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.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old September 1st, 2012, 05:24 AM   #2401
aquaticko
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Manchester, NH
Posts: 1,995
Likes (Received): 1031

Quote:
Originally Posted by China Hand View Post
....Public Transit in the USA, asides Manhattan, Boston, Chicago and Seattle, is mostly for the not-normal people. Losers, those on Gov't assistance, the poor, and the devoutly environmental.

Not having a car in almost all of the USA means you are a loser.
Go to a job interview and tell them you took the bus. You won't get the job. HR will have someone go into the parking lot to check if you have a car and how nice it is....
Now that was a useless block of text. I've only included the parts that most completely reflect your ideology.

And for you, of all people, to talk about ignoring facts? What a hypocrite.

I hate to be all ad hominem at you, but if you're not going to engage in a serious discussion about this, then don't.
aquaticko no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old September 1st, 2012, 05:56 AM   #2402
Nexis
Dark Wolf
 
Nexis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Along the Rails of North Jersey..
Posts: 15,684
Likes (Received): 17034

Top High Speed rail Networks by 2050

California High Speed Rail Network
Size : 800+ Mi (1,300kms)
Number of lines : 6
Stations : 25+
Projected Ridership : 95 Million a Year or 260,730 Daily
Top Speed : 220mph (350Km/h)
Cost : 68.5 Billion $

Midwest High Speed Rail Network
Size : 700 Mi+ (1,296Kms)
Stations : 76+ (Feeders factored in)
Lines : 6+ with 7 Feeders
Projected Ridership : 43 Million a year or 120,000 daily (Feeders factored in)
Top Speed on Trunk lines : 220mph (350Km/h)
Top Speed on Secondary / Feeder lines : 125mph (201Km/h)
Cost : 58 Billion $


Northeastern High Speed Network
Size : 1940 Mi+ (3,592kms)
Lines : 4+ with 6 Feeders
Stations : 90+ (Feeders factored in)
Projected Ridership : 127 Million a year or 350,000 daily (Feeders factored in)
Top Speed on Trunk lines : 220mph (350Km/h)
Top Speed on Secondary / Feeder lines : 125mph (201Km/h)
Cost : 120 Billion $


Taken from MWHSR , CAHSR and AMtrak Next gen sources , all done by 2050 or 2060 which is easy to do...Some of the lines are under Construction I do count the 110mph lines for now. I would say that 260 miles is under construction for enhancements and HSR prep in the Northeast which means 110mph , with room for 125mph Electric service down the road.

Top Regional Rail Networks by 2050

Midwestern Regional Rail Network - OH - IN - IL - MI - WI - MN - MO - KS - NE - ND - SD
Size in 2012 : 527.7 Mi
Size by 2050 : 2740 Mi
Electric lines in 2012 : 76 Mi
Electric lines by 2050 : 890 Mi
Number of lines in 2012 : 12
Number of lines by 2050 : 36
Top Speed 2012 : 100mph
Top Speed 2050 : 125mph
Daily Ridership in 2012 : 304,600
Daily Ridership in 2030 : 780,000


Northeastern Regional Rail Network - NJ - NY - CT - DE - MA - RI - NH - ME - VT - PA - MD - DC - VA
Size in 2012 : 3493 Mi
Size by 2050 : 9,300 Mi
Electric lines in 2012 : 2150 Mi
Electric lines by 2050 : 8,400 Mi
Number of lines in 2012 : 64
Number of lines by 2050 : 134
Top Speed in 2012 : 125mph
Top Speed in 2012 : 125mph
Daily Ridership in 2012 : 1.6 Million
Daily Ridership by 2030 : 4.2 Million


California Regional Rail Network
Size in 2012 : 716 Mi
Size by 2050 : 892 Mi
Number of lines in 2012 : 12
Number of lines by 2050 : 17
Electric lines in 2012 : 0 Mi
Electric lines by 2050 : 630 Mi
Top Speed in 2012 : 90mph
Top Speed in by 2050 : 125mph
Daily Ridership in 2012 : 107,500
Daily Ridership by 2030 : 480,200


Taken from the various State , County , City Plans and Proposals and Transit advocate wishlists... Ridership Projections for 2030 are from me....factoring in various TOD and service enhancement projects aswell as new lines.
I have yet to do the LRT / Metro and streetcar build out comparisons...

Midwestern Light / Heavy Rail Network - OH - IN - IL - MI - WI - MN - MO - KS - NE - ND - SD
Size in 2012 : 322.4 Mi
Size by 2050 : 820 Mi
Number of lines in 2012 : 15
Number of lines by 2050 : 59
Stations in 2012 : 268
Stations by 2050 : 420+
Daily Ridership in 2011 : 815,290
Daily Ridership by 2030 : 3.8 Million


Northeastern Light / Heavy Rail Network - NJ - NY - CT - DE - MA - RI - NH - ME - VT - PA - MD - DC - VA
Size in 2012 : 1302 Mi
Size by 2050 : 2526+ Mi
Number of lines in 2012 : 71
Number of lines by 2050 : 163
Stations in 2012 : 947
Stations by 2050 : 1784+
Daily Ridership in 2011 : 7.2 Million
Daily Ridership by 2030 : 20.3 Million



California Light / Heavy Rail Network
Size in 2012 : 431.8 Mi
Size by 2050 : 1051+ Mi
Number of lines in 2012 : 22
Number of lines by 2050 : 54
Stations in 2012 : 302
Stations by 2050 : 680+
Daily Ridership in 2011 : 1.1 Million
Daily Ridership by 2030 : 5.8 Million


Various Rail Projects to be done by 2030...

Light Rail
Streetcars
Commuter or Regional Rail
Heavy Rail

Second Avenue Subway - 250,000 - 3 Stations - 2 Mi - NY
Gateway Rail Project - 230,000 - 1 Expanded station - 7 mi - NJ/NY
DC Streetcar - 214,000 - 40+ Stations - 37 mi - DC
East Side Access - 190,000 - 1 New Terminal - 6 mi - NY
MOM Rail Network - 180,000 - 24 Stations - 115.7 Mi - NJ

Dulles Metrorail - 135,000 - 11 Stations - 23 mi - VA/DC
Northern Virginia Streetcar network - 106,000 - 26+ Stations - 40 mi - VA
Restored Philly Streetcars - 102,000 - 45 Stations - 36 mi - PA
Expanded Philly Network - 90,000 - 25 Stations - 25 mi - PA

Naval Yard Subway Extension - 86,000 - 2 Stations - 1.5 mi - PA
Purple line LRT - 75,000 - 21 Stations - 16.3 Mi - MD
Southern Hampshire Rail Network - 73,500 - 25 stations - 65 mi - NH
South Coast Rail Network - 73,000 - 30 Stations - 72 mi - MA/RI

Green line Extension to Somerville - 70,000 - 8 Stations - 5.21 Mi - MA
Northern Branch LRT - 68,000 - 9 Stations - 14 mi - NJ
Red line LRT - 64,000 - 20 stations - 14.6 Mi - MD

Hell Gate & West Side Line - 62,000 - 8 stations - 31 Mi - NY
West Shore line - 58,000 - 23 stations - 70 Mi - NJ/NY
New Haven - Springfield Commuter Rail - 55,000 - 12 Stations - 60.5 mi - CT/MA
Eastern Jersey Rail Network - 45,000 - 9 stations - 43.7 Mi - NJ/PA

Blue line Extension - 42,000 - 5 stations - 4.2 Mi - MA
Reading line - 41,000 - 12 Stations - 50 Mi - PA
Allentown line - 40,000 - 26 stations - 63 Mi - PA
West Trenton line - 39,000 - 5 stations - 28.4 Mi - NJ
__________________
My FLICKR Page < 54,100+ Photos of Urban Renewal , Infrastructure , Food and Nature in the Northeastern US
Visit the Reorganized New York City Section
My Photography Website
Visit the New Jersey Section
Nexis no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 1st, 2012, 07:31 AM   #2403
zaphod
PRESIDENT OF SPACE
 
zaphod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,175
Likes (Received): 1673

Just to sort of clarify things, is this about some people's political stance that there should be large government investment in freight rail, or something?

