Jump to content

New England High Speed/Inter-City Rail


The Voice of Reason

Recommended Posts

California just passed a $9.9 Billion bond issue to build a bullet train connecting all of Californias major cities.

http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/map.htm

San francisco to LA 432 miles

2 hours 38 minutes

$55.

by plane it costs $120 and by car it costs $86

The train will connect to as far north as Sacramento, and as far south as San Diego.

The only inconvenient trip is from San Francisco to Sacramento, and there are plans for a cut through later on if deemed successful.

NEW ENGLAND

New England needs regional transit solutions. We have entire states in New England that are smaller than some California Counties. We have clogged highways, and busy airports. In todays America that is now begining to support mass transit and rail transit again we need to start thinking regionally.

A train from Boston to NYC has long been a dream.

A train from Albany to NYC has also long been a dream.

a train from NY to Washington DC another long time dream.

If California can get something like this together, designed planned and paid for on its own, I see no reason why Massachusets, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey,Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, and Washington DC cant get their acts together and support something simular.

I could easily add New Hampshire and Maine.

A simple concept that ignores current rail lines would be best.

the goal is to make a syatem that has no restrictions on speed so as to create maximum efficiencies. There would be less stops than even the acela trains.

Rough concept, here goes. Maybe a map some day later if I get bored.

Portland ME

Portsmouth NH

Boston MA

Worcester MA It would be easiest to run through Worcester then down 84 to Hartford, then down 91 to New Haven

Providence RI not sure how it would link in.

Hartford CT

New Haven CT ?? not sure wich one of these cities would get a stop. but stamford likely gets the most traffic now.

Bridgeport CT ?? not sure wich one of these cities would get a stop. but stamford likely gets the most traffic now.

Stamford CT not sure wich one of these cities would get a stop. but stamford likely gets the most traffic now.

NYC

Albany NY on the same bond issue, but a seperate line North. maybe a line from Worcester to springfield and Albany.

Trenton NJ Capitol of NJ otherwise I would skip it

Phillidelphia PA

Wilmington DE ? have to go through DE

Baltimore MD

Washington DC

Maybe even Richmond VA

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 45
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I can probably argue that New Haven gets about the same amount of traffic as Stamford. I used to go into NYC from New Haven and the seats would be about half full. In fact, on occasion, I would get on at Fairfield and there would be standing room only at that point. CT is a tough one and while you can skip eastern CT, I don't think you can skip both New Haven and Bridgeport, but you'd have to stop at New Haven and Stamford (both are close enough to Bridgeport). You get a lot of traffic to New Haven because it has a lot of large law firms, one of the most prestigious colleges/med schools/law schools in the country, and a lot of biotech.

I wouldn't skip over Providence either because that cuts out quite a large population if you go around RI completely. It'd likely need a couple branches.

Branch 1

Portland

Portsmouth

Boston

Providence

New Haven

Branch 2

Manchester

Boston

Worcester

Hartford

New Haven

From New Haven

Stamford

NYC

Trenton (maybe)

Philly

Wilmington (maybe)

Baltimore

DC

In addition to that, there would be a branch from Albany to NYC and maybe a direct link from Albany to Boston and/or Albany to Burlington.

This plan would make Boston, New Haven, and NYC the hubs, all of which have train stations large enough to be rail hubs and which have a bunch of other rail options for more local connections.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From a business perspective the most important cities to link are Boston-Hartford-Stamford-NYC. These are all heavily traveled corporate markets. If the four major corporate powerhouses of the region could be connected by high speed rail it would really tie in those business communities and regional economies. I would consider the PVD-NL-NH branch to be more of tourist/day tripper branch whereas an inland branch from Boston-Hartford-Stamford-NYC would see daily business travelers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we kind of need to realize this... high speed bullet trains are supposed to stop in all the major cities and go quickly between the two. It defeats the purpose of having a high speed train if you have it stop every 30 miles. There would be other (regular Amtrak, Metro North, etc...) trains which would make all the local stops in between the major stops.

I wouldn't put a bullet stop in New London or Stamford, simply because both are already accessible via regular Amtrak and state commuter rail systems already. If you was heading north on the bullet, you would transfer in New York to get to Stamford. If you was heading south, transfer at New Haven.

Boston should probably be the northern terminal of a bullet, just have commuter rail expansion and more use of the Downeaster between Boston and Manchester/Portland.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bullet trains are not really for the casual traveler. The people who ride acela are politicans, and business people not keen on flying short hops.

Also, I am not saying we need to create a whole new rail system, but a high speed seperate system to replace air travel. Places not on the list would be served by re-allocated amtrak trains, and regional rail all ready in place or fortified.

Stamford, Bridgeport, and New Haven, are all very well served to NYC, so stopping there is not an issue. Stopping in all of those locations only is necessary. Because a short ride on metro north gets you to New Haven or NY.

stops slow down these trains and make them less effecient and make the system make less sense.

