UNITED STATES | High Speed Rail

[Songoten2554]

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

[aquablue]

There may not be room for new tracks in the NEC. hence maglev

[geoking66]

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 The NEC uses outdated electric systems, with overhead lines at 11 or 12.5 kV 25Hz AC until it reaches New Haven.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.

[aquablue]

BS. You need new tracks - no fix'm uppers will work, given the congestion on those tracks no matter what upgrades are done. A crash just happened yesterday btw a freight and an amtrak in Illinois - they won't remove that law. Yes, fix the NEC but don't expect it to ever really be much more than a short term, stop gap measure. Didn't you read the report by Amtrak recently? They said it would cost 7 billion to upgrade the NEC but that would only gain you 20 mins time off the NY-DC trip - not really efficient use of funds if you ask me. I think its time to try something new that isn't going to interfere with the freight operations. IMO, maglev is the ONLY solution due to lack of room for new HSR, unless you move the whole track inland and have spurs into the cities on regular lines. Maglev could hover above the Intersates, which a new LGV could not.

Also, By the time the upgrades are done, the congestion, etc..will have started to erode the economy. We will allready be far behind other nations who are planning the real thing now.

[aquablue]

Originally Posted by Songoten2554

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

HSR isn't an option unless it is moved far inland from the major cities due to massive sprawl/urbanization along the route. Maglev can be elevated above highways. the Feds won't allow these light HSR trains on regular tracks due to regulations due to freight trains along the routes.

[Songoten2554]

the HSR Tracks will be identical to the regular Railway tracks but there could be some ways to be intergreted with them

the french approach to high speed rail is pretty good and spot on but for the NEC railway right of way will have to stay how it is but outside the NEC it can adapt better

the french approach to HSR outside the NEC will be alot easier

[aquablue]

Can you believe it, the so called HSR for the SE USA - DC-->Charlotte is going to be 110mph top speed? And that may not even happen at all!!! HAHAHAHA, is this some kind of a joke. Why don't americans understand what HSR is? Are they that parochial, do they not look beyond their borders? HSR is greater than 150mph. Also, its disgusting that even this lametable 110mph speed train may not happen due to anti-rail, pro-highway idiots and scumbags who are stuck in the past and think rail is for old people or for romantic journeys only. This country needs to wake up. I can't wait for oil to rise, then these people will be singing a different tune!! haha, what creeps!!

If you dare google it, search for HSR south east USA -- prepare to be disgusted.

[kkackwurst]

funny threat.

[iampuking]

110mph? Even ours (UK) is faster than that

[geoking66]

Originally Posted by aquablue

BS. You need new tracks - no fix'm uppers will work, given the congestion on those tracks no matter what upgrades are done. A crash just happened yesterday btw a freight and an amtrak in Illinois - they won't remove that law. Yes, fix the NEC but don't expect it to ever really be much more than a short term, stop gap measure. Didn't you read the report by Amtrak recently? They said it would cost 7 billion to upgrade the NEC but that would only gain you 20 mins time off the NY-DC trip - not really efficient use of funds if you ask me. I think its time to try something new that isn't going to interfere with the freight operations. IMO, maglev is the ONLY solution due to lack of room for new HSR, unless you move the whole track inland and have spurs into the cities on regular lines. Maglev could hover above the Intersates, which a new LGV could not.

Also, By the time the upgrades are done, the congestion, etc..will have started to erode the economy. We will allready be far behind other nations who are planning the real thing now.

Actually, you're forgetting that Acela is capable of only 135mph on non-25kV AC and 150mph on 25kV AC. If they were to upgrade Acela, not just the tracks and electrical systems, to say, 175mph or even 200mph, the time would shorten by over 35-45 minutes at minimum. Seriously, where are you going to put MAGLEV? Remember, there are huge clearance issues especially going into New York City. Also, MAGLEV's capacity isn't amazing. It may go quickly but requires large spacing. Curves on MAGLEV are also an issue. To get the desired speed that you're talking about would need it to be flat and straight enough, but the NEC and Northeast doesn't have any areas that can fit it. You say that more tracks are necessary. Think about it this way. The West Coast Main Line in the UK operates during rush hour 6tph in both directions for high-speed Virgin, at 10tph Overground/Silverlink up to Watford Junction, and freight trains. That's a train every two to four minutes. The NEC's gaps between trains during rush hour are about ten minutes.