I dunno, to some extent I think it would help in some places to fund projects that get rid of bottlenecks. It's all proportional, highways get a lot of funding, rail should at least get a little based on the role it plays. Railroads pay taxes on their infrastructure, trucking drives on roads for free(fuel taxes are still just a pool of money in the end, its not a true user fee).

Quote:
I mentioned it to reference traffic volume in the USA. On interstates traveling between those points in future Megacities, it's mostly truck traffic moving goods. Why? It's cheaper than the train. Thus freight, and by extension passenger, traffic is cheaper and more flexible on the roads.
Yeah, so what?

Rail does not necessarily have to have 100% share of freight movement to still serve as a profitable part of the transportation system. Since deregulation in the 1980s and access to modern sources of capital investment, railroads in North America aren't going anywhere.

In other countries freight lines are still being built. The Ghan to Darwin from Alice Springs in Australia was built to serve an Indian Ocean port. Saudi is expanding their railways, the UAE and Qatar are planning them, and they've already bought some American built diesel locomotives. To large mines and to move containers between their growing industrial and port centers. Obviously much of freight in those places go by truck, and there will never be a densely woven network of local railways unless they are for commuter trains. But the main lines have an important job to do. Same in China, some truly massive coal-hauling lines there, I believe they use most powerful locomotives in the world now.

Quote:

The USA built out a huge rail network for bulk and intermodal, and have pulled up much of that track that was laid in the 1800's because it is cheaper, faster, more flexible to ship by truck.
Rail is one component of the transportation system, which consists of trucking, maritime, etc. Of course trucking is more logical for point to point freight haulage. But rail is good for moving raw tonnage between major hubs, and trucks and trains can work together where goods are shipped to rail terminals for going cross-country.

The 19th century rail network was not meant for intermodal traffic. It was designed for depots originating less than carload freight and boxcars going to local sources of traffic. Hence tons of branch and secondary lines, which tried to hit as many small towns as possible. Also while I am not a huge history expert, I understand that the contraction of the network actually started as early as the beginning of the 1900s. There was a long recession at the end of the 1800s caused in part by too much speculative railroad building. By the 1930s a lot of stuff was being abandoned.

Last edited by zaphod; September 1st, 2012 at 07:52 AM.
zaphod está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old September 1st, 2012, 08:34 AM   #2404
trainrover
:-x
 
trainrover's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,787
Likes (Received): 738

Nothing new to be gleaning from all this trashy, 60-year-old gibberish being bandied about here ... cut to 20'26" whereat the tirade lasts a mere six minutes



Hey! China , HSR would work in N America I happen to reckon it being more the case of which kind, conventional or maglev ...
__________________
.
hee hee
.
trainrover no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 1st, 2012, 09:05 AM   #2405
NordikNerd
Rail & Road traveller
 
NordikNerd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Link÷ping
Posts: 2,747
Likes (Received): 1408

Quote:
The USA built out a huge rail network for bulk and intermodal, and have pulled up much of that track that was laid in the 1800's because it is cheaper, faster, more flexible to ship by truck.
Whould be interesting to see what lines existed in the 1950's, when they ceased with passenger and freight service and when the tracks were pulled up.

In Sweden most narrow gauge lines ceased passenger service in the 1960's. Freight service continued to the late 1970's or early 80's. Then the tracks were removed.

I dare to say that at least 20 % of all railway disappeared during that time,

Is it the same thing in America ? Are they building any new railway lines lately ? Are there narrow gauge lines operating now except museum railways ?
NordikNerd no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 1st, 2012, 11:14 AM   #2406
Nexis
Dark Wolf
 
Nexis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Along the Rails of North Jersey..
Posts: 15,684
Likes (Received): 17034

Quote:
Originally Posted by NordikNerd View Post
Whould be interesting to see what lines existed in the 1950's, when they ceased with passenger and freight service and when the tracks were pulled up.

In Sweden most narrow gauge lines ceased passenger service in the 1960's. Freight service continued to the late 1970's or early 80's. Then the tracks were removed.

