56 High Speed Rail Links We Should've Built Already
Vložit
- čas přidán 20. 06. 2024
- Nothing that exists in North America fits the definition of true high-speed rail. If we actually ever started building a network, where would we start? And how would we know when we were done? This video details a methodology for answering all those questions, then counts up 56 city pairs we really should've had high-speed rail service between long, long ago.
----------
CityNerd is on Nebula, the creator-owned streaming service, ad-free! Using my custom link gets you 40% off an annual subscription, and really helps the channel! go.nebula.tv/citynerd
----------
Patreon - a way to directly support continuing CityNerd output! Thanks to all who have signed up so far.
/ citynerd
----------
Previous CityNerd Videos Referenced:
- The High Speed Rail playlist includes all the content referenced in this video! • High Speed Rail
Also check out @alanthefisher Alan's great video on the Biden administration's big moves to invest in US passenger rail: • The American Governmen...
----------
Resources:
- en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropo...
- en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combine...
-ktla.com/news/california/brig...
- skift.com/2023/12/08/biden-ad...
- www.fastcompany.com/91000949/...
- www.11alive.com/article/news/...
- www.hsrail.org/st-louis-corri...
- cadenaser.com/nacional/2023/1...
- www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-r...
----------
Images
- North America By JZTess - Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index...
- California Zephyr By Tony Webster from Minneapolis, Minnesota - Amtrak on the Colorado River, CC BY-SA 2.0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index...
- Coast Starlight By Steve Wilson - Flickr: The Southbound Coast Starlight at horseshoe curve, CC BY 2.0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index...
- Cascadia flag By cascadia dan - cascadianow.org, CC BY-SA 3.0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index...
- Acela By Fan Railer - Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index...
- China HSR Map By FlyAkwa (old png file : WouterH) - Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index...
----------
Instagram: @nerd4cities
BlueSky: @nerd4cities
Threads: @nerd4cities
Twitter: @nerd4cities
----------
Music:
CityNerd background: Caipirinha in Hawaii by Carmen María and Edu Espinal (CZcams music library)
----------
Business Inquiries: thecitynerd@nebula.tv - Věda a technologie
You know, Nebula doesn't have a comment section. (File this under "feature, not bug.") ALSO, you're going to get all my videos early on Nebula, AND ad and promo-free. It's like $2.50 a month if you use my custom link to sign up for an annual subscription -- and it really helps the channel! go.nebula.tv/citynerd
I kinda wish Nebula did have a comment section. Nebula being a paid-for platform would keep out the bots and trolls that are such a problem on CZcams, and we could have a decent conversation. Especially if the comment section was organised like old-reddit.
Where do you think are the best places to discuss topics relating to urbanism and transit?
And thanks for another great video!
So I sometimes watch on Nebula, but def don't consider the lack of comment on there a bonus, one would hope the people that go there might be able to actually have a good discussion. I find it frustrating that if I do want to comment I have to come to this shit site, full of bad-faith commenters. That said, I don't worry about ads etc as I have an effective ad blocker.
Madrid to Sevilla was prioritized for the World Expo in 1992. Celebrating the 500 anniversary of the Discovery. I rode the AVE to the Expo and also the following year when I went Eurorailing.
i pay for nebula but never use it because of the lack of comment section - truly disappointing
Jet Lag uses r/nebula for their comment section, but your channel your choice
56? Damn, that’s a new record for a top 10 list channel 😋
You are cute!
Haha just noticed
I’ve seen top 100+ before O_o
At least 5× better
You must have missed his video on the 60 best “The Cheesecake Factory” restaurants in the world.
One thing not taken into consideration with intercity driving is the likely need to stop for refreshments and bathroom breaks, adding to travel time. This is a non-factor for airline and rail travel.
This should be part of the crowdsourced extension of the video & data! Get as nerdy as people want🙂
This is the kind of thing that would get me to upgrade my Patreon level!
And traffic. And quality of roads. Driving from and to or through Milwaukee and Chicago is a nightmare.
To say nothing of the cost and inconvenience of parking when you get there.
Also weather conditions. I drive from Minneapolis to the Chicago area a few times a year and winter weather can easily cause us to cancel a trip.
@@glenmurie Though in most cities (including, Milwaukee, but probably not Chicago) that inconvenience of parking and stopping on the way is far outweighed by the convenience or cost savings of already having your own car to drive there, as opposed to either getting around on public transit or renting a car.
Also refueling
As somebody who flies halfway across the continental US for work on a regular basis, I think there's an unquantifiable 'other' factor in HSR's favor: the unpredictability, discomfort, inconvenience, and general pain-in-the-ass-ness of air travel. Not having to put up with that is worth an extra hour or two on a train, I think, especially if the train ticket costs substantially less.
Ask Europeans about train delays and cancellations, train travel is not immune to that. UK rail is notorious for cancellations, especially on Avanti West Coast and Trans Penine. And DB (German state rail company) is so known for literally never being on time that Germans get confused when a DB train actually is on time. And we can't forget the frequent transit strikes in France.
Where did I claim train travel doesn't have delays or cancellations? I'd wager that they're probably less common and less lengthy than their air travel counterparts in most cases. Air traffic controllers and air crews have gone on strike, too, so what's your point?
@@mrvwbug4423 British German here. UK doesn't really have HSR yet and most of the non HS problems are due to the network being so old and compacted, which the US would barely face. Germanys problems mostly revolve around driver shortages because they are going back to the 30s and insisting all higher paid employees have German bloodlines going back a century, again something non existent in the US.
At least you can leave the train most of the time on your own free will. When you fly you're trapped.@@mrvwbug4423
@@FlatDerrick Tf? Nobody in Germany says that. Of course there are too many AfD a-holes that are plain racists and idiots, but you have that in the US, too, and not less than in Germany. Most delays, and that comes from a German Railway Engineer, are due to our lack of HSR Lines. Most Routes in Germany use a fun mix of modern, fast high speed lines between 250 and 300 km/h (155-190 mph) and older lines, sometimes built in the 19th century and only modernized. Many of these lines are also crowded since our government has missed to fund railways properly and Germany doesn't segregate goods trains, regional trains and long distance high speed trains. That means that there are lots of conflict points. Only way to make that better is to build infrastructure.
As a Mexican, I can’t thank you enough for including us 🙏🏼 sometimes I get tired of advocating for HSR and better intercity public transit here in my country because so many people keep saying it’s “not possible” or “too expensive” and that they would feel better just traveling in their own car anyways. Fortunately, Mexico is undergoing somewhat of a rail revival after the completion of the first segments of the Maya Train and the Interoceanic corridor so this is proving to people that rail projects can be feasible. Also, at a local level the public transit is usually decent (not perfect, but def decent) so it remains to be seen if we’ll finally take the next step and implement HSR to move between cities.
As for the city pairs you mentioned, I’d have to say I agree with all of them except Mexico to Monterrey because the geography would make the construction of that a money-burning nightmare. You mentioned something similar for Leon to Aguascalientes but there’s already plans for a non-HS train between the two using the existing tracks that go through Encarnación, so a future upgrade might be possible.
The other projects are so awesome tho and they would definitively have to be built first in order to change the culture around cars which have slowly taken over due to the inconvenience of combis and buses (which are currently still the most widely used form of public transportation in MX).
Mexico City to Querétaro in particular is so desperately needed that it’s not even funny. The highway connecting those two has been recently upgraded and it’s STILL one of the most dangerous in the country. That said, don’t anyone sleep on the potential of a Monterrey to Laredo HSR! This is actually being considered by the government of Nuevo León because a lot of people travel between the two cities for jobs and also for shopping in the US.
