Club PA 2.0 has arrived! If you'd like to access some extra PA content and help support the forums, check it out at patreon.com/ClubPA
The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Supertrains!

werehippywerehippy Registered User regular
edited April 2009 in Debate and/or Discourse
obama_train_sticker_p217410374707551835qjcl_400_1.jpg

Obama just gave a speech on plans to expand high speed rail in the US (video in the link).

The plan includes two stages of funding, one for shovel ready projects and one to build a series of high speed hubs including:
    California Corridor (Bay Area, Sacramento, Los Angeles, San Diego) Pacific Northwest Corridor (Eugene, Portland, Tacoma, Seattle, Vancouver BC) South Central Corridor (Tulsa, Oklahoma City, Dallas/Fort Worth, Austin, San Antonio, Little Rock) Gulf Coast Corridor (Houston, New Orleans, , Mobile, Birmingham, Atlanta) Chicago Hub Network (Chicago, Milwaukee, Twin Cities, St. Louis, Kansas City, Detroit, Toledo, Cleveland, Columbus, Cincinnati, Indianapolis, Louisville,) Florida Corridor (Orlando, Tampa, Miami) Southeast Corridor (Washington, Richmond, Raleigh, Charlotte, Atlanta, Macon, Columbia, Savannah, Jacksonville) Keystone Corridor (Philadelphia, Harrisburg, Pittsburgh) Empire Corridor (New York City, Albany, Buffalo) Northern New England Corridor (Boston, Montreal, Portland, Springfield, New Haven, Albany) An expansion of the existing Northeast corridor

The proposed layout actually doesn't look that different from the on we were kickign around here on the board awhile back (there's a larger image that includes some non-high speed rail in the plan link)
rail_map_blog.jpg

I have to say, it's well past time we started investing in smart mass transit infrastructure, though on a person level I'm depressed as hell I'm almost dead center in the biggest in the entire Northeast.

werehippy on
«1345

Posts

  • bowenbowen How you doin'? Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    This will be fucking awesome. I'd love to have this expanded heavily for long distance or vacation travel. And even expanded locally for commuter traffic to replace buses. Fuck buses.

    bowen on
    Ladies.
  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    I hope they use designs that are actually proven to work

    a nationwide Acela would be a spectacular waste of money

    nexuscrawler on
  • YamiNoSenshiYamiNoSenshi A point called Z In the complex planeRegistered User regular
    edited April 2009
    What time frame are we looking at for this? I love this idea, but with something this huge and ambitious and the way things normally work in this country (*cough cough Big Dig*) it seems I'll use it once when I do my mandatory Florida retirement. But still, kudos for doing something awesome for the country.

    YamiNoSenshi on
    Damn it, it's fucking noon. I demand to know if Yami shit on a desk yet.

    Watch me sometimes stream games.
  • JebusUDJebusUD Adventure! Caaba Beankomy XobthroRegistered User regular
    edited April 2009
    Now if they only build the damn train from MPLS to St. Cloud like they were gonna before they decided to half ass it and only go up to Big Lake. Who lives in Big Lake! Why build a train from the cities to that tiny town?

    This is what bipartisan compromise gets you. Half of a railway that stops at a pointless destination.

    JebusUD on
    And I won, so you lose,
    Guess it always comes down to.
  • Mullitt The WiseMullitt The Wise Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    This is awesome for California. Will make going to the Bay Area much easier.

    Mullitt The Wise on
    balloonssig.jpg
  • SynthesisSynthesis Honda Today! Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    God willing, this is the beginning of the end for the ridiculous universal paradox that trains in the United States are slower than freaking buses. Stuck in traffic.

    Seriously, how the fuck did we come to this point?

    Synthesis on
    Orca wrote: »
    Synthesis wrote:
    Isn't "Your sarcasm makes me wet," the highest compliment an Abh can pay a human?

    Only if said Abh is a member of the nobility.
  • SeptusSeptus Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    I'm not at all sure how smart this is, without having good local transit systems in each of the cities on the routes. I don't think the rail plan works at all, for the commuter aspect, without that.

