|
|
| Amtrak curviest streches (1357179) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
| (1357179) | |
Amtrak curviest streches |
|
|
Posted by TransitChuckG on Wed Jun 24 13:23:08 2015 Amtrak |
|
|
| (1357195) | |
Re: Amtrak curviest streches |
|
|
Posted by Jersey Mike on Wed Jun 24 14:49:44 2015, in response to Amtrak curviest streches, posted by TransitChuckG on Wed Jun 24 13:23:08 2015. Interesting graphics, but a generally flawed assessment, especially by discounting "curves near stations". Compare how trains stop at BWI and how they stop at New London. Also not all trains stop at all stations. |
|
|
| (1357215) | |
Re: Amtrak curviest streches |
|
|
Posted by TransitChuckG on Wed Jun 24 17:54:11 2015, in response to Re: Amtrak curviest streches, posted by Jersey Mike on Wed Jun 24 14:49:44 2015. Thanks, Mike. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1357216) | |
Re: Amtrak curviest streches |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Wed Jun 24 18:08:12 2015, in response to Re: Amtrak curviest streches, posted by Jersey Mike on Wed Jun 24 14:49:44 2015. Of course, the "solution" is a new curveless railroad with average speeds of 140 mph so that trains can run between NYP and BOS in 1½ hours. Just abandon the notion of tilt trains, IOW. |
|
|
| (1357218) | |
Re: Amtrak curviest streches |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Wed Jun 24 18:24:28 2015, in response to Amtrak curviest streches, posted by TransitChuckG on Wed Jun 24 13:23:08 2015. I thought it was going to be Amtrak women in a yoga class. |
|
|
| (1357228) | |
Re: Amtrak curviest streches |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Wed Jun 24 20:32:08 2015, in response to Re: Amtrak curviest streches, posted by Olog-hai on Wed Jun 24 18:08:12 2015. That's how they do it in Europe and Asia. |
|
|
| (1357248) | |
Re: Amtrak curviest streches |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Thu Jun 25 02:09:18 2015, in response to Re: Amtrak curviest streches, posted by italianstallion on Wed Jun 24 20:32:08 2015. And coming soon to California and Texas, if they can get their act together. |
|
|
| (1357252) | |
Re: Amtrak curviest streches |
|
|
Posted by Jersey Mike on Thu Jun 25 06:55:02 2015, in response to Re: Amtrak curviest streches, posted by WillD on Thu Jun 25 02:09:18 2015. So not coming to Texas or California. |
|
|
| (1357409) | |
Re: Amtrak curviest streches |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Fri Jun 26 01:11:30 2015, in response to Re: Amtrak curviest streches, posted by Jersey Mike on Thu Jun 25 06:55:02 2015. They're building it in California. I know it pains you to see useful rail infrastructure built instead of some useless foamer's wet dream, but at least something built for 220mph operation will come of the project. And if Texas ever decides to stop impeding private industry we'll see if they can get a similar HSR line built. |
|
|
| (1357426) | |
Re: Amtrak curviest streches |
|
|
Posted by Jersey Mike on Fri Jun 26 06:53:06 2015, in response to Re: Amtrak curviest streches, posted by WillD on Fri Jun 26 01:11:30 2015. I'll believe it when I see it. Everybody knows the state doesn't have the $45 billion to spare and never will. Dedicated RoW HSR is not feasible in this country and it never will be. If you want high speed...fly. Airports work great, they really do.BTW my "wet dream" is 110mph service on existing rights of way. Responsible government spending instead of socialist make work boondoggle. |
|
|
| (1357428) | |
Re: Amtrak curviest streches |
|
|
Posted by R2ChinaTown on Fri Jun 26 07:21:30 2015, in response to Re: Amtrak curviest streches, posted by Jersey Mike on Fri Jun 26 06:53:06 2015. Truth |
|
|
| (1357557) | |
Re: Amtrak curviest streches |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Sat Jun 27 01:26:06 2015, in response to Re: Amtrak curviest streches, posted by Jersey Mike on Fri Jun 26 06:53:06 2015. Everybody knows the state doesn't have the $45 billion to spare and never will.But they do. They have cap and trade funds which will provide for the construction of the first two phases beyond the ARRA funding they've received to this point. Dedicated RoW HSR is not feasible in this country and it never will be. Why not? We've carved plenty of transportation ROWs out of the rural parts of the country and those areas have not seen inhabitation significantly increase in the last 40 years. Plenty of space to run a ROW for 220mph trains through once you clear the suburbs. Hell, they manage to find room in Europe and Japan, so we should have an easy time making dedicated high speed rail lines. BTW my "wet dream" is 110mph service on existing rights of way. Which is the very last thing any of the freight railroads want to hear of and thus the absolute worst prospect for any rail service improvement. Look at Illinois backing off the UP corridor improvements in favor of 220mph service between St Louis and Chicago. If you want high speed...fly. Airports work great, they really do. But they don't. Airline trips shorter than 350 miles result in inconvenient trips for passengers and a disproportionate amount of time spent in crowded terminal airspace. That is the exact market where true high speed rail works best, delivering door-to-door times equal to or faster than air travel. Responsible government spending instead of socialist make work boondoggle. If that's the case then one could only come to the conclusion you favor a 220mph true high speed rail line. Anything with an average speed below 125mph is a recipe for endless operating subsidies. At least a true high speed rail line stands a change at attracting a large enough market share to repay its construction costs. |
