daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Railways

Railways (Inter)national commuter and freight trains



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


View Poll Results: Should the US build or improve it's HSR network?
Yes 249 89.57%
No 29 10.43%
Voters: 278. You may not vote on this poll

Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old April 29th, 2007, 01:33 PM   #241
Trainman Dave
systems rule!
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 499
Likes (Received): 17

This thread is not about Japan. Most of us have been to Japan and we are very aware of the Shinkasen system.

The population density and distribution in Japan has provided a unique opportunity for an simple, very effetctive railway. These conditions don't even approximate the northeast corridor in the USA.
Trainman Dave no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old April 29th, 2007, 02:29 PM   #242
Tri-ring
Expert
 
Tri-ring's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 459
Likes (Received): 7

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trainman Dave View Post
This thread is not about Japan. Most of us have been to Japan and we are very aware of the Shinkasen system.

The population density and distribution in Japan has provided a unique opportunity for an simple, very effetctive railway. These conditions don't even approximate the northeast corridor in the USA.
Oh I don't know about that, the NE corridor looks very much the same as the Tokaido line back in the '60. The Tokkaido corridor was a very congested railway back then and it is the same now.
The distance of the NE corridor is shorter than the Tokkaido with only about 350Km or the equivalent to Tokyo-Nagoya and you guys don't have to negotiate with the rocky terrains like Japan.
It's just a matter of choice and will, remember the Shinkansen was announced in 59 and went into service in 64 meaning it only took 5 years to complete.
__________________
banned for denial of war crimes in world war 2.
Tri-ring no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 29th, 2007, 04:28 PM   #243
Trainman Dave
systems rule!
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 499
Likes (Received): 17

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tri-ring View Post
Oh I don't know about that, the NE corridor looks very much the same as the Tokaido line back in the '60. The Tokkaido corridor was a very congested railway back then and it is the same now.
The distance of the NE corridor is shorter than the Tokkaido with only about 350Km or the equivalent to Tokyo-Nagoya and you guys don't have to negotiate with the rocky terrains like Japan.
It's just a matter of choice and will, remember the Shinkansen was announced in 59 and went into service in 64 meaning it only took 5 years to complete.
The Tokkaido corridor was congested as early as as the 1930's running on a narrow guage railway which was still in place in 1959 running at less tham 100km/h

The NEC has Alcela running at over 150 km/h on many stretches and fast commuter trains running on all stretches.

Trying to compare the conditions between Japan and the US and suggesting that there is simple solution is to trivialize almost 100 years tranportation politics in the United States. While I admire the accomplishments of Japanese in building the shinkansen system, which I have visited and enjoyed traveling on, the suggestion that the US can solve a complex political problem in five years the way that the Japanese solved thirty years of failure to invest in its railways is offensive.
Trainman Dave no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 29th, 2007, 06:06 PM   #244
Tri-ring
Expert
 
Tri-ring's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 459
Likes (Received): 7

Within the mentioned 30 years Japan was at war for a good 20 years and still recuperating the last 10.

The problem maybe complex but needless to say it is a political one. If you Americans only refinanced some of the tax payer's money into more worthwhile projects instead of war machines you people would have developed a more productive infrastructure and don't tell me Japan gained all the profit since Japan pick up around 2 billion dollars US anually for maintanance of military installation here in Japan for the last 2 decades. Japan is also pitching in a whopping 609 billion dollars US as a restructuring aid to move US millitary installations from Okinawa to Guam.
__________________
banned for denial of war crimes in world war 2.
Tri-ring no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 29th, 2007, 06:09 PM   #245
Trainman Dave
systems rule!
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 499
Likes (Received): 17

Our current presidency is but a blip on the political debate over transportation policy
Trainman Dave no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 29th, 2007, 07:32 PM   #246
Frank J. Sprague
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 99
Likes (Received): 3

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tri-ring View Post
Within the mentioned 30 years Japan was at war for a good 20 years and still recuperating the last 10.

The problem maybe complex but needless to say it is a political one. If you Americans only refinanced some of the tax payer's money into more worthwhile projects instead of war machines you people would have developed a more productive infrastructure and don't tell me Japan gained all the profit since Japan pick up around 2 billion dollars US anually for maintanance of military installation here in Japan for the last 2 decades. Japan is also pitching in a whopping 609 billion dollars US as a restructuring aid to move US millitary installations from Okinawa to Guam.
Are you sure that is 609 billion dollars US? 609 billion yen sounds like a much more plausible figure. I do agree that the US should turn its attention inward and disengage from areas like the Middle East, South Korea and NATO. By keeping returning our military forces home we can maintain the same size military at far less cost, forward deployment is expensive and the host nations only pick up a fraction of the actual costs, and even at that a large amount of the "costs" are offset by the economic stimulus of having the forces in the host nation.

In the US losing a military base is a big issue due to the area where the base is located losing that economic activity. Since the end of the Cold War we have closed scores of bases across the US, we would have been far better off closing the bulk of our overseas bases instead.

The US will be much better off when we elect our own version of Shintaro Ishihara and have an America that says "NO" to nations like Israel and South Korea.
Frank J. Sprague no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 29th, 2007, 11:50 PM   #247
steph35
piéton
 
steph35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Paris
Posts: 2,527
Likes (Received): 1565

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Fusion View Post
Should it? Probably. Will it? Not a chance.

agree, but i will be 'more' precise, "should it? of course. will it? not a chance, before a long time"
__________________
Piéton
steph35 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 30th, 2007, 12:05 AM   #248
Trainman Dave
systems rule!
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 499
Likes (Received): 17

Quote:
Originally Posted by steph35 View Post
agree, but i will be 'more' precise, "should it? of course. will it? not a chance, before a long time"
I am confused, this is a long thread! In what context are you replying?

Last edited by Trainman Dave; April 30th, 2007 at 12:19 AM.
Trainman Dave no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 30th, 2007, 12:42 AM   #249
rantanamo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 3,507
Likes (Received): 353

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank J. Sprague View Post
Are you sure that is 609 billion dollars US? 609 billion yen sounds like a much more plausible figure. I do agree that the US should turn its attention inward and disengage from areas like the Middle East, South Korea and NATO. By keeping returning our military forces home we can maintain the same size military at far less cost, forward deployment is expensive and the host nations only pick up a fraction of the actual costs, and even at that a large amount of the "costs" are offset by the economic stimulus of having the forces in the host nation.

In the US losing a military base is a big issue due to the area where the base is located losing that economic activity. Since the end of the Cold War we have closed scores of bases across the US, we would have been far better off closing the bulk of our overseas bases instead.

The US will be much better off when we elect our own version of Shintaro Ishihara and have an America that says "NO" to nations like Israel and South Korea.
You guys really over simplify the world. Its simply not that simple.
rantanamo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 30th, 2007, 06:52 AM   #250
steph35
piéton
 
steph35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Paris
Posts: 2,527
Likes (Received): 1565

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trainman Dave View Post
I am confused, this is a long thread! In what context are you replying?
about the title of the thread
" Should the US build or improve it's HSR network?"

this kind of superstructures (HSR, like europeans's or japaneses's) needs many studies of all sorts... so, if nothing is decided in a near future, it will take many, many, more time before seeing this improvement...
__________________
Piéton
steph35 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 28th, 2007, 05:57 PM   #251
ovem
Commieblocks fan
 
ovem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 6,824
Likes (Received): 885

a high speed train would be useful in the east side from boston to miami via new york, philadelphia, baltimore, washington DC, atlanta and jacksonville. i'm talking about a unique path... that would be successful i think... on the other hand i dont think a high-speed network would be so much successfu in the west side. california is the queen state of cars i think well.. i;d like to see a unique line from vancouver to san diego passin throug portland, sacramento, san fracisco and los angeles. what about a high-speed railway from houston to portland via dallas denver and salt lake city? or chigago detroit toronto montreal?
__________________
My tumblr
ovem no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 2nd, 2007, 09:21 PM   #252
aquablue
BANNED
 
aquablue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,750
Likes (Received): 229

Wasted potential on the NEC Re: HSR/Maglev

I'm extremely frustrated with the transportation situation the United States and its various governmental bodies, its awful beaurocracy. They are squandering the potential to improve connectivity in the most densley populated part of the country by ignoring the potential for high speed rail/maglev transportation up and down the NEC. Ever since Bush has come into office, no movement has happened on the maglev initiative - it has stalled and there is no furher news on it - how shortsighted.

The NEC is a megalopolis, a long narrow strip of land consisting of various cities with suburbs almost completley conjoined - if not now, they will be in the comming decades. There is aprox. 40 million people living in this coridor, more if you add adjacent areas further south and west. If you add places like Charlotte, etc..

Here we have an area that is very dense, comparable to the density of the european nations where HSR is now used succesfully. New Jersey is very dense, much denser than somewhere like France, for example. There can be no excuse that lack of density is an issue. I mean, Spain with its massive land area has only around 40 million and look at its new rail lines that are very succesful. We have incredible airline delays and congestion at places such as JFK, where there is no room for new runways. The NEC consists of some of the most vital cities in the country, NYC, Boston, Philadelphia and Washington D.C along with other large cities. A proper dedicated Maglev or HSR system would allow more room at airports for longer distance flights by siphoning off the short halls up and down the north east.

In order to increase the economic output of this region and to improve the situation of expensive housing in places like manhattan, boston, d.c, etc. it is vital to offer a way of joining all these cities together in a quick and efficient manner. It really should be actiing like one very large city and high speed rail could make it so.

Right now, it takes 6:30 hours to get from DC to Boston on the so-called HSR acela train- unacceptable. With maglev that could be down to 2-3 hours. Think of the possibilities for development. Cities like philly, baltimore, providence could almost act as bedroom communities for the larger employment centers leading to economic revitalization. People could live in Philly and work in DC, NY or Boston. Likewise for baltimore, D.C, etc. Airports could be linked to the system in order for transfers from long distance flight connections from places like JFK to smaller areas such as providence, trenton, etc.

Although people say there is no room for a new traditional LGV style line due to urbanization, a maglev could be a much better solution. Being elevated above the highways or along the current NEC rail line. Elevation would allow it to fit into the current urban sprawl without impacting too many residential areas.

There really is a lack of forsight, and I believe that in the future the US will regret not investing in itself as it looses out to the new emerging economies. Its time to invest in the country and stop being the police man of the world. There is no need for a massive military anymore as soon as Iraq has ended. Just enough troops required to defend the country. Let the EU or China be the world's guardian. If California gets its new HSR, it would be extremely stupid for the states in the north east to rest of their laurels. I am hoping that the california project may spur interest in investing the money now for the economic benefit of the region in the future.

Also, it is disgusting that in this so called democary, big business lobbyists are able to derail projects like HSR - an example, South West airlines in Texas derailed their HSR project with false ads, etc... To be honest, I wish business were not allowed to lobby at all - the people should be allowed to choose rather than big business.
aquablue no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 2nd, 2007, 09:34 PM   #253
pflo777
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,456
Likes (Received): 89

i dealt with the problem for a while, had a lot of discussins and all I can say in the end is this:

If the US wants something, they do it/get it.

If they dont want it, they dont do it/ get it, no matter how usefull or good it is.

Yes, a really good high speed rail would be good for the Norhteast....,so what?

Last edited by pflo777; December 3rd, 2007 at 01:43 PM. Reason: typo
pflo777 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 2nd, 2007, 09:44 PM   #254
aquablue
BANNED
 
aquablue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,750
Likes (Received): 229

So what? Please take that cynical attitude and shove it up your arney please!

That kind of attitude leads to inaction - if more people had the will to ask for it, it would happen. The point i'm making is that the people here don't know how good this would be for the country. The majority don't know that they may want it or how great it could be because the majority havn't travelled enough to experience such transportation options.

I don't know how you could be so flippant and glib either, how creepy. I'm trying to bring up a serious issue here that is very important. Perhaps you really don't care about this country - well, perhaps do not discuss here please.

The goal should be to raise awareness so that more citizens ask their leaders for an improved way to travel in this era of high gas prices, global warming, air pollution, increasing gridlock and congestion, and competition from growing emerging nations. There must be a desire to invest in the country for the future generations = and a proper high speed link would kill many birds wih one stone - delivering a clean, environmentally friendly way of travel that will boost economic development, protect the air we breath, reduce gridlock and help us attract new business. There is the prestige issue too, which is important in attracting foreign investment. I.e, if you build it, they will come, look at Shanghai!
aquablue no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 2nd, 2007, 10:32 PM   #255
aquablue
BANNED
 
aquablue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,750
Likes (Received): 229

