|
|
| Re: High Speed Rail vs Really Fast Regional Rail (1153343) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: High Speed Rail vs Really Fast Regional Rail |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Fri Apr 27 17:16:46 2012, in response to Re: High Speed Rail vs Really Fast Regional Rail, posted by Wado MP73 on Fri Apr 27 04:14:59 2012. 100 mph speed limit on MNR land and its four or five draw bridges100 mph since when? Nowhere on Metro-North allows 100 mph (which would require some kind of ATS and Class 6 track). You getting things mixed up with the MBTA-owned section of the NEC? When you think of business, politics and geography, that line should have a HSL run through Hartford and leave the Shore line for tourists Politics? No, those favored the Shore Line in every respect. The Shore Line was always the heaviest in terms of passenger traffic going back to New Haven RR days as well. You're not going to get away with evading Providence or the entire state of Rhode Island either, in terms of both politics and geography and even business. Boston is closer to New York than DC No, it's the same distance, give or take five miles depending on the route. This is clearly visible on any map, too. Claytor said at the time the run will eventually become shorter than NY-DC He wasn't telling the truth; the fastest conceived speed on the Shore Line was three hours NYP-BOS or a 75-mph average speed, which the AE hasn't achieved; it has achieved its goal of 2:45 for NYP-WAS though. Or was he conceiving having the Acela run via the currently-rail-trailed former New Haven Air Line? Too many curves and the grades were steeper. |
|
|
|