I dare to say that at least 20 % of all railway disappeared during that time,

Is it the same thing in America ? Are they building any new railway lines lately ? Are there narrow gauge lines operating now except museum railways ?
A lot of the lines in the Midwest and Northeast were spared , some are not regional Rail anymore but were converted to Light Rail or Metro lines...another 1,500 miles of former or current Freight branches will suffer the same fate in the Northeast and Midwest. They stopped ripping up lines in the late 70s and starting restoring them in the late 80s....we still have a long way to go though.
__________________
My FLICKR Page < 54,100+ Photos of Urban Renewal , Infrastructure , Food and Nature in the Northeastern US
Visit the Reorganized New York City Section
My Photography Website
Visit the New Jersey Section
Nexis no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 1st, 2012, 01:52 PM   #2407
China Hand
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 705
Likes (Received): 161

Quote:
Originally Posted by zaphod View Post
Just to sort of clarify things, is this about some people's political stance that there should be large government investment in freight rail, or something?
Not from me.

Quote:
I dunno, to some extent I think it would help in some places to fund projects that get rid of bottlenecks. It's all proportional, highways get a lot of funding, rail should at least get a little based on the role it plays. Railroads pay taxes on their infrastructure, trucking drives on roads for free(fuel taxes are still just a pool of money in the end, its not a true user fee).
Quote:
trucking drives on roads for free
Free? *cough*. Oh boy. You really are a bit clueless.
That is just...incorrect. You need to talk to truckers about their costs.

What bottlenecks? Freight in the USA moves freely and unimpeded via long haul truck in most instances, intermodal and bulk train in the remainder. 3 or 4 days coast to coast. What 'bottleneck'?

"Rail should at least get a little based on the role it plays."

Should? There is no 'should'. Something either is or it is not.
I read 'should' in this context as 'I want this to happen regardless of any other factors'.

More taxes for a nation drowning economically and marginal improvement seen with any USA HSR build out.

Quote:
I mentioned it to reference traffic volume in the USA. On interstates traveling between those points in future Megacities, it's mostly truck traffic moving goods. Why? It's cheaper than the train. Thus freight, and by extension passenger, traffic is cheaper and more flexible on the roads.

Quote:
Yeah, so what?
That is a stellar argument. I mention this because most traffic in the USA travels by roads as it is cheaper. Freight as well as people.

If you want to add costs to driving, just come out and say it.

If you want to just tax autos and hand it to HSR to make people do it, just state so.

You want to 're-engineer' USA society to add 'the real true cost' or some such in order to force people to use trains they do not want to use, then kindly just admit it.

Realise that most USA citizens simply do not have tolerance for that sort of policy attitude.

Nations are unique, not all solutions work in all nations.

Get This Concept.

Quote:
Rail does not necessarily have to have 100% share of freight movement to still serve as a profitable part of the transportation system. Since deregulation in the 1980s and access to modern sources of capital investment, railroads in North America aren't going anywhere.
Correct. As it currently does serving a small niche market and cedes the majority of freight traffic to long haul truckers because trucking it is cheaper.

Do any of you understand that if train freight were cheaper, that it would be used? The only way to make it cheaper is to throw more money at it via taxes, fees and such. It's currently cheaper to ship by truck. QED and done.

If you want your pet gov't funded idea to be paid for, then we can talk fantasy land all day...

Quote:
In other countries freight lines are still being built
You ALL really need to 'grok' that nations differ and have different needs and desires. Americans do not want to pay for HSR. QED, no HSR rail. As it stands now the country cannot afford much of anything, unless you guys want to force people to do 'what is best', and that won't be accepted by most Americans.

Quote:
The Ghan to Darwin from Alice Springs in Australia was built to serve an Indian Ocean port.
Where large amounts of new traffic from India to Darwin justified the building of said line to bring it from the West Coast of a mostly deserted Island Continent Nation to its major population centres.

There is no similar counterpart in the USA.

I am really having a difficult time taking any of you seriously as your arguments are beyond weak, selective and simply spontaneously ignore so many facts.

America built out its rail and has little need for new lines. Sure you could ALL justify any new line, but reality is it's not wanted nor needed in the USA.

I really get the strong impression your opinion is an ivory-tower wishlist and disconnected from reality.

