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 February 19th, 2008, 10:33 PM   #421
Chafford1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 130
Likes (Received): 0

The Keystone Corridor in the US is a good example of how lines can be upgraded on limited finances - electrified and upgraded to 110mph (176kph)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keystone_Corridor

The South East High Speed Rail Corridor (http://www.sehsr.org/)

the Mid West Regional Rail Initiative,

(http://www.dot.state.mn.us/passenger...s/midwest.html)

and the Ohio Hub all follow this 110mph template (albeit using diesel power).

(http://www.dot.state.oh.us/ohiorail/...rdc/index.html).

And despite what was posted earlier in this thread,they all look like serious, achievable schemes.
Chafford1 no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old February 21st, 2008, 08:09 PM   #422
trainrover
:-x
 
trainrover's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,787
Likes (Received): 738

Quote:
Originally Posted by sarflonlad View Post
The trouble with HSR and America is that your average American is not aware of what HSR can achieve.
I disagree -- today's average N American's is agoraphobic (as ever) . . . .
trainrover no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 9th, 2008, 04:23 AM   #423
manrush
Agenda 21 Advocate
 
manrush's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Urban New England
Posts: 4,150
Likes (Received): 499

There have been plans to make an HSR from Boston all the way to Montreal. Would be cool, as New England could use some HSR. Too bad Massachusetts has a score of other problems.
manrush no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 9th, 2008, 08:46 AM   #424
Galls
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 107
Likes (Received): 9

Quote:
Originally Posted by trainrover View Post
I disagree -- today's average N American's is agoraphobic (as ever) . . . .
I agree, but I also find that the Ipod has been the greatest aid to public transit.

So while I really do not care for its isolationist ability, actually deplore them, it has been a great aid to public transit; putting idiotic people in their own little world under the guise of "chilling out" or relaxing.
Galls no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 9th, 2008, 08:49 AM   #425
Galls
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 107
Likes (Received): 9

Quote:
Originally Posted by manrush View Post
There have been plans to make an HSR from Boston all the way to Montreal. Would be cool, as New England could use some HSR. Too bad Massachusetts has a score of other problems.
Through Vermont and New Hampshire right? I have a suspicion that will not happen. To damn hilly, low population route, descent distance and Boston sucks, they would rather go straight to NYC. However it will most likely be left to the plane.
Galls no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 9th, 2008, 09:07 AM   #426
Xusein
 
Xusein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 26,172
Likes (Received): 10379

I don't know if there are any viable railways that go down that path anyway...maybe there is some, but it would take major reconstruction and as said before, it's not viable enough.

Boston should concentrate on getting a REAL HSR to New York. Acela's ok, but it doesn't cut it.
Xusein no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 11th, 2008, 10:51 PM   #427
flierfy
Registered User
 
flierfy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,885
Likes (Received): 296

Quote:
Originally Posted by Galls View Post
Through Vermont and New Hampshire right? I have a suspicion that will not happen. To damn hilly, low population route, descent distance and Boston sucks, they would rather go straight to NYC. However it will most likely be left to the plane.
Low population is rather good for high-speed rail-line. Trains don't stop anyway and the less people live along such a rail-line the less resistance there would be.
__________________
Rippachtal.de
flierfy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 11th, 2008, 11:44 PM   #428
UrbanBen
the transit nazi
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Seattle
Posts: 966
Likes (Received): 12

Quote:
Originally Posted by flierfy View Post
Low population is rather good for high-speed rail-line. Trains don't stop anyway and the less people live along such a rail-line the less resistance there would be.
Yeah, the "not enough people" argument for HSR that you hear is completely bogus. If you have enough for an airport, you have enough for HSR.
UrbanBen no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 12th, 2008, 12:05 AM   #429
Mariachi McMuffin
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 138
Likes (Received): 0

There really is no need for HSR in the U.S. at this point. Regional flights are cheap and even with the high gas prices, driving is still viable.

Dont get me wrong, I would love to have a train going 250 mph that would get me from Milwaukee to Chicago in 20 minutes, but its not worth the cost to build that this point in time.
Mariachi McMuffin no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 12th, 2008, 10:42 AM   #430
elfabyanos
Dracuna Macoides
 
elfabyanos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Brighton
Posts: 1,814
Likes (Received): 5

Actually every high speed line that has ever been built turns a profit within about a decade. Unless the economics that apply to the rest of the world don't apply to the USA then "not worth the cost" is not valid. Not worth the political effort maybe.
elfabyanos no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 12th, 2008, 04:28 PM   #431
Galls
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 107
Likes (Received): 9

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mariachi McMuffin View Post
There really is no need for HSR in the U.S. at this point. Regional flights are cheap and even with the high gas prices, driving is still viable.

Dont get me wrong, I would love to have a train going 250 mph that would get me from Milwaukee to Chicago in 20 minutes, but its not worth the cost to build that this point in time.
It is desperately needed in BosWash, the fact that our highways are clogged and now our airports, especially NY and Phily, are far beyond capacity warrants high speed rail.

