Amtrak funding

[Anonymous]

Alexander,Thanks but I already work for them,have since 1976. But I'll be watching for when you take over for Matt Rose. Thanks,Keith

[Anonymous]

Alexander,Now this, makes sense to me.Still think the costs would be astronomical,but if it was done one step at a time it might work,learning as they go.Don't know how receptive the frieght RR's would be but they've been forced into sharing tracks before.
Now if we could just convince the feds to give a project like this the money it would take we'd be in buisness.Just give us some the money allocated to other modes of transportation.
Keith

[Anonymous]

Don,I think any time you'd want to reach any big, inner city the costs would be about the same.Unless you want the stations located outside of town like the airports.Keith

[Anonymous]

Keith:

Wouldn't be surprised if we do get there, someday. After all, whatever becoems of Amtrak, I doubt that the passenger train is really "dead". It may be about to undergo a rough -- and I mean ROUGH -- change, but I'll bet we will still have passenger trains operating, say, 5 or 10 years from now, much less further out.

The big question is how to accompli***he transition, how to change Amtrak to operate in the new environment, and how to build that new track environment.

Freeway building started in, what? 1946? 49? And the Eisenhauer plan went in in the early 50s. But the bulk of construction didn't take place for another ten years, with significant gaps still being filled in the 60s and 70s. Even today, there are segments uncompleted, or cancelled.

So building the same scale project, for rail, may take just as long.

Now hold onto your hat, this October is going to be a bumpy, poltically and emotionally charged ride!

(And I'll be I'll be seeing you again then!)

See ya around,

Alexander

[Anonymous]

Alexander; I totally agree! Might start sooner than we think.Can you picture the notheast without some form of inter-city rail? 15 yrs ago would you have thought your own Portland-Seattle train service would have grown into what it is today? Their are many more such corridors just waiting for the right time and person to come along and get it started.I really don't care who the person or corporation is, even if it turns out to be AMTK.
Lets get by Sept.before we think about Oct.I am totally convinced AMTK will get what it needs to not only grow but, finally get what it needs to plan for the future.Keith

[Anonymous]

Since most of the large cities are building light rail systems, surely Amtrak could purchase right of way along their electrified standard gauge tracks and travel at light rail speeds into the city. These light rail lines do have an end of track, and it is here where Amtrak should start building high speed rail through the countryside. For example, DART has built light rail all the way out to Loop 12 in southern Dallas with plans to extend this to the LBJ freeway loop soon. All Amtrak would have to build is to the LBJ loop, where it could connect onto the DART light rail line....

If not light rail, Amtrak could connect in the outer reaches of a city to an already existing commuter rail line or freight line, they all go to the central city's stations. In many cases the track right of way have already been abandoned. Of course, Amtrak would have to electrify the line if Amtrak chooses electric engines, but would not have to if it decides to keep its Genesis and Talgos.
Let's not make mountains out of molehills. I am not suggesting that we build high speed rail lines through cities. The trains would have to slow down on the freight, commuter, or light rail lines because of signals, both road crossings and train.

[Anonymous]

Quite frankly, we don't have much choice in the matter. Building more freeways won't cut down on car emissions much, and just about every city and state are looking at losing their federal highway funding. Airports are dirtier than highways, so that won't be the answer either. Trains, both innercity and intercity, don't pollute anywhere near as much as cars and jets, so here lies the answer, something anyone serious about the issue understands already. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure this out.

So since every large state is going to lose its federal funding for highways, we might as well as build high speed rail instead....

[Anonymous]

Don,
Light rail wasn't built to accomodate heavy rail eguipment.So if AMTK were to use light rail tracks they would need light equipment themselves.Also AMTK would have to give up the idea of AMTK express and postal delivery.Some of the AMTK express cars weight 130 tons a piece loaded. Doesn't mean it can't be done,just have to buy new equipment or use roadrailers exclusively. Keith

[Anonymous]

Yes. Amtrak could also use TGV electric engines and cars which are 40 percent lighter than American diesels and cars. Think not of today, but of tomorrow. From the TGV website:

Although some people might suspect that a train's weight would affect fuel consumption as much as its shape would, weight actually has little influence on that aspect of the operation of high speed trains, But a heavy train stresses the tracks more than a lighter one does and consequently increases maintenance costs. Therefore, to protect the tracks, fast trains need to weigh as little as possible. We have crafted cars from lighter material than has been incorporated into conventional trains. Use of such materials in the passenger cars has made it possible to produce double decker vehicles that weigh no more than the single deck high speed trains, even though they boast seats for 45 percent more passengers. Thanks to aerodynamic styling, they also run as fast as their one level counterparts and consume less energy. The mortors directly responsible for turning the driving wheels, the traction motors, have been lightened too without sacrificing power. Motors on the faster next generation TGVs will be 40 percent lighter than the latest TGV motors. These weight reductions have been achieved by design changes as well as by using lighter materials. On a seat per seat basis, the TGVs are among the lightest trains in the world. We have put a lot of work into the seats as well. To save a few kilograms per seat, those in the next generaton TGVs will be made of carbon fibers, magnesium and composites.

[Anonymous]

Alexander lives in the Portland area. I am willing to bet that Alexander will agree that the Cascades trainsets look lighter than Superliner cars.....

[Anonymous]

Well, someone who knows what they are talking about!

[Anonymous]

I think it is time that America Puts more Money into High Speed Rail.   Traffic Jams cost American's $68 BILLION in Productivity, let alone not including Pollution, lost family time, Vehicle Matience etc.