Dallas-Houston Japanese Bullet Trains

[JL Chicago]

Hi Sam.
Thanks for the reply. I'm not proposing a 200 mph railway for the NEC as it would be prohibitively capital expensive. It's just too crowded. Which ironically helps Amtrak because in comparison it's slower trains are still competitive as cars and planes are also slower.

But I lived in TX in the 90s and once outside the big cities it's sparsely populated. Thus land is available and affordable for a 200 mph line. And I've driven in TX. An 80 mph train just doesn't compete. And flying is relatively uncongested as well as the airports. . So I just don't see how 80 or even a 100 mph train competes. And if your product is not competitive then you must discount to attract customers. And those discounts cost money too.

The UK did a study and found that trains under (IIRC) 150 mph can never be cost effective but over 150 can be if land can be obtained relatively cheaply. (Mph in top speeds not averages BTW.)

I currently teach PT at DePaul U in Chicago. Their transportation dept recently did a study of millennials. Amtrak barely registers on their radar scope. It's MegaBus or Spirit Air or car (if they don't own one that's easy, they rent or ZipCar). Note these same millennials are big users of the CTA and Metra trains. It's just Amtrak they avoid. Too slow compared to the competition. We're about to completely lose the next gen of intercity riders. And once loyalties are established they don't change. Think of the post WWII vets and their travel prefs. They abandoned railways and never went back. We've got to think long term and stay ahead.

[Anonymous]

JL Chicago

Sam1
Why do you keep saying we must walk before we run?? 

Amtrak has 75 per cent of the NYC to DC air/rail market with trains that average a tad over 80 mph. 

Amtrak has won its share of the NYC to DC rail/air market by incrementally upgrading the existing rail corridor as opposed to building a new railroad.

In FY14 the NEC had an operating profit of $482.2 million before depreciation, interest, etc. (capital charges). Assuming that it wears 80 per cent of Amtrak's capital charges - Amtrak does not reveal how it allocates the capital charges, it had a loss of $96.6 million in FY14.  That's down from $504.7 million in FY10.

If Amtrak operated 205 mph trains in the NEC or elsewhere - average speed would be less than the top speed - would it turn in better numbers?  Would it do a better job of meeting the travel needs of the people in its market? I suspect not. 

The cost to build a high speed railroad from scratch probably is greater than making incremental upgrades to existing rail corridors.  Moreover, the operating cost for a moderate high speed railway is less than the operating cost for a super high speed railway.   

I don't recall saying that I am comfortable with an average speed of 80 mph, but perhaps I did.  

If the current rail route between Dallas and Houston or along the I-35 corridor could be improved incrementally for passengers trains running an average of 100 to 110 mph, the outcome could be better for more people in Texas when costs, revenues, etc. are factored into the equations. 

The Texas Central Railway has not presented any validated ridership, revenue, or cost projections.  Without them it is impossible to know whether its proposed high speed railway between Dallas and Houston will be financially successful.

Southwest Airlines started with three airplanes.  And built itself incrementally into the largest domestic carrier - volumes - in the United States.  Its success story is a case study at many of the leading business schools.  Presumably there is a lesson there. 

[JL Chicago]

Sam1
Why do you keep saying we must walk before we run??
My grandparents, now long dead, rode on 100 mph Hiawathas (behind steam no less!) 80 years ago.
How much longer do you propose we continue to walk?
Why do you insist on 80 year old speeds today?
Have you ever ridden on a 200 mph train?

[CMStPnP]

blue streak 1

Oppponents are trying an end around by enlisting politicians to make it impossible for the corporation to build the line.  Since no way can be found to find out who is supporting the legislators ( both state and congressional ) we cannot know who is behind the oppposition.

http://www.fwbusinesspress.com/news/article_9017d060-e45c-11e4-bace-bfba547e611d.html

http://www.citylab.com/politics/2015/04/meet-the-opposition-to-texas-high-speed-rail/390576/ 

 http://www.star-telegram.com/opinion/editorials/article18720000.html

http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/2015/04/dart-supports-high-speed-rail-project-but-its-austin-lobbyist-is-working-against-the-effort.html/ 

 

 

It's fairly normal Texas Politics and I have my doubts it will kill the plan because they cannot set the precedent against just a rail company.    It will be overturned at some point in the courts.    I am kind of uncertain of it thought because this is not a INTERSTATE company so they might not be able to use those arguments but still most Texas State Judges are fair minded and I think this bill is overreach by the legislature if it passes which I still have faith it will not pass.

