An article in todays Wall Street Journal indicates that Russia has started high speed service between St. Petersburg and Moscow. The former time was 4 1/2 hours and it is now 3 3/4 hours for a 45 minute savings running up to 155mph. Eight Siemens trains were purchased for $1 billion. The article indicates that hundreds of billions of dollars of infrastructure improvements are needed for faster speeds. Glowing reports about how you can get off the trains in downtown and not have the hassle of airline security. So for $1 billion dollars if you want to go and come from and to center city you can save 45 minutes off the old time and not go through security and it only costs $100 to ride. Sorry but this is in no way cost justifiable to me because the bulk of business and manufacturing companies have moved out of downtown areas into industrial parks or cheaper areas and are closer to airports world wide. That will actually make convenience less than flying for most people as well as the time issue. By the way, How's that high speed rail for the US coming along that Obama announced?
ndbprr An article in todays Wall Street Journal indicates that Russia has started high speed service between St. Petersburg and Moscow. The former time was 4 1/2 hours and it is now 3 3/4 hours for a 45 minute savings running up to 155mph. Eight Siemens trains were purchased for $1 billion. The article indicates that hundreds of billions of dollars of infrastructure improvements are needed for faster speeds. Glowing reports about how you can get off the trains in downtown and not have the hassle of airline security. So for $1 billion dollars if you want to go and come from and to center city you can save 45 minutes off the old time and not go through security and it only costs $100 to ride. Sorry but this is in no way cost justifiable to me because the bulk of business and manufacturing companies have moved out of downtown areas into industrial parks or cheaper areas and are closer to airports world wide. That will actually make convenience less than flying for most people as well as the time issue. By the way, How's that high speed rail for the US coming along that Obama announced?
As far as US high speed rail goes, are you suggesting something would be built in 10 months?
"I Often Dream of Trains"-From the Album of the Same Name by Robyn Hitchcock
More along the lines it will never happen.
ndbprrMore along the lines it will never happen.
Depends on what happens with the price of oil, and what happens to Carbon Caps. It wouldn't take much to destroy the economics of the airline industry again.
I'll call the Russians and tell them to cancel it because you don't believe it's a good investment.
As far as your political dig, the Feds are evaluating all of the applications they have received for the 8 billion dollars they have earmarked for rail speed upgrades and expect to make a decision before the first of the year.
Dave
Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
"So for $1 billion dollars if you want to go and come from and to center city you can save 45 minutes off the old time and not go through security and it only costs $100 to ride"
Remember, this system will handle millions of passengers who would otherwise be driving or flying, Both of which are subsidized and far less efficent than HSR.
"Sorry but this is in no way cost justifiable to me because the bulk of business and manufacturing companies have moved out of downtown areas into industrial parks or cheaper areas and are closer to airports world wide"
Actually, the majority of economic activity that takes place in the world today happens in cities. Even with massive suburbanization, this is still true in the U.S.
"That will actually make convenience less than flying for most people as well as the time issue."
If this is true, than why does the NorthEast Corridor turn a profit? How can companies like JR west survive? Why is the AVE so wildly successful?
By the way, How's that high speed rail for the US coming along that Obama announced?
Hes given 10 billlion as a "down payment" for HSR. Thats it.
ComradeTacoIf this is true, than why does the NorthEast Corridor turn a profit? How can companies like JR west survive? Why is the AVE so wildly successful?
"The Northeast Corridor routes carried more than half of the railroad's 25 million passengers in fiscal year 2004, generating more than $600 million in ticket revenue.
But Laney said the routes have been one of Amtrak's most costly operations. Of the railroad's $550 million operating budget, $280 million went to service Amtrak's debt while much of remainder went to Northeast Corridor maintenance and operations, he said. "
If this excerpt from the Washington Post is correct, than the NEC route,is,infact,making a profit.
The Spanish AVE has captured nearly 90% of the rail/air traffic between Madrid and Seville, cut travel by several hours, and has a healthy 125% fairbox-recovery ratio.
ComradeTaco "The Northeast Corridor routes carried more than half of the railroad's 25 million passengers in fiscal year 2004, generating more than $600 million in ticket revenue. If this excerpt from the Washington Post is correct, than the NEC route,is,infact,making a profit.
For FY08 the NEC had an operating profit of $369 million. But operating profits are only part of the story and do not take into consideration the other charges, which in Amtrak's case consist of interest, depreciation, federal and state capital payment adjustments, and discontinued operations.
The aforementioned charges allocated to the NEC are not set forth in the documents that Amtrak makes public. Moreover, although I have asked Amtrak for the charges allocated to its three categories of train operations (NEC, State Supported and Other Short Distance Trains, and Long Distance Trains), they have not responded.
Most of the interest and depreciation is driven by the capital investments in railway equipment and right-of-way infrastructure. The NEC, which is owned mostly by Amtrak, represents the railroad's biggest outlay for capital investment and, thus, accounts for the largest portion of the interest and depreciation. Also, the newest equipment runs in the NEC, for the most part, and it attracts the highest per unit allocation of interest and depreciation.
Most of the state supported and long distance equipment attracts interest and depreciation, but this equipment depreciation is relatively small compared to the facilities depreciation attributable to the NEC. Moreover, inasmuch as Amtrak's trains run over hoist railroads, for the most part, outside of the NEC, any depreciation associated with those facilities is charged to Amtrak through rents and is shown as an operating expense.