Also everyone needs to concider Albany. There is a big push in NY state to have a train to Albany from NYC, so including Albany would be an important thing for New York State. Also, remember Albany is tha capitol of the largest, most populous, and most powerfull state on the East Coast. Those guys in Albany need better access to NYC and Washington DC.

The biggest problem has always been how to build track seperated from its surroundings. California has the North East beat hands down on the ease of seperated rights of way.

The easiest way to create a seperated right of way would be to use existing Highway ROW space. Medians make a lot of sense.

Another part of the California plan ingludes completely new stations for many of the stops. this makes a great deal of sense concidering the needs and performance expectations of this system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I don't believe there is a train from Boston to Manchester, which is really ridiculous. Since Portland and Portsmouth are serviced by train from Boston, how about this?

Branch 1

Manchester

Boston

Hartford

New Haven

Branch 2

Boston

Providence

New Haven

From New Haven

NYC

Philly

Baltimore

DC

I don't think you can skip New Haven because of the size of the train terminal and the amount of connections. You can't get an easy train connection from Providence or Hartford to New Haven except for Amtrak. New Haven offers Amtrak to just about anywhere, Metro-North to serve the CT and NY cities between New Haven and NYC, and Shoreline East to serve the CT towns between New Haven and New London. It's too important a rail hub to not stop there, but I can agree with skipping Stamford and even Worcester (only ~40 miles from Boston, served by MBTA Commuter Rail). That would make the closest cities on this high speed train New Haven and Hartford (~40 miles apart) and Baltimore and DC (also ~40 miles apart) with everything else being 55-100 miles apart. If the train can do 80-100 mph between those stops, it'd be worthwhile. You could even then extend it from DC to Charlotte to Atlanta and maybe even then Orlando and Miami. We'd then have a real east coast bullet train.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Assuming the info from the train in CA

Sacramento to Stockton is 44 miles and takes 20 minutes.

Modesto to Merced is 38 miles and 16 minutes.

So on these short trips it looks like they expect to average 120MPH

the Cal site calls the train 220MPH bullet trains, so that makes sense

more info on the bond issue

A $9.95 billion dollar bond measure is on the November 2008 ballot with $9 billion for implementing the high-speed train system and $950 million for improvements to other rail services that connect to the high-speed train service. This bond measure requires a simple majority vote for approval.

Doing something like this would allow for a connection of Manchester, NH to Boston, or better shore line east, or some version of the NH-Hartford-springfield line. or whatever.

I made this

NE2.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure the huge desire to expand it to Maine, would there be a big enough demand for it up there?

And I'm surprised nobody's willing to extend the line southward from DC? You could have it going to at least Richmond, and then down the I-85 corridor... connect the two big megalops...

EDIT: Hmmm, PVD to HFD wouldn't be a bad idea. Surprised nobody thought of that sooner. Only bad thing is there's no set ROW between the two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Outside the box LD, outside the box! :)

The way I see it a project of this importance could swing a few new ROW.

Regarding South of DC, we enter a lower density living situation, and a more car friendly area as well.

Call the South a later expansion, whatever you want, but even right now after decades of out migration and an industrial collapse, the North East is the back bone of America. 100 Million people and a disporportionate amount of our econemy, wealth and power are concentrated between DC and Boston.

In all honesty any extention could be possible depending on their interest and willingness to pony up some cash to be added in. If Maine and NH do not want to be part of it I doubt anyone would complain.

To me and I think most people, the key pieces are Boston NY Philly and Washington DC. places like Baltimore, Wilmington, Trenton, Rhode Island and Connecticut just happen to be on that corridore.

Here is some interesting stuff from the California site.

http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/news/NewsRelease117.pdf

the business plan calculates high-speed trains will alleviate the need to spend nearly $100 Billion to build about 3000 miles of new freeway plus five airport runways and 90 departure gates over the next 2 decades.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Would be a long awaited good connection between the two as well. Route 6 doesn't really cut it, and a bullet line would work out better for both states than an I-384 extension.

Of course, if you run a line through eastern Connecticut, it's tempting for me to want to see a stop put in Danielson... especially if they ever built commuter rail along I-395.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think what makes the CA plan interesting is that they studied Acela, and the gradual improvement of existing trains etc, and found that no matter what was done the train would not compete with Airplanes. They also found that the cost would be rediculous. So in order to have the positive environmental impact and have the potential user base that they were seeking they are starting from scratch, and allowing the local rail systems to handle the rest.

the beauty of this is that ridership would increase on the regional rail services in order to feed the bullet train.

Riders in Bridgeport would take metronorth to New Haven then take the bullet train to Philly.

Although you could argue that Amtrak would not want to loose their only profitable routes, the reality is that the government would not get in the way of something like this. they would adjust their service to better serve a successful project, and expand their service outside of trafitional areas.

Amtrak is not a privately owned company. they get about 1 billion a year in federal funding.

so imagine Amtrak boosting service from Springfield to the closest bullet train. or from Syracuse to Albany especially shoreline east and such

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dividing the tax burden between all the states involved is one way to make the difference.

By issuing 9.9Billion in Bonds California tax payers will be saving themselves movey over the long term wether they use the train or not. studies being studies... but The numbers they have are profound.

Say the price tag out east is much higher. call it 15 Billion, then put aside another 5 billion for re alligning supportive rail networks. NYC could add a whole new line, so could Philly and Boston.

using a really high number like 20 billion in bonds, any project can get done.

With a AAA rating amongst all these states, the payments for each state would be pretty minimal.

The californians think their system will be profitable, so ultimately taxpayers might even get a small tax break if applied to the East Coast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Kerry pushes high-speed rail

Posted by Foon Rhee, deputy national political editor November 19, 2008 12:20 PM

Senators John F. Kerry and Arlen Specter introduced a bill today to fund high-speed rail lines along the East Coast and in several other key areas of the country.

Kerry, a Massachusetts Democrat, and Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican, said the legislation would help repair the nation's crumbling infrastructure, and at the same time create jobs when the country appears headed for a deep economic recession.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

......

Regarding South of DC, we enter a lower density living situation, and a more car friendly area as well.

Call the South a later expansion, whatever you want, but even right now after decades of out migration and an industrial collapse, the North East is the back bone of America. 100 Million people and a disporportionate amount of our econemy, wealth and power are concentrated between DC and Boston......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is great news.

every little step helps.

I would set up a system that takes efficiency first, and kind of throws everything else out. I don't want my government to fund a huge project that is immediately limited by its design. I was a system that can grow with time, and can embrace new technology as it develops. If we build something in the North East that is not much more efficient than Acela, it will be a failure in my book. we need true high speed rail.

when the first bullet trains came out they only went something like 150MPH, now they are over 300 MPH.

I want tracks that will be able to handle advancements and upgrades.

"my system" would start in Portland ME at the rail yard on the waterfront near the base of the Casco bay bridge. Closest it could get to the old port the better.

The train would head South and West along the existing train rights of way untill they meet 295 across the R1 Bridge near the tank farm.

at that point I would put the trains into the median of 295, then into the median of the Maine Turnpike.

sure the median is not always as wide as you might need it for the 2 tracks you would need, but there is plenty of room here to widen the highway on the outside lanes. you may not need tose lanes with the train taking cars off the road either.

this median would allow the train to reach top speed in their sunken trench away from all other forms of transportation.

I would follow this path all the way to Andover ST in Boston. After this it might get a bit more tricky to find a path, but no project of this size could happen without doing some serious infrastructure work. Following Rt 1 for a while would work because it has a median here, but at some point you have to do something more drastic. Even following the existing rail path here and linking up with the T at the Wakefield station would work

It would be worth the cost to bring the trains right under the city. Re-working some of the T lines might be a solution because god knows the T needs to be brought into the 20th century.

The Boston Station would definately be around the current city hall plaza. they will be re-doing that area any year now as is, and this would be the excuse they need. Haymarket might be even better due to all the parking but anywhere theree would work.

Linking up with 93 South the train would get back to full speed again. Basicly I would use the existing HOV lanes as the space the trains would use. again trenched where possible. then I would kind of zig a little back to 95 and head to providence again in the median. this part of the line would be a breeze to build, and much of it could be at ground level to keep cost down. Around washington street in Pawtucket I would hop on the train ROW, through the city then head West towards Hartford along RT6. then through farmland all the way to 384

In East Hartford where 384/84 meet RT2 the track would lead North to link up with the train tracks and bridge over the CT river.

this brings you right downtown to the station and a link with the Hartford New Haven Springfield Rail.

and now I am off to Thanksgiving with the family :P

the rail would then head

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are a bunch of improvements that need to be done to the NEC. But I view the NEC's needs as incremental: we don't need to build a whole new corridor starting from scratch. There are a few critical spots that, if improved, could significantly increase the average speed of the Acelas on the NEC. They include:

The B&P Tunnel in Baltimore (Union tunnel needs work too, but B&P is the worst)

The Movable bridges in CT

The S-curve in Elizabeth, NJ

Portal bridge in NJ

More constant-tension catenary throughout

There are a number of other strategic places where minor reolcations (though sometimes requiring major property acquisitions or tunneling) could be done too.'

While they're at it they could buy more Acela coaches to lengthen the trainsets, and buy a few more trainsets as well.

I too would like to see the NEC extended to Portland, but the Boston Rail Link will be a $5 billion project on its own. It should probably get built eventually, but there are better places to start where we'll get more bang for the buck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I too would like to see the NEC extended to Portland, but the Boston Rail Link will be a $5 billion project on its own. It should probably get built eventually, but there are better places to start where we'll get more bang for the buck.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.