2029. There's nothing we love more than claiming to be #1 at something and "fastest non-maglev train in regular service" is a great thing to be #1 at.

Yes, people should stop dunking on a project which is massively over budget and behind schedule. Nobody should address the fact that it will likely be an expensive disaster. Leave light rail alone!

Whilst that sounds like a smart plan, in practice it would probably not happen since the upside of having a completely independent HSR system is that the system doesn't have to be compatible/follow the conventional rail requirements e.g. crashworthiness requirements, signalling. It would also be especially difficult to sell for the freight operators that probably own that rail link to completely change out their infrastructure.

It's a big airport, and if you land on the wrong half from your gate it is quite a long tax to get to the other side

Lmao yeah, they're going to fight this tooth and nail. For all the airlines green washing they will never support something thats eco friendly but hurts their bottom line.

That's true but it could also have the effect of driving more flights to dfw from the high speed rail riders like he mentioned in the video. I'm not sure how much of their revenue comes single in-state flight routes between Dallas Houston etc but i think it shouldn't be too big of a political issue

Well the big idea is to connect all Texas cities and that is the plan. Just gotta do the DFW-Houston first.

Many CAHSR renderers use something like a Velaro, though some others also showed a TGV-like train instead. I do believe the Velaro is the to-go choice for CAHSR, though.

Nothing has been confirmed for Brightline west yet iirc, they have some tenders with an Alstom train!

One thing to consider for CAHSR would be energy consumption. And currently the Alstom Avelia's have the lowest / best weight to capacity and energy per passenger ratio, thanks to Jacobs bogies and double decks.

N700S will export to Taiwan, replacing some of the existing N700T. And E5 series is set for the India HSR project, also for sale if the price is good for Japan

@@keiming2277 Hm. That's cool.

@@alistairlee7604 The main problem is, will Japan or anyone who’s looking to be the train supplier for this project is….. Will they willing to export the technology to build the train in USA ? China, the rising power of the high speed railway import technology form Japan and Germany as part of their deal for buying those trains for the amount of money and eventually they built their only train

High speed railways have less curves and must be as straight and level as possible. Good luck with that.

@@ianhomerpura8937 not entirely true. Look at the Shinkansen south of Tokyo station: It runs parallel to existing train lines, with a lower than usual speed and tighter curves. The same thing can be seen all over europe, the final approaches are often slower So it would be totally fine if this section would be a little slower too (for example 100mph)

@@ianhomerpura8937 Looking on a map, the rail from Cypress to Houston proper has fairly gentile curves and that is apparently taken for Texas Central. The only excuse why it doesn't go further is presumably the aquisition of land next to the station.

@@MarioFanGamer659 is the route safeguarded at least?