MaglevWhat is new is President Obama's anti-airline rhetoric: ""Imagine boarding a train in the center of a city," Obama urged Americans in the speech. "No racing to an airport and across the terminal, no delays, no sitting on the tarmac, no lost luggage, no taking off your shoes. Imagine whisking through towns at speeds over 100 mph, walking only a few steps to public transportation, and ending up just blocks from your destination. Imagine what a great project that would be to rebuild America." Finally, we have a leader who recognizes the aesthetic and cultural importance of convenient, safe, comfortable, fast, and DIGNIFIED transportation.While downtown usually represent the largest concentration of travel markets for a major metropolitan area, the point has been made recently that suburban stops are a good thing. Obviously, it can avoid time-consuming back-tracking from the near side of a metropolitan area and also can provide convenience to the far side. Sam1 suggested the latter for San Antonio from Houston which might work well from Dallas-Fort Worth as Well. Another example would be to extend corridors past Chicago Union Station to O'Hare Airport using the existing and under-utilized run-through tracks.
What is new is President Obama's anti-airline rhetoric:
""Imagine boarding a train in the center of a city," Obama urged Americans in the speech. "No racing to an airport and across the terminal, no delays, no sitting on the tarmac, no lost luggage, no taking off your shoes. Imagine whisking through towns at speeds over 100 mph, walking only a few steps to public transportation, and ending up just blocks from your destination. Imagine what a great project that would be to rebuild America."
Finally, we have a leader who recognizes the aesthetic and cultural importance of convenient, safe, comfortable, fast, and DIGNIFIED transportation.
While downtown usually represent the largest concentration of travel markets for a major metropolitan area, the point has been made recently that suburban stops are a good thing. Obviously, it can avoid time-consuming back-tracking from the near side of a metropolitan area and also can provide convenience to the far side. Sam1 suggested the latter for San Antonio from Houston which might work well from Dallas-Fort Worth as Well. Another example would be to extend corridors past Chicago Union Station to O'Hare Airport using the existing and under-utilized run-through tracks.
Harvey:
I don't think your post was misleading, and that does seem to be what Bluestreak was suggesting. Though he might have been suggesting moving some cars from one train to the other.
I was just pointing out a couple of political realities of which someone from out of state might not be aware.
Dave
Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow
Maglev What is new is President Obama's anti-airline rhetoric: ""Imagine boarding a train in the center of a city," Obama urged Americans in the speech. "No racing to an airport and across the terminal, no delays, no sitting on the tarmac, no lost luggage, no taking off your shoes. Imagine whisking through towns at speeds over 100 mph, walking only a few steps to public transportation, and ending up just blocks from your destination. Imagine what a great project that would be to rebuild America."Finally, we have a leader who recognizes the aesthetic and cultural importance of convenient, safe, comfortable, fast, and DIGNIFIED transportation.
I agree that it is a great thing that High-speed Trains can take us directly into cities. However, what if the populariy picks up and we need huge terminals like airports have. If the trains offer the same level of service as those in Europe and Asia they could become the prefered use over planes. What if someone wants to drive from a rural area to a major city to catch a train. I saying this could really catch on in America. If we want to have a network someday that goes coast to coast then we are going to need bigger hubs and the center of cities is not the place for them.
Actually, city center is exactly where the terminal should be. You then bring the suburban and rural riders in on local light rail or subway trains.
Federally funded high speed rail is the major artery the trains should only stop at the center of large cities. State governments need to supply the intercity trains to the smaller cities and villages and local governments need to supply the capillaries to the suburbs and neighborhoods. All train stations should be served by local mass transit.
Check out Grand Central, Penn Station in NYC, Union Station in DC, etc. Here in Charlotte we are in the process of building our new multimodal facility in city center.
Yes, but if you are going to have people taking the train halfway across the country they need some place to park their cars or if someone gives them a ride to the station it's going to be hard to get to because of the traffic. You can have the major stations outside the city for the intercity train and take a local light rail into the city to smaller stations. I am just saying if High-speed Rail will become a popular as flying we need to make room and also need to focus on building new right-of-ways for the intercity trains if they will be truly successful.
Also what exactly is a mulitmodal facility?
BT CPSO 266 Yes, but if you are going to have people taking the train halfway across the country they need some place to park their cars or if someone gives them a ride to the station it's going to be hard to get to because of the traffic. You can have the major stations outside the city for the intercity train and take a local light rail into the city to smaller stations. I am just saying if High-speed Rail will become a popular as flying we need to make room and also need to focus on building new right-of-ways for the intercity trains if they will be truly successful. Also what exactly is a mulitmodal facility?
