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?
My guess would be no.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.Would the New Orleans to Florida route be eligible for high-speed rail funding, which is about to be distributed in several days?
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 contextMy 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.
well I did say OVER 79... like 90? MAYBE 100 if we got really lucky? ha. I know... but such is life.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 contextMy 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.
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.I'm surprized there is no train service to Tallahassee.
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.well I did say OVER 79... like 90? MAYBE 100 if we got really lucky? ha. I know... but such is life.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
Oh I know... I was poking fun at myself as well, pretending that 90 is really alot faster than 79. Ha!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.well I did say OVER 79... like 90? MAYBE 100 if we got really lucky? ha. I know... but such is life.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
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.
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.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.
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)!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.
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!
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 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.
We can't guess right all the time! : )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.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 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.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 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.
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.
Very true. This would also be a good oportunity for a "test" service as well....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.
Enter your email address to join: