About time we actually get some progress on American high speed rail!! We're SO behind Europe. Next we need to build true HSR between NYC and Boston. Smart CEO obviously knows the numbers and the business inside and out.
The corridor to upgrade it to true HSR would be far too expensive to ever be profitable... Newest lines would have to use greenfield routes but the Northeast is already very crowded... I'd be happier to see Montreal-Albany-NYC or Albany-Boston...
@@fhowland and the USA just voted ( i believe, if our media doesn't lie ) for another 60 billion for ukraine. Thats a lot of highspeed tracks and trains
This train will also be its own billboard directly to all its potential customers. When everyone is stuck crawling along I-15, BOOM, there goes the 200mph train that you should've taken instead of driving.
Three billion dollars is a year's metropolitan city public transportation budget. For this type of project is a deal gone right for the fed. Nothing to cry about, the private sector is taking all the risk and securing the feds. Profit is the commitment between investors and government a secure check no matter how many travelers.
This is how HSR needs to be built in America, privately, efficiently and with limited scope. California shows you what not to do and that's bite off more than you can chew and designing by committee thinking. By trying to satisfying everyone you've helped no one... Brightline is one-track with passing sections in an existing public ROW with limited access but electrified using the highest speed rolling stock possible... Aka it feels like an Interstate High Speed Rail line which is a concept that could be rolled out across the land... Pun intended... Seattle-Portland via the I5 ROW, Salt Lake to Las Vegas via the I-15, etc.. Atlanta-Charlotte, Dallas-Houston, Raleigh-Richmond-Washington, Milwaukee-Chicago-Detroit, Kansas City-St Louis, Jacksonville-Orlando, the list is pretty long... These short-medium haul train lines could really take a big bite out of America's crowded airports and flying market and reduce emissions at the same time!
Trains need to run where is high population and shipping volume. Texas is to midwestern and therefore sparce. While Texas's cities are denseish they are large and spread out it's also surrounded by other sparse states. High capacity high speed freight makes great sense in Texas but not so much passenger... yet. Highspeed however is always dragged down by the higher cost of land where it is truly needed. I wish them luck with this project.
They tried. Couldn’t secure the right of way. BL is using the center median for their ROW. Do in Texas also and forget about trying to secure private property. Texas triangle: Dallas-Houston-San Antonio/Austin
"The first high-speed train in the US" - false. "The cleanest greenest train in the world" - false. As much as I am pro public tansportation and trains, this kind of cheap populism is abhorrent.
@@stickynorth socialized risk and privatized profits is as private as it gets. The project is not entirely private. It is subsided with government grants. Whether it will finish on time, we will have to wait, just like everyone is waiting for the Bakersfield to Merced line to finish…12 years and counting.
@@thomaskim3128 i understand your concern, but.. bakersfield to merced is fully public project, brightline is a private company, and looking at brightline florida, they seem to know what they do, and get things done. But yes lets see. :)
Yes a multibillion dollar, international investment firm is going to invest $10B of their own money in a project that a couple of RU-vid uninformed 'experts' say no one will use! Do you realise how silly you sound? They've literally been studying the viability of this project with qualified professionals for the last 5yrs. Their model is also TOD orientated & doesn't just rely on pax profitability.
China has 33,221 high speed trains. Yet you are the No. 1 economy. No way. What are you going to have a war before you hand the No. 1 economy to China. England handed it to you without war.
@@yappofloyd1905 not proper high speed Please take a look other country . The purpose is Less Flight .If speed is low .People will buy air tickets and more car on the highway .Please Look Time .Why People Flight ?You know What I mean. (1h 20m Nonstop flight Time) .en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fastest_trains_in_China
Its cause they are using highway right off way, they don't want to do a lotta tunnelling. If they committed to 350km/h, it would end up like CAHSR, a pain in the ass acquiring land and envoirmental review, nimbys doing everything in their power to derail the project etc. Hopefully in the future Brightline west will be expanded into downtown Vegas and upgraded so it could handle higher speeds but it would be some time from now
So $12B divided by 230 miles of track equals about $52M per mile. What’s break even in terms of paid fares? How many decades to profitably? I’m all for this project, but that’s too expensive.
Building the Eisenhower American Highway System cost $618b in 2024 dollars. This is not the whole story. With car infrastructure, the cost burden is primarily on vehicle owners, not investors or the government. A holistic approach to estimate the cost of cars and the highway system can easily balloon up to $40-50m dollars per mile: It costs nearly $30b per year to maintain the US road network (reason foundation). Let's be generous and say it costs an average of $8b per year over the past 60 years. Total: $480b. We have passed $1t. Deaths from car accidents: a generous average of 30000 deaths per year over the last 60 years (wikipedia), assuming 40,000 GDP per capita over same period is a loss of nearly $100b of lost potential output. Little to no people die in passenger trains. ~$1.2t. Auto Insurance: has ballooned up to $250b per year in 2024. Generously average insurance at $40b per year over the last 60 years, that's around $2.4 trillion. ~$3.6t Include dollars spent on car purchases: at 8 million cars per year (currently around 15 million per year) and an average of $20,000 per vehicle (far below the average cost of a car, and not including interest) over the last 60 years, consumers have spent ~$9.6t on cars. More than $13t spent on cars and car infrastructure over the last 60 years. Nearly $220b per year on cars and car infrastructure over the last 60 years. We have not considered vehicle maintenance, tolls, or parking. Not to mention the deterioration of once thriving inner city communities when the Highway Act decided to just pave over them to make way for white suburbanites. And do not forget about the health and environmental impact of fossil fuels on both air quality and the climate. Add to that the cost to restore air quality and to reverse carbon emission trends. We are not building 40,000 miles. This is 230 miles of track. The US is not developing a nationwide high speed rail system anytime soon. And definitely not by end of the 21st century. It's really not that expensive. California High-Speed Rail (LA to Bay Area)... now that is expensive. Thank you for coming to my ted talk.
85% of 50 million traffic by car between Las Vegas and Ca. 42.5 million auto traffic. Maybe 1/5 decide to do the rail: 8.2 million traffic. $1.25 per mile fare. RT = 440 miles: $550 x 8.2 mil = 4.5 billion fare revenue. ???
That would be annual and id expect fares to be a bit cheaper. That's just revenue, not sure how much operating costs are but let's assume about a decade to profitablity. Pretty good for something that's for the public good
the slowest high speed in the world ...hahahaha.....USA is FAR FAR FAR AWAY behind on CRIME HEALTH CARE quality of electrical grid, roads, bridges with at least 20 -30 other nations ...pathetic
