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 July 12th, 2009, 10:44 PM   #601
Slartibartfas
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vedunia
Posts: 11,595
Likes (Received): 5955

NYC-Chicago would be the ideal distance for night trains. Does AMTRAK run night trains on between these cities?

For HSR its a tad too long, to be perfect but maybe still feasible. But certainly not as first line. Usually it is said that the time should be below 4 hours to be still competitive. below 2 hours its highly competitive and really beating up the airservices between the same cities.
__________________
"Brexit means Brexit and we are going to make a Titanic success of it.”
Boris Johnson, Foreign Secretary, UK
Slartibartfas no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old July 12th, 2009, 11:18 PM   #602
nomarandlee
My Mind Has Left My Body
 
nomarandlee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: 1060 W. Addison, City by the Lake
Posts: 7,209
Likes (Received): 2771

Well the train does travel "overnight" but it takes a lenghty sixteen to hour ride right now. So unless you have a buisness dinner meeting in NYC it will not do you much good. For some reason it looks as if it is an extra four-five hours traveling eastbound then westbound. Not sure why that is.

http://www.amtrak.com/timetable/may09/P48.pdf
__________________
Stephane Charbonnier, “I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.”
nomarandlee no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 13th, 2009, 12:55 AM   #603
hoosier
Registered User
 
hoosier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 2,446
Likes (Received): 58

Quote:
Originally Posted by hkskyline View Post
Groups blasts high-speed rail plans
10 July 2009

CHICAGO (AP) - A Chicago-based conservative group is blasting plans to spend federal stimulus money on high-speed rail in Illinois and elsewhere around the country.

Some $8 billion is set aside in the federal stimulus bill to pay for high-speed rail. Illinois wants a slice of that to develop high-speed service on several routes, including between St. Louis and Chicago.

But an Illinois Policy Institute report argues the federal effort to construct high-speed networks will end up costing at least $90 billion. Over the long term, it says the costs will run into the hundreds of billions.

It says Illinois should focus instead on incremental improvements, including upgrading railroad crossings.

Advocates say high-speed rail will reduce pollution and road congestion.
What a bunch of stupid *******s. Are they not aware that the present value of the cost to build the interstate highway network is over ONE TRILLION DOLLARS!! And that doesn't include the enormous maintenance costs.
__________________
R.I.P. Moke- my best bud
hoosier no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 13th, 2009, 12:59 AM   #604
hoosier
Registered User
 
hoosier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 2,446
Likes (Received): 58

Quote:
Originally Posted by Onn View Post
The two cities are much too far apart. It would be easier and faster to just take a plane. I don't think even high-speed rail is going to be very effective bridging that gap.
I disagree. There are a bunch of medium to large cities on the I-90 corridor from Chicago to Albany that are spaced perfectly apart for HSR. These include South Bend, Toledo, Cleveland, Erie, Buffalo, Rochester, and Syracuse. Connecting all of these cities together justifies building a continuous high speed line from Chicago to Albany and then Albany to New York City, which has pretty high rail ridership.

Or if you want to build the route to the south you have other population centers like Youngstown, Pittsburgh, Harrisburgh, and Philadelphia.
__________________
R.I.P. Moke- my best bud
hoosier no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 13th, 2009, 01:00 AM   #605
hoosier
Registered User
 
hoosier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 2,446
Likes (Received): 58

Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyFish View Post
Wanna bet

Yes.
__________________
R.I.P. Moke- my best bud
hoosier no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 13th, 2009, 01:52 AM   #606
nomarandlee
My Mind Has Left My Body
 
nomarandlee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: 1060 W. Addison, City by the Lake
Posts: 7,209
Likes (Received): 2771

Quote:
Originally Posted by hoosier View Post
I disagree. There are a bunch of medium to large cities on the I-90 corridor from Chicago to Albany that are spaced perfectly apart for HSR. These include South Bend, Toledo, Cleveland, Erie, Buffalo, Rochester, and Syracuse. Connecting all of these cities together justifies building a continuous high speed line from Chicago to Albany and then Albany to New York City, which has pretty high rail ridership.

Or if you want to build the route to the south you have other population centers like Youngstown, Pittsburgh, Harrisburgh, and Philadelphia.

That northern route (the current Lakeshore limited) would add another +200 miles and at least one hour on to the Chi-NYC trip. Serving those two cities should be of prime importance. I am not sure if an extra hour would substantial make or break the route but statistics and analyst would have to look at that.

If veering a bit to try to service more metros then I think it would be better to do a Chi-Cleveland-Pitts-Philly-NYC route which is approx 878 miles. The Philly and Pitts combo would also serve a far greater population on that line.
__________________
Stephane Charbonnier, “I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.”
nomarandlee no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 13th, 2009, 09:18 AM   #607
philvia
Registered User
 
philvia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Nyc
Posts: 1,022
Likes (Received): 33

i dont think hoosier thinks things through.. he just blindly jumps on the HSR band wagon. Servicing that many small cities on a NYC-Chicago route would be ridiculous and negate just about every benefit to HSR.
philvia no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 14th, 2009, 04:55 AM   #608
hoosier
Registered User
 
hoosier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 2,446
Likes (Received): 58

Quote:
Originally Posted by philvia View Post
i dont think hoosier thinks things through.. he just blindly jumps on the HSR band wagon. Servicing that many small cities on a NYC-Chicago route would be ridiculous and negate just about every benefit to HSR.
No, you clearly do no think things through. You should familiarize yourself with the Shinkansen HSR service that operates between Osaka and Tokyo. There are differing levels of service on that route. The cheapest service stops at all the stations and has the greatest travel time. The most expensive service makes the fewest stops and has the lowest travel time. Something similar could be developed in the U.S.

Connecting all of the I-90 corridor cities makes perfect sense because it would connect the smaller cities to the larger ones and eliminate the puddle-jumping flights that currently travel between the likes of Erie and Cleveland or Toledo and Cleveland for example. Taking HSR to a major airport sure beats going on one of those dinky turboprop planes.
__________________
R.I.P. Moke- my best bud
hoosier no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 14th, 2009, 04:57 AM   #609
hoosier
Registered User
 
hoosier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 2,446
Likes (Received): 58

Quote:
Originally Posted by nomarandlee View Post
That northern route (the current Lakeshore limited) would add another +200 miles and at least one hour on to the Chi-NYC trip. Serving those two cities should be of prime importance. I am not sure if an extra hour would substantial make or break the route but statistics and analyst would have to look at that.

If veering a bit to try to service more metros then I think it would be better to do a Chi-Cleveland-Pitts-Philly-NYC route which is approx 878 miles. The Philly and Pitts combo would also serve a far greater population on that line.
The I-90 route would be used to connect Chicago with Boston in addition to all of the cities in between.

And I did suggest a more southernly route to connect Chicago with New York, paralleling I-90 and I-76 to Philadelphia. A spur off of this route would go to Washington, D.C. and Baltimore.
__________________
R.I.P. Moke- my best bud
hoosier no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 14th, 2009, 05:55 PM   #610
philvia
Registered User
 
philvia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Nyc
Posts: 1,022
Likes (Received): 33

regular amtrak trains already service that I90 corridor you speak of. use that for "local" stops and have the high speed stop 2 or 3 times for connections... no need to build two tracks and classify them both as hsr
philvia no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 14th, 2009, 09:11 PM   #611
SnailTrain
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 529
Likes (Received): 0

I don't believe that the USA has either the will, the money or the engineering expertise to EVER build a high speed rail network. They are also too proud or stupid, according to your point of view, to import the ability.

To make it viable would require vast amounts of federal money, and walnut brained flat earthers who "think" like Sarah Palin will ensure this never happens.

So, dream on Americans - as the Chinese pass you out. Best to just stick with that which you best ie - more freeways with hundreds of lanes for climate wrecking SUV's to crawl along, while the rest of the world (except the UK of course - USA's dim-witted poodle nation, which has the slowest, worst trains in Europe) gets on with building High Speed Rail.

I'd love to be proved wrong, but this is where my money would go, if I was a betting man.
SnailTrain no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 14th, 2009, 10:57 PM   #612
davsot
Perro que ladra no muerde
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 7,243
Likes (Received): 47

I just hope you're wrong.
davsot no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 14th, 2009, 10:59 PM   #613
FM 2258
Registered User
 
FM 2258's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Austin
Posts: 5,438
Likes (Received): 612

Quote:
Originally Posted by poshbakerloo View Post
Why not link New York to Chicago?
We have American Airlines, Continental, United, Delta, U.S. Airways, Southwest and JetBlue for that.
FM 2258 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 15th, 2009, 01:07 AM   #614
philvia
Registered User
 
philvia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Nyc
Posts: 1,022
Likes (Received): 33

SnailTrail describes most of the country perfectly, but IMO those parts of the country have no importance anyways other than feeding the northeast and west; which shares the train culture he brags about in EU and parts of Asia.
philvia no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 15th, 2009, 04:49 AM   #615
ADCS
Kickin' it
 
ADCS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Screwston, Plexus
Posts: 508
Likes (Received): 37

Quote:
Originally Posted by SnailTrain View Post
I don't believe that the USA has either the will, the money or the engineering expertise to EVER build a high speed rail network. They are also too proud or stupid, according to your point of view, to import the ability.

To make it viable would require vast amounts of federal money, and walnut brained flat earthers who "think" like Sarah Palin will ensure this never happens.