[aquablue]

What are you suggesting? There is no room to straighten the current track for true HSR in the NEC. Even if you upgrade the catenary, there are too many curves to make a difference. Didn't you hear what I said about the 7billion upgrade for 20mins reduction (official study)? If not maglev, what do you suggest to get true HSR in the NEC, new ROW, or what? The current tracks are useless, especially north of NYC in CT. At least you can put the maglev over the highways, its possible to do that on highways that have medians.

[ADCS]

Problem is that the rest of the country doesn't want to pay for it, and without a powerful passenger rail lobby to counteract both them and the freight companies who want that federal cash themselves, its going to be a hard battle.

Even on the state level, you have problems, such as Central PA and Upstate NY whose representatives are loath to spending money on Philly and NYC

[ADCS]

It's better than the 79 mph that we have now (Why is it 79 mph? Why not a round 80?)

[phattonez]

At least the California one is the real deal. 200 mph.

[33Hz]

Originally Posted by aquablue

What are you suggesting? There is no room to straighten the current track for true HSR in the NEC. Even if you upgrade the catenary, there are too many curves to make a difference. Didn't you hear what I said about the 7billion upgrade for 20mins reduction (official study)? If not maglev, what do you suggest to get true HSR in the NEC, new ROW, or what? The current tracks are useless, especially north of NYC in CT. At least you can put the maglev over the highways, its possible to do that on highways that have medians.

I don't get it, in post #4 you say that the arguments about ROW are baloney, so yes, a new HSR ROW is needed. I think this whole "maglev can go over highways" argument from its supporters is a red herring - there is absolutely no technical reason why HSR couldn't do the same. Only problem is that it would be expensive and hard to maintain in either form.

Much more realistic is that the line should run alonside existing highways as has been done in Germany, Holland and the UK, for example. The CTRL is proof that a 300km/h railway can follow existing highway curves.


UK




Germany




Holland

[elfabyanos]

The funniest thing I read re. the California HSL was a pro-car lobby critic citing HSR as "a 21st century version of Victorian technology", as if cars were invented in the 20th century! Granted I see his point, cars are 'newer' by about 50 years, but I found it funny

[elfabyanos]

Originally Posted by geoking66

The West Coast Main Line in the UK operates during rush hour 6tph in both directions for high-speed Virgin, at 10tph Overground/Silverlink up to Watford Junction, and freight trains.

From the 2009 timetable Virgin will operate 11tph during the peak, I believe it's already more than 6 per hour in the non-peak now.

Aquablue - I have never understood the idea that Maglev is easier to find space to build. A maglev train is about the same size as a normal train, it's trackbed is about the same size as a normal trackbed, the only reason it can 'hover' above expressways is because a bloody great long elvated section for the trackbed is built, which could just as easily be a conventional trackbed. I don't get it. All the proponents of Maglev seem to make this same mistake - that Maglev will be cheaper and easier to build, cheaper to maintain, easier and more convenient to use and have a higher potential capacity. The only proven thing with Maglev is that it's fast. France are upping their LGVs up to 224 mph within the next 5 years. That would bring DC and Boston within 2 hours of each other on a dedicated high speed line with no timetabled stops. Why choose maglev?

[Tri-ring]

Originally Posted by elfabyanos

From the 2009 timetable Virgin will operate 11tph during the peak, I believe it's already more than 6 per hour in the non-peak now.

Aquablue - I have never understood the idea that Maglev is easier to find space to build. A maglev train is about the same size as a normal train, it's trackbed is about the same size as a normal trackbed, the only reason it can 'hover' above expressways is because a bloody great long elvated section for the trackbed is built, which could just as easily be a conventional trackbed. I don't get it. All the proponents of Maglev seem to make this same mistake - that Maglev will be cheaper and easier to build, cheaper to maintain, easier and more convenient to use and have a higher potential capacity. The only proven thing with Maglev is that it's fast. France are upping their LGVs up to 224 mph within the next 5 years. That would bring DC and Boston within 2 hours of each other on a dedicated high speed line with no timetabled stops. Why choose maglev?

Can I shed some light to that subject, first of all, maglev can turn tighter curves due to magnetic induced propulsion positioning the cart within the guideway.
In term of price since it is still in development stage(for Japan anyways) this can not be thoroughly compared but in theory there is no alignement of rail nor sleepers needed and the Japanese system only needs coils for magnetic inducement, I think the price can be reduced significantly once technology is established.
Price for construction of experimental track can be found here.

[pflo777]

1. Germany developed a new generation of Maglev Trains in the years 2002-2007, based upon the Transrapid System that they sold to China (in 2001), and which is in reliable operation there for 4 years now.

This new Generation of Vehicle and Guidway is 25% cheaper than the one sold to China, which makes costs per mile for constructing it about as expensive as a modern state of the art Wheel/Rail Highspeed system




http://www.max-boegl.de/boegldip/web...osition=inline


2. This system needs a corridor of 13 meter width (+1 meter noise protection walls where necessary) and can operate there with 500 kmh speed and a 10 minutes intervall.

Based upon tested todays technology.

3. As the Transrapid system wraps around the guidway it can go aroung thigher curves.
Even with 400 kmh it could easily follow a US-Highway.
With 500 kmh it might need to cut some corners, but generally would also be able to follow it.

4. I highly recommend to take a look at the Shanghai maglev route on google earth, there you can see, how a system looks, that carries 20 000 Passengers/day (which makes 7,3mio a year) with 430 kmh in a 15 minutes interval.( with passenger numbers rising)

To sum it up:

Dinner is served!
The US would just have to stop talking, discussing and babbling (what they actually do for 25 years now) and just go for it.

[33Hz]

Originally Posted by pflo777

1. Germany developed a new generation of Maglev Trains in the years 2002-2007, based upon the Transrapid System that they sold to China (in 2001), and which is in reliable operation there for 4 years now.

This new Generation of Vehicle and Guidway is 25% cheaper than the one sold to China, which makes costs per mile for constructing it about as expensive as a modern state of the art Wheel/Rail Highspeed system

I suspect, as with the UK case, that the actual cost of the track hardware will be insignificant compared to the cost of land, project planning and other legal fees on a US project in the NEC. If Transrapid can show that their track is cheaper (is it in use at Emsland yet?), they still have the above to overcome.

2. This system needs a corridor of 13 meter width (+1 meter noise protection walls where necessary) and can operate there with 500 kmh speed and a 10 minutes intervall.

Based upon tested todays technology.

As can be seen in the pictures above, HSR typically needs 8 to 10 metres for a twin track.

Whilst no train is yet running at 500kmh regularly, neither is any Transrapid. AFAIK they top out at 430kmh (for 2 minutes) in Shaghai and 450 on the test track. Granted this is faster than a normal train in regular use.

The 10 minute interval is IMHO the achiles heel of the technology. Intervals on TGV are 3 minutes, allowing over 20,000 passengers each way per hour. On Transrapid it is 6,000 per hour.

3. As the Transrapid system wraps around the guidway it can go aroung thigher curves.
Even with 400 kmh it could easily follow a US-Highway.
With 500 kmh it might need to cut some corners, but generally would also be able to follow it.

This is a myth. The TGV records show that a normal train is perfectly able to ride corners at high speed, they do not need to be wrapped around it to travel over them safely.

Instead it is all to do with cant deficiency (super-elevation) of the tracks and passenger comfort. Dedicated passenger railways can use high cant just like the maglev tracks have to be leaned into corners.

4. I highly recommend to take a look at the Shanghai maglev route on google earth, there you can see, how a system looks, that carries 20 000 Passengers/day (which makes 7,3mio a year) with 430 kmh in a 15 minutes interval.( with passenger numbers rising)

If you look at the line on Google Earth, or indeed below, you can see that the track - elevated or not - requires long sweeping curves and realistically a lot of land underneath. If you want the line to really enter the city centre, as was done at Lille, Antwerp and London, then tunnelling is the only acceptable answer and Transrapid does not lend itself well to this. That is why Shanghai avoided it.

Originally Posted by elfabyanos

France are upping their LGVs up to 224 mph within the next 5 years. That would bring DC and Boston within 2 hours of each other on a dedicated high speed line with no timetabled stops. Why choose maglev?

To be fair, DC to Boston is 450 miles, so even using the sort of average speed the AGV could give (~170mph), they are at best 2h40m apart. But the difference in timing would not be sufficient to go to the expense of constructing maglev infrastructure through or under all the intermediate cities.