Saludos from Mexico 🇲🇽 ✌🏼
Mexico City has such an interesting mass transit system. Each location having it's own little logo? How cute. I'd love a scenic train ride from Seattle down the Mexican coast.
Que
@@AMPProf Emocionado por los nuevos trenes? Busca la info bro muchos canales de urbanismo están hablando de eso
@@luislicona386EVERYTHING you mentioned in your dissertation is almost exactly the SAME THING north of the border; this is the result of automotive industry/energy corporation-inspired lobbying in various nation's throughout the western hemisphere....
Back in 1976, I was in Mexico with "family" members and a friend; Al throughout the country, we discovered that one huge, governmentally-owned energy corporation, Pemex, was the LARGEST cartel in the nation at that time! I saw a documentary on how they do business with landowners with petroleum under their properties, and it makes me wonder where the drug cartels got their ideas....
It COULD be that Pemex is blocking the development of high speed rail in Mexico; who really knows?!
@@romywhite290 The logos aren't for branding they are to help illiterate folks navigate the system which is amazing
As a North Carolinian, I would absolutely love to see high speed trains connecting all the way from Atlanta to Montreal
I would like to see one that goes from Alberta to North Carolina.
As a Montréaler I'd also love this
that would be phenomenal
New Orleans to Montreal (and Boston).
We will (hopefully) be getting part of this (Raleigh to Richmond) with the largest fed grant in history to NC.
As fun as it is to see this map of what a version of my country I'd actually want to live in would look like, it's also deeply painful. Thanks as always for the emotional whiplash Ray! Keep it up!
I didn’t expect to see you under a transit video lol
Mogswamp foamer arc lol
flatworld high speed rail network when???
Sup Mog
Fascinating analysis. I love the nerdiness. As a former American now resident in Switzerland, I want to make a few comments quasi observations. First, I've travelled by train from London-Paris-Basel; Amsterdam-Paris; Basel-Berlin; Basel-Vienna; Basel-Rome; Basel-Palermo (yes, that's at the far end of Sicily). I've made many other shorter trips as well, such as London-Edinburgh or Paris-Nîmes. Second, high-speed rail is great, but the one step down, you can call it fast-rail or rapid-rail, is also important. Within Switzerland it was decided to run trains slightly slower in order to increase connectivity and convenience. This connectivity is worth a lot. Third, you leave "comfort" out of your analysis. For me, nothing beats reading a book, drinking an espresso, sitting in a comfortable seat with room to stretch. Also the convenience of train stations in Europe. I can walk 10 minutes to the main statin in Basel and exit at St Pancras Station in London. Now, that's convenient. Fourth and lastly, every analysis I hear about high-speed rail seems to overlook the importance, nay, the necessity of connecting local transit. For example, I was in the USA recently and took a series of connecting trains from JFK Airport to Wilmington DE to visit friends near Kennett Square Pennsylvania. I couldn't complete the last 20 miles by public transportation. This lack of local connectivity sometimes means it is easier to rent a car and drive the entire distance, rather than completing 95% of the journey by public transportation and then being stuck.
The National Museum of Transportation in St. Louis is a 40 min. walk from the nearest public transport.
I think this map is incredibly comprehensive when you take into account that it only focuses on time. I would argue that there are many more corridors like the PNW or my hometown of Milwaukee to Chicago that would be incredibly successful when you take into account other factors like the huge gap in comfort between rail and air travel and the gap in freedom during the trip that exists between rail and car travel.
I’ve ran a few suitability analysis of my own for projects in college about ideal connections for high speed rail and I found similar results although my criteria were stricter and resulted in less connections.
As someone from the Milwaukee CSA, I completely agree with the need for a Milwaukee to Chicago line. It's easily my top pick that wasn't included. The close proximity and small size of Milwaukee kept it off the list. It goes to show that a purely mathematical methodology can yield gaps and problems. The geography of central Mexico preventing high speed rail is another example
Another factor that is particularly relevant to lines like Milwaukee to Chicago is weather impacts. Things like ice can still affect rail, but air travel is especially sensitive to such weather. There are likely many weather conditions through several US corridors where rail would be more reliable.
Guelph is pronounced as "Gwelf". Glad to be included here. We're working hard on getting more trains 🙏
Shhh... his pronunciation is funnier. 😄
Like any Canadians, we are always happy to be mentioned.
I never dreamt that the pronunciation of Guelph wasn't obvious.
In Vancouver “Guelph” is pronounced “Dude Chilling”
Hey, i heard of Guelph, thanks to How I Met Your Mother.
It slays me that we have such relatively poor public transit in this country, both long distance and intra-city rail. I live in the D.C. area and Virginia keeps widening Route 66. I know there’s more to it than meets the eye but why are we not simultaneously extending the rail line as the road gets built? Everyone benefits from public transit even if you are not using it.
They really should in that case---but it's a bigger chunk of right-of-way than they want to bite off. That has to be planned decades ahead. Montgomery County (MD) seems to have done some of that, but hasn't been consistent and either never got continuous R/W, or abandoned some of it.
The main upside of I-66 widening (HOT lane construction) is that Fairfax Connector & other buses don't ever get stuck in congestion along I-66
Bingo! All highway expansion projects to me should be co-financed along side a comparable public transit corridor project in a 1 for 1 model...
Because the rail line out 66 is the Meteo subway orange line. It already goes too far out from the city. The Silver Line is even worse. For some reason the region really wants subway lines, above ground, further out than most cities commuter trains
It's not relatively poor, it's just poor. 3rd world countries perform better and have better rail.
It's important to remember that a Toronto-Montreal service would likely include Ottawa. Not only is it closer to both of the terminal destinations that they are to each other (very close to Montreal in particular) but also adds a good 1.5 million people. So that would have moved it higher on the list. Only question is how much higher.
The proposed Quebec City-Windsor High Frequency Rail service will route through Ottawa. But that means it will also completely bypass all current Via stations along Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence between the GTA and Montreal. I fear that will make those stations uneconomical for Via and they will abandon Oshawa to Cornwall.
I think this is an often overlooked factor in favor of rail. Frequent flights between city A and B means you can travel from A to B or B to A. But at rail-connection has value for anyone in-between the endpoints. Perhaps the bulk of traffic is still between the big destinations, but as a form of rural subsidy/development policy it is unbeatable: access to transportation is instrumental for breaking out of unemployment etc. Airplanes do the opposite
@@kingstonsean I don't think that's very likely because the HSR service will attract much greater total ridership and place rail much more in the general mindset of the region. Plus, since the local services are going to terminate at Kingston it will be less prone to delays since now, a delay caused by a freight train on either the Kingston-Montreal or Kington-Toronto segment can carry over to the other. Plus, the schedules can be set specifically for the needs of the intermediate cities rather than the needs of the end to end travelers. So the combination of factors would mean that ridership would still be healthy or even increase.
@@Nouvellecosse I hope you're right. Ever since Air Canada abandoned Kingston I have had to rely on Via to get to either Pearson or Dorval airports. But, Via has still not restored the early morning train to Toronto. And, they talked about starting a late evening train service back from Toronto to Kingston a few times but never implemented it. That suggests to me that they don't see enough potential between Oshawa and Kingston.
@@kingstonsean I suspect part of the situation you describe is due to there being a limited number of passenger train slots along the existing lakeshore corridor since VIA's use of the corridor is largely controlled by CN. So VIA prioritizes trips that they feel will be most useful to passengers going between the larger markets. Without having to worry about them on the corridor, the schedule can be made to best suit the needs of intermediate areas.
I'm waiting for LA --> Phoenix-->Tuscon --> El Paso. It's a 12 hour drive, so that seems like a reasonable distance. There might be like 10 yearly passengers though...
For the whole length maybe, but some of those legs would have a lot more
LA to El Paso? Might get quite a lot of traffic, just a low volume of US citizens (and a dubious quality to its voluntary use). Given the current stunts over immigration.
I used to live in Tempe, right next to Phoenix, and I absolutely would have visited Tucson more and LA and El Paso at all if I could've taken the train to them.
As I said in another comment PHX to TUS seems like it would score high using his metrics.
@@pongusikya agreed and judging by the amount of traffic on the 10 and the fact that there's only really one route, I feel like LA -> PHX would be pretty good too. Maybe with stops in Palm Springs and Indio...
Up here in the frozen north of the Canadian prairies, there's been interest for years in building high speed rail between the Edmonton metro and Calgary. There's certainly enough daily trips up and down the highway, plus flights. Plenty of population too!
How would the trucks survive tho? They can't get on passenger trains....
@@toastandpoop They can get on cargo trains tho
@@clipsburg412 Yep, intermodal cargo trains. Works quite well for the long haul, switching back to trucks for last mile.
I do not believe Danielle "Trump North" Smith will let it happen.
@@denelson83 One of the many reasons to get rid of the UCP. :)
My theory: Building HSR between two cities increases their gravity, especially if the cities then build housing, commerce, and local lines near their hub stations.
Given that Portland/Seattle would have people-friendly terminals, they might have a higher infrastructure rank than, say, Ranch Cucamonga to some strip mall area south of the Las Vegas airport. NY Penn Station stomps every other NA terminal for local infrastructure, for sure.
For decades, planners have claimed there to be a "TGV effect" once a new line opens: property values go up, local economy booms, etc.
However it's been somewhat debunked.
HSR simply speeds up whatever economic growth was already happening (and it usually quiets down afterwards) for a limited number of years, then growth continues as before the introduction of HSR. As a corollary, some cities that have had HSR for decades now did *not* boom. There was little to no "TGV effect" because they had little to no growth to begin with (e.g. Le Mans, Tours, Reims, Mâcon)
Don't get me wrong: I'm as pro rail as they come, but don't sell rail on the idea of economic boost. It's minor, at best. There are plenty of other good arguments for it.
@@remicardona_poly Agreed. Local Metros are the way to go for local economy booms, not HSR. HSR is great for the environment and people's mental wellbeing, but not necessarily for property values
@@remicardona_poly But isnt' that a big part of the business model of Brightline? To develop and sell property around the train stations?
Maybe it’s different in recent decades, because there are more transportation options (planes, cars, busses). A century and more ago, the placement of rail stations sealed the fate of new towns, determined the locations of capitals and county seats, etc. But when the only alternative was horse and buggy, rail companies had much more influence.
I used to take Amtrak between Seattle and Portland. Always preferable to going through hell of commuting to airports. connects downtown to downtown. High Speed Rail would make it a no brainer.
I currently live in Japan and some of the city pairs with High Speed Rail here actually don't have air connections. You can't fly directly from Tokyo to Sendai for example, you need to drive or get the bus or train.
That might be a symptom of a fantastic high-speed rail network though.
@@hassellchannel It definitely is. Part of the reason the Texas Triangle hasn't been built yet is because airlines have lobbied against it because they knew it would cut into their market share.
@@IBeforeAExceptAfterKexactly. It’s the same story for Australia despite being in a much better state than America. Not just automotive, oil, NIMBYs, land owners and such, rail transport also have to go against airline, even bus and other services that’s attached to those that benefits from lobbying against rail. It feels hopeless.
As someone who now lives in STL, I can attest that taking the train from STL to CHI with the meager increased speed took just under 5 hours from station to station. I drove to CHI a month later and the driving time was only 15 minutes shorter. When it is getting down to less than a 30 minute difference; no driving, arriving at Chicago Union and no parking etc etc - it totally makes it worth it to take the train. Now more than 4 trains a day would be great, but that is bringing state politics around Amtrak Midwest. Missouri (I think last year? don't quote me on the exact details) finally decided to fund the River Runner train so there are now TWO a day between STL and KC. Though sadly, the timing on that doesn't beat the driving time but is likely less stressful than I-70 which is about to be widened - for reasons we all know.
Selfishly I'd like to see STL to Memphis and on to New Orleans (which sadly didn't make the cut).
Unfortunately, I'm pretty sure the 2-a-day River Runner was what they had pre-pandemic. Would be my absolute dream to see even a semi-frequent Missouri network that connects its largest metros. But no, we *definitely* needed another lane everywhere...
Is it perhaps counting as "two" River Runners a day with one dedicated River Runner (#311) and the Lincoln Service/River Runner (#319)? I mean I'd def take the standard one and not one dependent on the Lincoln Service first. @@TheKeksadler
I think the Missouri River Runner would have higher ridership if it passed through Columbia instead of Jefferson City. Imagine how many students from Mizzou would use it instead of driving, kinda similar to Champaign-Urbana or Bloomington-Normal from Chicago
I live in Gary, Indiana, and I far prefer taking the South Shore Line to Chicago for that reason - it's probably as fast as taking the Dan Ryan, but you don't need to pay $27/hour for downtown parking
The NEC being overtalked and overhyped isn't for nothing, it is by far the strongest corridor with the highest possibility for a large, cross-border HSR network. Yet even that, the country still won't make a true, separate and dedicated HSR line. :(
I get that it's easily the most impactful and expensive place to build -- but it also generates like at least 10x the benefit of anywhere else!
As a spaniard, I can tell you that you don't need a completely separated line in order to have HSR. Many places can be solved with improvements, and inna country where acquiring the ROW can be absurdly expensive and the funds are always small, making puntual improvements (like straightening a few curves, or replacing an aging bridge) can sometimes help a lot. Plus, on those places, the catenary will be new, therefore helping with its upgrade
I'm not American so I may be wrong on this, but it seems to me that another advantage of the NEC is that the cities themselves aren't as car centric and have decent public transportation. The whole idea of high speed rail falls apart if you depend on people arriving at the train station by car, so you need that local and regional public transportation in place before building the high speed rail lines.
@@fritzp9916 I forgot to comment this to CityNerd, but showing the Cuenca station is the worst example you could give, because it is absurdly far from the city, ehich being quite small, it lacks any good public transportation.
In the case of the NEC, they might need to dig a bit not to have long, slow sections on the outskirts of the city
The whole idea of use CSA's falls apart if people don't drive to the stations.
Wow!! 56 is definitely a new record for this channel 😲
I'm calling this a top 10 list with 46 honorable mentions.
We all know this stuff, but what are you all gonna do to make this actually happen? No meaningful chance comes out of this youtube video, and from people watching it and commenting on it. I don’t care what the legal solution is, anything to make this development go faster.
Just pause the video at 16:13 with all these connections added to the map. It all makes so much sense. These are some decent railway networks. Apparently you can't have that in the US :(
The big issue that is far too often overlooked is what happens after you arrive at your destination after taking an HSR trip. There are simply too many cities in this list that have abysmal public transit networks and are about as far from "Walkable" as you can get. Most European or East Asian HSR networks tap into an already expansive and efficient public transit network, making transfers on and off HSR lines into regional or urban transit networks a breeze. Hell, sometimes you can even walk to your final destination given how dense and walkable some of those cities are.
This is NOT the case in North America as there are few cities with adequate public transit networks to fully support the scale of HSR ridership such lines could in theory support. The success of HSR is also very much tied to the ease of accessing the network, and while I still 100% agree that these should be built, there's no way we can ignore the importance that adequate urban public transit has on supporting those HSR lines. Maybe it's a case of "build it and they will come", but it won't do anyone any good if the infrastructure for the HSR lines (stations) is quite disconnected from the public transit network, or if the new stations are located in the periphery of the city.
