[emersonbiggins]

Anybody who has read my posts in the past knows that I am 110% in favor of high-speed rail in the US. Why we remain one of the few first-world nations without a world-class rail transportation system is beyond ludicrous, and borders on the asinine - as if we have a 100-year chip on our collective shoulders against railways in general, recalling distant memories of rail monopolies that prohibited the free movement of people and goods within the US.

Anyways, I've done some thesis work tangentially related to high-speed rail. Here is one such map that I devised for the south-central US region (Kansas City to Mexico corridor), indicating a proposed network of high-speed rail lines, with stations spaced ~100 miles apart, on average.



And here is another graphic indicating relative densities (pp/sq mi), and travel times of the automobile vs. the car between cities in the region.


link to larger

[Plantagenet]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TheDude', 'I')'m for it, so long as it stops at the In-And-Out-Burger.

$8 billion might lay ca. 200 miles of track

[Plantagenet]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('emersonbiggins', 'A')nybody who has read my posts in the past knows that I am 110% in favor of high-speed rail in the US. Why we remain one of the few first-world nations without a world-class rail transportation system is beyond ludicrous, and borders on the asinine - as if we have a 100-year chip on our collective shoulders against railways in general, recalling distant memories of rail monopolies that prohibited the free movement of people and goods within the US.

Anyways, I've done some thesis work tangentially related to high-speed rail. Here is one such map that I devised for the south-central US region (Kansas City to Mexico corridor), indicating a proposed network of high-speed rail lines, with stations spaced ~100 miles apart, on average.

[mos6507]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', '
')The pics really help with visualization of the Texas population centers that would be served by high speed rail running north from the Mexican border.

[mos6507]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Newfie', '
')Yup, pretty sure he is right. Big waste of money to support the elite.

[Plantagenet]

Amtrak is a federal bureaucracy. OF COURSE its fares are high.

If you want lower fares, then either lobby your congressman for higher government subsidies or privatize it.

[bencole]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('bencole', '
')The high speed is basically just a convenience for commuters who live far away from their job.

[emersonbiggins]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('emersonbiggins', 'A')nybody who has read my posts in the past knows that I am 110% in favor of high-speed rail in the US. Why we remain one of the few first-world nations without a world-class rail transportation system is beyond ludicrous, and borders on the asinine - as if we have a 100-year chip on our collective shoulders against railways in general, recalling distant memories of rail monopolies that prohibited the free movement of people and goods within the US.

Anyways, I've done some thesis work tangentially related to high-speed rail. Here is one such map that I devised for the south-central US region (Kansas City to Mexico corridor), indicating a proposed network of high-speed rail lines, with stations spaced ~100 miles apart, on average.

[Quinny]

I'm a big fan of rail & public transport, but, why 'high speed'.

Surely the important thing is to have an efficient transportation system for freight. People should rarely be travelling long distance not on a daily basis. IMO a passenger rail system with 100 miles between stops is one that should be used maybe once a year for vacation, not a commuter line! Home working and skills training would be a better way to spend money than encouraging long distance commutes.

If large amounts are being spent on major infrastructure projects, we should be looking at sustainable power generation like tidal barrages or hydro, not schemes that encourage people to travel to work!

[ReverseEngineer]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', 'A')mtrak is a federal bureaucracy. OF COURSE its fares are high.

If you want lower fares, then either lobby your congressman for higher government subsidies or privatize it.

[emersonbiggins]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Quinny', 'I')'m a big fan of rail & public transport, but, why 'high speed'.

Surely the important thing is to have an efficient transportation system for freight. People should rarely be travelling long distance not on a daily basis. IMO a passenger rail system with 100 miles between stops is one that should be used maybe once a year for vacation, not a commuter line! Home working and skills training would be a better way to spend money than encouraging long distance commutes.

If large amounts are being spent on major infrastructure projects, we should be looking at sustainable power generation like tidal barrages or hydro, not schemes that encourage people to travel to work!

[Quinny]

EB I like your style and agree with a lot you say, but on this we will probably have to agree to disagree.

The planloads of passenger currently ferrying between Dallas and Houston dozens of times a day shouldn't be!

They certainly don't need to!

Think Global, act Local.


$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('emersonbiggins', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Quinny', 'I')'m a big fan of rail & public transport, but, why 'high speed'.

Surely the important thing is to have an efficient transportation system for freight. People should rarely be travelling long distance not on a daily basis. IMO a passenger rail system with 100 miles between stops is one that should be used maybe once a year for vacation, not a commuter line! Home working and skills training would be a better way to spend money than encouraging long distance commutes.

If large amounts are being spent on major infrastructure projects, we should be looking at sustainable power generation like tidal barrages or hydro, not schemes that encourage people to travel to work!

[bencole]

A simple and elegant 100 year old solution to the excessive cost and right of way issues ( long straight rails, minimum turn radius of 7 km, etc) of high speed rail infrastructure. A good physics read a too!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gyro_monorail

[Newfie]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Newfie', '
')Yup, pretty sure he is right. Big waste of money to support the elite.

[dinopello]

Union Station in DC to Penn Station in NY is $133 on Acela round trip.

[emersonbiggins]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Quinny', 'E')B I like your style and agree with a lot you say, but on this we will probably have to agree to disagree.

The planloads of passenger currently ferrying between Dallas and Houston dozens of times a day shouldn't be!

They certainly don't need to!

Think Global, act Local.

[Plantagenet]

The bottom-line here is that Obama IS NOT going to build high speed rail networks in the U.S.

He's going to dribble out a few billion dollars, which will disappear into planning studies and maintainance on the pathetic existing train network.

Obama hasn't allocated enough money to make high speed rail happen-----his rail plan is a sham. Obama himself says his money for rail is a "first step." We've already had the first step.....the crummy Acela line from Boston to DC averaging 80 mph.

Its time for a real high speed train network in the US but Obama isn't going to support it.

Obama will throw a few billion dollars at it to make "true believers" like Mos all giggly, but the actual effect of his plan is to delay the prospect of a national program to build High Speed Rail in the U.S. by another 4-8 years.

Obama's High Speed Rail plan, like his deficit reduction plan, is a farcial lie.

[Newfie]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dinopello', 'U')nion Station in DC to Penn Station in NY is $133 on Acela round trip.

[Newfie]

I thought some of you guys might like this perspective from an industry insider.

http://www.masstransitmag.com/interacti ... o-nowhere/

High-Speed Rail to Nowhere

Posted by Fred Jandt
Mass Transit magazine editor

As I write this it’s been a few hours since the President announced his high-speed rail vision for the United States. Long enough time for stories to fill up the Internet, but I haven’t had a chance to hear the pundits come out of their holes and bash the plan or put it up on an unreachable pedestal. As my brother is fond of saying, I’m approaching this with cautious optimism. I just hope President Obama knows what he’s getting himself into.

Let me be clear on one point. I live in the Midwest. And because of this — among other reasons — I want a high-speed rail network. I want it desperately. I’ve ridden the trains in other countries. I know how convenient they — not can be — are. I also know that these countries sink a considerable amount of money into them.

Note that last sentence: present tense.

I applaud President Obama for having the vision, wherewithal and passion to make this happen. The investment of $8 billion this year and another $5 billion over the next five years will definitely get a high-speed rail network bristling with activity. And with public-private partnerships, we could see trains running on these lines in less than a decade.

But then what?

We built it. They came. Now who’s going to run those high-speed rail corridors? The $13 billion is a nice down payment to get the system built, but what about the operating costs. Make no mistake; this is a public transportation system. We can call it a national high-speed rail network and make allusions to the Interstate Highway System, but it is still public transit.

And where are our public transit systems these days? Washington, D.C.? Atlanta? Boston? New York? Seattle? San Francisco? San Diego? Chicago? Los Angeles? Dallas? All of these systems and more are facing major operating budget shortfalls in the next year. Most of them are considering (possibly drastic) service cuts and fare increases. The recent stimulus funds have helped a little, but public transit is still choking on its own success.

The creation of the high-speed rail network isn’t the only thing that needs to be planned and funded. Its management and operation needs to be as well — which may just be the most difficult part. Are individual corridors going to fall under the purview of the local public transit authorities? Is it going to the state DOTs? Or are these going to be part of Amtrak? This is the true question that needs to be answered when it comes to a high-speed rail network.

I want high-speed rail. I think it’s a wonderful idea. I think it will not only be good for the environment, but also for the Interstate System, the airline industry and public transportation agencies in particular. But consider me cautiously optimistic until I here just how it’s going to be operated.

Check out Mass Transit’s new Top 40 Under 40 promotion on our Web site. We’re looking to recognize transit’s best and brightest under the age of 40 in an upcoming issue. Click on the link and you can read more about it and nominate yourself or any of your colleagues.

Thanks for reading the MT Position updated every Friday,

Fred

[bencole]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', '[')The bottom-line here is that Obama IS NOT going to build high speed rail networks in the U.S.

He's going to dribble out a few billion dollars, which will disappear into planning studies and maintainance on the pathetic existing train network.