What kind of railroad system should America upgrade first?

Question

By the state or Us govt, should they upgrade regular passenger rail system first or should they go for high-speed train first? because it looks like more travelers seem plane and travel by car are impractical. Logical freight train in US seems to be more advanced than passenger train.

Mah opinion is US should upgrade regular passenger train system first and then in next five to ten years is high-speed train.

Answer 1

I think the USA should FIRST impliment several LONG-Distance High-speed rail corridors.  North/ South and East/ West, perhaps along the I-5, I-80, I-95, and I-50. There are already numerous SOUND regional / commuter railways (ACE, CALTRAIN, METROLINK, VIA, ROADRUNNER).

Using the I-5 corridor for example: San Francisco to Sacramento to Reno to Winnemucca to Elko to Salt Lake City to Denver to Omaha to Iowa City to Chicago to Toledo to Cleveland to New York.  Use VERY few stops along such a route nothing less than 150-200 miles between stops.

Perhaps even make a LOOP of those corridors ?

THEN regional or state railways can fill in the gaps and provide feeder service.

Answer 2

I think they should focus on short- and mid-distance commuter trains first (such as Metrolink in California, the L in Chicago, etc.)  This is what people use on a daily basis, and it is much more important than long-distance trains.

Answer 3

It needs to happen in phases of course.

First there needs to be more route options, then as the need calls for the speed can be increased.

For true high speed rail there needs to be dedicated lines and that is quite expensive.

Freight service is profitable for the carriers so that is where their research and development goes.

The Government agency that owns Amtrak also funds all Amtrak lines, states only do it in some commuter lines. Subisdies are the only way there will ever be affordable efficient passenger service.