This is one of the issues I see with California HSR, especially in Los Angeles. They need to develop their public transit within the city as well for sure
I think he could make his case without putting his thumb so heavily on the scale with the 10 minute transit time to/from the train assumption. I wonder how much of the New York population would be able to get to the train station in 10 minutes. Same for almost every other city on the list. He says he’s using one triangle and everyone else would have a different triangle, but realistically, the vast majority of people would have triangles less favorable to HSP.
A lot of HSR stations in China are located away from city centers, and still see massive use (more than domestic flights). Many airports in the US are not connected to transit at all and far from city centers (looking at you JFK). I think this point is overstated, it matters from a city design standpoint - which is an issue - but not a HSR viability standpoint. If HSR stations are sinply placed closer to city centers (i.e. in existing train stations), even having to drive there will make it a more viable option than short domestic flights. Case in point: Amtrak connections such as LA to SD or Philly to NYC are heavily used; imagine if they had a HSR connection.
i think it depends why you are going to the city. i do find most us cities still have a walkable core downtown -- if that is where you are going for tourism or work. But if you are say, visiting friends or going to a bespoke event, they won't live downtown and that is where it gets tricky for sure. (im considering cities where the alternative is driving there, as opposed to flying. Trains put you in a better boat than flying 99% of the time)
Even over 750 miles, people will still take the train because it is more convenient, comfortable, and relaxing than a plane. Not everybody, but many will on a modern high speed train
That does not apply in Europe where they have interconnected high speed rail covering much of the continent. But their discount airlines are really cheap, much cheaper than the USA. Anyway, almost no one gets the train for distances of more than about 800 km.
Absolutely. Trains do not have turbulence, sudden changes in air pressure, seat belts, and someone kicking the back of your seat for hours at a time. Add to that the wide comfortable train seating compared to the increasingly narrow airplane seating, the lack of TSA and security checkpoints, and the sheer unpleasantness of airports (even PDX!), and many of us would be much happier to take the high-speed train, even if it were to take half-again as long to get from A to B.
@@Dave_Sisson Gonna have to agree with you. Being French, here are 2 examples from over here. The 2 largest domestic air routes are Paris-Toulouse and Paris-Nice (with about 2M pax/year each), both happen to be quite far (time-wise) away from Paris, 4.5 and 5.5 hours respectively. Trains have a very small modal share on those routes.
There's a project to extend HSR from Bordeaux to Toulouse, which would put Toulouse at 3:15 from Paris. This time makes the train more competitive, as history has shown over the past 40 years of HSR in France.
For Nice however, even if we dug 400 miles of HSR in a straight line under the Alps (economically unfeasible, to be clear), those city pairs would still be too far away and trains still would not make a significant dent in air travel. This route is a lost cause for HSR **from Paris**.
Yeah I wanted to have a little bit where I point this out but then also point out that not 100% of people will take HSR even at optimal 250 mile distance because something like 25% of the people in this country apparently believe that anything that isn't driving or flying is a global social engineering conspiracy of some sort. It all balances out
The most glaring example I can think of where people fly when HSR would be perfect is in the UK. UK rail is really expensive and tops out at 125mph. If you're heading up the WCML to Birmingham, Manchester or Liverpool it's not too bad, but Ryanair or Easyjet up to Endinburgh or Glasgow is cheaper and quicker than LNER or Avanti. The UK should've turned the ECML and WCML into HSR corridors decades ago, HS2 is a tiny fraction of the HSR that the UK needs.
That Madrid to Seville route is incredible. I was on the Iryo service last year, and wow, was it impressive! I could only dream of such a level of civilization in the US.
I rode the AVE Sevilla-Madrid in 1998, and at that time it made the US seem primitive by comparison. That gap has grown by orders of magnitude during the intervening 25 years.
Yeah I took it to Cordoba -- so to be fair, that route has a bit more gravity than just Seville. Cordoba is what, 500K?
Not even close! According to the govmt, just 322k!
The funniest thing about the Madrid-Sevilla is that it's the slowest HSR line in the country. Many sections are ~270 km/h, with the mountain crossings north of Córdoba limited to 250 and even 220km/h. By comparison, the lines built after that one have continuous 300km/h capability, with some of them allowing (theoretically) 320, 320 or even 350km/h, quite overkill as the fastest rolling stock is just 320km/h capable and they don't reach them for energy cost reasons
You should do the longer one that includes over 100 city pairs. Let's shoot for the stars
#1 SAN JUAN PUERTO RICO 🇵🇷.
We are a small 100x30 Mile long Island that is perfect for HSR from San Juan(300,K)/Ponce(100K)/Mayagüez(80K) passing thru cities with smaller but at a minimum 30k population. It would probably make a 2.5Hr trip into a 45-60 minute one.
There's definitely a demand enough for pdx/seattle/vancouver. Especially since the region isn't going to stop growing. It really needs to happen sooner than later.
It'd be really good to have a normal train that's frequent and not subject to coastal erosion, freight traffic, understaffing, and the slow border crossing and BC trackage
Imo the main factor pushing Cascadia above a lot of the other pairs on this list is the higher quality of local transit in each of the main cities, and the mere existence of local transit in the smaller stops along the way. Sure, Chicago-Detroit is a pretty strong pair, but what are you gonna do when you arrive in Detroit? There's hardly any frequent routes. Then look at any of the three Cascadia cities and most of the core routes are frequent.
I wonder if there's any data for how elevated rail lines respond to landslides...
At this point it might as well be thought of as Portland to Seattle HSR, and something a heck of a lot slower to Vancouver. Passenger trains are agony in Canada and in the Lower Mainland especially
imagine playing Ticket to Ride against the CityNerd. it would be really tedious or really fun, you decide.
This video should be required viewing for everyone in the United States
Living in Madrid right now and seeing the examples used really makes me appreciate I have these travel options available to me. From Stl though and can totally agree the Chicago to Stl corridor is a no brainer. Great video!
As a Texan, that Dal-> Hou -Austin rail triangle would be amazing!
Heavy agree. San Antonio as well. Austin to Sant Antonio makes so much sense to me with stops between at San Marcos and New Braunfels. So many commuters live and work in all of those places going both directions.
@@TransitTangentsATXSATX would make sense as HSR with no stops in between. A commuter interurban has been explored and should imho get some more attention for the purposes you’re talking about (stops in SM, NB, and maybe like Shertz, Kyle, and Buda). Having HSR stop at those locations would make it so that it’s not HSR anymore as it wouldn’t even have the time to speed up and slow down to those high speeds.
Connecting SA International Airport and Austin Bergstrom International Airport should be included in any HSR design plan.
Dallas to Houston isn't going to start service until like 2050 lol, never mind adding ATX into the mix. Our country, and especially Texas, is a joke when it comes to mass transit (or any other good stuff really)
Practically speaking, the biggest and most vital engineering hurdle is the Trans-Appalachian Corridor connecting Pittsburgh to the coastal plain somewhere around Chambersburg, PA. *Every* train between the Midwest and Mid-Atlantic needs to use this Trans-App Corridor.
I want Pittsburgh DC hsr through the mountains
If Switzerland can tunnel under the Alps we can tunnel under the Appalachians.
@@blushdog99 Wanting something is not getting it! It's a long way from Chambersburg to the Monongahela, through a lot of mountains oriented at crazy angles.
China, Japan, and Switzerland are pretty mountainous
The Capital Limited is an example of a 150 year old route following the meandering rivers through the region with slow climbs up the mountain passes. Upgrading all of that to HSR means countless tunnels and huge expense.
The big difference between Europe and North America is the presence or lack there of public transit. Frequently in North America one would need a car to get to the train station and another at the destination. The cost of parking and car rental has to be part of the total picture.