Quote:
Originally Posted by elfabyanos View Post
Actually every high speed line that has ever been built turns a profit within about a decade. Unless the economics that apply to the rest of the world don't apply to the USA then "not worth the cost" is not valid. Not worth the political effort maybe.
That I do not think is true. The NEC is no where near the black when you account for infrastructure costs.
Galls no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 12th, 2008, 05:55 PM   #432
elfabyanos
Dracuna Macoides
 
elfabyanos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Brighton
Posts: 1,814
Likes (Received): 5

The NEC is not considered a new high speed line. That's an expensive upgrade to modest high speeds by international standards, and expensive upgrades rarely achieve great benefit to cost ratios. Most new high speed lines turn a profit in about a decade.
elfabyanos no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 13th, 2008, 01:18 AM   #433
Mariachi McMuffin
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 138
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by Galls View Post
It is desperately needed in BosWash, the fact that our highways are clogged and now our airports, especially NY and Phily, are far beyond capacity warrants high speed rail.
You are talking about one line, maybe in the entire country that might be a necessity.

Its not worth the cost in most of the U.S. Nobody would use it when you can simply take an equal or less expensive flight.
Mariachi McMuffin no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 13th, 2008, 01:19 AM   #434
Mariachi McMuffin
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 138
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by Galls View Post
It is desperately needed in BosWash, the fact that our highways are clogged and now our airports, especially NY and Phily, are far beyond capacity warrants high speed rail.
You are talking about one line, maybe in the entire country that might be a necessity.

Its not worth the cost in most of the U.S. Nobody would use it when you can simply take an equal or less expensive flight.
Mariachi McMuffin no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 13th, 2008, 01:59 AM   #435
Galls
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 107
Likes (Received): 9

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mariachi McMuffin View Post
You are talking about one line, maybe in the entire country that might be a necessity.

Its not worth the cost in most of the U.S. Nobody would use it when you can simply take an equal or less expensive flight.

If it is full trip time comparative or even slightly longer you can assume that a statistically relevant amount, everyone, would choose the train instead of the tortures of air travel.
Galls no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 13th, 2008, 11:52 PM   #436
dösanhoro
Registered User
 
dösanhoro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Helsinki
Posts: 218
Likes (Received): 53

Hsr rail is not worth the cost in many places. Solution: build it where it makes sense. If a hsr takes as long as a flight with comparable cost the flight loses 90% of the time. No airplane I was ever in has ever matched the comfort of an average train imo. Unless your loaded with money planes are cramped and uncomfortable. The only bonus for planes is the view on start and landing. Have you ever ridden a half decent train? I am sure the majority will agree with me

These are classical arguments for hsr. Airport security takes long. But then again why is there no train security. Or security in every place where crowds are. Hijack a train and you are limited by the tracks.

Airports are very often in the middle of nowhere. Hsr rail can stop at the outskirts of a city and in the center. But then again the rail tracks where built already. If there are no rail tracks in the center I can imagine this can become expensive
dösanhoro no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2008, 12:11 AM   #437
Mariachi McMuffin
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 138
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by Galls View Post
If it is full trip time comparative or even slightly longer you can assume that a statistically relevant amount, everyone, would choose the train instead of the tortures of air travel.
Why does the train system need to be HSR? High speed rail, opposed to Amtrak Diesel trains, does not equate to that much shorter of travel time. They have done studies about that on the East coast.

I agree that MagLev trains would be an excellent way to connect regions, but its costs are even more astronaumical than regular high speed trains.
Mariachi McMuffin no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2008, 02:03 AM   #438
Galls
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 107
Likes (Received): 9

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mariachi McMuffin View Post
Why does the train system need to be HSR? High speed rail, opposed to Amtrak Diesel trains, does not equate to that much shorter of travel time. They have done studies about that on the East coast.

I agree that MagLev trains would be an excellent way to connect regions, but its costs are even more astronaumical than regular high speed trains.
I am not, nor have I ever argued for the development of a transnational high speed rail system, so people can take the train from LA to NY. What I would like to see is HSR between economically viable cities. BosWash is just the defining example of HSR in the country as the cities are strong and so is the desire to travel between them.

As for your argument of why not just use Amtraks P42s instead of their HHP-8s and Acela Express engines is a very simple one. Why not just use coal fired boilers instead of diesel trains, the fuel is cheaper and they where capable of just as high speeds as the P42s achieve today.
Galls no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2008, 02:24 AM   #439
dösanhoro
Registered User
 
dösanhoro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Helsinki
Posts: 218
Likes (Received): 53

Maglev trains have not seen widespread use even when they have been available for years. Hsr vs non hsr might just make the difference between people choosing or not choosing rail. Non hsr rail ca also mean very different things. Have heard many people not satisfied with Amtrak. I have got the impression Amtraks problem is not the speed but cargo trains making decent service impossible. Make lighter trains with adequate separation so trucks and sheep won't derail trains. Unnecessarily heavy trains mean higher costs.

Why should it not possible to replace some shorter flights with rail , high speed or not.
dösanhoro no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2008, 03:59 AM   #440
ramvid01
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: NYC
Posts: 749
Likes (Received): 68

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mariachi McMuffin View Post
Why does the train system need to be HSR? High speed rail, opposed to Amtrak Diesel trains, does not equate to that much shorter of travel time. They have done studies about that on the East coast.

I agree that MagLev trains would be an excellent way to connect regions, but its costs are even more astronaumical than regular high speed trains.
Studies? What studies? The only reason it isn't much faster on the East Coast is because of politics and the fact that Acela only goes 150 mph for 16 miles on the NEC.

Why does it have to be HSR? On short routes it has to be HSR because it needs to compete with the small regional airlines or else it just won't be make a big impact on regional travelers. We are to a point in this country where we have to have HSR on some of the shorter routes.

And even with Acela not being a true high-speed solution, it still carries the majority of the passengers between Was and NY (I think I read 54%).
ramvid01 no está en línea   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 09:52 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