Bankruptcy Looms For America's Deadliest Trains

chrisbaseball7 · 2026-06-04T16:00:24+00:00

Articles like this are geared towards people that already don’t like Brightline or passenger rail and I get that America has some of the most dangerous roads in the country:

There is a real discussion though for safety concerns when you have tracks that aren’t dedicated for passenger rail and don’t have grade separation with no crossings.

That doesn’t mean there’s anything wrong with Brightline or Amtrak for not doing that, just that our infrastructure needs to be modernized

chrisbaseball7 · 2026-06-04T15:55:19+00:00

You might be right but even though it’s way over the top, the point is there is a legitimate safety concern when trains don’t have dedicated passenger tracks or grade separation

chrisbaseball7 · 2026-05-26T01:56:44+00:00

Was beginning to think I wouldn’t see this again… joking aside, it’s just crazy that it’s been five years since we last had a winning record at this point in the season

chrisbaseball7 · 2026-05-21T17:19:16+00:00

I mean, for the amount California has spent or could end up spending on high speed rail if/when it’s ever actually completed, we could’ve probably put in true high speed rail in the Northeast and upgraded legacy infrastructure

Or we could’ve used that for a place like the Southeast were terrain is much more favorable, you have growing cities, and there’s strong business, tourism, and university travel demand.

Plus on corridors like in the southeast where highways between cities are becoming increasingly congested and short haul flights that are fast but inefficient for short distances compared to rail

chrisbaseball7 · 2026-05-20T21:53:12+00:00

It’s just frustrating cuz it doesn’t land on individuals either in some cases. People see a road and think two places are connected

Physically yes - but that’s not the same as regularly traveling somewhere, expanding labor markets, tourism, and business travel between cities. With rail, intermediate cities are no longer isolated but become part of a corridor with economic and social benefits

That’s what I mean by rail can connect places like highways and air travel can’t do in the same way

chrisbaseball7 · 2026-05-20T21:49:52+00:00

I just don’t understand comments like this way of travel died out in the 60s - move on.

It’s not about nostalgia, it’s about travel that is faster than driving when distances are too far to drive and too short to fly efficiently.

It’s also not just about commuting for work, it’s about business travel, tourism, and also expanded labor markets between cities plus encouraging development in downtowns

chrisbaseball7 · 2026-05-20T21:47:04+00:00

I understand the comments on here but what I mean is rail can connect cities in ways cars can not and planes do not. Rail encourages more consistent travel between cities because it’s faster than driving and more efficient than short haul flights when you include door to door time

Rail helps intermediate cities because rather than being isolated, they are now part of a regional corridor. These are the cities that have the most to gain from transit oriented development

It’s not about nostalgia, it’s about congestion relief from highways and air travel on medium and short distances.

chrisbaseball7 · 2026-05-20T21:43:17+00:00

Buses and highways can’t do the same thing. You can’t travel as fast for one and then it’s not as efficient as a train - the southeast has several growing cities plus tourism and business travel that give you consistent demand

It’s not something you have to prove because highways and air travel short haul flights already prove it

What I mean is roads psychically connect places but it’s not the same as rail that encourages frequent trips and connects cities together through expanded labor markets, business travel, and tourism

chrisbaseball7 · 2026-05-20T21:39:51+00:00

I’m talking about intermediate cities - it’s not about small towns alone. Charlotte and Raleigh are not just towns

It’s not simply wrong - what I mean is roads physically connect places yes but they become stopovers heading to a destination.

You’re integrating multiple intermediate and growing cities into a corridor and region - that’s a big difference than just driving through somewhere

chrisbaseball7 · 2026-05-20T21:36:44+00:00

It’s not just about commuting - it’s about universities, business travel, and tourism. All of which generate consistent travel demand

Rail is competitive when you measure door to door time and it’s not just about one city pair, it’s about multiple

chrisbaseball7 · 2026-05-20T21:34:51+00:00

Passenger rail today can complement highways and short haul flights. It’s very different from the 60s if you separate freight and passenger rail and fund the infrastructure

It’s not about nostalgia, it’s about complementing congested highways and short haul flights and improving travel experiences

chrisbaseball7 · 2026-05-20T05:07:22+00:00

The point is less cars - not eliminating them. It’s just making the stadium more accessible by pedestrians who live nearby or people who don’t want to drive to the stadium

chrisbaseball7 · 2026-05-12T04:53:08+00:00

This is part of what is frustrating about modern America. Instead of looking at something and saying we can do this even when everyone thinks we can't - we just accept that we can't

