High Speed Passenger Rail: How fast is fast enough?

[Anonymous]

The Hiawathas  had a sign that stated in no uncertain terms "Slow to 90." This was back in the steam days.

If such trains driven by men who dont allow fear to replace duty to get the passengers to point B as fast as thier infrastructure and engines will allow were common back then, why arent we running dedicated isolated tracks 200-250 mph today?

Something was lost along the way, possibly a unwillingness to spend dollars to upgrade and constantly seek high speed.

Amtrack 110-140 is not too shabby. But it isnt possible the entire corridor. New Carrollton and near Aberdeen you can get up and run. But there is just too much slow stuff messing up the place.

I am not going to make a speech but the powers that be need to feel a determination from the bottom of the bridge abutments all the way to congress to upgrade, repair and make 150+ possible the entire length of the corridor.

I would close that corridor. Dynimate all the old stuff. Pave the thing down to packed dirt and rebuild it all. We can participate in reconstruction over seas but cannot replace a old bridge casterating a HST down to 30 mph. hmph. Typical.

Then make more of these corridors across the USA. That would be a start.

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

The Hiawathas  had a sign that stated in no uncertain terms "Slow to 90." This was back in the steam days.

If such trains driven by men who dont allow fear to replace duty to get the passengers to point B as fast as thier infrastructure and engines will allow were common back then, why arent we running dedicated isolated tracks 200-250 mph today?

Something was lost along the way, possibly a unwillingness to spend dollars to upgrade and constantly seek high speed.

Amtrack 110-140 is not too shabby. But it isnt possible the entire corridor. New Carrollton and near Aberdeen you can get up and run. But there is just too much slow stuff messing up the place.

I am not going to make a speech but the powers that be need to feel a determination from the bottom of the bridge abutments all the way to congress to upgrade, repair and make 150+ possible the entire length of the corridor.

I would close that corridor. Dynimate all the old stuff. Pave the thing down to packed dirt and rebuild it all. We can participate in reconstruction over seas but cannot replace a old bridge casterating a HST down to 30 mph. hmph. Typical.

Then make more of these corridors across the USA. That would be a start.

And where would you find the money for that???

[Anonymous]

The Hiawathas  had a sign that stated in no uncertain terms "Slow to 90." This was back in the steam days.

If such trains driven by men who dont allow fear to replace duty to get the passengers to point B as fast as thier infrastructure and engines will allow were common back then, why arent we running dedicated isolated tracks 200-250 mph today?

Something was lost along the way, possibly a unwillingness to spend dollars to upgrade and constantly seek high speed.

Amtrack 110-140 is not too shabby. But it isnt possible the entire corridor. New Carrollton and near Aberdeen you can get up and run. But there is just too much slow stuff messing up the place.

I am not going to make a speech but the powers that be need to feel a determination from the bottom of the bridge abutments all the way to congress to upgrade, repair and make 150+ possible the entire length of the corridor.

I would close that corridor. Dynimate all the old stuff. Pave the thing down to packed dirt and rebuild it all. We can participate in reconstruction over seas but cannot replace a old bridge casterating a HST down to 30 mph. hmph. Typical.

Then make more of these corridors across the USA. That would be a start.

And where would you find the money for that???

The same place they have been finding money for the last few decades. Congress.

No matter what happens to the Nation, they always find a way to spend more money each year.

[Krazykat112079]

Here's a start...reduce all of the top end government salaries to the average salary of the US.  Not only will that free up a little money (70 million+ by my quick and unscientific calculations) but it would give the government a little more incentive to do a good job and think of the grand scheme.

[oltmannd]

Here's a start...reduce all of the top end government salaries to the average salary of the US.  Not only will that free up a little money (70 million+ by my quick and unscientific calculations) but it would give the government a little more incentive to do a good job and think of the grand scheme.

$70M wouldn't even get you a short, M-F peak only commuter line.....

[Krazykat112079]

Here's a start...reduce all of the top end government salaries to the average salary of the US.  Not only will that free up a little money (70 million+ by my quick and unscientific calculations) but it would give the government a little more incentive to do a good job and think of the grand scheme.

$70M wouldn't even get you a short, M-F peak only commuter line.....

Oh, no doubt that it is only a drop in the ocean, but find enough drops and you get rain.  $70 million can replace or maintain some aging cars, which is a start.  I'm certainly happy with baby steps, as long as they are forward. 

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

Here's a start...reduce all of the top end government salaries to the average salary of the US.  Not only will that free up a little money (70 million+ by my quick and unscientific calculations) but it would give the government a little more incentive to do a good job and think of the grand scheme.

To be fair, one should compare top end (whatever that means) government salaries to top end private sector salaries.

[Anonymous]

Let's cap salaries at 120,000.

Everything else put back into the company bank.

[Paul Milenkovic]

The Hiawathas  had a sign that stated in no uncertain terms "Slow to 90." This was back in the steam days.

If such trains driven by men who dont allow fear to replace duty to get the passengers to point B as fast as thier infrastructure and engines will allow were common back then, why arent we running dedicated isolated tracks 200-250 mph today?