If your local airport has rail service and the l-d buses call there too, that would be one example of a multimodal facility. In Trenton, NJ, Amtrak and NJ Transit commuter trains share the facility with a light-rail line and commuter buses. That is another example.
Our multimodal facility will be a station for Amtrak, CATS Commuter Rail, CATS street car, CATS buses, and Greyhound. CATS is the Charlotte Area Transit System, consisting of City Buses, Van Pools, Light Rail, Trolley, and coming soon, Commuter Rail and Street Cars.
The problem with putting it outside the city is that cities grow. My house was miles outside the city of Charlotte when it was built in 1978. Now it is inside the city, and not even near the city border. The current Amtrak station is on the opposite side of town and not convenient to get to. It would take a couple of bus transfers to get there, and neither the current light rail, nor any of the planned rail expansions go to it.
BT CPSO 266 Yes, but if you are going to have people taking the train halfway across the country they need some place to park their cars or if someone gives them a ride to the station it's going to be hard to get to because of the traffic. You can have the major stations outside the city for the intercity train and take a local light rail into the city to smaller stations. I am just saying if High-speed Rail will become a popular as flying we need to make room and also need to focus on building new right-of-ways for the intercity trains if they will be truly successful.
HSR won't overlay well on existing fly/drive America. But, it will likely be part of a gradual change to living in cities (this is already happening), more transit to support that urban living, more dense suburbs and transit to support commuting, and a slowdown in the rate of sprawl. The increasing cost of energy is going to drive these changes.
So, you won't need train stations that look like an airport. Just train stations that look like train stations, with much of the access by local train and transit.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
Atlanta has nice plan for a multimodal station plan, too. I'm not holding my breath. Big news here is they are going to rename an HOV-2 lane to an HOT-3 lane and use the tolls to buy a few more busses and P&R lots. I can hardly stand the excitement!
NC and Charlotte are doing a smart thing! (IMHO...)
HarveyK400 I have no idea why it could possibly cost $313 billion for HSR between Dallas-Fort Worth and San Antonio unless Halliburton gets a no-bid contract from the Governor. By comparison, California is estimating just $40 billion for a 700 mile long HSR, 220 mph network. The Southeast Corridor may be a tad more between Washington and Jacksonville for the 220 mph corridor alternative. There aren't that many other full HSR corridors close to implementation. Illinois and Wisconsin are looking at improvements for 90-110 mph services that would take only half a billion each. So maybe the the first phase may be around $100 billion - just a guess.
I have no idea why it could possibly cost $313 billion for HSR between Dallas-Fort Worth and San Antonio unless Halliburton gets a no-bid contract from the Governor. By comparison, California is estimating just $40 billion for a 700 mile long HSR, 220 mph network. The Southeast Corridor may be a tad more between Washington and Jacksonville for the 220 mph corridor alternative. There aren't that many other full HSR corridors close to implementation. Illinois and Wisconsin are looking at improvements for 90-110 mph services that would take only half a billion each. So maybe the the first phase may be around $100 billion - just a guess.
The General Accounting Office (GAO) released recently a report of its audit of select proposed high speed rail projects in the U.S. The GAO is considered by experts to be one of the best audit organizations in the country, primarily because of its ruthless objectivity.
Amongst the projects that it reviewed is the status of high speed rail in Texas. It found that as of March 2009, Texas has taken no further action to establish a high speed rail system since the failed Texas TGV proposal. However, a grassroots organization of local elected officials and others is pursuing high speed rail in the Texas Triangle. It is important to note that the Texas Legislature has not sanction any high speed rail for the Lone Star State.
The Texas TGV, which was first proposed in 1982, would have provided high speed rail between Dallas/Fort Worth, Dallas/Fort Worth Airport, Houston, Austin, and San Antonio. Service was to have commenced between DFW and Houston in 1998, with service to Austin and San Antonio beginning in 1999.
The project failed because the proponents could not raise sufficient funds in the private capital markets, and the legislature refused to fund the project, although it authorized the formation of the Texas High Speed Rail Authority (THSRA). The THSRA issued requests for proposals. Two of three applicants met the criteria. Texas TGV Corporation (Morrison Knudsen, Bombardier, Alstom, Credit Lyonnais, Banque IndoSuez, Merrill Lynch) was granted the franchise after evidential hearings were held on the franchise applications.
Southwest Airlines filed suit to block the project, but the Texas court of jurisdiction dismissed its lawsuit. Contrary to popular belief, Southwest Airlines was not the major reason the project fell over. The project never got beyond the environmental impact study phase.
The estimated cost of the project was $4 billion, with a projected ridership of 11.3 to 18 million by 2015. Since 1982 the CPI has increased 120.5 per cent, which means the $4 billion would be equal to $8.82 billion today. A better inflation indicator would be the construction cost deflator, which would be somewhat different than the CPI, but it is more difficult to get. In any case, it appears that $313 billion to build HSR in Texas, if that is what the DOT person said, even after allowing for an extension of the line to Little Rock and Tulsa, is not well founded.
The GAO also found that the estimated cost of the California High Speed Rail project as of July 2008 is $32.8 to $33.6 billion, which is considerably less than the $40 billion being thrown around by people who have not been able to review the primary source documents. The GAO had access to these documents.
Phoebe Vet Harvey: I don't think your post was misleading, and that does seem to be what Bluestreak was suggesting. Though he might have been suggesting moving some cars from one train to the other. I was just pointing out a couple of political realities of which someone from out of state might not be aware.
ASbsolutely do not reroute the Piedmont or Carolinian. My suggestion is from 6 Months ago. When the booking on the Cresent north of Charlotte are above the assigned seating capacity (this is the high passenger load on the Cresent) take one or more coaches from the Caolinian after it arrives in Charlotte, Clean and restock then connect them to the northbound Cresent. At the same time place the needed replacement car(s) on the southbound Cresent; when it arrives in Charlotte drop the cars and the northbound Carolinian pick them up and run the normal consist. This move will probably require the installation of a switch(s) to expedite the move.
Phoebe:: Has stimulus money started the building of the new Charlotte intermodal passenger station??
The above substituting of equipment works both ways. The beauty of this solution is that Amfleet I cars could be used for the overflow loads and that would not be too bad for a three hour trip on the train from Charlottesville to /from Wash. However I believe the equipment on the Carolinian is better than that.
The second is that no switching costs other than an extra hour engineer/conductor time (?) would be incurred in Charlotte as that is a crew change point and the required switching - placing cars could be done at the end or beginning of a shift. I don't know if they do the Carolinian turning now. Phoebee do you know?
I've had times when friends said they couldn't get a seat on the Cresent Wash - North and when I checked sets were available to Charlottesville but not further on so they flew (PERMANENTLT LOST PASSENGERS)
Work is underway to finalize the Environmental Assessment (EA) required to utilize Federal funding for the Charlotte Gateway Station project.
FTA expects to issue a Finding of No Significant Impacts (FONSI) this spring
NCDOT hopes to advance the RFQ for a Master Developer for the Charlotte Gateway Station this year
Blue Streak: There is a fly in the ointment of your proposal. The Carolinian is 2 trains; one starting at each end each day. The Crescent is 4 trains. The trip each way takes 2 days. Perhaps the answer is another train running the same route as the Crescent but only from Atlanta to DC & back.
Phoebe VetActually, city center is exactly where the terminal should be. You then bring the suburban and rural riders in on local light rail or subway trains. Federally funded high speed rail is the major artery the trains should only stop at the center of large cities. State governments need to supply the intercity trains to the smaller cities and villages and local governments need to supply the capillaries to the suburbs and neighborhoods. All train stations should be served by local mass transit. Check out Grand Central, Penn Station in NYC, Union Station in DC, etc. Here in Charlotte we are in the process of building our new multimodal facility in city center.
Consider for a moment the Amtrak stops at Newark, NJ, New Carrollton, MD, and Alexandria, VA that are there for a purpose. Suburban stops work.
Thanks for the drawing of the Charlotte multi-modal terminal.
Now what is that Graham Drop-off area? That cant be for transit buses, taxis, or kiss-n-ride? And where is the LRT? Doesn't the wind blow and rain fall - I know you get more rain than Chicago?
oltmanndBT CPSO 266 Yes, but if you are going to have people taking the train halfway across the country they need some place to park their cars or if someone gives them a ride to the station it's going to be hard to get to because of the traffic. You can have the major stations outside the city for the intercity train and take a local light rail into the city to smaller stations. I am just saying if High-speed Rail will become a popular as flying we need to make room and also need to focus on building new right-of-ways for the intercity trains if they will be truly successful. HSR won't overlay well on existing fly/drive America. But, it will likely be part of a gradual change to living in cities (this is already happening), more transit to support that urban living, more dense suburbs and transit to support commuting, and a slowdown in the rate of sprawl. The increasing cost of energy is going to drive these changes. So, you won't need train stations that look like an airport. Just train stations that look like train stations, with much of the access by local train and transit.