    And the Fed and State governments will have to work hard on the private railroad cooperation. I don't think the rail industry gives two shits about any change to their system, so a cooperation that provides supposed benefits to both parties, but requires the rail industry to put up their own money, seems hard to enact.

    Also: Holy God I loved BART in San Francisco, as a local means of transport, and I fucking hated the Metro system. I'd love the former to be used as a model for intracity mobility.

    Septus on
    PSN: Kurahoshi1
  • bowenbowen How you doin'? Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    They can only go so fast on the track or something stupid like that, to the point where a bus going 65 on a highway is going faster than a residential/consumer line train.

    bowen on
    Ladies.
  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    These don't seem like they'd be much use for commuting but rather as a replacement for short distance flights

    nexuscrawler on
  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    bowen wrote: »
    They can only go so fast on the track or something stupid like that, to the point where a bus going 65 on a highway is going faster than a residential/consumer line train.

    High speed rails require special tracks. Which is why the Acela was such a damn failure. It only has one section of high speed rails and goes a normal speed the rest of the time.

    nexuscrawler on
  • JebusUDJebusUD Adventure! Caaba Beankomy XobthroRegistered User regular
    edited April 2009
    Why doesn't the Chicago Hub connect to the eastern rail lines? or are they connected by other lower speed rail systems?

    JebusUD on
    And I won, so you lose,
    Guess it always comes down to.
  • Moe FwackyMoe Fwacky Moderator mod
    edited April 2009
    This has been a long time coming. But you would think there would be at least one cross-country high-speed rail line.

    Moe Fwacky on
    E6LkoFK.png

  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    Septus wrote: »
    I'm not at all sure how smart this is, without having good local transit systems in each of the cities on the routes. I don't think the rail plan works at all, for the commuter aspect, without that.

    And the Fed and State governments will have to work hard on the private railroad cooperation. I don't think the rail industry gives two shits about any change to their system, so a cooperation that provides supposed benefits to both parties, but requires the rail industry to put up their own money, seems hard to enact.

    Any increase in the total system is also an increase in the localized system as it makes it more connective. Standard chicken - egg fare.

    And if it were actually true high speed rail it wouldn't have any impact on private rail lines as it would require purchasing new right of way. It isn't true high speed rail and is actually just track and signaling improvements to get trains back up to the speed they were at 50 years ago. Very little that gets built under this plan will be able to top off over 110 mph, sadly. It's not high speed rail it's higher speed rail. I'm looking forward to what CLEAN-TEA sets aside and to see if it'll allow a few real routes to get made. That would be awesome.

    moniker on
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    Moe Fwacky wrote: »
    This has been a long time coming. But you would think there would be at least one cross-country high-speed rail line.

    Because it wouldn't be cost effective in the slightest. HSR is only useful for distances no further than ~500 miles. After that you should be flying somewhere. Closer than that and the plane really isn't the most efficient means of travel. And fortunately we have a lot of locales that are within ~500 miles of each other which will allow you to stitch mega-regions of the country closer together.

    moniker on
  • JebusUDJebusUD Adventure! Caaba Beankomy XobthroRegistered User regular
    edited April 2009
    Moe Fwacky wrote: »
    This has been a long time coming. But you would think there would be at least one cross-country high-speed rail line.

    Why? Planes are probably simply cheaper at that distance.

    JebusUD on
    And I won, so you lose,
    Guess it always comes down to.
  • WulfWulf Disciple of Tzeentch The Void... (New Jersey)Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    Uh... wouldn't it be better if the Florida and East coast lines oh I dunno, linked up?

    Wulf on
    Everyone needs a little Chaos!
  • bowenbowen How you doin'? Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    bowen wrote: »
    They can only go so fast on the track or something stupid like that, to the point where a bus going 65 on a highway is going faster than a residential/consumer line train.

    High speed rails require special tracks. Which is why the Acela was such a damn failure. It only has one section of high speed rails and goes a normal speed the rest of the time.