[oltmannd]

PNWRMNM

I do not think it is much of a real restate deal. I do think it is an attempt to sell Japanese rolling stock.

Sounds likely to me.  That and sell some management consulting, as well.

[blue streak 1]

Oppponents are trying an end around by enlisting politicians to make it impossible for the corporation to build the line.  Since no way can be found to find out who is supporting the legislators ( both state and congressional ) we cannot know who is behind the oppposition.

http://www.fwbusinesspress.com/news/article_9017d060-e45c-11e4-bace-bfba547e611d.html

http://www.citylab.com/politics/2015/04/meet-the-opposition-to-texas-high-speed-rail/390576/ 

 http://www.star-telegram.com/opinion/editorials/article18720000.html

http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/2015/04/dart-supports-high-speed-rail-project-but-its-austin-lobbyist-is-working-against-the-effort.html/ 

[CMStPnP]

I would be surprised if they won and in fact it is likely they will lose.   There are multiple forms of eminent domain and one of them reverts the land back to the original owner if the enterprise fails at somepoint.....which makes the Senators concerns about business failure in this case moot.

[blue streak 1]

Another article about Texas senate. 

http://www.texastribune.org/2015/04/08/bill-targeting-bullet-train-project-moves-senate-f/

 

 

[CMStPnP]

It's not the "Texas Legislature" as you state because they have not voted on it yet.   It's two or three legislative opponents of the project that are just opponents because they represent a select few that want more than fair market value for their land........basically a shakedown for more money.     Thats all it is.

I'm willing to bet they are very large landowners vs run of the mill family farmers as well, to have that kind of legislative power.

[blue streak 1]

NARP has post in its blog that Texas legislature is trying to kill the HSR.  Sort of gives pause to lie that oponents of Amtrak want private operation of passenger trains 

 

http://www.narprail.org/hotline--blog/hotline-906#comments

 

[CMStPnP]

schlimm

My point certainly was not to "serve" Waco and its environs.   My point was  to use the Dallas to San Antonio corridor with the addition of a spur to Houston.  And the why is to avoid building a separate line from Dallas to Houston, thus saving money.   The real estate development can occur along either RoW.

OK, it's a construction costs issue then.    Well if thats the concern, if it was one entity involved in building both lines then I would say that might happen.    But what I see Texas doing is allowing the Texas Central folks complete freedom and then attempting to fix it later with taxpayer money.     Texas Central has not expressed an interest in any other route in the state (and here is where they differ from All Aboard Florida).    What I find kind of appalling is the state is going to let Texas Central build something that is only partially adequate and then try to fix it to make it fully adequate with taxpayer money.

For example the Dallas to Fort Worth leg, sounds like the State is going to build that along with perhaps fixing the Mass Transit system in Dallas so that Dallas Union Station is not the only hub.........somehow tying the new HSR rail station into Dallas Mass Transit.........thats all comming from taxpayers and if I were Mayor of Dallas I would be assessing Texas Central for the costs because they are creating them with their decision making.    Maybe they intend to recoup the money via taxes on the new real estate development which is largely derilict buildings and vacant lots now.    Not sure what the plan is.

There really is not a good excuse for not using Dallas Union Station as the HSR station other than they want more acreage to develop from the ground up.

Interesting to note the All Aboard Florida plan has the FEC tracks being elevated in downtown Miami station with the level under the tracks at street level being retail lease space.   Dallas will probably have a similar deal but just East of Union Station instead of at Union Station........no reason I can think of off hand for it other than available real estate to develop.