So, dream on Americans - as the Chinese pass you out. Best to just stick with that which you best ie - more freeways with hundreds of lanes for climate wrecking SUV's to crawl along, while the rest of the world (except the UK of course - USA's dim-witted poodle nation, which has the slowest, worst trains in Europe) gets on with building High Speed Rail.

I'd love to be proved wrong, but this is where my money would go, if I was a betting man.
At first I thought this was the height of ignorance on this site, but then...

Quote:
SnailTrail describes most of the country perfectly, but IMO those parts of the country have no importance anyways other than feeding the northeast and west; which shares the train culture he brags about in EU and parts of Asia.
...this came along.

No will? Maybe, but in many ways, it's more of a healthy skepticism. FFS, the US is a huge country with many different needs - why should one part dictate what the others do? You'd do well to study some history before revealing your ignorance.

No money? If we cut our military budget by 20% and put that all toward HSR, we have the best system in the world in 5 years. Would it be worth it, would it be used? Those are the more important questions (both of which I think yes to, but there are legitimate objections).

No engineering? Please. Building a rail line is just like building a freeway, just with less concrete, more ballast, shallower grades, wider curves, and more expensive steel (plus possible electrification). Our engineering is just fine, thank you very much. It's just mathematics, anyway.

Importing the ability? Well, we already do a good job of that through our massive numbers of foreign students that come to study at our universities. Also, why does it make any sense at all in this economy to shovel more money offshore? When a debtor nation does that, things rarely end up well. Better to develop endogenous industry at that point.

Get over your blind disdain for the US based on your dislike for our politicians. There isn't a country in the world that doesn't have idiotic politicians.

Oh, and for philvia - who the hell do you think feeds you? No importance, my ass. Oh, and last time I checked, the west coast is just as car-dependent as the central part of the country, and rail service in the Northeast is piss-poor by European standards - old trains, old infrastructure, expensive and low frequencies.
ADCS no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 15th, 2009, 06:58 AM   #616
philvia
Registered User
 
philvia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Nyc
Posts: 1,022
Likes (Received): 33

mid westerners are so fun to troll

i wasn't comparing the equipment or service as much as i was the rail culture. but if you want to complain about a $12 ticket from nyc to philadelphia on brand new express double decker trains that leave every 15-20 minutes then ok. amtrak is expensive and slow but that is exactly what we're discussing in this thread; putting priority to upgrading the NEC to true HSR because it already has the ridership and overbooked trains.... you know, instead of promising it to a hsr linking random small midwest towns that wont embrace it for anything more than novelty.
philvia no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 15th, 2009, 03:50 PM   #617
FlyFish
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 352
Likes (Received): 83

Agreed, I know all politics is local but I do't know why so many find it so hard to accept that the first place we should employ true HSR is the corridor that already has the riders.
FlyFish no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 15th, 2009, 09:10 PM   #618
lostknight
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by SnailTrain View Post
I don't believe that the USA has either the will, the money or the engineering expertise to EVER build a high speed rail network. They are also too proud or stupid, according to your point of view, to import the ability.
You dear sir are a jackass of the highest order if you honestly believe what you are posting.

Quote:
To make it viable would require vast amounts of federal money, and walnut brained flat earthers who "think" like Sarah Palin will ensure this never happens.
Ahh. Another open-minded liberal.
Quote:
So, dream on Americans - as the Chinese pass you out. Best to just stick with that which you best ie - more freeways with hundreds of lanes for climate wrecking SUV's to crawl along, while the rest of the world (except the UK of course - USA's dim-witted poodle nation, which has the slowest, worst trains in Europe) gets on with building High Speed Rail.
And I would guess Asian as well, not to mention racist.
lostknight no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 15th, 2009, 09:14 PM   #619
lostknight
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2
Likes (Received): 0

Look, rail in this country is never going to work until you make it competitive with air and trains. That means improving the quality of rail, and the speed of rail. As Colorado rail authority is proving out, speed is a determining factor to perception of quality and worth.

Now, there is a obvious gap in the system - around Denver and the true mid-west. That's also because population density there is through the floor. But bear in mind that Denver already is committed to the best build out of light rail and commuter rail of any city it's size, New Mexico is making consumer trains work and Nevada is the perfect test case of a classic European high speed rail line from Los Angeles.

The difference is that it's not about population density in what the idiots on the left term fly-over country, it's about finding the right rail mixture to support services, and understanding that there are places where flying will always make more sense.
lostknight no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 15th, 2009, 09:20 PM   #620
davsot
Perro que ladra no muerde
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 7,243
Likes (Received): 47

Well, they should do HSR in the most important corridors. But I really hate how they dub everything HSR, even though some are just 110 MPH max. It's really annoying.

Sigh... Well, it just wouldn't sound as enticing if we were to call it Medium Speed Rail.
davsot 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 02:16 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