    I figured something like that.

    In my opinion this needs to not be commercial oriented and needs to be run solely by the DoT. Also a commuter line that services the local area would be awesome. I would love to walk half a mile up the road, and pay for a $30 monthly pass and save all that god damned money on having to drive. Probably would be better than trying to figure out my bus route that takes 60 minutes to make a 10 mile drive.

    bowen on
    Ladies.
  • GooeyGooey (\/)┌¶─¶┐(\/) pinch pinchRegistered User regular
    edited April 2009
    Wulf wrote: »
    Uh... wouldn't it be better if the Florida and East coast lines oh I dunno, linked up?

    Same thing with Dallas/San Antonio/Austin and Houston.

    Gooey on
    919UOwT.png
  • bowenbowen How you doin'? Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    JebusUD wrote: »
    Moe Fwacky wrote: »
    This has been a long time coming. But you would think there would be at least one cross-country high-speed rail line.

    Why? Planes are probably simply cheaper at that distance.

    I don't think the reason is economics more of a "relief from dependence on fuel."

    bowen on
    Ladies.
  • SaammielSaammiel Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    Man, Omaha gets left out. Which wouldn't be all that shocking if they weren't talking about running a line to Albany, Raleigh and especially that hellhole Jacksonville of all places.

    From what I understand a lot of the problems and costs associated with running high speed rail transit in the United States has to do with elevation gradients in various parts of the country and also the cost of getting the land to run the track through. Doesn't seem like either would be a problem with Omaha and I would love to be able to zip to Chicago for a weekend. Going to join a tea party over this great injustice Obama, just you wait and see.

    Saammiel on
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    JebusUD wrote: »
    Why doesn't the Chicago Hub connect to the eastern rail lines? or are they connected by other lower speed rail systems?

    They would be, but even if not it would be too great a distance to really be worthwhile. The only way it doesn't make any sense is that there are stops between Chicago and New York that should be on a HSR line. You'd never have a high speed train actually make a Chicago-NYC run, but you should have a Chicago-Pittsburgh and a Pitts-NYC setup which is functionally the same as Chi-NYC on a map. Of course, the DOT's map really sucks and is 20 years old so hopefully part of the early stages here is going to be LaHood and DOT/FTA fiddling with the corridors. It should look more like this:
    rail-network.jpg

    moniker on
  • tsmvengytsmvengy Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    JebusUD wrote: »
    Now if they only build the damn train from MPLS to St. Cloud like they were gonna before they decided to half ass it and only go up to Big Lake. Who lives in Big Lake! Why build a train from the cities to that tiny town?

    This is what bipartisan compromise gets you. Half of a railway that stops at a pointless destination.

    You realize the rest of it is in planning right? It has nothing to do with bipartisan compromise - they are building it in stages.

    tsmvengy on
    steam_sig.png
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    bowen wrote: »
    JebusUD wrote: »
    Moe Fwacky wrote: »
    This has been a long time coming. But you would think there would be at least one cross-country high-speed rail line.

    Why? Planes are probably simply cheaper at that distance.

    I don't think the reason is economics more of a "relief from dependence on fuel."

    No, it's economics. A train is slower and more expensive than a plane for distances > ~500 miles. NYC-LA is 2,791 miles.

    moniker on
  • bowenbowen How you doin'? Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    If jetfuel jumped up 500% would it still be more expensive, albeit longer?

    bowen on
    Ladies.
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    bowen wrote: »
    If jetfuel jumped up 500% would it still be more expensive, albeit longer?

    Yes.

    moniker on
  • WulfWulf Disciple of Tzeentch The Void... (New Jersey)Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    Gooey wrote: »
    Wulf wrote: »
    Uh... wouldn't it be better if the Florida and East coast lines oh I dunno, linked up?

    Same thing with Dallas/San Antonio/Austin and Houston.

    Shit, you're right. :|

    Wulf on
    Everyone needs a little Chaos!
  • bowenbowen How you doin'? Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    moniker wrote: »
    bowen wrote: »
    If jetfuel jumped up 500% would it still be more expensive, albeit longer?