I agree that transit should converge on an airport or train station to provide an alternative to the automobile and the cost in land and facilities for storing automobiles. However, people live in an auto-centric world, often without transit within walking distance, because the transit system could not keep up with urban sprawl. Parking and protected curb-side drop-off and pick-up are things that generally are done well at outlying airports; but not so well with carriageways converted for auto use for downtown railroad stations. If you have a historic train station, it may be a good thing to save it; but convenient intermodal transfers are key as its primary function and must take precedence.
In that drawing, "UP" is aproximately East.
That big two headed white arrow is the rail ROW which already exists.
It is a preliminary drawing not the final design. It will actually be larger, and will probably include a maint facility for the CATS commuter rail. There is a glass canopy over the train boarding area.
Charlotte is trying to reduce the number of people who come to city center by car, Center city parking is all privately owned or paid. There are free park and rides spread around the city at bus stops and light rail stations. The Blue Line light rail has a stop at an entrance to the Overstreet Mall, which uses a series of elevated closed in walkways to connect buildings all over city center.
Charlotte Gateway Station will incorporate various modes of land-based passenger transportation on two blocks, with the main station and office complex being located beside Norfolk Southern's major north-south rail line. The station and office complex will be comprised of:
Additionally, Charlotte Gateway Station will include:
In all this do not lose sight of the fact that Obama is a product of the Chicago Democratic machine and has surrounded himself with people from Chicago. Announcing Chicago as the starting point has nothing to do with trains or high speed rail. I will happily eat my words but it appears to me to be a payback and will not happen.
I see the "trolley line" and the transit center at the bottom, southeast side, of the map; but no double arrow for the NS tracks.
The Overstreet Mall is great, taking a page from Minneapolis and other cities; but the Blue Line is farther away than the parking which is given a preferred status in the development. Chicago isn't any better, lining the Loop L with parking garages rather than buildings with direct entrances from the stations, and terminating our Blue Line under the parking garage at O'Hare Airport rather than at the airline terminals.
Furthermore, there seems to be no physical connection between the transit center and the Overstreet Mall. Apparently one must walk a block on the street and around the EpiCenter to an entrance to the Overstreet Mall on College Street.
Obama is not a product of the Chicago Democratic Machine. That outright partisan lie has been perpetuated by the Republican National Committee to discredit Obama both before and after the election, and to demean his efforts, in this case, to improve intercity rail passenger service. His predecessor wanted to dismantle Amtrak; so, if you're a HSR advocate, give him a break.
Chicago may not have anywhere near as many Amtrak trains as any city on the NEC; but it does have the most routes. The short-term objective is to improve corridors for 90-110 mph service to be more competitive with driving. This means stops at suburban and intermediate cities and towns. Some corridors, such as Chicago-Saint Louis, could have extended rural sections grade separated for 150 mph running with few curve easements.
Maybe there is some payback, not to the Chicago Machine, but to the Midwest and the rest of the country that has waited and supported improvements to the NEC in the past as an acknowledged priority.
The tracks marked Trolley line are, in fact, the Blue Line light rail. The trolley has been running for several years before the light rail was built. Notice that the light rail line runs through the Charlotte Convention Center.
Epicenter is still under construction. It is connected to the Overstreet Mall. The lower floors are occupied. Dale Earnhardt Jr owns a bar called Whiskey River in that building.
http://www.whiskyrivercharlotte.com/index.php
The white arrow refered to the original drawing of the Gateway Station. The Transit Center is a sheltered CATS bus terminal. It is NOT the new Gateway terminal. The new Gateway Station is about 3 blocks north east of the mall diagram, as is Bank of America Stadium, home of the Carolina Panthers. Both are easily reached from I-77 and I-277. Graham, Brevard, College, and Church streets all have exits from I-277 about 1 block left of the mall picture. There is a light rail station over Trade Street with walk off connections directly to the Arena, the Transit Center, and the Bank of America parking deck. I do not know whether or not it will be connected to Epicenter when it is completed.
This image was taken out the window of a light rail train as it sat in that station. Trade Street is shown below, the building under construction to the left of Trade St is Epicenter, the building to the right is the Bank of America parking garage. The tallest building in the background is the 60 story Bank of America headquarters. The transit center is behind and to the left. The Time Warner Arena, where the Charlotte Bobcats play is behind and to the right. You can get off the light rail and walk all the way to the Bank of America headquarters without going out doors.
Phoebe Vet Blue Streak: There is a fly in the ointment of your proposal. The Carolinian is 2 trains; one starting at each end each day. The Crescent is 4 trains. The trip each way takes 2 days. Perhaps the answer is another train running the same route as the Crescent but only from Atlanta to DC & back.