@alberthartl8885 The same is true of flying, but HSR is a much better travel experience. Metro area transit definitely needs improvement. It is encouraging that even Los Angeles is taking great strides (LA 28 Olympics).
"Gelph" getting a shout out! Yay.
Also, funny story with Guelph, Waterloo region is called the tri-cities. And while the Ontario government occasionally mis-quotes it as "Kitchener-Waterloo-Guelph" (much to the chagrin of Cambridge, the actual third city), it is neither part of the GT(H)A nor of Waterloo Region. Poor Guelph. But given their is now a relatively frequent commuter train, it probably makes sense to include it.
Ah, GO, giving hope to commuters while making life a nightmare for everyone else. I would visit Guelph more frequently if they actually had trains running between Kitchener and Guelph on weekends. But alas.
Tragic Seattle to PDX isn't on the list. If we aren't getting high speed rail I would settle for more than 6 trains a day (that don't get cancelled day of and replaced with busses).
I'm happy that Indianapolis got included in this. It's sad that we only have 3 trains a week to Chicago. I think if we had a convenient high speed rail a lot more people would take advantage of that.
I can vouch for this
I'm in Indy and really want to take the train and spend a few days in Chicago; but every time I look into it I feel like I'm trying to crack some secret code just to figure out the timetable the train runs on and eventually give up 🙃
Given how much a flight hub Chicago is, a convenient train from Indy would open up a lot of flight options as well!
Among the Midwestern states, the Indiana state government has typically been the least supportive of intercity rail.
Just stumbled onto your channel. Loved this video. I'm crying that I didn't know about it when I taught engineering economics last year and the major project was on the economic analysis of high speed rail in North America. This would have made an amazing intro to appropriate modeling and easily hops over to $ analysis ... but I'm retired now ... don't have to worry about this stuff ... I can just sit back and watch videos all day! Thanks for your work.
This is my all time favorite CityNerd video! I love the topic, I'm happy with the analysis and assumptions, and the pace helps accentuate how much needs to be done here in NA.
Cries in Kansas City to Denver. I have made that drive so many times. It’s awful, but still cheaper than an airport shuttle/flight/rental car/flight/airport shuttle
Of all the boring interstate drives I've heard about but have never endured, I-70 between Kansas City and Denver is at the top of the list. I can only imagine the monotony and aggravation of driving the mostly flat road for hours on end while everything looks mostly the same in front and on the sides.
@@ozmoe I actually enjoy the drive and have good memories of audio books like Plato's Republic. However, I would 100% prefer to be lounging on a train, walking up and down the aisle, as I read the book myself and take notes / tend to my children (the days of undisturbed travel are long over).
curious to see where adding Ottawa to the Toronto-Montreal pair would've landed. Toronto to Ottawa is already the busiest route in Canada and Ottawa to Montreal has the distance benefit.
He probably didn't count Gatineau in the Ottawa virtual census area
true with Gat its a population centre of 1.5m @@gabrieldomocos7570
One factor that might improve the gravity model a lot is special reasons to go to specific cities. National capitals obviously, but plenty of plenty of other cities have many more or many fewer visitors than average. I can't think of a way to estimate that that isn't ad-hoc.
@@wintermath3173Vegas is the biggest example. Surely with all those extra tourism trips relative to the size of the urban area, it’d be higher on this list
The extra distance of ~90km is so small that it would be silly to skip Ottawa. Montreal-Windsor at HSR speeds still beats flying with Ottawa included.
I really enjoyed the clarity of methodology, and I think that is reflected in the final product, which is more realistic as a long-term vision than anything I've seen to date.
So the Northeast Corridor, LA Hub, Texas Triangle, Florida and the Great Lakes region... what a surprise! lol thank you for doing this video very informative!
Former resident of SW Michigan here, which leads me to make a comment regarding the DET-CHI pairing in your exercise. To this day, each of Michigan's 3 largest cities (all no farther north than Detroit) are NOT connected by passenger rail. They are Detroit, Lansing, Grand Rapids. If you want to take a train between Grand Rapids (1M+ metro area) and Detroit, you have to take the Amtrak to Chicago, then take another train back to Michigan which ends in Grand Rapids. That's a 2.5-3 hour drive (Grand Rapids to Detroit), but a 7-10 hour ride by train. The only way between Michigan's 2 largest cities is via a trip to Chicago. Lansing, the capitol, which sits nearly equidistant between Detroit and Grand Rapids, has no rail service at all.
However, some of Michigan's smaller cities ARE connected via rail, along the DET-CHI Amtrak line. So Ann Arbor, Jackson, Battle Creek, and Kalamazoo are all connected by passenger rail today. But the three metro areas that contain the majority of Michigan's population have no rail connection.
Cities/towns in northern Michigan used to have passenger rail service. There was once regular service, for instance, between Grand rapids and Traverse City (that rail bed is now a 200 mile bike path).
Also, I live in Tacoma now and fully support the breakaway republic of Cascadia and our eventual escape from the American/Canadia quagmire. Free Cascadia!!!
As a Detroiter, I always thought that was strange that the Wolverine Services are three branches, going to the biggest three cities and all separating in New Buffalo, instead of interconnecting all of them. It would make Michigan more attractive to invest in services like that
I did not know this! I would love to see Michigan build a high-speed rail system now.
Long live Cascada! 😂
This doesn't take away from your extremely valid point at all, but the pedant in me feels compelled to point out that Lansing and Grand Rapids are both significantly north of Detroit. I believe I heard something recently about a proposed rail connection between Lansing and Traverse City, which, while nice, is obviously a much lower priority than connecting our three major metro areas, as you suggest. But of course, with Detroit being the origin of the automotive industry, there is a mix of cultural association with the Motor City and the political/economic influence held by the major automaker corporations that, unfortunately, I expect to stand in the way of real progress here in Michigan for quite some time.
Lansing does has passenger service. It's just between Port Huron and Chicago. Bluewater Service is the name of the trains.
not now babe new citynerd vid just dropped
This is a triumph. Thank you for all the work you put in on this.
You incorporated exactly the critique I had of that first triangle plot!
Now to see where those additional routes would go based on Madrid-Sevilla. 😊
I’m surprised Columbus didn’t land on the list, especially since it seems natural to connect it to Cleveland, Cincinnati, and Pittsburgh to build out the network.
I observed the same thing in a separate comment. I would have expected Columbus, Ohio to make the list somewhere (it's now in the top 15 of largest cities in country). But I'm guessing it's "Penalized" in the formula with its direct, interstate connections to Cleveland, Cincinnati, Indianapolis, and Pittsburgh. So you're not going to get much high-speed-rail gain.
It’s just the gravity model: not enough combined people and with too little time savings compared to driving on these routes. You have to remember that Cleveland, Columbus, and Cincinnati are all great mid-sized cities, but combined they only add up to Philadelphia. Realistically, I think all of the suggested Ohio routes should be served, but it would require a lower minimum score threshold to be included on the list.
Cleveland CSA, which includes Akron and Canton is considerably larger than Columbus CSA, which is why it barely made the list, but Columbus didn't despite similar distances.
His model also favors city pairs at a sweet spot in distance, so many seemingly obvious pairs are either too close or too distant.
@@DarrLawnot it's metro area, but yes, 3-C is more likely to happen because it is all within one state
@@jacksonp2397Cincinnati subway system. Cincinnati subway system. Cincinnati subway system.
Your channel is really making a difference. Thank you!
Also, i would love a Chicago to New York night train in a sleeper car.
No Calgary to Edmonton 😢Welp! I WILL DO IT ANYWAY!!
Thanks for doing the math on all this!