Quote:
Nothing new to be gleaning from all this trashy, 60-year-old gibberish being bandied about here ... cut to 2026 where the tirade lasts a mere six minutes
Maybe it is a 60-year old argument because the issue is settled and you want a fantasy that will never happen?
China Hand no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 1st, 2012, 06:08 PM   #2408
Woonsocket54
PC LOAD LETTER
 
Woonsocket54's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: East Millinocket, Maine
Posts: 5,643
Likes (Received): 5745

not like anyone gives a shit, but 12 Dec 2012 is when amtrak will begin serving norfolk virginia
Woonsocket54 está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old September 2nd, 2012, 12:40 AM   #2409
trainrover
:-x
 
trainrover's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,787
Likes (Received): 738

Quote:
Originally Posted by trainrover
Hey! China
China HSR is terrific? Toys? Fantasy is inherent in virtually instantaneous child's play at erecting HSR that's up to snuff, as in killing, e.g., patrons ... plus, I ain't asking either
__________________
.
hee hee
.
trainrover no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 2nd, 2012, 04:20 PM   #2410
China Hand
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 705
Likes (Received): 161

Quote:
Originally Posted by sekelsenmat View Post
!?!? When did Skyscraper city got dominated by anti-rail biggots?

If you don't care about rail, why discuss here at all? Just keep to the road forum.

If you care about rail, then you know that long distance Amtrak is very important.
I am a fan of reality and the reality is that in the USA the various economic, political, population density, geographic and social factors combine to make HSR non-viable.
China Hand no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 2nd, 2012, 07:20 PM   #2411
makita09
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,536
Likes (Received): 92

If you were a fan of reality you wouldn't use so many ad hominems, appeals to authority and appeals to tradition and ignore the similarity in population density between areas of the USA and areas of the rest of the world that have HSR. You would just state your point and be done with it. Ergo, you aren't a fan of reality, you are a fan of trying to convince other people to share your personal and invented reality.
__________________
"There is no problem so bad that you can't make it worse" - Chris Hadfield
makita09 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 3rd, 2012, 04:38 AM   #2412
aquaticko
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Manchester, NH
Posts: 1,995
Likes (Received): 1031

Quote:
Originally Posted by makita09 View Post
If you were a fan of reality you wouldn't use so many ad hominems, appeals to authority and appeals to tradition and ignore the similarity in population density between areas of the USA and areas of the rest of the world that have HSR. You would just state your point and be done with it. Ergo, you aren't a fan of reality, you are a fan of trying to convince other people to share your personal and invented reality.
This. Can we stop responding to his provocations in both this and the US HSR thread (not that I haven't done it, too) and have meaningful conversations?
aquaticko no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 3rd, 2012, 12:33 PM   #2413
Sopomon
Hideous and malformed
 
Sopomon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 870
Likes (Received): 153

I think it's long been argued that on shorter hops within regions, HSR in the US would be viable. I certainly believe so.

However, the US political machine curtails any real hope of it becoming a reality anytime soon. Firstly, there is a very strong backlash against "Big Gubment" and for some, anything that is publicly funded is socialist and inherently evil. However, thanks to the multitude of regulations and laws that need to be traversed by private firms, there is very little incentive for private firms to do it. And then secondly, even getting the government to fund anything in the first place is nearly impossible thanks to the idiotic two-party system, which only serves to encourage political extremism and pathetic tit-for-tat squabbles over the most minor aspects of any project.
It's good to see CAHSR even happening at all, but it's also sad to see it bogged down in incompetent management.
__________________
And he kicked so many rosebushes at her that eventually, Sasuke turned into a log.
Sopomon no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 4th, 2012, 03:14 AM   #2414
Stainless
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Pyeongnae
Posts: 420
Likes (Received): 34

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sopomon View Post
I think it's long been argued that on shorter hops within regions, HSR in the US would be viable. I certainly believe so.

However, the US political machine curtails any real hope of it becoming a reality anytime soon. Firstly, there is a very strong backlash against "Big Gubment" and for some, anything that is publicly funded is socialist and inherently evil. However, thanks to the multitude of regulations and laws that need to be traversed by private firms, there is very little incentive for private firms to do it. And then secondly, even getting the government to fund anything in the first place is nearly impossible thanks to the idiotic two-party system, which only serves to encourage political extremism and pathetic tit-for-tat squabbles over the most minor aspects of any project.
It's good to see CAHSR even happening at all, but it's also sad to see it bogged down in incompetent management.
Exactly. It would take some major ambition for anyone to build a decent passenger service in the US. Too much of this is people's reluctance to use something that might make them appear poor. Attitudes like China Hand has mentioned like 'Not having a car in almost all of the USA means you are a loser.' is sadly an attitude too many have. I have not visited America in over a decade, but have many friends from there I have met all over the world. They are envious of other countries' PT systems and find it liberating to not have to get in a car to do anything. To say rail is not something people would use is a fallacy, it would be a hard sell to some, but it could work.
Stainless no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 4th, 2012, 03:31 AM   #2415
1Filipe1
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 887
Likes (Received): 319

Personally, i feel China Hand, is out of his mind.

Last time i checked, when you know what people in the usa want? did you ask the 300 million what they wanted? who are you to say that places like the northeast, califronia, etc wouldn't do good with rail? the city i lived in had passenger rail before and its been gone for years now, and ive read articles of it coming back which i doubt but, ive read about it. I just think its ridiculous your trying to jam down what you think down everyones throats and say what everyone else opinion is, is wrong.
1Filipe1 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 4th, 2012, 04:31 AM   #2416
Nexis
Dark Wolf
 
Nexis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Along the Rails of North Jersey..
Posts: 15,684
Likes (Received): 17034

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stainless View Post
Exactly. It would take some major ambition for anyone to build a decent passenger service in the US. Too much of this is people's reluctance to use something that might make them appear poor. Attitudes like China Hand has mentioned like 'Not having a car in almost all of the USA means you are a loser.' is sadly an attitude too many have. I have not visited America in over a decade, but have many friends from there I have met all over the world. They are envious of other countries' PT systems and find it liberating to not have to get in a car to do anything. To say rail is not something people would use is a fallacy, it would be a hard sell to some, but it could work.
Thats not true , Look at the Recent Trends in Increased Mass Transit Ridership and Amtrak Ridership is exploding....
__________________
My FLICKR Page < 54,100+ Photos of Urban Renewal , Infrastructure , Food and Nature in the Northeastern US
Visit the Reorganized New York City Section
My Photography Website
Visit the New Jersey Section
Nexis no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 4th, 2012, 05:02 AM   #2417
nyarch21
Registered User
 
nyarch21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 476
Likes (Received): 801

^ really?
Why is this I wonder?
nyarch21 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 4th, 2012, 05:48 AM   #2418
Nexis
Dark Wolf
 
Nexis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Along the Rails of North Jersey..
Posts: 15,684
Likes (Received): 17034

Quote:
Originally Posted by nyarch21 View Post
^ really?
Why is this I wonder?
-Rising Gas Prices
-Better Fare Systems
-Gen Y isn't driving as much as the older Generations
-The Baby Boomers are retiring in Transit Regions like St. Louis , Northern Virgina , New England
-Expanded Systems and Restored Rail lines to older Suburbs
__________________
My FLICKR Page < 54,100+ Photos of Urban Renewal , Infrastructure , Food and Nature in the Northeastern US
Visit the Reorganized New York City Section
My Photography Website
Visit the New Jersey Section
Nexis no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 4th, 2012, 06:41 AM   #2419
trainrover
:-x
 
trainrover's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,787
Likes (Received): 738

Selling the idea of rail back to the public is less tough also because of the --albeit slow-- abolition of discouraging measures.
__________________
.
hee hee
.
trainrover no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 5th, 2012, 02:17 AM   #2420
Stainless
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Pyeongnae
Posts: 420
Likes (Received): 34

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexis View Post
Thats not true , Look at the Recent Trends in Increased Mass Transit Ridership and Amtrak Ridership is exploding....
I know it is true for systems that are already there, I was thinking more about areas where the train left a long time ago. Many people will not notice that. Even in the UK many people I speak to are unaware that rail use has basically doubled in a decade.
Stainless no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
marc, rail, train

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 02:24 AM.


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