    Yes.

    Wow, I didn't realize that the difference was that great.

    I would honestly rather use this for local commuting or going to the beach for a weekend than for going to visit cali or something.

    bowen on
    Ladies.
  • SeptusSeptus Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    Well, without considering cost, I'd certainly enjoy the experience of the train, more than flying, possibly much more depending on the room. I might enjoy it more than driving a car depending on a lot of factors. But the longer the trip the worse it gets, and cost-wise, I can't see the prices being very favorable if you still have to own a car, and I will have to in Texas. I'm not very optimistic about this system, outside of the Eastern and Western seaboards.

    Septus on
    PSN: Kurahoshi1
  • Casual EddyCasual Eddy Don't despair. Not even over the fact that you don't despair.Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    damn... I wish I could take a super train from raleigh to NYC

    how long would that take

    Casual Eddy on
    Elki wrote: »

    Casual Eddy: best poster 2014.
    tyrannus wrote: »
    Casual Eddy: best poster of 2015

    gotta update that stuff man
  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    bowen wrote: »
    moniker wrote: »
    bowen wrote: »
    If jetfuel jumped up 500% would it still be more expensive, albeit longer?

    Yes.

    Wow, I didn't realize that the difference was that great.

    I would honestly rather use this for local commuting or going to the beach for a weekend than for going to visit cali or something.

    Yeah some stuff it'd be really nice for

    like I live right by NYC but aside from crappy Chinatown buses there's no way to get to Philly, Boston, or DC that isn't long, expensive or exceedingly difficult.

    nexuscrawler on
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    Septus wrote: »
    Well, without considering cost, I'd certainly enjoy the experience of the train, more than flying, possibly much more depending on the room. I might enjoy it more than driving a car depending on a lot of factors. But the longer the trip the worse it gets, and cost-wise, I can't see the prices being very favorable if you still have to own a car, and I will have to in Texas. I'm not very optimistic about this system, outside of the Eastern and Western seaboards.

    Every improvement in connectedness makes the whole system improved. This is the same basic argument of the 'we can't afford a comprehensive public transit system that would be attractive and useful to riders because no one rides our spartan public transit system that serves an extremely limited purpose now.'


    Not to mention the fact that train stations are downtown rather than an hour outside of it. So the need for a car becomes much diminished for the purpose that trains and planes are commonly used for now anyway. Chiefly businesspeople going to meetings. The issue can also be easily improved by simply increasing the number of cab and livery drivers, car sharing programs, and car rental places nearby the train station.

    moniker on
  • GooeyGooey (\/)┌¶─¶┐(\/) pinch pinchRegistered User regular
    edited April 2009
    Septus wrote: »
    Well, without considering cost, I'd certainly enjoy the experience of the train, more than flying, possibly much more depending on the room. I might enjoy it more than driving a car depending on a lot of factors. But the longer the trip the worse it gets, and cost-wise, I can't see the prices being very favorable if you still have to own a car, and I will have to in Texas. I'm not very optimistic about this system, outside of the Eastern and Western seaboards.

    That's kind of the way I feel about it.

    Gooey on
    919UOwT.png
  • bowenbowen How you doin'? Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    And also be really nice to avoid traffic. Like if I could go from Syracuse to Seaside heights in 7 or so hours and avoid the horrendous traffic that is the GSP.

    bowen on
    Ladies.
  • JebusUDJebusUD Adventure! Caaba Beankomy XobthroRegistered User regular
    edited April 2009
    tsmvengy wrote: »
    JebusUD wrote: »
    Now if they only build the damn train from MPLS to St. Cloud like they were gonna before they decided to half ass it and only go up to Big Lake. Who lives in Big Lake! Why build a train from the cities to that tiny town?

    This is what bipartisan compromise gets you. Half of a railway that stops at a pointless destination.

