General -  Why The US Has No High-Speed Rail (99 views) Notify me whenever anyone posts in this discussion.Subscribe
 
From: WALTER784 DelphiPlus Member Icon Posted by hostMar-8 11:42 PM 
To: All  (1 of 8) 
 828.1 

Why The US Has No High-Speed Rail

FWIW

 

 
From: Shrinking Shorty (TOILETHEA1) DelphiPlus Member Icon Posted by hostMar-9 5:04 AM 
To: WALTER784 DelphiPlus Member Icon  (2 of 8) 
 828.2 in reply to 828.1 

Very well said, hope things change for the better for trains but not holding my breath.

 

 
From: WALTER784 DelphiPlus Member Icon Posted by hostMar-9 9:09 AM 
To: Shrinking Shorty (TOILETHEA1) DelphiPlus Member Icon  (3 of 8) 
 828.3 in reply to 828.2 

I won't either, but it does explain all the obstacles involved in getting high speed rail service in the US.

FWIW

 

 
From: Shrinking Shorty (TOILETHEA1) DelphiPlus Member Icon Posted by hostMar-9 11:51 AM 
To: WALTER784 DelphiPlus Member Icon  (4 of 8) 
 828.4 in reply to 828.3 

It really does, very well done.

 

 
From: samuelofisrael (8320john1)Mar-9 4:43 PM 
To: All  (5 of 8) 
 828.5 in reply to 828.1 

High Speed Rail America, so far, is a bust and likely to continue to be a bust unless radical social mores are instituted. True enough the 'other' transportation lobbies are not interested in HSRA and why should they be? For the betterment of the culture? Less carbon pollution? Decreased automotive hwy accidents? It's about the money. And that's a powerful lobby. Would the Anaheim [DisneyLand] to Sodom on the coast pay for itself or another Amtrac? Earthquake prone California would pose other problems as with Japan, a seismically active waiting for the Big One. With a few exceptions HSRA is DOA.     

 
 Reply   Options 

 
From: Ishmael112Mar-9 7:54 PM 
To: WALTER784 DelphiPlus Member Icon  (6 of 8) 
 828.6 in reply to 828.1 

1.  And important detail they omitted about the Northeast Corridor Line is the catenary.  The present catenary from Washington to New Haven was installed in the 1930's.   It's worn out and needs to be replaced.   Also, it isn't a constant tension catenary; the wires stretch out in summer heat and shrink in winter cold.   So we need a new constant tension catenary.   Make that repair and the Acela could move at much higher speeds.   

2.  Professor Robert Cervero commented on some of the real problems California is having with its high speed line.   First, the line goes through places which are already heavily developed with large populations.   That makes land very expensive.   Another big expense is that this is rugged land which needs a lot of bridges and tunnels; they cost a lot to build.   The project has run out of money and is now moving very slowly if at all.   

3.   In Texas the answer is for a private company to build a high speed railroad.   Well, Texas is the land of wide open spaces so perhaps their terrain is more like China's than California's is.   I say more power to them and I await the new railroad.   And in Florida it gets better.   Brightline, I mean Virgin, already exists.   It hasn't reached Orlando yet, much less Jacksonville as was promised but it does go to Palm Beach.   Again, this is a private project.   I say more power to them.   Miami to Palm Beach is up and running.   As for the rest of it, to be very frank I'm not holding my breath.   If passenger rail service were really profitable the private railroads never would have given it up and except for the Northeast Corridor it costs the Federal Government millions of dollars.   But I am ready to be convinced by the Texas and Florida private railroads.   

4.   On thing that was not explained in the video.   Why must a high speed rail line be elevated for its whole length?   Do they do that in Europe and Japan?   I have never heard that they do.   But perhaps I'm missing something.

 

 

 

 
From: WALTER784 DelphiPlus Member Icon Posted by hostMar-10 11:29 AM 
To: Ishmael112  (7 of 8) 
 828.7 in reply to 828.6 

Ishmael112 said...

The present catenary from Washington to New Haven was installed in the 1930's.   It's worn out and needs to be replaced.

Ishmael112 said...

Another big expense is that this is rugged land which needs a lot of bridges and tunnels; they cost a lot to build.   The project has run out of money and is now moving very slowly if at all.

Ishmael112 said...

Well, Texas is the land of wide open spaces so perhaps their terrain is more like China's than California's is.   I say more power to them and I await the new railroad.   And in Florida it gets better.   Brightline, I mean Virgin, already exists.   It hasn't reached Orlando yet, much less Jacksonville as was promised but it does go to Palm Beach.   Again, this is a private project.   I say more power to them.   Miami to Palm Beach is up and running.   As for the rest of it, to be very frank I'm not holding my breath.   If passenger rail service were really profitable the private railroads never would have given it up and except for the Northeast Corridor it costs the Federal Government millions of dollars.   But I am ready to be convinced by the Texas and Florida private railroads.

They promised Orlando but not Jasonville... 

If you build elevated railway over existing railway, new land is not required... however the elevated platform is a bit more expensive, but hey... how many car/truck/other vehicle collision occurrences could be reduced as the rails are elevated over the roads?

FWIW 

 

 
From: Ishmael112Mar-10 12:40 PM 
To: WALTER784 DelphiPlus Member Icon  (8 of 8) 
 828.8 in reply to 828.7 

What I read is that originally Brightline was intended to terminate at Jacksonville.   And that makes a lot of sense; a rail line traveling the length of Florida, a very long state.   At the same time by not crossing the state line it would avoid expensive and needless Federal laws.   

Recently I learned that Brightline has been changed to Virgin and is owned by the Virgin Corporation.   I wonder if that means that Brightline was headed for financial difficulties and sold out because of it; however I have no real evidence of that.   

It may be that by creating new passenger railroads which operate within states the costs could be greatly reduced and private companies could operate them at a profit.    The cost reduction would be because there would be no Federal Reguations.   In Europe passenger cars are much lighter than in the US and Europe seems to operate passenger rail as safely as we do.   

*   *   *

 I suspect elevating entire rail lines is extremely expensive.   And  we have vast rural areas were there seems to be no strong reason to do it.   We could build overpasses for either the road or the railroad where they are needed to avoid grade crossings.   However, where we have highways througn developed areas elevating a parallel rail line can make a lot of sense.   

 

 

 

First Discussion>>

Adjust text size:

Welcome, guest! Get more out of Delphi Forums by logging in.

New to Delphi Forums? You can log in with your Facebook, Twitter, or Google account or use the New Member Login option and log in with any email address.

Home | Help | Forums | Chat | Blogs | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
© Delphi Forums LLC All rights reserved.