I'm surprised forumists haven't jumped all over the proposal for 220 mph high speed bypasses along the NEC as did a writer from Connecticut. He decried the lack of high-speed service in southern Connecticut. I wonder what he and his neighbors would say if their homes were threatened with dislocation for such a high speed line?
Actually, the bypasses being studied are a strategy practiced in Europe to speed up travel to the outer ends of a corridor and its extensions over conventional "classic" lines hemmed in with development and limited by 19th Century engineering. Travel distances from bypassed intermediate stations are shorter, so overall travel time still is reasonable. It seemed that the service plan omitted the option of local Connecticut shore services paired with both the new high-speed route to Washington, DC, Virginia, and the Carolinas and the existing route via Baltimore to Washington, DC.
The increased number of trains with the high-speed services and variations is predicated on new capacity (ARC) through New York City.
The Long Island options were interesting but problematic with respect to both capacity and infrastructure. A long tunnel under Long Island Sound would be extremely costly and have the same safety access and egress concerns as other long tunnels. Furthermore, the proposal to cross to New Haven, CT would be at the widest point. Greenport, NY to New London, CT would be shorter; but demand, both through and Long Island-accessed may not justify the cost for a faster but unlikely true high speed route using mostly available LIRR infrastructure.
Have you seen the thread in General Discussion : "East Coast HSR Plan Announced"?
_____________
"A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner
That's logical, of course it's in general and not passenger.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.