|
|
| High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service (614045) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
|
Page 1 of 6 |
|
|
| (614045) | |
High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by R42 4787 on Thu May 8 00:45:59 2008 It seems 300 km/h (186 mph) service will never come to the States. We need some sort of dedicated, high speed right of way.But we can do it: Simply convert the existing Amtrak NEC main line from Washington north into a high speed, grade seperated ROW. No local, commuter or freight commuter service will share the tracks. All local, commuter and freight service will now operate via the B&O/Reading main line from Washington to New York, via Baltimore, Philadelphia and Newark. A connection would be made to "THE TUNNEL", Hoboken and perhaps a newly reopened CNJ terminal in Jersey City at the north end. The B&O/Reading/CSX main line would be widened at points and fully electfied to allow for addiional passenger service and CSX freight. While much of the old PRR Amtrak main line is converted into a dedicated high speed line, local/commuter service will still be able to run along the line by using the outer tracks, which would then be completely seperated from the inner dedicated high speed tracks. |
|
|
| (614047) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by The Port of Authority on Thu May 8 00:49:03 2008, in response to High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service, posted by R42 4787 on Thu May 8 00:45:59 2008.  Besides, what are you going to do with the New Haven Line? |
|
|
| (614049) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by SUBWAYMAN on Thu May 8 00:50:21 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service, posted by The Port of Authority on Thu May 8 00:49:03 2008. You don't like High-Speed Rail? |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (614050) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by R42 4787 on Thu May 8 00:50:38 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service, posted by The Port of Authority on Thu May 8 00:49:03 2008. Dedicated high-speed tracks inner, local service outer tracks. |
|
|
| (614051) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by J trainloco on Thu May 8 00:50:46 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service, posted by SUBWAYMAN on Thu May 8 00:50:21 2008. That's not what he said. |
|
|
| (614052) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by The Port of Authority on Thu May 8 00:51:11 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service, posted by SUBWAYMAN on Thu May 8 00:50:21 2008. I like high speed rail, but this is highly unrealistic. Hence the pie in the sky graphic. |
|
|
| (614053) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by The Port of Authority on Thu May 8 00:52:31 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service, posted by R42 4787 on Thu May 8 00:50:38 2008. And what about the numerous curves on the RoW in CT? High speed lines and sharp curves don't go well together. |
|
|
| (614054) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by The Port of Authority on Thu May 8 00:52:52 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service, posted by J trainloco on Thu May 8 00:50:46 2008. exactly... |
|
|
| (614055) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Thu May 8 00:53:55 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service, posted by The Port of Authority on Thu May 8 00:52:52 2008. confirmed |
|
|
| (614057) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Thu May 8 00:54:38 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service, posted by The Port of Authority on Thu May 8 00:51:11 2008. your post made sense to me. i don't know where he got that idea from. |
|
|
| (614058) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Thu May 8 01:09:35 2008, in response to High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service, posted by R42 4787 on Thu May 8 00:45:59 2008. I see I was a bit too late with this post, and that you don't know how to respond to an existing thread. Why the focus on the NEC? We've already got a workable solution which, although not HSR in the strictest sense, is more than adaquate for the time being.Your plan represents a massive waste of resources because your dedicated HSL built on the NEC would completely squander the other two tracks if you removed commuter traffic from them. There are only so many WAS/BAL - PHL/NYC trips to be made, and even when you grind the airline shuttles into the ground you'll still be left looking for more business. Then there's the small matter of the numerous junctions along the NEC. It does little good to go 186mph for 100 miles only to sit and crawl through ZOO at 20mph. If you really have to give the Northeast Corridor a 186-200mph line then go with new construction of a two track dedicated High Speed Line. You can avoid the enroute urban centers as you please, include junctions so 'local' trains can call at Philadelphia and Baltimore, you don't completely screw over the far more numerous commuter passengers, and you can likely get a higher average speed. That being said, I think it is a complete mistake to focus any more effort on the NEC for the time being other than fixing NYC's passenger stations and completing NECIP. For passenger rail to be truely accepted in this country you're going to need a far broader political base, both ideologically and geographically. You're not going to get that rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic in the Northeast. The best chance for a true high speed rail line in the country (in the sense that it's about the only one still being talked about), is the California High Speed Rail Authority plan. Even then the line 40 billion dollars from getting built and on life support from an indifferent governor. I believe that we need the feds to step in and provide some financial incentives to get projects like CAHSR and the earlier Texas TGV and Florida Overland Express projects off the ground. That way rail support becomes more of a national issue and areas which currently recieve little service and provide little support would see the sorts of benefits an NEC-like line can provide. |
|
|
| (614060) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by R42 4787 on Thu May 8 01:16:05 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service, posted by WillD on Thu May 8 01:09:35 2008. The B&O main line could certainly host trains diverted off the Amtrak NEC. Or would it not? |
|
|
| (614064) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC—300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Thu May 8 01:59:49 2008, in response to High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service, posted by R42 4787 on Thu May 8 00:45:59 2008. You're joking, right?Nothing like that is ever done "simply". The ICE-T in Germany gets average speeds up as fast as 120 mph on traditional rail corridors. And that's with top speeds of 143 mph. How fast do you think the NEC really needs to be? Amtrak's already trouncing the air shuttles between NY and DC with trains operating at 82-mph average speeds. You cannot convert the NEC into a railroad that has average speeds that would allow a 1˝-hour trip between the two cities, something that's not even needed. And you'll never, ever get commuter rail off that artery—it's too important. (So you want to kill NJT service to Trenton?? or SEPTA R2 to Delaware and R7 to Trenton NJ?) |
|
|
| (614065) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC—300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Thu May 8 02:02:12 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail on the NEC—300 kmh service, posted by Olog-hai on Thu May 8 01:59:49 2008. BTW, the former Royal Blue Route, as much as I'd like to see passenger service on it again, needs to be fully reworked. You can't electrify it through places like Darby PA, where you have a trolley line crossing at-grade—you'd have to elevate the railroad.THAT Tunnel is a fiasco that will collapse under its own weight. |
|
|
| (614066) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Thu May 8 02:03:27 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service, posted by The Port of Authority on Thu May 8 00:49:03 2008. No kidding. Not to mention unneeded. |
|
|
| (614067) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Thu May 8 02:04:18 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service, posted by SUBWAYMAN on Thu May 8 00:50:21 2008. He never said anything of the sort. He said that it's unrealistic (nobody does it that way) and that it is not necessary. |
|
|
| (614071) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC—300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Thu May 8 02:14:39 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail on the NEC—300 kmh service, posted by Olog-hai on Thu May 8 02:02:12 2008. There are high voltage AC catenary/low voltage DC trolley overhead crossings in Germany and Switzerland, it is entirely possible to do so. Of course if Mr. Wong is trying to shoehorn all of the NEC's traffic off onto the former B&O it should be elevated just for the density of traffic. |
|
|
| (614075) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by SUBWAYMAN on Thu May 8 02:39:11 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service, posted by Terrapin Station on Thu May 8 00:53:55 2008. You obviously hold a grudge against me don't ya? |
|
|
| (614076) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by SUBWAYMAN on Thu May 8 02:44:54 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service, posted by Olog-hai on Thu May 8 02:04:18 2008. Ok |
|
|
| (614078) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Thu May 8 02:46:35 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service, posted by R42 4787 on Thu May 8 01:16:05 2008. No, it cannot without an enormous expenditure. Are you going to build another bridge over the Delaware to go to four tracks there? Now you're packing Amtrak's long distance traffic, SEPTA's commuter traffic, and CSX's trains onto a two track bridge.What makes you think you could sustain 186mph through something like the Elizabeth curves? How are you going to deal with the many low speed junctions on the NEC such as ZOO? But perhaps most importantly, why exactly do you want to shift capacity from one line to another? As I said once you remove commuter traffic from the NEC you'll be hard pressed to replace it with traffic. Why settle for a middling solution like attempting to convert the NEC and shoving traffic to the B&O when you could build a new line, likely for about the same money by the time you fix up the other two lines, and gain a dedicated high speed line. |
|
|
| (614079) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by SUBWAYMAN on Thu May 8 02:50:10 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service, posted by The Port of Authority on Thu May 8 00:51:11 2008. OK but if there is a plan for High-Speed rail that is realistic than it is not a pie in the sky. |
|
|
| (614081) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by The Port of Authority on Thu May 8 03:05:33 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service, posted by SUBWAYMAN on Thu May 8 02:50:10 2008. Yes, but I was responding to this specific proposal... |
|
|
| (614108) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Thu May 8 05:30:37 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service, posted by WillD on Thu May 8 01:09:35 2008. Your plan represents a massive waste of resources because your dedicated HSL built on the NEC would completely squander the other two tracks if you removed commuter traffic from them. There are only so many WAS/BAL - PHL/NYC trips to be madeThere are, however, other city pairs that could use a section of that HSL. |
|
|
| (614119) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Thu May 8 06:35:46 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service, posted by The Port of Authority on Thu May 8 00:52:31 2008. They do pretty well in Germany, you just need better banking (superelevation) and no freight. |
|
|
| (614122) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Thu May 8 06:54:54 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service, posted by Dutchrailnut on Thu May 8 06:35:46 2008. Their Germans are better than our Germans.your pal, Fred |
|
|
| (614124) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Thu May 8 07:01:23 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service, posted by Fred G on Thu May 8 06:54:54 2008. Jahwhole (sp) |
|
|
| (614133) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Thu May 8 07:47:50 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service, posted by SUBWAYMAN on Thu May 8 02:39:11 2008. No. You came to an incorrect conclusion, duh. And look, you just did it AGAIN... |
|
|
| (614134) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Thu May 8 07:48:33 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service, posted by SUBWAYMAN on Thu May 8 02:50:10 2008. but this one may not have been realistic... |
|
|
| (614141) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by SUBWAYSURF on Thu May 8 07:57:33 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service, posted by SUBWAYMAN on Thu May 8 02:39:11 2008. She holds a grudge against everyone. Himself being number 1. |
|
|
| (614163) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by JohnL on Thu May 8 09:48:42 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service, posted by Fred G on Thu May 8 06:54:54 2008. Don’t mention the Germans! |
|
|
| (614170) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC—300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Thu May 8 10:34:13 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail on the NEC—300 kmh service, posted by Olog-hai on Thu May 8 01:59:49 2008. Air shuttles *should* be trounced!They should outright be BANNED, then expanded services to more distant destinations would be more feesible, and everything else good. ROAR |
|
|
| (614171) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Thu May 8 10:39:55 2008, in response to High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service, posted by R42 4787 on Thu May 8 00:45:59 2008. There is little point to doing anything with the NEC.Yeah, they will eventually put some faster trains on those tracks, maybe reorganize interface with commuter trains, and shove freight service elsewhere. But that is it. Done. HSR *is* indicated, and needed in this country, but it cannot coexist with existing freight tracks. Using existing interstate ROWs as the backbone, new rail lines *can* be built. Making Chicago in five hours by rail *is* possible and will put more airlines to sleep. But it MUST be new ROW. LION doesn't see the fed doing anything of the sort. Ergo it must come from regional governments and/or private enterprise. Construct the ROWs and then contract with operators for service. Include head-end (UPS, FedEx etc) as strictly containerized shipments such as the airlines already use. Use the EXACT same containers, that way they will be inter modal with air. ROAR |
|
|
| (614186) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC—300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Thu May 8 11:03:58 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail on the NEC—300 kmh service, posted by Broadway Lion on Thu May 8 10:34:13 2008. Air shuttles *should* be trounced!They should outright be BANNED I wasn't aware you were a Socialist. That's a classic case of government involvement in the means of production. |
|
|
| (614187) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC—300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Thu May 8 11:11:18 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail on the NEC—300 kmh service, posted by AlM on Thu May 8 11:03:58 2008. No, not a socialist ☺But landing slots at an airport are already regulated, and it seems to be a better allocation of resources to allow more longer flights in, and to eliminate the air shuttles. After all, there is no way to expand these airports even if we wanted to. You cannot even add so much as one parking place for one more automobile. ROARING |
|
|
| (614190) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Thu May 8 11:14:31 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service, posted by Dutchrailnut on Thu May 8 06:35:46 2008. They do pretty well in Germany, you just need better banking (superelevation) and no freight.And no local trains on the adjacent track. |
