I-35 in OK from Purcel to the TX border: designed for high speed rail?

[armadillo speedbump]

Noticed that I-35 in Oklahoma has a wide median, mostly 90' or more, from south of Purcell to Marietta near the Texas border.  But more interesting, all but 1 of the curves (at the sb foot of the climb over the Arbuckle 'mountains') are designed with a very gentle standard curve, about a 2 mile radius.  A radius that happens to be wide enough to support 150 mph for passenger trains.  The south ends lines up well with for a new track coming off the freeway southbound to join the BNSF line to cross into Texas.  Similarly for the north end for a new track to cut over to the BNSF south of Purcell to then follow into the OKC metro.

Is that just a coincidence?  I found some examples elsewhere in OK, but plenty of exceptions, and a quick search didn't find similarly large curves in Texas.  I can think of plenty of other reasons for wide medians and gentle curves, but a little surprised at the standardization on the particular 76 mile stretch.

[Plutonic Panda]

Although I would love to see it, after a really rough week, I sincerely appreciate the chuckle you gave me at insinuating Oklahoma with plan for practical long range, passenger rail lines, let alone HSR.

Now to its credit, it is upgrading, and it's extending the heartland flyer. But it can't even connect its two biggest cities with anything better than a 4+ hour, 45 MPH train line proposal which predictably went nowhere.

At some point I do believe there will be real high-speed rail between Oklahoma City and Dallas at least. When that will happen, I have no idea. But I highly doubt it's even on the radar for the state. Right now they just wanna upgrade the heartland flyer line.

[Scott5114]

Just a coincidence. It was built with a wide median because land was cheap in the 60s.

Oklahoma will probably be the last state in the union to get high speed rail. The sorts of people who ride trains aren't the sort of people that vote for Oklahoma politicians, or the sort of people who choose to live in Oklahoma, for that matter.

[Bobby5280]

None of the Interstate highways in this country have medians that can accommodate true high speed rail lines for long distances. The proposed Brightline HSR corridor from Las Vegas to the West edge of the LA metro is supposed to be built in the median of I-15. But that's only going to work on long straight away paths. They'll have to do something else where the highway curves.

While it may seem like I-35 in Oklahoma has pretty gradual turns the road is very damned wiggly when it comes to high speed rail standards. And that's just looking at the road from overhead imagery. There are all kinds of little grade changes, like the hilly area around Davis. A true high speed rail line going through that area would need to be built on a lot of new terrain path and probably even need some tunnels.

Then there's the larger question of how practical a DFW-OKC HSR line would be. What good would it do for passengers? The DFW region has a fair amount of mass transit service. But it won't take you everywhere in the metroplex. OKC has far less mass transit service. Both metros are very spread out and very automobile-oriented. Passengers would be stuck at the train station having to rent a car or call an Uber. It still seems easier to just hop in the car and drive down I-35.

[MaxConcrete]

I have also noticed the very high design standards of I-35 in Oklahoma, especially compared to the original I-35 in Texas.

I always assumed it was because that section of I-35 was built in the late 1960s or early 1970s, which was in the latter part of the construction of the original interstate system, most of which was done 1957 to 1975. For example, the 1965 map linked below showing interstate construction status shows no activity on this section of I-35 in Oklahoma, while the adjacent section in Texas is complete.

Standards for interstate highway construction improved substantially in the 1960s, and Oklahoma, by proceeding more slowly to build interstates, benefited from the higher standards. Higher standards included wider medians and high-quality geometrics.

Texas, in contrast, was ahead of most states and built many interstates to the low standards that were in place before the interstate system was designated, or were built using the original (lower quality) standards of the late 1950s. Of course many sections in Texas were also built in the late 1960s and later, and the higher standards on these sections is clearly visible. Texas has been plagued by interstate highways built to original low standards, and is still working to remedy their shortcomings, for example I-35 between Denton and the Oklahoma state line.

As for high speed rail, I seriously doubt there was any consideration of its inclusion in the design for I-35 in Oklahoma.

http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/old-highway-maps/1965_esso_us_texas_med.jpg

[I-35]

As others have stated, it's likely just a coincidence that Oklahoma has wide medians and that HSR requires it.  The curve radii to maintain speed on HSR lines is measured in miles, however, so it's likely that any bends in the interstate would not be able to accommodate trains traveling over 160 MPH, although articulating trainsets do reduce this a fair amount.  The future of HSR in this area relies entirely on the Dallas to Houston line getting built and then expanded from there, so until shovels start flying down south, I don't think Oklahoma will get 'on board' so to speak until they can realize the economic benefits of it.

[Plutonic Panda]

The future of HSR in this area relies entirely on the Dallas to Houston line getting built and then expanded from there, so until shovels start flying down south, I don't think Oklahoma will get 'on board' so to speak until they can realize the economic benefits of it.

I'd go a step further and say that really wouldn't be worthwhile for the state to invest in HSR until the entire Texas triangle line is completed.

[Road Hog]

The future of HSR in this area relies entirely on the Dallas to Houston line getting built and then expanded from there, so until shovels start flying down south, I don't think Oklahoma will get 'on board' so to speak until they can realize the economic benefits of it.

I'd go a step further and say that really wouldn't be worthwhile for the state to invest in HSR until the entire Texas triangle line is completed.

I do think HSR from Dallas to Houston is quite feasible. You're talking downtown to downtown in 90 minutes as opposed to driving out to the airport, finding parking, clearing security, flying, waiting for your baggage, and finding a downtown shuttle — all of which could take 3 hours total.

OKC is closer to Dallas than Houston, but I don't know if the ridership is there yet.

[kphoger]

OKC is closer to Dallas than Houston, but I don't know if the ridership is there yet.

I don't think OKC–Dallas passenger rail traffic will ever be there to justify the cost of building the infrastructure.

[Road Hog]

The downtown-to-downtown calculus (or destination to destination) comes into play for me for driving as well. For example, I've both driven and flown from DFW to New Orleans. Driving takes about seven hours with maybe one pit stop halfway (Nachitoches usually). Flying can be between 5-6 hours from the time I leave the house to the point I'm kicked up working a sudoku and an Irish Car Bomb at Monahan's just off Bourbon.

[Plutonic Panda]

OKC is closer to Dallas than Houston, but I don't know if the ridership is there yet.

I don't think OKC–Dallas passenger rail traffic will ever be there to justify the cost of building the infrastructure.

It all depends on how Oklahoma grows. There's actually some pretty big development starting to happen in Oklahoma and some pretty impressive growth in central Oklahoma. it's not at Austin or Dallas growth levels yet, but the growth level have been increasing and there are bigger and more exciting developments that get announced every year. if OKC ever hit anything close to Austin level growth, I can see a pretty solid case for standard high-speed rail within the next 15 to 20 years.

But every time I've been on the heartland flyer line it's actually had pretty decent ridership. It's not packed by any means. But still more than I would've thought.

[Road Hog]

Yes, as far as I can tell the OKC and Tulsa metros are growing, as well as Bryan County (Durant), which if you squint hard enough is commutable to the north Dallas suburbs.

[Bobby5280]

I do think HSR from Dallas to Houston is quite feasible. You're talking downtown to downtown in 90 minutes as opposed to driving out to the airport, finding parking, clearing security, flying, waiting for your baggage, and finding a downtown shuttle — all of which could take 3 hours total.

That's assuming they would be able to build such a line downtown to downtown.

One reason why the HSR project in California turned into such a silly boondoogle is the fact the HSR line will only reach the outskirts of the LA and Bay Area metros when fully completed. Passengers will be forced to use other modes of travel to reach the city cores. The outcome probably won't be any different in Texas. Train passengers will be traveling from suburb to suburb, or even exhurb to exhurb.

It's already very difficult to build ordinary slower-speed commuter rail lines in the US. Look at the price tag for the 2nd Avenue Subway project in Manhattan. Building a HSR tunnel under a city like Dallas might cost more on its own than building out the rest of Texas' I-69 projects and then some.

[In_Correct]

Oklahoma most certainly is not going to build any High Speed Rail any where if they can not even finish U.S. 377 / S.H. 99 and even takes for ever to expand their toll roads.

As for rail projects it would be much better for the Knox Henderson Station to be opened, Texas Central Railway to be constructed, and extensions of other existing yet very incomplete projects.

To add to the main reasons why the median is large, it is not unlike the freeway segment north of McAlester. It was very easy to build corridors with minimal Environmental and Financial and Political and Social obstacles.

If there was ever going to be a time to build rail lines in the large median, it would be decades ago.

[Henry]

Several urban Interstates have local rail lines in the medians because they are straighter for the most part, and where there are curves, they are far more gradual and smoother than what the rural sections would demand. So while in theory HSR could run along I-35 between OKC and DFW, it's just unfeasible due to the many other factors that have been alluded to, such as the hilly terrain (which shocked even me, because I always thought OK was flat!). In any case, there should be a workaround on the whole thing, and if there's not going to be any HSR in the median, at least reserve some of it for future widening projects. The ROW is already there, so all that needs to be done is to build towards the middle, instead of away from it.

[In_Correct]

Perhaps it is best, considering that the new Bridges to span Red River in future includes plans to " convert an old one to a frontage road bridge " is to simply add Frontage Roads from Texas to The Red River to Oklahoma. And it would also be very useful for Ardmore, which is not that much different from Decatur. Ardmore in this case has insufficient tight clover ramps that makes it better to drive in the inside lanes in an attempt to avoid the traffic entering and exiting.

If I remember correctly, the only " Flat " areas in Oklahoma is in The Panhandle, and that was many years ago thus I am probably remembering it wrong. Much of Oklahoma has very small mountains, some of which have Beautiful Wind Turbines.

[Bobby5280]

Several urban Interstates have local rail lines in the medians because they are straighter for the most part, and where there are curves, they are far more gradual and smoother than what the rural sections would demand.

Light rail/subway lines can be built in the median of an urban Interstate (or above/below it) because the trains never reach high speeds and have frequent stops. Regional commuter rail lines can run at higher speeds, but they don't often run at speeds faster than typical freeway traffic. Somewhat frequent stops hold down those top speeds.

Not only does a true high speed rail line require far more gradual curve and grade geometry than any super highway, the trains need considerably more distance between stops in order to achieve true high speeds and sustain them for any significant amount of time/distance. Even Amtrak's Acela line from DC to Boston can't be put in the median of a typical Interstate; its top speeds peak at around 150mph in limited places.

If I remember correctly, the only " Flat " areas in Oklahoma is in The Panhandle, and that was many years ago thus I am probably remembering it wrong. Much of Oklahoma has very small mountains, some of which have Beautiful Wind Turbines.

It's mostly flat out in Oklahoma's Panhandle. The far Western edge has the highest point in the state, Black Mesa. That actually spans the OK/NM border. Then there is the caprock drop-off North of Boise City. IMHO, US-287 needs to be four-lane divided through there for safety sake regardless if I-27 is ever extended through there.

[Plutonic Panda]

^^^^

It's amazing the change of scenery if you start at Black Mesa, and then head to the south east corner of the state. Oklahoma actually has alligators.

[motorola870]

Perhaps it is best, considering that the new Bridges to span Red River in future includes plans to " convert an old one to a frontage road bridge " is to simply add Frontage Roads from Texas to The Red River to Oklahoma. And it would also be very useful for Ardmore, which is not that much different from Decatur. Ardmore in this case has insufficient tight clover ramps that makes it better to drive in the inside lanes in an attempt to avoid the traffic entering and exiting.

If I remember correctly, the only " Flat " areas in Oklahoma is in The Panhandle, and that was many years ago thus I am probably remembering it wrong. Much of Oklahoma has very small mountains, some of which have Beautiful Wind Turbines.

If I'm not mistaken they are going to restore the old US77 connection across the river as the southbound bridge was originally US77 before they built out I35 at the river. The service road will link up to serve thackerville. Not really any point on having dual service roads linking to exit 1 for the Casino.

[Bobby5280]

A service road bridge across the Red River next to new I-35 bridges could be convenient for people using the Chickasaw Travel Stop and Border Casino. The main entrance for WinStar is by Exit 3. The WinStar property is already enormous, but if they keep expanding it (and more stuff continues to get built nearby) they'll need to build continuous frontage roads from the Red River to Exit 3 (Rogers Rd) as well as add more lanes to surrounding roads. A SPUI would be good at Exit 3, but the WinStar water tower that was strangely built within the exit property would be a major obstacle.

[TXtoNJ]

You're gassing yourself up if you think the reactionaries that run the state will ever let that happen. Too many car dealers would be sad.

[kphoger]

I always thought OK was flat!

That's because you're from Illinois.  Most states seem rather flat, compared to Illinois.

[rte66man]

Perhaps it is best, considering that the new Bridges to span Red River in future includes plans to " convert an old one to a frontage road bridge " is to simply add Frontage Roads from Texas to The Red River to Oklahoma. And it would also be very useful for Ardmore, which is not that much different from Decatur. Ardmore in this case has insufficient tight clover ramps that makes it better to drive in the inside lanes in an attempt to avoid the traffic entering and exiting.

If I remember correctly, the only " Flat " areas in Oklahoma is in The Panhandle, and that was many years ago thus I am probably remembering it wrong. Much of Oklahoma has very small mountains, some of which have Beautiful Wind Turbines.

If I'm not mistaken they are going to restore the old US77 connection across the river as the southbound bridge was originally US77 before they built out I35 at the river. The service road will link up to serve Thackerville. Not really any point on having dual service roads linking to exit 1 for the Casino.

Sort of. The original I35 bridges were built in the early 60's. You are right that they used the US77 bridge for the southbound lanes but that bridge was replaced back in the 80s, then again not too long ago.

They need a 3rd bridge to act as a relief route when there is an accident at or near the existing bridges.

[I-35]

A service road bridge across the Red River next to new I-35 bridges could be convenient for people using the Chickasaw Travel Stop and Border Casino. The main entrance for WinStar is by Exit 3. The WinStar property is already enormous, but if they keep expanding it (and more stuff continues to get built nearby) they'll need to build continuous frontage roads from the Red River to Exit 3 (Rogers Rd) as well as add more lanes to surrounding roads. A SPUI would be good at Exit 3, but the WinStar water tower that was strangely built within the exit property would be a major obstacle.

Amtrak could add a station to the current Heartland Flyer line a mile from Winstar and have the casino run shuttles from the NB and SB trains - I'm not sure why this is never discussed.  I get that the casino makes money on bus shuttles, but the line is right there.

[Scott5114]

I believe that water tower also serves the welcome center just north of Exit 3. The Chickasaws paid for the welcome center, so I guess they figured if they put the water tower there they could run lines to both WinStar and the welcome center more cheaply.

I feel like the old way of accessing WinStar, getting off at Exit 1 and seeing the casino slowly come into view as you go up the frontage road, was a lot cooler than the approach from the north you get at Exit 3.