|
|
| (1358033) | |
Re: Amtrak curviest streches |
|
|
Posted by Jersey Mike on Tue Jun 30 14:01:18 2015, in response to Re: Amtrak curviest streches, posted by WillD on Sat Jun 27 01:26:06 2015. But they do. They have cap and trade funds which will provide for the construction of the first two phases beyond the ARRA funding they've received to this point.Yeah, and when the State has another budget shortfall then they won't have cap and trade funds. Why not? We've carved plenty of transportation ROWs out of the rural parts of the country and those areas have not seen inhabitation significantly increase in the last 40 years. Plenty of space to run a ROW for 220mph trains through once you clear the suburbs. Hell, they manage to find room in Europe and Japan, so we should have an easy time making dedicated high speed rail lines. The age of new rights of way ended with Eisenhower. Construction costs are just too high to build hundreds of miles of brand new stuff. For the same money you could fix the potholes that are much more salient to the average taxpayer. Which is the very last thing any of the freight railroads want to hear of and thus the absolute worst prospect for any rail service improvement. Look at Illinois backing off the UP corridor improvements in favor of 220mph service between St Louis and Chicago. Freight railroads get upgraded lines at public expense. They only whine and moan to sweeten the deal. If that new Governor in IL is talking about 220mph HSR its because he knows its a pipe dream that will let him cancel the more achievable service. Sort of like Gov Hogan in MD floating the idea of a MagLev to avoid talk of other services or upgrades. But they don't. Airline trips shorter than 350 miles result in inconvenient trips for passengers and a disproportionate amount of time spent in crowded terminal airspace. That is the exact market where true high speed rail works best, delivering door-to-door times equal to or faster than air travel. Ha! Have you flown recently? I can get to BWI in 20 minutes and then be at Pittsburgh, Albany or Boston in under 3 hours curb to curb. The only reason I take the train is so I can get pictures. My friend flies and makes fun of me. If that's the case then one could only come to the conclusion you favor a 220mph true high speed rail line. Anything with an average speed below 125mph is a recipe for endless operating subsidies. At least a true high speed rail line stands a change at attracting a large enough market share to repay its construction costs. Come on dude, you're WAY smarter than that. The entire French LGV system has never generated enough profit to pay for its costs and requires billions of subsidies every year. Government will always have to pay for transportation because user fees can never effectively capture all the social gain. |
|
|
| (1358042) | |
Re: Amtrak curviest streches |
|
|
Posted by Bill West on Tue Jun 30 15:26:31 2015, in response to Re: Amtrak curviest streches, posted by Jersey Mike on Tue Jun 30 14:01:18 2015. The judge of the value of social gain is the individual people. If they won't voluntarily put their money where their mouth is then political meddlers should butt out. Nobody is entitled to take on a messiah complex over other people's spending priorities.You will note that I don't advocate which direction transport supporters should go with their own money, just that if they want to be left free then refrain from interfering with the directions others choose. In a user pay of the real cost, if others are mistaken they alone will get hit with that cost. The problems with pseudo money like social gain are: -the value gets claimed by multiple users leading to cost/benefit calculations that wouldn't balance if they had to be traced to real money. IE the airline, taxi, hotel, restaurant and stadium interests each claim full credit for the same one million that a sports event brings to town. -the cash bill the public sees for a service is low leading them to order more of it than it is worth to them. This leads to faulty decisions such adding more transit in a city when all it does is increase the density and decrease the quality and economics of living there. Or trying to add long distance rail passenger service when for a long time its real train and track costs have become greater than the real costs of a plane and airport. Bill |
|
|