All this is to say that the NEC wears the bulk of the interest and depreciation. Assuming that 75 per cent of it is attributable to the NEC, which I believe is a conservative figure, the charges in FY 2008 would have been $445 million, which would have wiped out the operating profit and left the NEC with a $76 million loss.
In addition to these items, Amtrak incurred net costs of $220 million for infrastructure management, ancillary businesses, unallocated system charges, and eliminations. Assuming 75 per cent of these charges were attributable to the NEC, it would have worn another $165 million in charges, thereby bringing the loss to $241 million.
In FY08 the NEC carried 10,897,852 passengers or 37.9 per cent of the total system load of 28,716,407.
For FY08 Amtrak had a net loss of $1,132,778,000 before adjustment for extraordinary items. After taking these adjustments into consideration, the net loss was $1,049,947,000.
ComradeTacoThe Spanish AVE has captured nearly 90% of the rail/air traffic between Madrid and Seville, cut travel by several hours, and has a healthy 125% fairbox-recovery ratio.
ndbprrSo for $1 billion dollars if you want to go and come from and to center city you can save 45 minutes off the old time and not go through security and it only costs $100 to ride. Sorry but this is in no way cost justifiable to me because the bulk of business and manufacturing companies have moved out of downtown areas into industrial parks or cheaper areas and are closer to airports world wide.
You clobbered a couple of interesting points---the ticket price for one thing. Who are the paying customers in this HSR? A regional HSR does not a country make. And what organizations funded this through what means? And my favorite issue--real estate development. Around this 'burg the development has mostly been towards smaller localities outside London's borders and the major highway here The 400 series--401, 402, and the 403. Note the new Toyota plant at Woodstock ON at the conjuncture of the 401 and 403 interchange with approximately 4 new parts plants nearby. All highway---
Any argument carried far enough will end up in Semantics--Hartz's law of rhetoric Emerald. Leemer and Southern The route of the Sceptre Express Barry
I just started my blog site...more stuff to come...
http://modeltrainswithmusic.blogspot.ca/
Of course not. But does any mode of travel not require subsidies of one type or another?Aside from that, the AVE provides service from city centre to city centre, encouraging economic activity to remain within the cities and helping prevent the vicious cycle of decay that has plagued our rustbelt cities since the early 50's.
"You clobbered a couple of interesting points---the ticket price for one thing. Who are the paying customers in this HSR? A regional HSR does not a country make. And what organizations funded this through what means? And my favorite issue--real estate development. Around this 'burg the development has mostly been towards smaller localities outside London's borders and the major highway here The 400 series--401, 402, and the 403. Note the new Toyota plant at Woodstock ON at the conjuncture of the 401 and 403 interchange with approximately 4 new parts plants nearby. All highway---"
Ticket prices can range from 60-220 euros depending on class and time of departure.Look at it this way: A highway encourages car-based infrastructure, a rail line encourages rail-based infrastructure. A highway will create suburban sprawl with large parking lots and little accomodation for pedestrians,bikers etc. Rail lines encourage dense,urban devolpment with a better variety of transport options.
If the former time from Moscow to St Petersburg was 4h 30m (to travel just over 400 miles) that gave an average start to stop speed of about 89mph, which isn't bad if the line was not purpose built for HSR. Reducing the journey time to 3h 45m lifts the average speed to about 106mph. Here in Britain you can do London to Edinburgh in 4h 20m (393m/91mph) on Victorian era track which is likewise not HSR. A purpose-built HSR system allows significantly higher speeds (e.g. London to Paris, 2h 15m/308m/136mph). Given that the Acela Express does no better than 6h 35m from Boston to Washington (467m/71mph), and Chicago to St Louis in 5h 20m (284m/53mph) is more representative of routes outwith the NEC, it is not reasonable to suggest that the time savings arising from proper HSR routes in the USA would not be worthwhile. Clearly, new purpose-built HSR routes could make a huge difference in point to point journey times.
The $1bn figure quoted was the cost of the new trains, which are presumably fleet replacements for older slower trains or are to expand the service. It does not include the cost of the infrastructure. I don't know whether or not $125m each for ten-car high speed sets is value for money, but it does serve to illustrate that $8bn is a drop in the ocean.
In cities which have good quality public transport and which have not been blighted by uncontrolled urban sprawl, the city centre ought to be the most easily accessible place within the city and the main destination for people travelling to a city. However, there is absolutely nothing to stop the construction of HSR terminals on the periphery of the city if so desired. Such terminals could be easily accessible by road and provided with ample long-stay car parking, just like airports. The peripheral terminal could be linked to the city centre by frequent metro services, or the HSR trains could continue the last few miles into the city centre on existing low speed lines.
I offer no comment on whether or not US HSR represents a good use of taxpayers' money because (a) as a Brit it's really none of my business and (b) some of the sentiments expressed on the subject in other threads are, IMHO, frightening. However, it seems pretty clear to me that despite the challenges posed by a dispersed population, if the people of America are prepared to invest a large enough amount of money over what would inevitably be a prolonged period they could achieve something very worthwhile.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.