Something was lost along the way, possibly a unwillingness to spend dollars to upgrade and constantly seek high speed.

Amtrack 110-140 is not too shabby. But it isnt possible the entire corridor. New Carrollton and near Aberdeen you can get up and run. But there is just too much slow stuff messing up the place.

I am not going to make a speech but the powers that be need to feel a determination from the bottom of the bridge abutments all the way to congress to upgrade, repair and make 150+ possible the entire length of the corridor.

I would close that corridor. Dynimate all the old stuff. Pave the thing down to packed dirt and rebuild it all. We can participate in reconstruction over seas but cannot replace a old bridge casterating a HST down to 30 mph. hmph. Typical.

Then make more of these corridors across the USA. That would be a start.

Make that the amateurs talk about infrastructure spending . . . the pros think signals.

[JT22CW]

The Hiawathas had a sign that stated in no uncertain terms "Slow to 90." This was back in the steam days.

If such trains driven by men who dont allow fear to replace duty to get the passengers to point B as fast as thier infrastructure and engines will allow were common back then, why arent we running dedicated isolated tracks 200-250 mph today?

Something was lost along the way, possibly a unwillingness to spend dollars to upgrade and constantly seek high speed.

Amtrack (sic) 110-140 is not too shabby. But it isnt possible the entire corridor. New Carrollton and near Aberdeen you can get up and run. But there is just too much slow stuff messing up the place.

I am not going to make a speech but the powers that be need to feel a determination from the bottom of the bridge abutments all the way to congress to upgrade, repair and make 150+ possible the entire length of the corridor.

I would close that corridor. Dynimate all the old stuff. Pave the thing down to packed dirt and rebuild it all. We can participate in reconstruction over seas but cannot replace a old bridge casterating (sic) a HST down to 30 mph. hmph. Typical.

Then make more of these corridors across the USA. That would be a start.

Um, what?

Deutsche Bahn didn't need to "dynamite all the old stuff" to make 120-mph average speeds possible on traditional rail corridors. Nor would "all the old stuff" need to go to achieve such average speeds on the NEC. It won't cost $7 billion, in spite of what Kummant claims.

The Northeast Corridor is vital not only as a high-speed traditional rail corridor but also as a commuter rail corridor for several cities. Replacing it with a 200-mph corridor is out of the question, as is ever taking it out of service. The chief barriers right now are signals (something that cannot be helped on the parts of the NEC that Amtrak doesn't own), catenary wire age, and FRA "track classes" whose definitions appear unclear and stringent.

(What bridge are you talking about, anyway? Dock bridge over the Passaic River in Newark NJ will never be upgraded to faster than 30 mph; the notion of high-speed running through Newark Penn is not only unreasonable, but dangerous, unless you're going to somehow fence off Tracks 2 and 3.)

[Anonymous]

True high speed will never be achieved safely here on the ground in the USA. You need to copy and follow the European and Japanese models of construction that has been done for years safely.

If for a moment one should think of a instant strip of bare dirt wider than the entire railroad needs to be with all the old bridges blown down and replaced between Wash DC and Boston Ma there is no problem with land buying.

If you should build a new NEC that has no conflicts with anything, man or beast unless at necessary station stops and properly signal it, there would not be any problem.

I say that the old Rail on ballast on the ground model of the current NEC is obselete. We need to erase it and build a elevated and isolated/protected HST corridor where practical (Tunneling where must) on land that is already set aside.

Those old bridges can be replaced. We are already replacing Interstate Bridges that seem to drop every year and taking lives as they fall.

It will be expensive. It will take time. It will eat revenue. It will change life all along the rails both sides for several hundred miles. But imagine for a moment a true HST corridor second to none in the USA and is a model for future expansion across the Nation.

Then again a tank of gas or a airline ticket will do us just fine, wont it.

Without a dream to achieve, HST might as well be a academic discussion. And long after all of us discussion participants have passed on, the rails continue to rust and the NEC continues to beg Congress every year for just enough to get by until the next bill or choo choo needs buying.

[Prairietype]

From a purely practical standpoint and primarily based on the reality of our railroad landscape today and how it is integrated into our communities, it would probably be more economical to build an elevated system with piers over hundreds of miles.  There is a point where retrofitting will involve double the work and time, and this would translate into costs that would approximate the higher cost of an elevated system, monorail or something else.  But there is one true possibility with this approach and that is you could probably order up about any speed currently available with an elevated type of rail system. 

And maybe it's all a matter of points. Assign one point to following and if it totals 4 it can be done:

1. Is there as vital transportation need for high speed rail?

2. Is there a total political commitment for this to happen?

3. Will the public fill the system to capacity?

4. Will it make enough money to not drain the national treasury? 

On this last point there is a far cry difference between a system that has a $20 million dollar shortfall as opposed to one that has a $2 billion dollar deficit.  I think that an intelligent approach making strategic improvements with existing roadbeds across the country is a much more realistic approach to having reliable, dependable and swift service.