Damn I did not realize that we forgot about those city pairs... 🚆
My dad used to ride the train from Nashville to Atlanta back in the 60's. It's good to see Amtrak is considering this corridor again, but their projected 6.5 hour travel time sucks. If they could do it in 5, I think a lot of people would prefer the train over driving, but of course you also have the problem that they only anticipate running the train twice a day.
That's an insanely long travel time, it's less than 4 hours to drive that distance, even literally worse than a 3rd world bus service Greyhound does it in less than 5. Don't even need HSR on that line to start. Get the line speed up to 125mph and run Chargers, it would be a less than 3 hour trip if you keep the number of stops down, probably just stop in Marietta, Chatanooga, Murfressboro and Nashville.
Absolutely loved this video and would love to see the next 100 or so unveil on the map!
Here a fan of you from Spain. High speed rail in Spain was built in 1992 between Madrid and Sevilla because Sevilla was the host of the Universal Exposition that year…
Just looked at taking an Amtrak from Jacksonville, FL to Nashville, TN and the only route offered is a 14 hour train to DC, a 12 hour train to Indianapolis, then a 5 hour Greyhound to Nashville 😂 over 3 days...
15:33 As a native Utahn, I was curious if we were going to make the list at all. I'd _love_ to have HSR here, but I recognize that the Salt Lake Metro is probably the last major-ish city in the US that will get anything like it. Maybe someday we can connect Denver to Las Vegas/California, and Boise/PNW. But that day is far off I fear.
SLC would probably be higher on an hSR (higher Speed Rail) list, as would be much of west of the Appalachians! How many Utahns want to go to LV, the closest metropolitan area to SLC? Even Denver is quicker by plane because of the mountains, but it’s not a practical pair for HSR unfortunately.
Visited SLC a few weeks ago for the first time! The front runner and trax were nice! We have an episode or two coming up in a few weeks where we talk about the trip.
Convential speed rail to Vegas and Boise I think is the best we can expect until what was featured here is built. FrontRunner does a good job as is connecting the Wasatch Front. Expanding and enhancing that, and making better connections, would definitely help
Ideally the UT legislature does continue to fund FrontRunner and we'll see quasi high speed(they're claimed target is a top speed of 125MPH) regional rail along it at least, along with further expansions along the Front.
To be fair, it's probably a lot cheaper than much of that east coast corridor to build, even if it doesn't make a ton of sense.
This is what happens when people expect infrastructure investments to be made by corporations, people spend their afternoons sitting on the 405.
Unlike most other train youtubers, you actually back up your research with facts and numbers instead of "if we build trains they will come"
In terms of your Mexican network, I believe the very basic connections you show are quite close for reality. The only thing I would mention is that your map routes basically all routes from CDMX to León, splitting in three from there, while current alignments would have the CDMX-GDL route avoing León by going through Irapuato, and the CDMX-SLP (and to MTY) splits off from Querétaro. But your design with León as the split-off point makes much more sense to me in terms of network and connections, and is a lot better than what we have now.
Bonus, other possible high speed routes I would recommend for Mexico specifically are:
- CDMX to Veracruz, could be done by expanding the CDMX to Puebla line, is also historically important due to trade and being the first rail line of the country, could also hold historical significance.
- Mazatlán to Los Mochis (or up to Hermosillo), pretty straight alignment, really interconnected cities, and the car travel right now is abysmally expensive in the toll road.
- CDMX to Morelia, also a relatively close and somewhat big state capital, and could be an alternate route later to Guadalajara.
- Also mentioning Tijuana to Mexicali, but since you said that SD includes the TIJ metro area, that makes sense that would be technically already included.
Great video, and thank you for including and actively discussing my country which IS indeed part of North America and Indeed should have freer movement of people!
I’m just happy el Bajío is is included 🎉
If anything, this is far more reasonable than most fictional high-speed route maps that feature lots of cross-country connections. China's cross country routes actually lose a lot of money and can't even pay for electricity to run the trains using ticket sales.
Also, i'm surprised Richmond is not on the list as it's about a million people in the metro area and very close to the Northeast corridor.
Edit: I must have overhead the New York to Richmond connection.
RVA? It is on the list. #47
To be fair, every transportation method is subsidized. Not sure if long distance rail would need to be subsidized moreso than its alternatives.
Infrastructure isn't supposed to be profitable necessarily. It's supposed to provide utility to the citizens.
Sure, we should discuss which ones are the best bang-for-our-buck, but it doesn't need to generate profit through ticket sales
@@gmarefan It's fine when it's subsidized, but many of China's lines are beyond that. There are worries that the whole system may start falling apart as many of these lines are complete black holes. As the system ages, it's going to start getting even more expensive. What is worse is that they subsidize the HSR at expense of the freight trains. China built the HSR without the functionality to let freight trains use them (even though many of these lines are only used once or twice a day). More and more goods are being shipped by truck not train as freight trains are so heavily taxed. It's a very unsustainable system. Spain is by far the country we should be celebrating and following.
Honestly, the only ones who mention a cross-country HSL in the US are either very idealistic (given that the focus is to build smaller networks first) or detractors (a typical strawman argument, especially because there are no HSL through the EU alone either).
I would love to see an extended map with those other 60 or 70 city pairs you mentioned near the end of the video!
This video shows the "Minimum Acceptable HSR Network" but that would be more like an HSR Network that would actually put us at the level of other developed countries.
First time viewer here. You sir are a freaking treasure! Solid analysis, thoughtful methodology, and comedy throughout. Give this man his own TV show!
Having recently looked at HSR for a Uni project I am going to have to play devil's advocate for a minute.
While I agree the HSR is the way forward for mid distance intercity trips I don't nessicary agree that it is the right choice at this time.
My big question is what the goal? Is it to replace air travel? Reduce CO2 emissions? Inspire transit use?
If the goal is to reduce CO2 then I think there is a strong argument for using transit funds to support local rail and local transit networks. Effective HSR is built off of effective local transit. The gravity model starts to break down if you now have to rent a car or Uber after your HSR trip.
I think we need to build HSR in the USA, but we need to recognize the opportunity costs of investing heavily in HSR. What changes could that money make locally?
It's surprising that Milwaukee and Madison didn't make the map, but i was amused to see your Chicago to Minneapolis line make the side trip to Milwaukee anyway.
CHI-MKE is too short -- it is way on the left of the triangle in his methodology. Some other super-short stuff did make the cut simply because the populations are so much larger, and population size increased demand/interaction models exponentially. That's why so many comparably small places like Harrisbug, Hartford and Rochester to NY show up. NY is massive.
CHI-MKE is about the same distance as NY-Philly. But NY+PHL is about 29.3 million people, while CHI+MKE is only about 11.9 million. If Milwaukee was a perfect 275 miles away from Chicago rather than 86 it would have made the cut. Madison is not only too close but too small -- CSA of about 916k is only about 45% the size of Milwaukee CSA.
Having CHI-MSP run through MKE is a no-brainer because while CHI-MKE does not make the cut it is a big city pair to benefit from HSR as part of the longer segment. And while the MKE-MSP combined population (about 6.1m) is too small to be anywhere near the top 56, the distance of 332 miles is close to optimal and a substantial secondary benefit of MKE-MSP traffic would further bolster CHI-MSP.
@@mturpizThanks for the explanation. I was expecting Chicago to Milwaukee to be in the top 10 since I have relatives who make that trip a lot.
I'm starting to think he doesn't acknowledge Wisconsin on purpose lol.
WI had plans and federal funds to begin building HSR between Madison and Milw, but then we elected Scooter on apparently no other platform than "sToP tHe TrAiN!" and he made us give away that money and job potential to another state.
It wasn't going to be very high speed but it was a start.
