There's a lot of cities with similar populations along the acela corridor so its not completely far fetched

@@lucaspadilla4815 the Acela corridor has many more cities and people. The sheer number of people on the east coast as compared to other regions in the US is why the north east corridor is in another league. The next most populous areas are adjacent to the NEC (for example Ohio or Richmond to Atlanta)

I think a 'Front Range' to the Rail Runner link is a no-brainer. The big issue with it is just distance; Pueblo to Cheyenne is actually about 80km shorter than Pueblo to Albuquerque as the crow flies, and when put like that you can see why the Front Range by itself is a lot more valuable than Denver to Albuquerque/Santa Fe. The other issue is just the potential routing. Pueblo to Santa Fe via the I-25 is probably relatively easy, but is an indirect route that certainly isn't ideal for HSR. A route that goes via the Rio Grande is a lot more direct, but requires navigating a ton of protected areas and Native American reservations, and the social and political reality is that HSR in the United States will never be able to ignore that (nor, in my opinion, should it try to). I'm of the opinion that the US should care more about Europe-style one night sleeper trains that can connect these kinds of cities that don't yet have any clear path to HSR.

@@skywardlp4916 I appreciate how you also mentioned that this is a collective area of population centers vs. individual nodes of large population. It seems as though most bean counters only consider a gravity model between two very large metropolitan areas and disregard a larger area of smaller trip generators.

The RailRunner is barely afloat, now you want to saddle them with the Pueblo mess?

A local/express split, with HSR running partly alongside light rail or traditional commuter rail would actually be the best way. Express takes the most direct path, local takes loops and connects to spurs and has higher station density Provided that you have periodic station transfers to/from local/express, you'd get the best of both worlds - better connectivity and faster travel times, even if part of your trip is on a local line

@@StephanieDaugherty I actually think you've got the best idea so far. I can imagine a service pattern where a 'full high speed' service runs the via Greeley route, while a local route takes the slower tracks via Boulder, maybe sharing tracks with Denver RTD focusing on the Boulder to Denver commuter section.

I wonder if HSR would do some work to cool off the housing market in Colorado.

@LucasDimoveo Probably not directly since HSR is not typically used by commuters. But construction of HSR, might include rail improvements that support the existing commuter rail network.

Amtrak doesn't have enough equipment to keep what they have running. No, it's not the money.

Well that's not going to happen. Ever. Unless you mean Brightline to Vegas?

@@tonyburzio4107 you don't think California highspeed will get completed? it is already started. its also not as expensive as the headlines make it out to be. 130 bil is way less than a large number of annual federal highway expenditures in the last ten years, i don't think its a problem of money, just lawmakers scared of opening the flood gates to rail while auto and oil are still whispering in their ears.

Cultural and accent differences are a beautiful thing and should be embraced

@@skywardlp4916I got a kick out of your pronounciation.

Correct. High speed rail only makes sense between major city pairs. Denver qualifies, but nothing else within 500 miles does.

@ggjohn303 if it serves only pair, it doesn't qualify. It has to serve couple major cities along with small cities. Also public transportation has to be good. Check Tokyo b Osaka

Lmao then just densify the city and make it walkable. I’m slashing your car tires btw

The cities in question have large enough populations that they don't have to be walkable to support intercity transit, even if people may have to drive to the train station (not in denver). Additionally, there is a large student population who are more likely to take transit

I think 5 million people is quite a lot more than "no one" and the area is growing pretty fast in terms of population

I live in Denver, it's not the best but it's definitely somewhat walkable/bikeable, as are Pueblo, Fort Collins, and Greeley, as well as Cheyenne and Colorado Springs to an extent. All most all of these cities have buses that run every 30 minutes, and Denver has a rail network already

@@tworoyboys208 Colorado Springs is only really walkable downtown in my experience, anywhere up north is very poorly covered by the bus routes with some places being 2+ miles from the nearest stop