|
|
| Re: High Speed Rail vs Really Fast Regional Rail (1153368) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: High Speed Rail vs Really Fast Regional Rail |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Fri Apr 27 19:21:44 2012, in response to Re: High Speed Rail vs Really Fast Regional Rail, posted by Olog-hai on Fri Apr 27 17:16:46 2012. 100 mph since when? Nowhere on Metro-North allows 100 mphI meant to write 90. That's what I get for staying up too late. 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. Hartford is more important to New York. Providence is more important to Boston. But they have the MBTA too. Or, you could do both and still avoid the Shore. No, it's the same distance, give or take five miles depending on the route. It's 190m and 205m, actually. (bird fly) 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 Claytor envisioned relocating 50 miles of track in CT and RI. Of his plans for the line, only the electrification became true. (and in a lesser way, Acela) |
|
|
|