If you want fast rail Chicago to Minneapolis, it needs to parallel I-90 and I-94: Chicago-Rockford-Janesville-Beloit-Madison-Tomah-Eau Shitte (Eau Claire)-Menomonie-Minneapolis....
The trouble will always be if the cities in question are car centric, and you have to drive to the departure train station, and possibly rent or Uber at the destination station. People will ask “why not just drive”
The bright line for example…. Great idea stopping in Orlando but it’s at the airport! You aren’t exactly walking or biking there and the Orlando commuter rail (SunRail) does not stop at the airport! Of course the SunRail doesn’t stop at any of Orlando’s most traveled tourist spots either! (and Disney has basically vetoed any future SunRail expansion there)
Good point. Brightline goes to the Orlando Airport. No SunRail there, as you point out. I would love to read a really good analysis of that idea. Didn't they know that Union Station was built in DC and 30th Street Station is in Philadelphia. Kinda, sorta busy stations. On the other end, in South Florida, Brightline runs into an unacceptable number of cars and pedestrians. I am pro-rail, but it has to be done sensibly.
Agree. HSR is not viable. It's easier to drive from the suburbs or neighborhood of Chicago to an area of Indy that isn't downtown which is what most people are doing. HSr won't and shouldn't happen except for a very niche market. Driving or flying is better and I hate driving. It would be too costly to build and maintain all of the lines. A HST is probably more expensive than a plane and there is not track to building and maintain for a plane.
@@canyonoverlook9937 florida and indianapolis have nothing to do with whether hsr is good in general. clearly considering how good public transit is in the northeast it must at least go there. it makes no sense that it doesn't. boston, dc, and especially ny are the best cities for public transit in america, can all clearly compete with public transit anywhere else in the world, and are at distances where flying is a pain in the dick. montreal/toronto have excellent public transit too and would fit fine. people absolutely would use boston-dc rail line with stops in nyc, pitt, baltimore, etc. because tons of people ALREADY use the rail line that's as slow as driving, and hsr would be at least twice as fast
Damn, beard looks good on you. But also shows how long you worked on the map lol
Someday we'll get the Texas Triangle 😅 There have also been discussions about connecting San Antonio down to the border with a stop in Laredo/Nuevo Laredo and then on down to Monterrey. It is mostly super flat empty desert land in between so could be fairly inexpensive to build. Not holding my breath though....
That was my thought. If DFW-SA was built, extending to LRD and MTY would seem sensible. Monterrey is a very big city, and there's already a bunch of traffic up to the I-35 corridor from there (not just freight).
I think the biggest problem with the Texas triangle is what would you possibly do after you get to the cities when you don't have a car? Sure I'd love to take train from Dallas to Houston, but then how do I get around Houston withouth a vehicle??
@@voscra How do you get around Houston if you fly in from Dallas (given how horrible I-45 can be, people do this all the time)?
This is an excellent analysis - your very first video on this topic is what made me discover your channel a few years ago. It's great to see you implement a very data-driven approach of the gravity model combined with the triangle weighting system. This is harder work than the civil consulting firms do and I can't believe I get to see it for free (and for $15 per year on Nebula ;)
If THIS is harder than what civil consulting firms do, I am very worried for your country... (not to downgrade the video of course, but I dare hope a real traffic prediction model, for a more important goal than a CZcams video, say, how to spend $10 billion, is a bit more advanced)
@@noefillon1749 Traffic prediction models are something our civil firms have down better than other country's. Rail infrastructure analysis.. not as much.
To be clear - a lot of very smart geotechs or actual engineers do well to assess constructibility. But there is an apathy for business-conscious decision making for rail.
This is a lot of work and some really cool analysis. Loving your content and thank you!
Such a great video with some strong, relevant data! Loved it, thanks
More rail please
being an orlando resident, i would love to hear your more in-depth thoughts on the miami/orlando brightline. Personally, I wish it was faster 😅, and the number of at-grade crossings through south florida has been a growing problem with the number of collisions it has.
The Brightline is proof South Florida drivers are out of their minds.
Train has collisions because people have driven their cars around the gates when the signal is flashing because they can’t wait 30 seconds.
0:52 I love this animated graph
Great video! Being an Ohioan, I feel your pain as a PNW native not seeing 3C show up. Cincinnati is a unique case because it and Dayton have sprawled into each other, for better or worse, which makes a case that they should be considered the same metro. If they were the same metro, I imagine Cincy-Detroit would have shown up on the list
It's interesting how NYC to ROC scores well enough to warrant a connection, but not NYC to BUF, ROC to BUF, or TOR to BUF. Perhaps it's implied by existing on the network? Would love know why it didn't make the cut. Great work!
Those would probably be high on an hSR (higher Speed Rail) list, as would west of the Appalachians!
As a Buffalonian, and Buffalo being the Second largest city in NY (depending on exactly how you define city boundaries) I was waiting for some sort of BUF-TOR or maybe a BUF-PIT pair
@@Musicman9492 Buffalo-Toronto is too close for the model, sine it assumes cars win at that 100 mile distance (and ignores border friction).
@@michaelbodell7740 True, but have you ever driven from Buffalo to Toronto? The traffic can be an absolute nightmare on the Gardiner Expressway. I feel like instead of exclusively using mileage for these metrics average travel time should also be considered.
@@michaelbodell7740 True, but he does say that he was using Time, not raw distance. And as the other commenter said, time can run north of 3 hours from city core to city core in a car, depending on time of day.
Glad to hear you have learned about the Harrisburg MSA! Now if only we could get some transit around here 😢
Seriously though, Harrisburg could be so well connected. Trains to Baltimore and DC via York, Philly via Reading, and NYC via Reading and Allentown should already be things.
@@jonathanstensberg and we could have had Light Rail from Ship to HBG, Lebanon to HBG, Lanc/York to HBG all complete by 2016-22 if not for *one* Cumberland County commissioner in 2003 who was the deciding vote for phase 1 and voted no 😪🤬
I think the Harrisburg *CSA* (he says CSA and cites the population of 1.3 million which applies to the CSA - the MSA is about half that) is a little too spread out for serious consideration as a HSR hub. The CSA ranges from Gettysburg to Lebanon including York (but interestingly not Lancaster). Harrisburg is clearly the major city in that region but it's a big region.
Loved the video, was kind of soothing in a way to watch you build out the map. Am surprised Vancouver - Seattle didn't make it.
I ride Amtrak from Chicago to Minneapolis, which barely made the cut. Although its a significantly longer ride than air and slightly unfavorable to the car, the trip is so pleasant, and I emerge so refreshed, that it is always my preferred mode. Great content here, thanks
Albany should be the capital for HSR with lines going to NYC,Boston, Montreal and Buffalo.
Albany would probably be higher on an hSR (higher Speed Rail) list! It deserves a quality rail connection even if not great for HSR!
It's in a lucky position, and would probably end up becoming a real city of these lines were built.
As someone who lives less than an hour from Albany in Western Mass and who would really appreciate faster travel to NYC, DC, Chicago, and everything in between... YESSSSSSS.
@@ttopero Why build hSR when you can build HSR if you take higher raking pairs into account, lol.
@@MarioFanGamer659 Albany could be a stop on an HSR route, but at some point, the short distance doesn’t allow an HSR to get to full speed sufficiently to warrant the stop for the route, even if it goes through it. Maybe doing hSR speeds along that portion is sufficient to warrant a stop❓❔
That is unless we’re willing to accept the marketing that says if a route has a segment it can get to HSR speeds, & the train is capable, we’ll call it HSR even if it’s just for a minor & inconsistent portion of the full route.
Biggest surprise for me was how early Pittsburgh popped up. I get excited riding around the Horseshoe Curve, but we really need a base tunnel. This video makes the Pittsburgh -Cleveland corridor look like an important connector. --- Speaking of connections, I'm very excited to see the S-Line come alive.