[schlimm]

My point certainly was not to "serve" Waco and its environs.   My point was  to use the Dallas to San Antonio corridor with the addition of a spur to Houston.  And the why is to avoid building a separate line from Dallas to Houston, thus saving money.   The real estate development can occur along either RoW.

 

[CMStPnP]

schlimm

No.   You use the Dallas- San Antonio line for part of the journey to Houston, then split at Waco (or some other point), and build only a line from Waco to Houston rather than Dallas to Houston.

I got it, I know thats what you were trying to communicate but do you then realize your inconviencing the Dallas to Houston passenger by the additional 15-20 min to accomodate the Dallas to Waco passenger?    Why not just ask the Waco passenger to spend an extra 15-20 min on the train North to Dallas if they want to go to South to Houston?    Thats probably the ratiionale.

However, I think TEXAS CENTRAL is more interested in real estate development than the bullet train itself and I think they see potentially easy financing from Japan if they can raise X amount in the United States.     They will also try to milk out taxpayer money just like All Aboard Florida is doing with Florida Tri-Rail......then claim innocence in the affair.      Hey if you build a monolith type station with several surrounding office towers in a convienent downtown location with rail access........of course the local train authority is going to want in on it and will probably add to your funds or construction.

We are already seeing a massive Dallas Station real estate development with this project and I am fairly certain we will see one with Houston as well with Texas Central being the primary landlord or developer in both terminus cities.     The passengers and fares are just gravy on the top.

You know what?   They could have just as easily built an elevated line into Dallas Union Station because the old and heavily decorated waiting room is on the second floor of Dallas Union station, the first floor was intended for baggage and thats the part Amtrak, Dart and TRE uses.     Texas Central could have come in on a elevated platform over the Amtrak, Dart, TRE and UP/BNSF tracks and then just busted out the bricked in exit points on the second floor of the station for bullet train.    Walla, everyone in one facility.    Second floor of Dallas Union Station is currently owned by the Hyatt Regecy for special events but I am sure they would sell it.

The problem is that if they used the Dallas Union Station location they do not have enough other real estate to develope around the station thats not already in use.    So they picked their current location to make more money on the real estate development.    That right there tells me they are not terribly focused on just carrying passengers.

[Anonymous]

The initial Texas Triangle concept included a connecting line from Austin or San Antonio to Houston. 

 

The Texas Rail Plan does not include a connection from Waco to Houston.  Population density probably was a factor.

 

The 2013 estimated population of Waco and the surrounding county (McLennan) was 241,000.  The estimated population for Austin and the surrounding county (Travis) was 1,120,954, as per the U.S. Census Bureau.

 

The Triangle Railroad Holding Company estimated in 2009 that high speed rail from Austin to Houston would attract an average of 31,150 riders per day compared to 34,000 between DFW and San Antonio and 49,500 between DFW and Houston.  The methodology for determining the ridership numbers is not given. 

 

The authors of the Texas Rail Plan, as per Page 4-52, included an analysis for developing a high speed passenger rail line between Austin and Houston.  The line would parallel roughly U.S. 290, which is the main highway between the two cities, and could include stops in Elgin, Giddings, Brenham, and Hempstead.  Bryan/College Station was also included as a possible stop, although to do so would require deviating from a relatively straight route between Austin and Houston.

 

The analysts identified existing rail infrastructure and operations, alternative routes, and infrastructure improvements required to support passenger rail in the corridor.  Rail Traffic Controller software was used to model passenger rail operations between Austin and Houston. 

 

The Capital Metro track from Austin to Giddings and an abandoned Southern Pacific right-of-way from Giddings to Hempstead were identified as the most likely route.  With curve modifications and infrastructure improvements, the route could handle speeds up to 110 mph.  More extensive improvements would allow higher speeds.

 

[schlimm]

No.   You use the Dallas- San Antonio line for part of the journey to Houston, then split at Waco (or some other point), and build only a line from Waco to Houston rather than Dallas to Houston.