    You realize the rest of it is in planning right? It has nothing to do with bipartisan compromise - they are building it in stages.
    wiki wrote:
    The route was initially designed to run the full distance between Minneapolis and St. Cloud, but the plan was not well-received by Minnesota politicians. Many have supported the idea of new passenger rail service in the state in the past few decades, but few plans have gotten off the ground. Governor Jesse Ventura was an early advocate of the Northstar commuter rail line, and convinced some people to come around to his point of view. However, current Governor Tim Pawlenty did not initially support the idea, and said he would not support it when he campaigned for the governorship. He changed his mind after the Federal Transit Administration determined that a scaled-back version of the line would cost less to initially build and would have lower maintenance costs after going into operation compared to other options.

    It is "in planning" still because of partisan obstruction.

    JebusUD on
    And I won, so you lose,
    Guess it always comes down to.
  • SyphonBlueSyphonBlue Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    werehippy wrote: »
    obama_train_sticker_p217410374707551835qjcl_400_1.jpg

    Obama just gave a speech on plans to expand high speed rail in the US (video in the link).

    The plan includes two stages of funding, one for shovel ready projects and one to build a series of high speed hubs including:
      California Corridor (Bay Area, Sacramento, Los Angeles, San Diego) Pacific Northwest Corridor (Eugene, Portland, Tacoma, Seattle, Vancouver BC) South Central Corridor (Tulsa, Oklahoma City, Dallas/Fort Worth, Austin, San Antonio, Little Rock) Gulf Coast Corridor (Houston, New Orleans, , Mobile, Birmingham, Atlanta) Chicago Hub Network (Chicago, Milwaukee, Twin Cities, St. Louis, Kansas City, Detroit, Toledo, Cleveland, Columbus, Cincinnati, Indianapolis, Louisville,) Florida Corridor (Orlando, Tampa, Miami) Southeast Corridor (Washington, Richmond, Raleigh, Charlotte, Atlanta, Macon, Columbia, Savannah, Jacksonville) Keystone Corridor (Philadelphia, Harrisburg, Pittsburgh) Empire Corridor (New York City, Albany, Buffalo) Northern New England Corridor (Boston, Montreal, Portland, Springfield, New Haven, Albany) An expansion of the existing Northeast corridor

    The proposed layout actually doesn't look that different from the on we were kickign around here on the board awhile back (there's a larger image that includes some non-high speed rail in the plan link)
    original.jpg

    I have to say, it's well past time we started investing in smart mass transit infrastructure, though on a person level I'm depressed as hell I'm almost dead center in the biggest in the entire Northeast.

    Which is the one that goes from Disneyland to a brothel in Vegas? I want to get on that one.
    Oh god I hope they actually build the one from Orlando to South Florida.

    SyphonBlue on
    LxX6eco.jpg
    PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
  • Salvation122Salvation122 Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    Wulf wrote: »
    Uh... wouldn't it be better if the Florida and East coast lines oh I dunno, linked up?

    I'm trying to figure out why the South-Central, Chicago Hub, and Gulf Coast lines aren't interconnected via Memphis.

    Salvation122 on
    sig.png
  • enc0reenc0re Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    So any word on whose high-speed technology will be competing for this?

    France's TGV?
    Germnay's ICE?
    Japan's Shinkansen?

    There's some good stuff out there.

    enc0re on
  • bowenbowen How you doin'? Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    I see this improving the country heartily. Major highways will probably a little less crowded, why the opposition, does anyone know?

    Is it just "Because those dems did it!"?

    bowen on
    Ladies.
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    damn... I wish I could take a super train from raleigh to NYC

    how long would that take

    It's about the same distance to DC as NYC. So roughly double that commute on Acela assuming an equivalent number of stops. Around 6 hours. Less, if they actually make Acela high speed rail and not higher speed rail.

    moniker on
  • bowenbowen How you doin'? Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    enc0re wrote: »
    So any word on whose high-speed technology will be competing for this?

    France's TGV?
    Germnay's ICE?
    Japan's Shinkansen?

    There's some good stuff out there.

    I hear Germany and China have an awesome one.

    bowen on
    Ladies.
«1345
Sign In or Register to comment.