Well, I'd also point out that even if a 12-hour run NYP-CHI might not sell millions of tickets between the endpoints, you'd pile them up in intermediate markets like nobody's business. On that sort of timetable, the implied times from NYP to Buffalo or Pittsburgh are pretty impressive; even counting bus links, you'd probably more or less collapse intrastate commercial aviation in New York or Pennsylvania (depending on which route you took). The same thing would apply to getting NYP-MIA down to a Palmetto-style run (if with a late arrival at the endpoints): You might not sell the tickets from NYP-MIA, but if we shift to the ticket sales you'd get to/from Raleigh, Savannah, and so forth, you'd be packing multiple-daily trains on a regular basis and having to trot out either seasonal specials, extra sections, or special additions at times.Call me a cynic, but I'm not sure throwing money into an 8 hour run between NY and Chicago is the best use of our money. It's a long enough corridor that even if we could get an average speed of 79mph, we're still looking at 10 hours (based on Google Maps.) My guess is that that sort of trip will, at least with today's technology, be better served by air. Now, improving it would still be useful for the in between points, especially if the Pittsburgh to NY could be shortened to even eight hours (right now the Pennsylvanian is a nine and a half hour run.) Perhaps make it possible to do eight hours from Pittsburgh to Chicago (hour and a half reduction) and then those that want to do the full length could do it in sixteen hours (instead of the 19 hours on the Lake Shore Limited.) If you leave at, say, 4:30 PM from Chicago, you could hit NY around 9:30 AM (and run an opposing-time train for 2x/day frequency, minimum.) Even bumping it up an hour could be useful if someone's going to a conference that starts in the afternoon (or has an afternoon meeting,) as they'd have enough time to stop at the hotel, freshen up, and be ready for a 1 PM meeting.Well, that's true for the most part. Speed does matter too; average speed matters, not top speed: bring NY-Chicago down to 12 hours... or 10... or 8....For the rest of the country, he says “frequency and reliability” are what matters for increasing ridership – not 150 mile speeds.
My point is that even if the endpoints aren't going to pile up all of the ridership, most LD trains have major intermediate markets to look at. In general, shooting for average speeds in the 80 MPH range seems to be a reasonable longer-term goal, and while still not cheap, it gives you the ability to crush bus and airline traffic for pretty much everything under 300 miles, and to seriously compete in the 400-500 mile range.