[yesplease]

Seems to be ~$15000 for an engineering review of modifications to existing railway. At $15,000 a pop, we would need well over 50,000 engineering/environmental reviews to approach a billion dollars. Could we see hundreds or thousands of engineering reviews? Sure, it's possible. Tens of thousands is stretching it and I doubt the project will need fifty thousand engineering/environmental reviews. Course, if someone can show me where the state is spending billions on engineering/environmental reviews that's fair enough.

[Newfie]

"engineering review and initial feasibility analysis" on about $8 million costs $15K

This to look at the possibility of improving handicapped access across a track.

An initial feasibility analysis is something that would be done BEFORE and EIS. So that is money IN ADDITION TO all I identified before.

Thanks for pointing out the omission.

Seriously, if anything my estimates were conservative.

[yesplease]

There's still now way the entire $2.5 billion fed grant is going to be spent on studies. If someone's willing to go through and link to and tabulate all the studies to come up w/ a billion+ in spending then that's pretty concrete. Anything else is just speculation.

[Newfie]

Yes,

I don't think I ever said that NOTHING would be built. I think someone else did say that but not necessarily as a considered opinion. In short you are taking a casual statement too literally.

What I am saying is that you seem to grossly underestimate the cost involved in the pre-construction stages. In fact, regarding your question concerning costs, several major preliminary contracts were let a couple of years ago. I think you could find those costs pretty easily as they would be public knowledge. These existing contracts, pre-stimulus contracts, were to move the process forward doing the initial route analysis and developing alternatives. As you can see from the like I posted above after two years work there is no consensus on the route. Much work still remains.

And, in the end, nothing may be built. Some of the 2.5 billion could go to land acquisition and the project stop there, for example. As I pointed out in my previous post planning and engineering do not assure a finished project. So you could easily spend the 2.5 billion and a lot more and then have nothing working. Remember the super-collider just to pick one famous example.

The cost for California HSR will be, in my estimation well in excess of 10 billion dollars.

Just remember that you have to:
do the planning
get environmental clearance
obtain ROW
build bridges and tunnels
eliminate all road crossings
Lay the tracks
build the stations
create a control system
create a marketing/payment mechanism
build power lines to the system
build the electrification system
buy the vehicles - quite possibly one-off designs
build yards to store and maintain the vehicles
create a maintenance staff for all the above
build redundant control centers
build an administrative complex
hire and train the administrative staff
etc..........................

I YOU want to do research to support your claim that it can be done for 2.5 billion then please be my guest. I think you would learn a lot in the process that would give you an insight into how governments work.

[Plantagenet]

Mexico lays out plans for more passenger trains and high speed rail service

Mexico to build high speed rail and expand passenger train service

Looks like the US is now lagging behind Mexico. Too bad the morons in the Obama administration never got the memo on peak oil-----putting billions into bailing out auto companies while abandoning high speed rail in the US isn't going to help the US economy in the long run-- high energy costs due to peak oil continue to decrease car use, while the feckless fools in the Obama administration do nothing to build the trains and trams and trolleys we are going to need to replace the cars.


Mexican train game is a winner!

[Newfie]

Plant,
Really, that post is just LAME. You really don't have a clue other than to blame every thing on Obama.

High Speed Rail as nothing to do with trams and trolleys.

High Speed Rail is another way to subsidize the rich and upper middle class. It does noting for the oil situation.

It WOULD line the pockets of the consultants and engineers (ME) and I am grateful that you wish to keep me fully employed at a nice salary. Very 1% of you.

Trams and trolleys are a far better idea for the rest.

[Graeme]

USA High-Speed Rail Gets Boost — 32-Train Order For Siemens Trains

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'S')iemens has obtained a $225 million contract to build 32 “Charger” diesel-electric locomotives in its Sacramento rail manufacturing facility for US high-speed rail projects.


Five states are ordering locomotives. The Illinois Department of Transportation’s order is connected to an overhaul of its Chicago to St Louis route. California, Washington, Michigan, and Missouri have joined the deal, which includes options for an additional 75 locomotives for regional use and another 150 locomotives for mainline transportation. The locomotives are scheduled to be delivered between fall of 2016 and mid-2017.

“For Siemens this order marks our entry into the US diesel-electric locomotive market and strongly underscores our long-term vision for the US passenger rail market,” Jochen Eickholt, CEO of the Siemens Rail Systems Division, emphasized.

“The new Charger locomotives represent the next-generation of equipment advancing high performance intercity passenger rail in the Midwest, California and Pacific Northwest,” said Federal Railroad Administrator Joseph C. Szabo. “This state of the art equipment will accelerate and brake more quickly, reducing trip times for passengers, as well as being more fuel efficient and burning cleaner than previous locomotives for the benefit of the environment.”

[Newfie]

Graeme,

Sorry but I don't think that this constitutes anything like "high speed" rail. Improved conventional rail? Yeah, maybe.

But there is misleading statements there. Deceleration is set by the Owner or Agency so that you make the passengers uncomfortable. Most all vehicles will stop faster than is allowed.

Just a bit of nit-picking.

[Graeme]

Well, perhaps some states are recognizing the value of public transport. Note that the diesel version is "more fuel efficient and burning cleaner than previous locomotives". And

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he electric version was introduced in the US last year and already at work in the Northeast.

[Graeme]

Making the Case for High-Speed Rail

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'M')ost American passenger trains, including Amtrak’s popular Acela service, run at speeds that are far slower than the superfast European and Japanese trains that can zip along at 200 miles per hour or more. The main reason is that, despite modest investments, American lawmakers have not given high-speed rail the priority it deserves.