[CMStPnP]

schlimm

Dallas to Houston directly = 239.3 miles

Dallas via Waco to Houston = 280.5 miles    So you would save building some 50 miles of HSR and add 41 miles distance (about 15 minutes) to the schedule.  Certainly should be considered.

Waco is not that large, and if your going to route via Waco I presume your going to stop there and the stop itself would take some time.    Why not have the Waco folks travel North for 15 min to Dallas on the DFW to San Antonio line then travel on Dallas to Houston. 

Isn't it the same thing but without the extra cost of the extra miles on Dallas to Houston leg?

[Anonymous]

schlimm

Why not build a line to Houston that splits off from the DFW-San Antonio at Waco or Austin?   It would not be so much longer in time than a direct line and would save huge amounts of infrastructure capital. 

The notion of a Texas Triangle apparently arose from the first high speed rail proposals in the state.  Texas TGV (1991), Fastrak (1991), and TRHC (Triangle Railroad Holding Company) (2009) proposed systems with legs that had the label Texas Triangle attached to them. 

Subsequently, as per Page 4-5 of the Texas Rail Plan, Chapter 4, Passenger Rail, 11 potential high speed rail corridors have been designated by USDOT.  Five were authorized under the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) and six were authorized under the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) in 1998.

Two of the USDOT designated corridors are in Texas.  They are the “South Central” and “Gulf Coast”. 

The South Central corridor runs from San Antonio to DFW, where it splits into two branches.  One runs to Oklahoma City and Tulsa; the other runs to Texarkana and Little Rock. 

The Gulf Coast corridor runs from Houston to Beaumont, New Orleans, and Mobile, with a branch from New Orleans to Atlanta.

Dallas to Houston was not included in the original 11 corridors.  However, TXDOT recognized the potential for high speed rail between Texas two largest metropolitan areas, and it is facilitating the development of high speed rail in this corridor, as per Page 4-7 of the Texas Rail Plan. 

“…TXDOT was awarded a $15 million grant from the Federal Railroad Administration for the Preliminary Engineering and NEPA work for new core express service (high-speed rail) in the DFW-Houston corridor.” 

In June 2003, TXDOT ask the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) to designate a corridor between Bryan-College Station and Temple as a high speed corridor to connect the DFW-Houston and DFW-San San Antonio corridors.  Proposed as the Brazos Express Corridor, it would have formed the Triangle envisioned in the earlier proposals for high speed rail in Texas.  The FRA rejected TXDOT’s request.

There are no plans at this point to build out the Texas Triangle as initially envisioned.

 

[schlimm]

Dallas to Houston directly = 239.3 miles

Dallas via Waco to Houston = 280.5 miles    So you would save building some 50 miles of HSR and add 41 miles distance (about 15 minutes) to the schedule.  Certainly should be considered.

[CMStPnP]

schlimm

Why not build a line to Houston that splits off from the DFW-San Antonio at Waco or Austin?   It would not be so much longer in time than a direct line and would save huge amounts of infrastructure capital.

Interesting question.    I have not looked at a topographical map but I am going to guess there is either a topographical issue or land ownership issue that would spike the costs of that type of route.    One issue is it would increase the length of the line Dallas to Houston by 1/3.

The original Texas Central line also built direct Galveston-Houston to Dallas and reached Austin by a long branch off the mainline that was at least 1/3 as long as the total distance Dallas to Houston and the line went slightly NW but mostly W in direction.    So they came upon the same decision point more than a Century ago.   It's probably a combination of topography, distance and speed.    Around Austin is the Texas Hill Country which, since your from Illinois, is almost identical to what you see along the Mississippi River in Wisconsin and Northern Illinois with large limestone bluffs........as well as along the Wisconsin Dells.    We do not have any topography features as large as the glacieal outlier hills of rock surrounding Devils Lake, WI though until you head further South or West from Austin.    The topography starts to get really choppy in places unless you follow a specific route, they seemed to do OK with the freeway to San Antonio to Austin but if you venture to far West from the freeway you run into topography issue costs.