The arguments from anti-rail types that there is no room for a new dedicated ROW in the NEC is baloney. Much of the land is old decaying industrial land along the current ROW. They could even build a new ROW up through Hartford, instead of going along the coast in CT. And then the fact that maglev can be elevated allows for highways to be used as ROW's further reducing the need for perfectly straight lines as maglev can reach high speeds even on curves. The only problem would be getting the thing into NYC. Perhaps it would be best to build the line with stops just outside the CBD's at transport nodes as to decrease the cost of tunnelling under cities. I.e, you could have a stop at Newark/Jersey City - a new rail station there connected by a quick transfer into manhattan by PATH, etc.. The overall time savings would still be alot quicker. the current NEC would be kept for freight and shorter distance commuting. The currrent proposal to link DC to baltimore would be a great start - unfortunately the project is on-hold due to dumb pro-road/airlines lobbysits and old fashioned backward republicans with no vision. I wonder if this country could ever really innovate again. A chane of government is required which I hope will happen soon. Perhaps americans are just happy to be backwards, I don't know, I can never understand why there is a lack of vision, a lack of interest in beating the odds. It always amazes me how many people would rather say "it'll never happen here" - this is why the lazy, boring politicians who have no real understanding of technology, environment, etc. have no interest in "wasting" tax payers money on so-called monstrosities such as maglev - if only they new how much benefit it would bring. Maybe they are all cynics.
aquablue no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 2nd, 2007, 11:03 PM   #256
cernoch
Registered User
 
cernoch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Prague
Posts: 933
Likes (Received): 4

Is that really your point of view or you've just pasted it from anywhere? I've never heard of any country where bureaucracy wasn't on a priority level. The idea of maglev transportation isn't the best one due to its unbelievably high price, in my opinion. More of your ideas are absolutely non-productive.
__________________
Czech cities on SSC:
Prague Ostrava Liberec Brno Olomouc
cernoch no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 2nd, 2007, 11:11 PM   #257
Songoten2554
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Miami Florida
Posts: 1,063
Likes (Received): 87

i do agree with you but i would say this maglev is very expansive and well HSR can be built in the united states but this is my approach to this

the HSR tracks can be built outside the city and well the Trains can follow existing Railway lines its much cheaper that way

the HSR Tracks can be built in the rural areas in the countryside and in the cities it can go with the other Rail traffic pretty much like the french and the japanese approach to HSR
Songoten2554 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 2nd, 2007, 11:19 PM   #258
Songoten2554
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Miami Florida
Posts: 1,063
Likes (Received): 87

maglev is great but the price its too expansive regular HSR is cheaper but way better since it can adapt itself to regular Railway traffic in the cities and go on high speed Railway Tracks outside the cities area

Maglev you have to built everything from scratch which makes it very expansive

with HSR however the Railway cars of the HSR. the stations of the HSR, the right of way for the HSR, and the electiricty power for the HSR will have to be built but there is an advantage to this in that you don't have to built anything in the cities area it can go on the normal railway traffic without having to build a new railway station but the thing is that it will have to be electified of the tracks area that it will use

HSR is expansive but its cheaper then maglev
Songoten2554 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 2nd, 2007, 11:53 PM   #259
aquablue
BANNED
 
aquablue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,750
Likes (Received): 229

There may not be room for new tracks in the NEC. hence maglev
aquablue no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 3rd, 2007, 12:38 AM   #260
geoking66
Registered User
 
geoking66's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: London, New York
Posts: 3,255
Likes (Received): 7278

A New York City metropolitan area inhabitant myself, better high-speed rail would be appreciated. Yes, I have NJT, which does a great job most of the time with tons of connectivity and easy of reaching the city, but a lot of the time I'm going to DC, Providence, or Boston and it takes about the same time as driving which seems contradictory. Before we start adding tracks, it's more important to fix the detereorating infrastructure of the already existing Northeast Corridor. The NEC uses outdated electric systems, with overhead lines at 11 or 12.5 kV 25Hz AC until it reaches New Haven. All of the NEC should be at 25kV 60Hz AC (for those who don't know, the US was stupid and uses 60Hz rather than the world standard of 50Hz, however that has to do with voltages and I'm not going into that). The tracks are worn out to the point of unusability; however, this stems from FRA Tier II requirements that trains be able to withstand crashes with freight trains. Not only does this almost never happen, but it puts too much strain on tracks, get rid of that rule. Other repairs such as bridge re-construction are necessary. It's important to note that the Northeast readily accepts rail transport unlike the rest of the US, which prefers driving. The Acela is booked solid, with at least 95% of every train reserved at least a week in advance.
geoking66 está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
amtrak, desertxpress, fly california, high speed rail, northeast corridor, texas triangle, united states

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 04:47 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium