Jump to content




Help Support AmtrakTrains.com by donating using the link above or becoming a Supporting Member.

Photo

High speed train travel on the Northeast Corridor is not feasibile


  • Please log in to reply
45 replies to this topic

#41 west point

west point

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,200 posts

Posted 13 June 2017 - 05:10 PM

Lets get back on topic. Make another thread for other than NEC HSR.
220 MPH HSR is not needed on the NYP - WASH segment. It might only save about20 minutes. You can get more time savings by getting rid of the slower spots. If Frankford jct to north PHL station had all the curves straightened then you save almost 15 minutes. Then the B&P tunnel, The 3 speed restricted draw bridges in Maryland, Straightening curves in Maryland & Delaware. Finish 4 tracking from PHL - WASH.

All that would get the 249 miles from NYP - WASH including stops under 2:00. The LD and NE Regionals under 2:40. That should steal a lot of auto and bus traffic. Intermediate stations would benefit as well.

Another benefit would be train sets could get more miles per day increasing capacity with no additional equipment.

The situation from New Rochelle - New Haven is going to be unsolvable for at least 15 years as all the swing bridges need replacing. Each replacement will cause 2 tracking at the location as 2 new 2 track bridges are built at that location. Construction schedule if no more delays 2022 completion.

http://walkbridgect.... public mtg.pdf

#42 VentureForth

VentureForth

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,477 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Richmond Hill, GA

Posted 19 June 2017 - 01:50 PM

Lets get back on topic. Make another thread for other than NEC HSR.
220 MPH HSR is not needed on the NYP - WASH segment. It might only save about20 minutes. You can get more time savings by getting rid of the slower spots. If Frankford jct to north PHL station had all the curves straightened then you save almost 15 minutes. Then the B&P tunnel, The 3 speed restricted draw bridges in Maryland, Straightening curves in Maryland & Delaware. Finish 4 tracking from PHL - WASH.

All that would get the 249 miles from NYP - WASH including stops under 2:00. The LD and NE Regionals under 2:40. That should steal a lot of auto and bus traffic. Intermediate stations would benefit as well.

Another benefit would be train sets could get more miles per day increasing capacity with no additional equipment.

The situation from New Rochelle - New Haven is going to be unsolvable for at least 15 years as all the swing bridges need replacing. Each replacement will cause 2 tracking at the location as 2 new 2 track bridges are built at that location. Construction schedule if no more delays 2022 completion.

http://walkbridgect.... public mtg.pdf


But what it seems like they are trying to do is increase the 160 mph sections to 165, which is a total waste of time.

The only way they'll be able to improve on your suggestions is to either go way high (equivalent to the height of I-95) or underground.

14,223 Amtrak Miles. Many more to go.
Completed Routes: Capitol Limited, Palmetto
Also Ridden: Carolinian, Crescent, Pacific Surfliner, Piedmont, Southwest Chief, Silver Meteor, Silver Star, Texas Eagle


#43 jis

jis

    Engineer

  • Gathering Team Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,962 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Space Coast, Florida, Area code 3-2-1
  • Interests:Trains, Planes and Travel

Posted 19 June 2017 - 02:08 PM

Nobody is trying to increase the currently non-existent 160mph sections to anything. They are working on increasing the current 150mph sections in RI and MA to 160mph, and the 135mph section in NJ to 160mph, the latter as an integral part of a whole series of other improvements in/reconstruction of signaling, power and control system, that will reduce congestion and improve operations.

 

Actually the bigger change in NJ is increasing the current 110mph outer tracks to 125mph between Jersey Avenue and Hamilton, and increasing the maximum speed on NJT trains from 100mph to 125mph so that the outer zone NJT expresses which often run on the center tracks upto County interlocking, can get out of the way of Amtrak trains faster and thus reduce congestion. Also the increased speed on the outer tracks west of County will allow Amtrak trains that stop at Princeton jct. move at full 125mph without getting stuck behind slow pokey NJT trains.

 

So everything about the NJ higher speed project is not about running Acelas at 160mph. That is just a small part of a much bigger overall project. But for the politicians I suppose 160 is the sexiest part. That does not mean that we, who are knowledgeable about such stuff should fall pray to the glitzy marketing fluff. :) The biggest gains are actually for Regionals and NJT Expresses.


Edited by jis, 19 June 2017 - 03:31 PM.


#44 Ziv

Ziv

    OBS Chief

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 382 posts

Posted 22 June 2017 - 08:36 AM

I am just about the least knowledgeable of the posters on this site when it comes to the NEC, but is seems to me that most of the problem with the NEC isn't 135 mph vs. 160 mph, it is 135/160 mph vs. 35 mph. I may not be putting it well, but the slow parts are the killer, not the intermediate speed parts.

Until the NEC can either straighten (unlikely) or go under the slower curves, the NEC will never be all that fast, even if they were able to double the amount of trackage that is rated at 160 mph. And oddly enough, there is this guy in California who claims (probably overly optimistically) that his Boring Company can possibly reduce the cost of boring a tunnel by 90%. Well, if he can reduce the price of building a tunnel by a mere (?) 50%, then there is a chance that some of the slower sections of the NEC might actually see some form of improvement in the next 10-15 years. But given the cost of tunneling today, it won't happen without significant reductions in tunneling costs.



#45 Green Maned Lion

Green Maned Lion

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,644 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NJ
  • Interests:Sleeping

Posted 22 June 2017 - 09:18 AM

I honestly do think that a private company that is anxious to figure out how to build lots of tunnels cheaply can cut it by 90%. First of all a good chunk of the public cost is plain old graft. Secondly, there really is no incentive to reduce the prices of projects, and the civil engineering world is a cartel, and a lot of these projects are DBs or DBMs on cost plus basis.

So I think you can cut it at least 50% by removing waste and sloth. And you can cut even more by becoming a proficient company who is looking to figure out how to do it fast and cheap.
Travelled: Broadway Limited (1), Lake Shore Limited (6), Capitol Limited (7), Empire Builder (1), Southwest Chief (2), Sunset Limited (1), California Zephyr (3), Coast Starlight (2), Silver Meteor (5), Silver Star (5), Silver Palm (2), Crescent (1), Cardinal (4), Auto Train (4), Pennsylvanian (2), Palmetto (1), Acela Express (1), Empire Service (1), Northeast Regional (11), Keystone Service (1) --- Total Miles: 50,144 --- Total Trains: 61
Most important: Keep it Simple, Stupid!
Posted Image
Dream of love, dream of me, for you are my love. I love you.
Avatar and sig were done by my fiance, Corvidophile.

#46 cirdan

cirdan

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,951 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 23 June 2017 - 05:15 AM

I have given comprehensive reasons in the other thread where this has been posted as to why I believe this claim about Marshall Plan having anything to do with major basic reconstruction of the European network is bunk. However, he seems tio be unwilling to enter into a constructive discussion about the validity or lack thereof of that bit of rewriting of history.
 
 
 
 
 
Shinkansen in Japan also has nothing to do with US post war reconstruction aid under McArthur. That predates the construction of the Shinkansen by a decade and a half. Indeed US started the NEC program with Metroliners in order to compete with the Japanese development and then proceeded to fail miserably. How could they possibly help someone else build something that they themselves proved incapable of building in a sustainable fashion?
 
 

 

I think this is getting philosophical..

 

If we look at Spain for example, in the post war period, the Franco government had a serious legitimacy problem due to itzs past connections with Hitler and Mussolini.

 

The US, and especially under Eisenhower, was among the first to break this taboo and even provide Marshall Plan assistance to Spain. Eisenhower recognized that Franco was playing a useful role in pushing back Communism. On the railroads this arrangement led to an influx of US-manufactured equipment, most notably the large ALCO diesels, and in later years domestically built equipment using US licences. Even after they began designing their own equipment, the US influence remained noticeable. Think for example of the unpainted stainless stell passenger cars of the Talgo III. This didn't really finish until the mid 1970s. I'm not sure whether it is a coincidence or there is a correlation that this was the time of Franco's death. Maybe it was simply that by that time the US railroad industry had little of interest to offer so they looked to European practice instead.

 

In an alternative universe we could imagine Soviet designed stock on those services.

 

As for Shinkansen, I understand in its origins this was a pre-war project. Imperial Japan took a close interest in developments in Germany, both using streamlined steam locomotives and using high speed diesel railcars, and were building prototypes of their own. They realized the classic network did not lend itself well to high speeds and were planning newer straieghter lines. Construction of some of the tunnels of the first Shinkansen line had actually begun before the wat.  I think the decison to go for electric traction and standard gauge was post war though.  






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users