Feds: Michigan will qualify for high-speed rail money
David Shepardson
Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood says the government is changing its qualifying rules for mass transit money, and promised that Michigan will receive a share of $8 billion in high-speed rail grants.
http://www.detnews.com/article/20100113/BIZ/1130413/Feds--Michigan-will-qualify-for-high-speed-rail-money
It's a pipe dream. Given the current state of rail in the US, it's a pipe dream right now. US rail is focused on moving freight, not people, and too little attention gets paid to that. Instead, we'd rather have these sexy high-speed rail headlines that mean little to our mobility and our economy.
Quote from: Brandon on January 13, 2010, 04:51:41 PM
It's a pipe dream. Given the current state of rail in the US, it's a pipe dream right now. US rail is focused on moving freight, not people, and too little attention gets paid to that. Instead, we'd rather have these sexy high-speed rail headlines that mean little to our mobility and our economy.
Exactly, especially if the governments in question want to use existing freight lines.
As a writer in a rail magazine said, the purposes of freight rail and passenger rail whether high speed or not are often at cross purposes.
Freight rail moves large volumes of tonnage at low to moderate speeds in an attempt to make a profit and, it has, mostly been profitable for nearly 200 years. (180 to be exact)
Passenger rail, especially government run, is a public service like the highways and airports/airlines runs light trains at moderate to high speed.
Logistically routing even the 100-150mph trains of the Northeast Corridor around freights moving 20-60mph is very difficult. Plus, the faster the train goes, the better the quality of the rail needs to be and the heavy freights like heavy trucks put a lot of where and tear on the track.
In places where there is true high speed rail, like Japan and France, the passenger trains operate on a dedicated right of way just for the passenger trains. And this, of course, raises the cost dramatically.
Quote from: mightyace on January 13, 2010, 05:10:33 PM
In places where there is true high speed rail, like Japan and France, the passenger trains operate on a dedicated right of way just for the passenger trains. And this, of course, raises the cost dramatically.
Umm... yeah. That's the idea of high speed rail. It has to operate on its own network in order to function properly.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2F8%2F8b%2FToyohashi_Station_001.JPG%2F800px-Toyohashi_Station_001.JPG&hash=dfdbc43acc8a8f29c633b43b20e2e4b42d5b874c)
You can't have HSR operating on standard tracks or else it won't be HSR at all.
Quote from: haljackey on January 13, 2010, 05:57:22 PM
You can't have HSR operating on standard tracks or else it won't be HSR at all.
Exactly, that doesn't keep Amtrak from claiming the Northeast Corridor as such. The fact that Amtrak can consistently go 100+ mph between Boston and Washington on a roadbed laid down over a century ago is amazing in its own away.
Part of the reason they try to do "high speed rail" (actually higher speed rail) on existing tracks is, besides being cheaper, there is less for the NIMBYs to complain about.
(Can anyone imagine how hard it would be to get new tracks through New Jersey?)
Quote from: mightyace on January 13, 2010, 06:04:15 PM
Quote from: haljackey on January 13, 2010, 05:57:22 PM
You can't have HSR operating on standard tracks or else it won't be HSR at all.
Exactly, that doesn't keep Amtrak from claiming the Northeast Corridor as such. The fact that Amtrak can consistently go 100+ mph between Boston and Washington on a roadbed laid down over a century ago is amazing in its own away.
Part of the reason they try to do "high speed rail" (actually higher speed rail) on existing tracks is, besides being cheaper, there is less for the NIMBYs to complain about.
(Can anyone imagine how hard it would be to get new tracks through New Jersey?)
Well most lines are built next to existing rail networks. In addition, less used/abandoned networks can be replaced with HSR tracks.
-Although there's a lot more to it than just replacing tracks. Curves need to be significantly straightened and grading must be very smooth.
Here in Ontatio, there's been talk of a HSR line in central/eastern Canada since the 1960s. Numerous planning and environmental studies have been done, but we haven't done anything in terms of actual construction yet. The first line, if ever built, would connect Windsor (Detroit) to Quebec City, with a spur line connecting with Ottawa. Design speed is 300km/h.
^^^
Yeah.
When it comes to HSR, I'll believe it when I see the construction equipment start to move.