Also, Dallas to Houston they decided on a route already.    They are going to follow the utility lines vs using the BNSF rail right of way or the UP rail right of way.    If you look at the choices the utility line routing has more straight rail, IMO.    I think that also will impact speed.

[CMStPnP]

daveklepper

That depends on the newspaper and its policies.  For example, in general, The Jerusalem Post has no objections for North American readership unless they are stated, as long as credit is given.

Actually your going to  find it depends on how the owner of the website wants to enforce it's rules.     It was already discussed earlier how Trains Magazine interprets the protections and will enforce the rules.    Given their behavior on railroad property it would be reckless of Trains to trust the railfan community to come up with it's own interpretation of the rules.    I have observed how that works on operating railfan trips.

I am pretty sure Trains has the practice prohibited in their rules.     Really I don't care what folks do here I was trying to avoid someone getting suspended and then having to read through 10-15 posts complaining about it.

[daveklepper]

I for one hope the Baltimore - Washington mag-lev project never gets off the ground.  It represents a truly useless waste of resources, since the existing NEC-Amtrak line is doing a good job now, and can more economically be upgraded to do a far better job than almost any other location on the Amtrak system.  The distance is so short that the time saving between maglev and 220mph HPS is trivial, 55 miles at 180mph average for 220 top speed gives 19 minuts, and maglev at 300 mph average for 350mph top speed gives 11 minutes.   A bullion dollars for an eight-minute saving in travel time?  (A billion being a guess as the difference between upgrading Amtrak and maglev.)

It would have to be heavily subsidized, and its main effect would be to reduce the ability of the NEC ti syooirt its operation from the farebox.

[Jim200]

schlimm

Why not build a line to Houston that splits off from the DFW-San Antonio at Waco or Austin?   It would not be so much longer in time than a direct line and would save huge amounts of infrastructure capital.

 

 

If the high speed rail project was being built by the federal or state govenment the line would probably go Houston to Austin to DFW, and satisfy both requirements with one line and an extension to San Antonio. Unfortunately at 220 mph, the cheapest construction is the shortest which follows a straight railroad combined with the fewest land purchases to avoid small towns and other problems. We will see if even the shortest can be built. High speed rail needs to be built everywhere.

[daveklepper]

CMStPnP

^^^ Not trying to get you in trouble but I can tell you as a long ago Moderator myself, you can't cut and paste a news article like that to the Trains website without exposing Kalmbach publishing to a lawsuit by either the author or original content owner.   Linking is OK but a direct cut and paste is going to get this website in trouble fast.

 

 

That depends on the newspaper and its policies.  For example, in general, The Jerusalem Post has no objections for North American readership unless they are stated, as long as credit is given.

[schlimm]

Why not build a line to Houston that splits off from the DFW-San Antonio at Waco or Austin?   It would not be so much longer in time than a direct line and would save huge amounts of infrastructure capital.

 

[Anonymous]

CMStPnP

Tx DOT already studied this Dallas to San Antonio route and they dispute many of the assertions you made above including that the existing right of way could be used for HSR.   

The passenger rail chapter of the Texas Rail Plan, which was written by researchers from the Texas Transportation Institute and the University of Texas at Austin, at the request of TXDOT, is a comprehensive overview of the plans to improve passenger rail in Texas.  It was completed in 2009 and revised in 2014.  It can be downloaded from TXDOT’s website. 

 

The researchers identified two corridors, which are integral parts of the Texas Triangle concept, that are good candidates for high speed passenger rail, which is defined in the plan as speeds up to 150 mph.  DFW to Houston and DFW to San Antonio drew equal weight. 

 

The report mentions no insurmountable cost or technical barriers to developing high speed rail between Dallas and San Antonio.

 

Had the state moved forward with the key corridors defined in the plan, the researchers had estimated that the system would have been able to recover its operating expenses in six years and its fully allocated expenses (capital and interest) in approximately 10 years.

