“The braking distance and inability to turn is why greater physical barriers are required to separate rail.”
That’s nonsense. HSR does not require any extraordinary barriers. Nothing more than you commonly find at modern highways in Europe.
Your “inability to operate off track” argument still doesn’t make any sense. I think you fundamentally do not understand how rail works. They don’t need to be able to operate on roads and for pure transportation purposes, they can be moved across any freight rail track of the same gauge. The US is full of those and even where there is no network at all, units can be transported also by ship and even via road if need be. If there are reasons why a HSR can’t be operated, well, it doesn’t operate. Easy as that. Same as if an airport is blocked due to bad weather. My experience with HSR is that it operates much more reliable than aviation.
Houston lilght rail sucks because it is an inferior system in a city completely designed for the car, with a barebone light rail tapered on at the side. Singapore is a hot city too, yet it has a well working rail system. And much of China is also hot and humid with great working rail systems, HSR as well. I know there are a lot of excuses that the US can’t have any of that because it is so big, so hot, so cold and what not. Those are excuses with countless real world examples proving that they are.
I find it rather bewildering how people don’t seem to think that airports can’t work because of the lack of transit, but with HSR stations it is absolutely impossible to have them working without. Yes, local transit is highly beneficial for both, but it is not a requirement for either to work.
My entire point is that Hpusolton is already developed around cars and tacking transit on top of that doesn’t work without an entire system being deployed at once, which is essentially impossible.
And the inability to work off track matters because trains don’t have flexibility. If something happens to the track in the middle of a 500 mile stretch between cities, that entire area of the network is down until a repair crew can be transported to the site and complete the repair because the trains can’t just drive around the issue like a car.
That is where you are going wrong. US cities were not transformed overnight to car oriented places either. That took decades. Maybe where the error arises is from the idea that only transit needs transit oriented places to work well, but cars do need car oriented places to support a car only design as well. Yes, cars can drive on all sorts of roads but that is true for one car, if you put everyone into a car in a transit oriented city, the whole traffic is going to collapse, commute takes forever …
Transition to transit oriented places can work, but you need long term dedication and political support. The Netherlands demonstrate that quite well. In the 1970s they were on their way to become transformed into a US style car hell hole, even had US city planners to make it a reality. The first oil crises and rising popular opposition against it, saved them.
You don’t transform an entire car oriented city into a transit oriented overnight. It is more like a crystallization process. A transit oriented city condensates along axis. This is happening in some places already today. One example is the Washington DC metro area. But of course, due to lack of political support if not open ideological opposition, it happens even much slower than it has to.
“The braking distance and inability to turn is why greater physical barriers are required to separate rail.” That’s nonsense. HSR does not require any extraordinary barriers. Nothing more than you commonly find at modern highways in Europe.
Your “inability to operate off track” argument still doesn’t make any sense. I think you fundamentally do not understand how rail works. They don’t need to be able to operate on roads and for pure transportation purposes, they can be moved across any freight rail track of the same gauge. The US is full of those and even where there is no network at all, units can be transported also by ship and even via road if need be. If there are reasons why a HSR can’t be operated, well, it doesn’t operate. Easy as that. Same as if an airport is blocked due to bad weather. My experience with HSR is that it operates much more reliable than aviation.
Houston lilght rail sucks because it is an inferior system in a city completely designed for the car, with a barebone light rail tapered on at the side. Singapore is a hot city too, yet it has a well working rail system. And much of China is also hot and humid with great working rail systems, HSR as well. I know there are a lot of excuses that the US can’t have any of that because it is so big, so hot, so cold and what not. Those are excuses with countless real world examples proving that they are.
I find it rather bewildering how people don’t seem to think that airports can’t work because of the lack of transit, but with HSR stations it is absolutely impossible to have them working without. Yes, local transit is highly beneficial for both, but it is not a requirement for either to work.
My entire point is that Hpusolton is already developed around cars and tacking transit on top of that doesn’t work without an entire system being deployed at once, which is essentially impossible.
And the inability to work off track matters because trains don’t have flexibility. If something happens to the track in the middle of a 500 mile stretch between cities, that entire area of the network is down until a repair crew can be transported to the site and complete the repair because the trains can’t just drive around the issue like a car.
That is where you are going wrong. US cities were not transformed overnight to car oriented places either. That took decades. Maybe where the error arises is from the idea that only transit needs transit oriented places to work well, but cars do need car oriented places to support a car only design as well. Yes, cars can drive on all sorts of roads but that is true for one car, if you put everyone into a car in a transit oriented city, the whole traffic is going to collapse, commute takes forever …
Transition to transit oriented places can work, but you need long term dedication and political support. The Netherlands demonstrate that quite well. In the 1970s they were on their way to become transformed into a US style car hell hole, even had US city planners to make it a reality. The first oil crises and rising popular opposition against it, saved them.
You don’t transform an entire car oriented city into a transit oriented overnight. It is more like a crystallization process. A transit oriented city condensates along axis. This is happening in some places already today. One example is the Washington DC metro area. But of course, due to lack of political support if not open ideological opposition, it happens even much slower than it has to.