Sunset East Eligible for HSR Funding?

Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
G

Guest_Ben_*

Guest
Would the New Orleans to Florida route be eligible for high-speed rail funding, which is about to be distributed in several days?
 
Would the New Orleans to Florida route be eligible for high-speed rail funding, which is about to be distributed in several days?
My guess would be no.

My understanding was that the high-speed funding would be open only to projects of that type, and that conventional rail initiatives would be excluded. I was of the impression that such projects, like the Florida DOT's proposal to return passenger rail service along the Florida East Coast line, would be eligible for funding from federal stimulus packages that were not devoted exclusively to HSR.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Would the New Orleans to Florida route be eligible for high-speed rail funding, which is about to be distributed in several days?
My guess is that it could be made eligible if the right people wanted it to be eligible. Since portions of that track could surely be updated to run over 79... technically it probably could be.

It would not really be the best way to spend that money... but if the right people get involved it could happen.
 
Definitely not - HSR funding is going to the so-called "shovel-ready" projects: California, Chicago, and the NEC for sure, possibly Florida and Texas, probably also PDX-SEA. Although in my opinion, the shovel should be used to bury the leaders of the CA High Speed Rail Commission....what are they THINKING??? Please, follow the European and Japanese examples, and get to work TODAY on the easy parts of the route!
 
My guess is that it could be made eligible if the right people wanted it to be eligible. Since portions of that track could surely be updated to run over 79... technically it probably could be.
It is indeed truly a sad state of affaris when in this day and age we try to convince ourselves that pokey 79mph is high speed by any sense of the term in today's context :(
 
My guess is that it could be made eligible if the right people wanted it to be eligible. Since portions of that track could surely be updated to run over 79... technically it probably could be.
It is indeed truly a sad state of affaris when in this day and age we try to convince ourselves that pokey 79mph is high speed by any sense of the term in today's context :(
well I did say OVER 79... like 90? MAYBE 100 if we got really lucky? ha. I know... but such is life.

The truth is that a max. speed of 110 is fast enough to create some pretty nice corridors (look at Keystone as a great example.) But even that seems difficult to get to in this country.
 
The Mobile - New Orleans Corridor portion of the route could have potential for HSR. If Florida kicks in some funds, the JAX-Tallahasee portion has potential. There is a lot of highway traffic between JAX and Tally on I-10. A high speed train would alleviate a very boring drive. Through trains from Miami, Tampa and Orlando could be run to Tally which is the state capital. There wouldn't been enough business between Tally and Mobile for HSR.
 
I'm surprized there is no train service to Tallahassee.
We could probably do an entire thread on train services (or the lack thereof) to various state capitols, especially in states that have Amtrak service to other places. I believe Idaho, for example, is served by the Amtrak only in Sandpoint at oh-dark-hundred; neither Boise nor any of the other comparatively large cities in the state have seen any Amtrak service since The Pioneer was axed.
 
It is indeed truly a sad state of affaris when in this day and age we try to convince ourselves that pokey 79mph is high speed by any sense of the term in today's context :(
well I did say OVER 79... like 90? MAYBE 100 if we got really lucky? ha. I know... but such is life.
Agreed. I was not criticizing you. Just reading the post made me think how due to a stroke of history of a government agency in its misguided attempt to increase safety, having used 80mph as the cutoff point for requiring ATS, has forever set that as the low bar for what will be considered high speed.

Actualy in this day and age, I tend to think that anything upto 125 mph is more or less medium speed. So I at least tend to categorize 80mph to 125 mph as medium speed. High speed in that line of thinking is 125 mph to whatever, but today practically it is 220 - 240 mph. That is a resonable categorization in my opinion because it is typically beyond 125 mph that universally some kind of advanced signaling and automatics train control system is required.
 
It is indeed truly a sad state of affaris when in this day and age we try to convince ourselves that pokey 79mph is high speed by any sense of the term in today's context :(
well I did say OVER 79... like 90? MAYBE 100 if we got really lucky? ha. I know... but such is life.
Agreed. I was not criticizing you. Just reading the post made me think how due to a stroke of history of a government agency in its misguided attempt to increase safety, having used 80mph as the cutoff point for requiring ATS, has forever set that as the low bar for what will be considered high speed.

Actualy in this day and age, I tend to think that anything upto 125 mph is more or less medium speed. So I at least tend to categorize 80mph to 125 mph as medium speed. High speed in that line of thinking is 125 mph to whatever, but today practically it is 220 - 240 mph. That is a resonable categorization in my opinion because it is typically beyond 125 mph that universally some kind of advanced signaling and automatics train control system is required.
Oh I know... I was poking fun at myself as well, pretending that 90 is really alot faster than 79. Ha!

What is sad is that I cannot imagine a scenario where we can get legitimate high speed rail connections. Even the NEC is limited by pre-existing right of way having the curves and such that it has. There is simply no reason why New York City and Chicago should not be linked by legitimate high speed rail. For that matter even averaging 100 mph on that 959 mile route could get the train within a 10 hour running time....

I know it's complex, but I wish our government would invest in something properly. Maybe they will... I'm hoping.
 
The Sunset EAst is the farthest thing possible from high speed rail. There are a lot of important corridors eligible for high speed trains. The Sunset East isn't one of them.
 
The Sunset EAst is the farthest thing possible from high speed rail. There are a lot of important corridors eligible for high speed trains. The Sunset East isn't one of them.
While I agree... if these states want there train back I'm sure they can convince someone to give them some HSR funding. Especially since it will be 'rebuilding' Katrina areas. In all honesty a a daily train operating NOL-Orlando with some 100+ mph sections could probably do pretty good, if connections were possible at NOL with the the Sunset, City, and Crescent.

I'm by no means suggesting that money WILL go there... just saying it is entirely possible, and maybe not a bad idea.
 
It would be a shame if this restoration isn't included as part of Florida's package. The restoration cost is just less than $33 million (chump change) and would be part of the foundation for high speed rail along the Gulf Coast and Florida. If you read the Gulf Coast Report, the farebox recovery of a restored Sunset would be 56% (51% is the national average for long-distance trains), which means the service is forecasted to be a fairly successful one.
 
Mobile - New Orleans are really too close together for real high speed service. They are only 145 miles apart. There could and should be a multiple trains per day medium speed service, stops being Bay Stl Louis, Gulfport, Pascagoula. There was a plan a few years back to relocated the CSX track several miles inland. What was to be put in the right of way was not really clear, but I think is was supposed to be a road. The line does need relocation - about 25 feet straight up. The double track it. Given the near dead level profile, there would be no real problem threading freights between the passenger trains.

There is a huge dogleg between Mobile and Pensacola. It is about 100 miles by rail, via Flomaton AL versus about 55 or so via I-10. (I am being too lazy to look it up for more precise numbers.) However, once east of Pensacola the rail distance and road distance to Jacksonville are about identical. There a few areas with relatively low speed curves, but most of the line is quite straight. It should be relatively easy and straightforward to match the road time given signals and ATC throughout and a 90 mph speed limit.

However, if we want true high speed, say 200 mph or more, then a seperate set of tracks, even if mostly in or adjacent to the CSX rigth of way will be needed.
 
Mobile - New Orleans are really too close together for real high speed service. They are only 145 miles apart. There could and should be a multiple trains per day medium speed service, stops being Bay Stl Louis, Gulfport, Pascagoula. There was a plan a few years back to relocated the CSX track several miles inland. What was to be put in the right of way was not really clear, but I think is was supposed to be a road. The line does need relocation - about 25 feet straight up. The double track it. Given the near dead level profile, there would be no real problem threading freights between the passenger trains.
There is a huge dogleg between Mobile and Pensacola. It is about 100 miles by rail, via Flomaton AL versus about 55 or so via I-10. (I am being too lazy to look it up for more precise numbers.) However, once east of Pensacola the rail distance and road distance to Jacksonville are about identical. There a few areas with relatively low speed curves, but most of the line is quite straight. It should be relatively easy and straightforward to match the road time given signals and ATC throughout and a 90 mph speed limit.

However, if we want true high speed, say 200 mph or more, then a seperate set of tracks, even if mostly in or adjacent to the CSX rigth of way will be needed.
1st of all someone has gotta get that dog taken care of... he doesn't need to be laying his leg on the tracks! (haha... it made me laugh)!

I have my doubts that we are ever going to see "true" high speed. Certainly most of this funding is going to end up being for 90-110 mph running... maybe up to 150 like in Orlando-Tampa. Of course we don't have too much longer to wait until we find out where the money is really going.

The more I think about it, the more I'm for NOL-Florida being a great link.
 
I am going out on a limb and predict that this segment will be part of the package that will be announced tomorrow....we shall see!
 
I am going out on a limb and predict that this segment will be part of the package that will be announced tomorrow....we shall see!

I've actually thought that the JAX-NOL would be a really good place to put HSR since most of the area is rural yet it connects some fairly major-size metropolitan areas with good stops along the way. I don't think right-of-way would be exhorbitantly expensive.
 
Well I am going to eat my words now; the New Orleans to Jacksonville segment wasn't funded. So what's next? If Congress was going to help reopen this line, it would have been part of the package.
 
There is a huge dogleg between Mobile and Pensacola. It is about 100 miles by rail, via Flomaton AL versus about 55 or so via I-10. (I am being too lazy to look it up for more precise numbers.) However, once east of Pensacola the rail distance and road distance to Jacksonville are about identical. There a few areas with relatively low speed curves, but most of the line is quite straight. It should be relatively easy and straightforward to match the road time given signals and ATC throughout and a 90 mph speed limit.
The 'dogleg' is because I10 crosses Mobile bay and the CSX goes north around it. You could shorten the route significantly by just building a rail connection paralel to I10. If we can afford a 6 lane freeway across the bay we can put a track there.
 
Well I am going to eat my words now; the New Orleans to Jacksonville segment wasn't funded. So what's next? If Congress was going to help reopen this line, it would have been part of the package.
We can't guess right all the time! : )

I'm still hoping this line (and many others) see's some money soon!
 
Well I am going to eat my words now; the New Orleans to Jacksonville segment wasn't funded. So what's next? If Congress was going to help reopen this line, it would have been part of the package.
Congress has a separate study to consider for funding the Sunset east.

And the monies handed out today were from the FRA, outside of Congress' hands as it were.
 
There is a huge dogleg between Mobile and Pensacola. It is about 100 miles by rail, via Flomaton AL versus about 55 or so via I-10. (I am being too lazy to look it up for more precise numbers.) However, once east of Pensacola the rail distance and road distance to Jacksonville are about identical. There a few areas with relatively low speed curves, but most of the line is quite straight. It should be relatively easy and straightforward to match the road time given signals and ATC throughout and a 90 mph speed limit.
The 'dogleg' is because I10 crosses Mobile bay and the CSX goes north around it. You could shorten the route significantly by just building a rail connection paralel to I10. If we can afford a 6 lane freeway across the bay we can put a track there.
There is more to it than that. If the orientation at the time had been to go east-west, then aiming to Pensacola from the east end of the current river crossing at about Hurricane AL would have gotten the distance down to something like 60 to 65 miles.

Both the original line into Mobile, the M&M, and the original line into Pensacola, which was a branch of the M&M line were built to connect ports with inland points. Therefore, the round about route between Mobile and Pensacola was a non-issue as the main traffic initially, and for many years out of both places was north-south with almost nothing between them. Both the M&M and the Pensacola to Flomaton lines were in place before the War Between the States, with the line from Mobile to New Orleans not being built until quite a few years after the war.

The thought was that east-west traffic would at best be a minor component of the total. In fact, up until the ACL plus SAL merger, and for quite a few years after, the freight traffic east out of Pensacola was very light.
 
Mobile - New Orleans are really too close together for real high speed service. They are only 145 miles apart.
I would think that distance is one of the few where a 220 MPH train could make trips practical that simply would not be any approximation of practical by any other mode of transportation. A 220 MPH train covering 145 miles could make the trip in about an hour each way, which is viable for a daily commute. There's no way an airplane or an automobile is likely to be remotely time competitive with that.
 
Mobile - New Orleans are really too close together for real high speed service. They are only 145 miles apart.
I would think that distance is one of the few where a 220 MPH train could make trips practical that simply would not be any approximation of practical by any other mode of transportation. A 220 MPH train covering 145 miles could make the trip in about an hour each way, which is viable for a daily commute. There's no way an airplane or an automobile is likely to be remotely time competitive with that.
Very true. This would also be a good oportunity for a "test" service as well....
 
Back
Top