Posted on 08/11/2010 10:52:32 AM PDT by Willie Green
Would you like to board a high-speed train in Atlanta and travel north to Nashville? Or even farther north to Chicago? Or how about Atlanta to Florida by high-speed rail?
Such travel may be available in the future, although we have not heard of any timetable.
What we have heard this week is that Georgia and Tennessee are applying for a $34 million federal grant to continue the development of high-speed rail service from Atlanta to Nashville. The Georgia DOT said the money would help speed development of the train system. The money would come from the Federal Railroad Administration under the U.S. High Speed Intercity Passenger Rail program created by Congress last year.
Georgia and Tennessee already received $14 million last year to develop plans for the Atlanta to Chattanooga leg of the high speed rail service.
While the push now is on for service from Atlanta to Chattanooga and Nashville, eventually the service could stretch on to Louisville, Ky., and Chicago to the north and southward through Florida.
One day, high speed rail service will likely connect many major U.S. cities. Much like the interstate highway system was started back in the 1950s during the Eisenhower Administration, President Obama and future presidents are likely to see high speed rail service as a major component of travel alternatives throughout the country.
Japan has had the high speed bullet trains for decades. Certainly, this mode of transportation should be added to the travel mix in our country as we look for ways to reduce the number of passenger cars and trucks on our highways.
Maybe to Nashville - a trip to Grand Ol’ Opry. Maybe once a year.
Still I think it would be mistake for the taxpayer to be asked to subsidize my tourism.
HEHE — you should try Trailways or Greyhound. Amtrack is a STEP UP!
And I used to go EVERYWHERE on Greyhound when I was in college. ... in the 70s’s ...
I vote NO!
Now Atl-Wash-Ny I might be interested in.
In terms of the quality of people you fly with, air travel today is like Greyhound decades ago. I can't see how the train would be worse.
"Did someone say trains? I like trains."
I understand the limitations of modern “education”, and the limitations of the news “reporters”, but doesn’t anybody remember an ancient invention called the airplane?
Do you mean those cramped sardine cans with the surly flight attendants?
3 words: Atlanta, Nashville (not as bad a Memphis), Chicago. Read between the lines.
Another union gummit boondoggle to pour your taxes into.
Pray for America
Don't pick on MARTA. I've only seen a stabbing in the car I was riding in once.
The future of transportation is with private vehicles that drive (or fly) themselves. Someday, you will be able to climb into your personal vehicle, tell it where you want to go, and then sit back and read a book or something while you get to where you want to go. Using GPS, live traffic data and sensors that maintain proper distance from the other vehicles on the road, you will be automatically whisked to your destination by way of the most efficient route.
The technology is already pretty much there. Take the human element out of driving a car and traffic jams and accidents will disappear overnight. Then we can take the rest of the remaining railroad lines and convert them into additional roadways.
And non smoking, too, which sucks for me.
But CA is four days by truck, about eight by air.
VA, from here, is ten hours by truck, with toll roads, and one by air.
It sucks to fly, but it costs less in time and money than the alternatives.
As noted, you can take the comfort of the train, but when I fly I need point A to point B in the minimum possible time.
I would not, could not on a Train
Nor Chevy Volt
in Carpool Lanes
Not on a bike
on Nature Trails
Nor Union Trams
that ride Light Rails
I do not like Green Transport Scams
I will not use them, Sam I Am
Screw trains, how about faster cars? I keep saying why are we satisfied with 70MPH car travel which we’ve had since the 60’s at least. With bold entrepreneurial leadership combined with original intent promotion of the general welfare instead of over regulation of both, and we’d have 150MPH cars driving on interstates built for speed. Trains are not for rugged individualists.
I would not go there via plane
I would not go there in a train
I would not go there in a van
I would not go there to say goodbye,Dan (Rostenkowski)
Whoop de doo.
How many miles of actual rails, on the ground, will be bought by that money?
Nope. I wish we were still travelling by horseback!
I spent five years commuting from Vermont to NYC on Amtrak. It was very pleasant, and I’m not arguing against it, but it was not terribly efficient. By the time we got past Albany and Saratoga on the way back up, the train was almost empty. And it was not unusual for me to leave the train in Rutland as the only passenger.
Me, the engineer, the steward, and two conductors.
Well, yes and no.
I don't want to convert the railroads into roadways. I'd much rather get the truck traffic all back on the railroads.
THEN you really see traffic congestion going away!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.