But there is alwyas the question of "what is it fast enough?"  Many people want a 200 mile an hour train, others would like to see 250 mph or even 300mph. I'll bet there are some who hae sci-fi dreams of 500 mph so as to compete directly with a jet airplane. But wouldn't 125 MPH scoot you along a corridor in a timely enough fashion? For me that latter is just fine. And it is far more affordable and possibly sellable to a Congress for funding than some of these other dream scenarios.  What should we do, dream and never see it happen, or get real and see real, but modest improvement?

[Anonymous]

500 is too fast. I dont know of anything on land capable of safely decel within G limits people from those speeds in a reasonable time or distance.

Consider the 737. You probably will be set up dirty with flaps, spoilers armed and about 140 Kias on touch down. Then you have about a mile and change to slow and stop that 150,000 pound mass with payload. You can oppose it with the two engines and pit 20K+ poounds thrust against the mass in addition to braking power.

Now a train at 150 or a tad higher is confined to a set of two rails, has a finite number of wheels and air, vacumn or electricity for braking. Possibly a maglev or monorail track might provide some kind of assist. You can only brake a object with people inside only so fast per unit of time staying within G limits.

Washington DC to Baltimore would be... 5 minutes? 10? Washington to Boston? 3 hours maybe? Less? I say 200-250 is fast enough. We may not have the room to hit the max before having to stop.

Keep in mind that the prospect of security lines, scanning, restrictions on carry ons, waits and usual over-booking and other issues that create irate and angry travelers all go away with a good fast train going where people are going. Poof. No problem.

Take a look at Disney. They have run a Mono for years and even through a hotel lobby without disturbing the folks. Yes the first timer will be floored, but the staff and regulars are used to that sight. Monos are pretty silent. I have ridden a few small ones in my time.

If we provide a train that features a social area, internet and wireless services along with various classes with different perks and turn that train into something that people will want to spend time in as part of thier business life or other pursuit instead of merely a metal tube that needs to be endured.

What matters is being able to get from DC to any of the points to Boston faster than a car or plane and with a deconstructed and rebuilt corridor, I only see positive things that will be a model for other corridors around the USA.

In trucking I recall a town that had several Amtrack Crossings in a short stretch of track affecting a large portion. The newspaper reported that no one was happy having to sit and worry about that train and Amtrack wasnt happy having to deal with 4-7 grade crossings in a short space.

I dont recall the details but short, no one was happy. Not the Town, not the railroad. I presented a solution that will remove grade crossings and any conflicts with either town or railroad. It will cost money, concrete and hopefully built high enough to clear all semi trucks and such for years to go.

I said to the coffee shop, raise the railroad 20 feet and remove all of that old stuff or bury it and build new tax revenue producting buildings over it. The laugher I heard that morning rings clear even today.

Perhaps nothing will get done until the mirth wears off and the reality sets in. They had no use for Amtrack and would rather the entire railroad hassle go away and not interrupt thier morning rush.

[Anonymous]

"I think all this has to be factored in -- delays, weather, security, the "real life" concerns.  IMHO if Amtrak could field passenger trains that would be from downtown Chicago to downtown Detroit, RELIABLY, in four to four-and-a-half hours, they would do good business. 

Now, is it possible to do this without electrification?  The evidence from VIA's corridor suggests that the answer is yes."

So what do you do when you get to "downtown" Detroit? Not much a real destination. I suspect most travellers final destination would be somewhere in the suburbs. How do they get there?

[SHKarlson]

"The pros talk about signals."

Perhaps so, although when I really want to mess with youngsters' minds, I tell them of the Morning Hiawatha that made it from Sparta to Portage in just under an hour, including the climb up to Tunnel City on single track, at a start-to-stop average speed of 81.1 mph, pulled by a coal-fired steam locomotive running on jointed rail and protected by upper-quadrant semaphores.  (Or perhaps I break out the images I have of speedrolls on the C&M.)

There's a lot of potential in the existing signalling, infrastructure, and stock.  All it takes is the discipline to do it right (he says, as the scanner relays the latest jam-ups on the Overland through DeKalb.)

[daveklepper]

I seem to recall that the normal running time of New York Central (Michigan Central) expresses between Chicago and Detroit, such as the Twilight Limited, were about 4:30.   The Mowhawk on the Grand Trunk, did it in 5:00  ----via Durand.  Correct me if my memory is in error.   So an even four hours with the best of today's conventional technology should be possible.

[blue streak 1]

it is not the top high speed that is important but getting rid of the slow orders. That is the curve speed, bridges, switch restrictions, opposing trafic and etc. 9 miles of 160 MPH trrack Class 7?) can be wiped out by 1 mile of a 40 MPH slow order on a  80 MPH rail line (class 4). Do the Math. Remember the speed reduction before the restrictions and the speed up afterwards.  An additional track (double or triple) probably costs a lot less than trying to build a high speed track.  Example Auto train takes 17:30 Sanford to Lorton (855 miles). If it could average 70MPH including the crew change the time would be reduced to say 13:00 or or less. This kind of track  would certainly help CSX to run intermodal along this corridor at the same speed and really bring in the traffic. Time for the upgrade tax credits to be passed.