Actuall if you think about it only when there is demand will cars be added to the southbound Cresent in either NYP or WASH (since motors are changed to P-40s,42s no additional time taken for brake tests). They would be removed in Charlotte. At no time would the cars proceed on southbound except maybe at Mardi Gras time. When AMTRAK was carrying mail cars the southbound Cresent would have them removed in Atlanta along with a couple coaches and that night the northbound Cresent would have the coaches and mail cars added. When ridding the Cresent to New Orleans the last two or three coaches have been closed off for lack of passengers beyand Birmingham. Remember SOU RR only operated the Southern Cresent 3 times a week ATL - NRL. AMTRAK started the daily run when they took over.
Another possibility is that coaches could be added in WASH and taken off either at Charlottesville, Lynchburg, or Greensboro. Then the northbound could pick up those cars the same night. That would require either NS doing the switching or AMTRAK (either by the train itself or a parked switcher) if the track layout would allow.That way only the dropping station - WASH segment would have the extra seats. When SOU ran the Cresent several coaches and sleepers were turned in WASH. All extra sections that SOU ran always ran ATL - WASH only.
If the proposed Lynchburg extension is implemented the lack of seats north may go away. Then again it may not if there is more demand.
I'm sorry I am wrong. I thought he was the Senator from Chicago, bought his house at a sweetheart price form Tony Rezko, pals around with a guy who killed cops and wanted to bomb the US Capital, has twelve or more millionaire Chicago pols as his advisors in DC, His wife had a $100,000 year job at the University of Chicago raised to $315,000 when he became Senator and was not replaced when she left and has two book deals in the last two years worth four million dollars. You are right all lies meant to discredit him. I should have known.
ndbprr I'm sorry I am wrong. I thought he was the Senator from Chicago, bought his house at a sweetheart price form Tony Rezko, pals around with a guy who killed cops and wanted to bomb the US Capital, has twelve or more millionaire Chicago pols as his advisors in DC, His wife had a $100,000 year job at the University of Chicago raised to $315,000 when he became Senator and was not replaced when she left and has two book deals in the last two years worth four million dollars. You are right all lies meant to discredit him. I should have known.
Can we leave partisan politics out of passenger train advocacy?
We can be mad with George Bush for his connections to the oil industry or whatever, and we can be mad at Barrack Obama for his connections to the principals of the Weather Underground. But at the end of the day, this train thing will sink or swim based on whether enough people ride it in relation to the money it costs to build it.
I have my personal opinions about President Obama and about his predecessor Mr. Bush and his predecessors before that, but I don't want to hear any name calling from the Right and I don't want to hear any name calling from the Left either, and I would like to be able to discuss pros as well as cons (yes their are cons to passenger rail, it isn't all sweet goodness as some people think, but their are ways to discuss the downside in a civil manner) of rail proposals on their merits.
If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
You forgot "Was born in Kenya", "Forced Hawaii to issue him a false birth certificate", and "Is a secret member of an Al Qaeda sleeper cell".
The rest of us are talking about trains.
Are you TRYING to get this thread locked?
Train-only zone
Paul:
Your post and mine crossed in the mail. I sent it before yours was up. Since you made my point, (and more diplomatically, I might add) I wouldn't have sent mine if I had seen yours.
blue streak 1When SOU ran the Cresent several coaches and sleepers were turned in WASH. All extra sections that SOU ran always ran ATL - WASH only.
Up until a few years ago, Amtrak short turned a couple of coaches at Atlanta, running 5 north of Atlanta and 3 south. Same number of coaches used as running 4 all the way thru, but NS switch crew costs probably killed that. No reason you couldn't drop the sleepers at Atlanta, too. It's a day train south of Atlanta.
Build the train:
Loco 1
Loco 2
baggage
thru coaches 1-3
lounge
diner
Atlanta coaches 1-2
Atlanta sleepers 1-2
At Atlanta, Loco 1 cuts away.
Cut train between lounge and diner.
Loco 2, baggage, 3 coaches and lounge head south.
Loco 1 grabs rear end left behind (diner, 2 coaches, 2 sleepers), turns it on Howell Wye using inbound crew and sets it on pocket track at station for servicing for that night's train. (pocket track already exists and is used on those days when the whole Crescent short-turns acc't track work to the south)
This saves two locomotives, two diners and two sleepers. QED
Oltmannd: That was fairly much a proposal I made several years ago to AMTRAK but was put down for 1. No first class service to NRL. 2 Cost too much (I have my doubts). Actually during the mail contract the cars were turned on the shorter distance to the belt line wye (don't know if the wye tracks are useable now).Also cars were stored there because the pocket was still used at Atlantic Steel (now gone).
ndbprrIf GE or Siemens announced it I would be interested but not a politician and that is reality to me.
Bombardier has said they're interested. Good enough?
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.