|
|
| (614203) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC—300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Thu May 8 12:07:01 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail on the NEC—300 kmh service, posted by WillD on Thu May 8 02:14:39 2008. I stand corrected, then. This would require conversion from trolley pole to pantograph, though? |
|
|
| (614207) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Thu May 8 12:23:17 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service, posted by Broadway Lion on Thu May 8 10:39:55 2008. It doesn't come from regional governments or private enterprise anywhere else in the world. Just like highways and airports don't. |
|
|
| (614286) | |
Re: High speed rail in the USA—300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Thu May 8 14:54:04 2008, in response to High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service, posted by R42 4787 on Thu May 8 00:45:59 2008. I just like this pic, so I'm posting it in here. Not necessary to do this for BOS-WAS, though; but it could work for NYC-CHI. |
|
|
| (614399) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by SUBWAYMAN on Thu May 8 19:27:17 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service, posted by Terrapin Station on Thu May 8 07:47:50 2008. No I didn't. |
|
|
| (614413) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by NIMBYkiller on Thu May 8 20:25:57 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service, posted by R42 4787 on Thu May 8 01:16:05 2008. It could host more trains, but certainly not ALL the commuter traffic. And no way CSX is gonna allow NS to run on its tracks without giving them a royal screw job. And you've still got the remaining Amtrak service to handle. Sorry, but you just can't fit it all. |
|
|
| (614416) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC—300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by NIMBYkiller on Thu May 8 20:29:43 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail on the NEC—300 kmh service, posted by Broadway Lion on Thu May 8 11:11:18 2008. How much government funding is actually put into these regional air shuttles? Revoke it. Any way they can do some tooling around with this essential air service bill? |
|
|
| (614418) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by NIMBYkiller on Thu May 8 20:32:28 2008, in response to High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service, posted by R42 4787 on Thu May 8 00:45:59 2008. One thing though....Amtrak already spanks any other mode of transportation between NY and DC. It's NY to Boston that needs help, and that's just in competition with road traffic. Amtrak is already faster than flying to Boston. Sadly, the real competition IS the road on that route. |
|
|
| (614419) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Thu May 8 20:35:51 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service, posted by Terrapin Station on Thu May 8 07:47:50 2008. Yes you did. Several people pointed it out. And you even acknowledged it. |
|
|
| (614420) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC—300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Thu May 8 20:36:49 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service, posted by NIMBYkiller on Thu May 8 20:32:28 2008. Acela's got a faster average speed than driving, on that route (64 mph). Unless you're speeding, in which case I have no sympathy for anyone popped by a state trooper. |
|
|
| (614424) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC—300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by NIMBYkiller on Thu May 8 20:39:40 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail on the NEC—300 kmh service, posted by Olog-hai on Thu May 8 20:36:49 2008. Reality is what I go by my friend. And in reality, the majority is doing atleast 80 for the majority of that trip. Amtrak needs to compete with what REALLY happens, not with what inanimate signs say should happen. |
|
|
| (614430) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC—300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Thu May 8 20:43:11 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail on the NEC—300 kmh service, posted by NIMBYkiller on Thu May 8 20:39:40 2008. Reality is what I go by my friend. And in reality, the majority is doing atleast 80 for the majority of that tripNope. They are not going that fast. Maybe you are, but not the majority, so you cannot justify it. |
|
|
| (614450) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Thu May 8 21:08:36 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Thu May 8 11:14:31 2008. In Germany the locals run fast too. |
|
|
| (614452) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Thu May 8 21:10:30 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service, posted by JohnL on Thu May 8 09:48:42 2008. Haha, great show!your pal, Fred |
|
|
| (614460) | |
Re: High speed rail in the USA—300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Thu May 8 21:21:54 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail in the USA—300 kmh service, posted by Olog-hai on Thu May 8 14:54:04 2008. Wow, concrete autobahns! :) |
|
|
| (614494) | |
Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service |
|
|
Posted by SUBWAYMAN on Thu May 8 21:49:39 2008, in response to Re: High speed rail on the NEC-300 kmh service, posted by Terrapin Station on Thu May 8 20:35:51 2008. So why do you care? |
|
|
|
|
Page 1 of 6 |
|