 

The researchers noted that the Dallas to San Antonio corridor is the most densely populated corridor in Texas.  And by implication the one in most need of alternatives to driving or flying. 

 

So why is the emphasis on developing the Dallas to Houston corridor?  Outside of the Dallas and the Houston anchor points, it is not a densily populated corridor? 

 

Politics and an opportunity for the Japanese to peddle their rail solution in America?

 

[CMStPnP]

Dragoman

Doesn't the Eminent Domain question, in this context, arise because it is a right of sovereign governments, and not of private entities? The state can exercise it in the interests of some private enterprise, if the state decides that it is in the public interest to do so, but I believe that is where the fight is fought 

No because all along it can be legislatively delegated to a subordinate government unit or private entity.   It was never an exclusive power, it was always a power that can be delegated via legislative decree.

I don't want to get political here because I am neutral on the Tea Party but some elements of the Tea Party have siezed upon eminent domain as an over reach of government.   I totally disagree with that characterization, especially in Texas where the practice is to offer compensation or look for an alternative first.   Eminent Domain has long been a practice of acquiring real estate in this country and honestly if anyone feels they have been mistreated by the practice.....thats why we have a Civil Court system with neutral judges.

[Dragoman]

Doesn't the Eminent Domain question, in this context, arise because it is a right of sovereign governments, and not of private entities? The state can exercise it in the interests of some private enterprise, if the state decides that it is in the public interest to do so, but I believe that is where the fight is fought.

[CMStPnP]

wanswheel

Excerpt from The Courier of Montgomery County

More than 800 people packed the Lone Star Community Center in Montgomery Monday night to learn what they can do to stop a proposed multibillion-dollar high-speed rail route that would cut through West Montgomery County and connect Houston with Dallas.

 

http://www.yourhoustonnews.com/courier/news/pack-center-against-high-speed-rail-project/article_71a73a2b-7365-578d-9b99-d852dca1dfc0.html

This happens with every large project that has eminent domain rights.  Local politicians and opportunists seeking to make more money whip up the locals on how it is an infringement on their land rights.    They usually lose the battle of course and all it really does is slow the project down a little.    The project has been very clear about when eminent domain will be invoked.   First they will make a fair offer for the land.   If that is refused they will look at costs of routing around the land, if the costs are unreasonable they will invoke eminent domain.   Eminent Domain can be done in two ways.   One is just granting of a land easement in which the property is only borrowed from the landowner as long as it is needed or their is a right of way.   Another form is outright siezure in which the property ownership transfers.    Legality of Eminent Domain has long been established by the Supreme Court and opponents typically lose their challenges but not before the opportunists can earn political points or a little money on the side.

[wanswheel]

Excerpt from The Courier of Montgomery County

More than 800 people packed the Lone Star Community Center in Montgomery Monday night to learn what they can do to stop a proposed multibillion-dollar high-speed rail route that would cut through West Montgomery County and connect Houston with Dallas.

 

http://www.yourhoustonnews.com/courier/news/pack-center-against-high-speed-rail-project/article_71a73a2b-7365-578d-9b99-d852dca1dfc0.html

[Anonymous]

I have ridden the Orange Line three times from DFW to downtown and back or vice versa.  Two of the trips were during the week.  One was on a Sunday morning.

According to DART's schedules, the average weekday time to get from the West End light rail station to DFW Terminal A on the Orange Line is approximately 50 minutes.  The average time to get to Terminal A, using the TRE from Union Station, with connections at CentrePort and the south parking lot is approximately 60 minutes.  

According to DART's Fact Sheet for 2013, the top speed of its light rail vehicles is 65 mph.  The train appears to hit this speed at several points along the Orange Line. 

One of the drawbacks to using the Orange Line or the TRE is the absence of dedicated luggage space on the trains.  DART acknowledges this fact in its guide to using the Orange Line to get to or from DFW.  It may not be a factor for people who are traveling light, but it could be a putoff for people with a large amount of luggage.