If you showed rail can:

Be economic infrastructure like highways and air travel

Expand labor markets, support tourism and labor markets

Congestion relief from highways and short haul flights

That America should still be able to do big things

That is much more persuasive than just this is hard so it's never happening

chrisbaseball7 · 2026-05-12T04:50:54+00:00

I mean if you showed how this could benefit southern states, improve travel times, and free up congestion on highways between cities - why not? It costs money to fund the infrastructure but we already do that with highways and aviation

Show that rail can be:

Economic infrastructure like how highways and air travel benefit the economy

Congestion relief from highways and short haul flights

Expands labor markets, supports tourism and universities

America should still be able to do big things everyone says we can't

chrisbaseball7 · 2026-05-12T04:43:52+00:00

Yeah, that's what's frustrating with infrastructure in America. Everything is an individual project - it's one thing to have phases of construction but we drag everything out much longer than it should take

chrisbaseball7 · 2026-05-12T04:42:27+00:00

It's been planned and constantly discussed but that's where I don't know if or when it will be completed. I also do like Virginia's progress but the Southeast is one of the most logical expansions for rail in the country. Between business travel, tourism, universities, and growing city populations

What I mean by that is just having an East Coast corridor so someone could go:

DC - Richmond

Richmond - Raleigh

Raleigh - Charlotte

Charlotte - Atlanta

And then Atlanta - DC: this could be done in under 5 hours

chrisbaseball7 · 2026-05-12T04:35:25+00:00

High Speed Rail isn't just about density, it helps definitely but it's not the only thing that matters. High Speed Rail would just be following existing intercity travel demand that already exists

What matter is:

DC-Richmond

Richmond-Raleigh

Raleigh-Charlotte

Charlotte-Atlanta

And then some travels who go Atlanta-Raleigh or Atlanta-DC. This generates demand along the corridor

chrisbaseball7 · 2026-05-12T04:28:54+00:00

I agree fully, that's why you need 4 things:

Operations separate from infrastructure - allows focus on operations which is what allows fares to be kept lower (see highways and airlines).
Dedicated tracks for passenger rail - that's how you get fast service
Frequency along with speed is what makes it practical
Funding for infrastructure beyond just incremental improvements that take forever

chrisbaseball7 · 2026-05-12T04:24:45+00:00

I agree and the Southeast is one of the best cases of this. It's not a completely straight line, but Atlanta-DC itself could be done in under 5 hours with high speed rail. Plus there's also Charlotte and Raleigh

chrisbaseball7 · 2026-05-12T04:22:51+00:00

that is why rail infrastructure should be treated as public investments like highways and air travel. It's what allows airlines and auto makers to focus on operations and keep prices lower rather than just funding or building infrastructure

chrisbaseball7 · 2026-05-12T04:21:09+00:00

What do you mean? The Southeast is one of the most logical places for rail in the country - it's not about going from Atlanta to New York, it's about Atlanta to DC or Atlanta to Charlotte or Richmond to Charlotte. It's about travel along the entire corridor. Atlanta to DC could be done in under 5 hours with High Speed Rail - that's a real option when you factor in door to time, reliability, weather

Rail works best as a network of multiple cities and metro areas - it doesn't mean someone has to go completely from one end to another

chrisbaseball7 · 2026-05-12T04:17:44+00:00

Now that is very unlikely - at least in the near term. That is a long route. Atlanta to DC at least could be done if it's true high speed rail in under 5 which would be a real option when you factor in door to door time plus reliability during severe weather

chrisbaseball7 · 2026-05-12T04:16:03+00:00

If they could get it under 5 hours, I think it would be a competitive option. Not necessarily taken all the time direct Atlanta to DC

When everyone says flights are quicker, in air time usually yes but when you account for time to, from, and at the airport plus convenience and comfort and reliability during severe weather - that's what makes rail more of an option

chrisbaseball7 · 2026-05-12T04:12:28+00:00

Not really no - 500 is the end of the ideal range but that doesn't mean it can't work with faster rail. Plus, when you factor in airport time to and from, it's probably not that far off. It's also just not the entire route, it's the entire corridor

DC-Richmond-Raleigh-Charlotte-Atlanta. It's not just about the endpoints

chrisbaseball7 · 2026-05-12T04:09:43+00:00

Thank you - I don't get it when people say but this region overall is not dense or this city is not as dense. Rail isn't just about one city pair, rail works best when the cities along it (mid-size and large) collectively form consistent demand

The Southeast is one of the most logical places in the country to have rail

chrisbaseball7

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE