In Washington's Union Station on Tuesday 12/16/2008 (according to THE WASHINGTON POST), Rep. John Mica (R-Fla.) announced that USDOT is requesting proposals for "development of high-speed rail service" between DC and NYC. The Federal Railroad Administration "is asking private companies and state entities to help the federal government design, construct, finance, operate and maintain high-speed rail service. Mica estimated the cost at $18 billion to $40 billion . . . and said the trains could be functioning between 2012 and 2020 . . . " "Mica said the Unites States has become a "third-world country" in rail infrastructure, struggling to meet demand."
It seems to me that instead of going to all this trouble to get people who have sabotaged high speed rail in the USA to design and develop a system, why not contact SNCF in France, DB in Germany and the Eurostar people in England, send them a big check and tell them to bring us some trains. Under those circumstances we could have high-speed rail probably next year while we are all still alive to enjoy and use it!
So what is Acela, chopped liver??????
Antozilla
So what is Acela, chopped liver?
It's not the train, it's the railroad the trains runs on.
Under two hour triple digit average speeds between Washington and New York could be easily obtained at a fraction of the cost.
Bypass all the kinks in the railroad.
Upgrade All catenary to modern standards.
Restrict 2 of the tracks to high speed trains only.
Make all connection between non high speed tracks that have to cross the high speed tracks grade seperated. Reconfigure the railroad so no train would have to pass through the diverging route of a turnout along the journey between the terminals on the NEC.
They should have a D.C to Boston or D.C to Chicago high speed rail.
I agree. Honestly, I'm more interested in high speed service to Chicago rather than another expensive line (more expensive than Acela!) to New York when there are already so many options.
Just a perspective on cost: China is more than 90% complete in building its 750 mile high speed line between Beijing and Shanghai. Cost so far: $732 billion. Much remains to be done including bridges, power system/catenary, new dedicated station in Shanghai and other "details".
Quote from: Antozilla on December 18, 2008, 07:26:08 AM
So what is Acela, chopped liver??????
Actually THE WASHINGTON POST article went on to describe the ACELA in this way: "Amtrak's Acela train makes the trip (DC - NYC) in about 2 hours and 42 minutes, traveling on most stretches at about 84 miles per hour. Some high speed trains in Europe and Asia go as fast as 250 mph." Historically, the ACELA covers the distance between DC & NYC only about 45 minutes faster than the Pennsylvania Railroad's crack CONGRESSIONAL LIMITED pulled by GG1 locomotives that was inaugurated in 1952. In contrast with other countries that have real high speed rail, the ACELA operates at least 100-150 miles per hour slower. If the ACELA averaged 100+ miles per hour it would cover the distance between DC & NYC in about 2 hours flat.
Is it worth spending $18 to $40 billion dollars just so we can reduce the time of a DC-NY trip by an hour or so, if that? The Acela is already very popular and there are train, bus and airline options in this corridor to meet every need and budget. Better to spend those dollars developing rail service in other underserved corridors.
Jim D.
I highly agree. Likely this new High Speed Line is going to be more expensive than Acela is, anyway, and with so many options, what's the point? Yes, the NEC is a money maker for Amtrak, but why not work in other corridors to make them popular as well?
I mentioned Chicago in an earlier post. Isn't this a popular airline route (at least between Philadelphia and Chicago). With the Cardinal (?) and the Capitol Limited, which are so unreliable I can't imagine that wouldn't hurt ridership, they take forever to get to the Windy City. I know I don't have the vacation time to spend all day on a train/bus when I have things to do over there.
So why not reduce the travel time on that route significantly? I'm sure you would be able to get more riders then. Even if it went down to 5 hours, it would be better than the 13 hour boondoogle it currently is (at least from Philadelphia, I dunno about NY and DC service off the top of my head).
Yes, I think we all agree that the country needs to spend billions to augment the rail system everywhere. There has really been no progress in decreasing travel times for train travel in 50 years. I looked at a 1958 schedule for the Pennsylvania's BROADWAY LIMITED and observed that it was scheduled to leave North Philadelphia at 7:21pm daily and arrived at Chicago at 9:00am the next morning (just under 14 hours). In 1938 the B&O CAPITOL LIMITED left Washington at 5:45pm and arrived in Chicago at 8:30am the next morning (just under 15 hours). AMTRAK cannot equal those times today! As soon as we stop spending $10 billion a month in Iraq we can make some progress.