There's definitely a charm to the Pennsylvanian train, but it's so achingly slow from Pittsburgh to Philly, and it's so much more time-efficient to just drive on the turnpike instead. I'd be ecstatic if there was a HSR replacement - taking a 2 hour ride for quick weekend trips would be the dream.
I’m excited to get two trains a day to PGH at some point…but high speed would be even better
The PA turnpike has been trying to replace the Allegheny Tunnel for over two decades now. If it takes that long to replace a short road tunnel, then I doubt we will see a high speed rail tunnel anytime soon, unless our entire outlook changes and we become willing to take on big projects again.
I’m a Canadian. I can understand the States not having high speed rails yet, as there are so many big cities scattered everywhere, but in Canada, we have no excuse. Like all our major cities are in a straight line from west to east lol. We have the slow train but it takes like 3 days to get across. At that point it’s just cheaper and more convenient to fly.
I'm a Canadian, too, and agree we need true high speed rail. But looking at his "triangle" it would really only work between Montreal and Windsor/Detroit. I don't think he mentioned Ottawa, but the proposed High Frequency Rail (HFR) will loop through Ottawa on its way between Montreal and Toronto. That adds even more density. The problem with the HFR route is it bypasses Kingston and other Lake Ontario/St. Lawrence River communities.
We do have High Speed Rail. The Acela reaches 150 mph and travels at 125 mph for more than half its route. It's a middling HSR line by European or Japanese standards (Most of their lines are older and top out at 160 mph, unlike China or Spain.)
I love your content so much, thank you so much, amigo.
"New York to Pittsburgh, which I'm gonna route through Philly for ... reasons" 🤣🤣🤣. I love this channel!
Does he live in Phila now?
@@RacksonRacksonRibss Dunno. I grew up there but have no idea where he lives. 🤷🏽♂️
There's an existing Amtrak from New York City to Harrisburg, PA via Philadelphia already and a once a day Philadelphia to Pittsburgh Amtrak. But the train to Pittsburgh goes over the mountains, so it isn't straight. Google Horseshoe Curve. It's just outside Altoona, PA.
It's a lot more realistic for both geological and political reasons to make a strong Pittsburgh to Philly connection that then goes to NYC.
@@RacksonRacksonRibssstill Albuquerque afaik.
Your first HSR video was pretty inspirational. I actually made an excel sheet using the gravity model you discussed there and mapped out a HSR network on MetroDreamin. Now I can update it again with these new ideas, sweet.
I'm making sad noises here in Denver.
Growing up in Washington, I think one need that is greatly understated is rail lines connecting the southwest and central parts of the state to the I5 corridor. Highway 12 and 18 and I5 between Portland and Olympia gets overrun with tourists to the point that traveling within your own state gets ridiculous
No need to go through each pairing individually, but would love to see what a map using Madrid to Sevilla as the threshold criteria.
Washington and Oregon can't even come together on replacing the I-5 bridge over the Columbia, which there should be substantial Federal funding for, so the chances of them ever building out Portland/Vancouver BC high speed rail are about bupkis.
PNW/Cascades would probably be higher on an hSR (higher Speed Rail) list, as would be much of west of the Appalachians!
That was entirely the fault of people in Vancouver. This wasn’t a project between states, it was basically local politics that killed it. They killed the max extension as well
^ That's Vancouver, Washington, for any non-locals reading this. (We know, it's confusing.)
@@joenuts5167 clark county*, people in the city proper did and still do support the CRC project
Remember: these city-pairs are the ones that should be connected by *high-speed rail first.* Those "gaps" jn the network could be (and in some cases, already are) filled in by conventional low-speed rail service.
Nice United polo!! I was in ABQ frequently this past summer and fall, and actually saw a few United games. 👏 As always, excellent video content.
I’m amused that Ottawa isn’t on here lol
Ottawa would probably be higher on an hSR (higher Speed Rail) list, as would be much of the rest of Canadian cities.
CN is rather clueless about Canada generally, especially for someone who grew up in Seattle.
Weird list
#1: Lincoln to Omaha, Nebraska
LOL This would probably be higher on an hSR (higher Speed Rail) list, as would be much of west of the Appalachians! By the time the train got to 125, it’d slowing down anyway😉
Yes! Nebraska needs passenger rail!
@@samotte8279 Lincoln-Omaha-Sioux City
Austinite here, Linking up the complete Texas Triangle is a slam dunk move that the gas-powered state government is ignoring as hard as they can. One of the reasons I think that isn't talked about as much is linking up most of the largest universities in the state directly to the DFW and Houston metros. I feel like every other student at these schools hails from DFW or Houston in someway. I'd imagine just having that safe and reliable transit accessible for Baylor, UT, Tex State, UH, and A&M if the Texas Central is making that connection in the Brazos Valley, so students can visit home or travel to one of the main airports makes a ton of sense. TxDOT is about to start tearing up I-35 for the next decade + in Central Austin anyway. So what's a little more construction. Fund a Buc-ees or HEB in every station hub, and you've got a money printer.
3C! I really feel like the power of the Midwest/Great Lakes, especially when connected across Pennsylvania through PIT and across the Erie Canal route to the East Coast would create some seriously solid demand. Cincinnati would be a hub that could connect to the hub in Chicago, a hub in Cleveland (where everything would get connected to the East), and perhaps a hub in the South, like Nashville or Atlanta. The NY-Chicago route has long roots in American history. And something I feel is getting forgotten is how much flying has come to suck the past few years. HSR could catch a lot of people who have no interest in flying domestically.
Drag on HSR in US significantly tied to (outside of Acela corridor) has pretty spartan intraurban mass transport. It's all about door-to-door travel time.
so early to a city nerd video we should be discussing uruk
Uruk?
The New Mexico United polo is sick!! Thanks for supporting your local club!
Rail is needed the most in North Carolina
My biggest issue with this focus on HSR is that it doesn’t account for the groups of cities that would probably be better served by hSR (higher Speed Rail) which can cost a lot less, be built more quickly & connect more islands of populations with more diversity of people.
HSR would also have to bypass all the communities that have been bypassed for generations, which hSR would be able to connect to with local services between “express” services.
This! An 100-125 MPH train is still faster than driving in most cases, but far far cheaper to build. Outside the NE corridor and a few special paired cities, most shouldbe hSR not HSR.
It's certainly not an either-or case, but rather a both-and. Most countries with decent rail networks have parallel slower services with many stops along side HSR so that travellers in smaller locals hop on the slow train to the closest HSR stop then transfer to HSR to their final destination.
In addition to the HSR list in this video, you can make a case for hSR in less populated areas for sure. Lower speed rail is also a backbone of travel. It answers another need. Here in France, HSR serves for business and leisure, and hSR mostly connects people to their regional hub.
@@lindsiria Look at something like the British Rail Class 387. That does 110mph and is used on local/regional services.
@@katrinabryce British Rail Class 395 is worth a mention here, too. Speaking of Britain, if the HS2 wasn't so over-ambitious on speed, it would have been more affordable and perhaps the project would have survived. Something of the specs of the Austrian mainlines, and rolling stock the likes of Stadler RABe 501 spring to mind. England is a small country by area; a line designed for max 250 mph was overkill.
Great video as always. Probably the best wishful high speed rail map i've ever seen of NA, backed by the joy that is data
"It's an election year, what did you expect." Perfect!
I really love that this channel is just video listicles but with actual methodology. It's not just cool cause of the hard data but taking time to share the method opens up discussion about the method itself and its benefits and shortcomings.
Also props for remembering Mexico is part of North America. Did any Central American cities make the cut or was there a lack of info to make the models?
feel like no central american cities are nearly large enough