High-speed rail can play an important role in the nation’s transportation system by reducing congestion at airports and on highways. It can also provide a big economic boost while helping to reduce pollution that is causing climate change. That is why President Obama gave it an important place in the 2009 stimulus bill, which helped kick-start projects to upgrade rail lines and build new ones around the country.

Since then, the federal government has spent about $11 billion on high-speed rail, with only a few visible improvements in American passenger rail service, as a recent Times article pointed out. That should not come as a surprise. Bringing high-speed rail service to the United States was always going to take time and money. In 2012, Amtrak estimated that updating rail lines and trains between Boston and Washington to speeds of 220 m.p.h., up from the Acela’s average speed of about 84 m.p.h., would cost $151 billion. Even getting the Acela to travel at 160 m.p.h. for longer stretches will require laying new track, building new tunnels and replacing signals.

Amtrak is already doing some of that, but more federal support is needed. California’s plan to link Los Angeles to San Francisco by high-speed rail is expected to cost $68 billion. Critics argue that such services cannot survive without public subsidies and that the United States has few of the dense urban areas that have made such train services successful in places like France and Japan. But these arguments fail to acknowledge that most forms of public transportation are subsidized somehow by the government; the federal government puts up most of the money to build the interstate highway system. Skeptics also greatly underestimate the country’s long-term transportation needs. The Census Bureau estimates that the American population will cross 400 million in 2051, and the country is becoming more urban, not less. California’s population is predicted to top 50 million in 2049. That growth will put an incredible strain on the nation’s highways and air-traffic system.

[Newfie]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', ' ')Even getting the Acela to travel at 160 m.p.h. for longer stretches will require laying new track, building new tunnels and replacing signals.

[Graeme]

California Groundbreaking Marks The True Beginning Of High-Speed Rail In America

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'O')n Tuesday, California’s bullet train, which will truncate commutes across the state and forever change how people get around, breaks ground in the Central Valley hub of Fresno. The process up to this point has been anything but high-speed, and supporters hope the ceremonial groundbreaking will usher in a new era that eventually brings the full rail system into use by 2028. A first-of-its-kind project in the U.S., it may also be a major step on the path towards other high-speed rails in places like Texas and the northeast corridor.

The first phase of California’s high-speed rail system will be a 29-mile stretch from Fresno slightly north to the town of Madera. From there the project will link up with urban centers like Los Angeles and San Francisco, eventually allowing commuters to travel between those two cities at 220 mph and cutting the trip from nearly six hours to less than three. The system will eventually extend to Sacramento and San Diego, totaling 800 miles with up to 24 stations.

The train’s speed isn’t the only big number associated with the project. The entire project is slated to cost $68 billion, but could easily run right through that estimate. As far as commuters, California has around 32 million registered vehicles traveling more than 330 billion miles a year. High-speed rail is necessary to meet the future demands of these residents and the projected 12 million new Californians coming to the state, according to Brian P. Kelly, California’s secretary of transportation, and Mary D. Nichols, chairman of the California Air Resources Board (CARB). The state’s population is expected to hit 50 million by 2030.

[Subjectivist]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'G')raeme, the above would be the one hopeful post from hundreds of crap depressing fake "green" crap articles you spam this place with. Congrats for posting out of character.

What I really like about the California high-speed rail system is that it will actually enrich the state connecting north and south into one collective entity. No more hyper-consumerist SoCal vs fake-green Norcal. Just one big well-fed, well-watered, well-oiled mellow paradise. The kicker is . . . we can shut the rest of you out with a few strategic roadblocks on the high sierras. yuck.

[Newfie]

Amtrak
Regional 170
Depart Philly 6:46am
Arrive NY Penn 8:15
$54 coach, $82 business class

Acela 2150
Depart Philly 6:30
Arrive NY Penn 7:45
$136 coach $213 first class

[Newfie]

Just thought I would bump this old chestnut to see if folks have changed their opinion in light of the recent Amtrak crash.

Bu the way, I was riding Amtrak through that curve two hours earlier.

[Keith_McClary]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Newfie', 'J')ust thought I would bump this old chestnut to see if folks have changed their opinion in light of the recent Amtrak crash.

By the way, I was riding Amtrak through that curve two hours earlier.

[SolarDave]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Newfie', 'J')ust thought I would bump this old chestnut to see if folks have changed their opinion in light of the recent Amtrak crash.

Bu the way, I was riding Amtrak through that curve two hours earlier.

[Newfie]

There is soooo much misinformation it is pathetic.

I'm on an all day webinar so I can't talk too much but will get started.

Amtrak does NOT and never will use PTC for passenger trainson the NEC. No GPS on the train.

From Wiki...
AmtrakEdit
Alstom's and PHW's Advanced Civil Speed Enforcement System (ACSES) system is installed on parts of Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor between Washington and Boston. ACSES enhances the cab signaling systems provided by PHW Inc. It uses passive transponders to enforce permanent civil speed restrictions. The system is designed to prevent train-to-train collisions (PTS), protection against overspeed and protect work crews with temporary speed restrictions.[38][39]

GE Transportation Systems' Incremental Train Control System (ITCS) is installed on Amtrak's Michigan line, allowing trains to travel at 110 mph (180 km/h).[40]

The 2015 Philadelphia train derailment could have been prevented had positive train control been implemented.[41]

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACSES

Amtrak MAY eventually install PTC to support freight trains in its tracks. They recently did trial installation South of Philadelphia. But the full implementation is on hold.

But NO intent, or need, to install PTC for passengers. They DO need to complete ACSES.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACSES