Posted on 03/12/2011 9:25:08 AM PST by Hojczyk
The Tampa-to-Orlando route had obvious drawbacks: It would have linked two cities that are virtually unnavigable without cars, and that are so close that the new train would have been little faster than driving. But the Obama administration chose it anyway because it was seen as the line that could be built first. Florida had already done much of the planning, gotten many of the necessary permits and owned most of the land that would be needed.
The Department of Transportation did not have that many options. Only two states, Florida and California, were deemed far enough along in their planning to receive money for building actual bullet trains trains that can travel more than 150 miles an hour, on tracks of their own that are not shared with other trains.
In the end, though, the states new governor decided not to build it at all, worried that those very drawbacks would ultimately make it a boondoggle.
Floridas route had some glaring imperfections, though.
Tampa and Orlando are only 84 miles apart, generally considered too close for high-speed rail to make sense. The train trip, with many stops along the way, would have shaved only around a half-hour off the drive. Since there are no commercial flights between the two cities, the new line would not have lured away fliers or freed up landing slots at the busy airports. And neither Tampa nor Orlando has many public transportation options. So the question arose: Could riders be persuaded to leave their cars behind and buy tickets to places where they would still probably need cars?
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Early reports of three passenger trains missingafter earthquake!
All work on high speed rail to be abandoned!
FL taxpayers know they will be on the hook for any shortfalls. No one wants this thing. They even repealed a state constitutional amendment requiring high speed rail over the costs involved. The bottom line is no such line will ever be built in this country and its a transportation system that would serve only a tiny fraction of the transportation market.
Willie Green would have to say its a white elephant. Good news FL took a pass on it.
Nonsense. I can't wait to read and dissect that study.
Consider: So I take the train from Orlando to Tampa. Then what, rent a car? The train shaves a half-hour off the drive the article says. Does that include TSA time? Please arrive 2 hours ahead of departure? Queue up in the already swamped MCO screening lines to take the tram to the departure station? Then add time spent in the queue at the destination trying to rent a car while my car sits in a parking lot at the origin airport costing how much a day? Do the airports (the purported termini) even have enough parking? As it is on busy days you are in satellite parking so add another 20 mins onto the trip time for the shuttle.
Who commutes between TPA and MCO anyway? Oh, so it would mainly serve tourists? Well, Disney does its level best to keep you on Disney property so if you are silly enough to fly into Tampa to shlep a weeks worth of luggage onto a train and then go to Disney, more power to ya.
And speaking of Disney, I am surprised that the Tampa tourism people wouldn't look at this funnel to the Mouse House with horror.
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.