Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote]QUOTE: Originally posted by nanaimo73 My analog unit upstairs is starting to remember the editorial you may be talking about. I believe that was about railroads asking for tax dollars to upgrade lines on which passenger trains (commuter rail) were going to be increased or added. As for the high speed rail going through Fort Wayne instead of Elkhart, I would say that is because of the 110 mph goal. It would require some kind of engine control, perhaps like the RF&P had in Virginia. Every lead unit on every train would have to have it. Dale [/quote] Well, thanks for the support. I think I remember a couple editorials over the last few years that touched on the idea.. Roughly around the time of the alameda corridor opening, I THINK. But, as I recall, there was no editorial suggestion that public participation be limited strictly to Alameda style projects. The prospects were left alarmingly open ended. On the FW corridor selection for HSR,...I think it boils down to really this simple concept: "destination"... The southern alternative would connect Chicago to Columbus OH and Pittsburgh... Not a lot of demand there, and continuing such a route to NYC has robust engineering requirements. The Northern alternative would connect Chicago to Toledo, Cleveland, and Buffalo easily...and while more distanr extending the line to NYC is just a matter of building a railroad. I'd be VERY VERY surprised to see the nod come south.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag