High Speed Rail and Amtrak News

[zilfondel]

Seattletransitblog.com has a post about NW High Speed Rail

Specifically, Washington (WSDOT) is going for broke and requesting money to largely complete the Portland-Seattle high-speed rail upgrades.

Here's the list:

Location Project Funding Request
Vancouver Yard Bypass and W 39th St bridge $45.1 million
Tacoma Pt Defiance Bypass $60.0 million
Stanwood Stanwood Station $600,000
Everett Curve Realignments and Storage tracks $2.12 million
Cascades Four New train Sets $108 million <------------ kind of a big deal!
Cascades Capitalized Maintenance $97.4 million
Kelso to Martin’s Bluff Rail project (In three phases) $222.0 million
Seattle King St Station Track And Signal Upgrades $120 million
Blaine Swift Customs Facility Siding $3.8 million
Cascades Advanced Signal System/Positive Train Control $30.2 million
Centralia New Crossover near China Creek $3.0 million

Total: $692.22 Million

8 daily trains, 3 hour trip time, expected 97% on-time performance.

There is pretty high expectation that they will get all of it funded... Obama is pouring lots of money into the HSR pot.


Oh, and these are potentially the new trains we would get. 130 mph Spanish Talgo 21's:


Bernat Borras


Fernando Monroy Pena

[Okstate]

Originally Posted by zilfondel

8 daily trains, 3 hour trip time, expected 97% on-time performance.
...130 mph Spanish Talgo 21's:

-What is the current trip time...it's pretty close to 3 hours currently, right?
-Would the decreased trip time mean that the new trains were running to their potential 130 mph or just that some timely obstacles were removed...or BOTH?

[electricron]

With the exception of the new Talgo locomotives, that's what the existing Cascade trains use.

The existing Cascade schedule between Portland and Seattle reads 3 hours and 30 minutes. The projects listed earlier improve or eliminate choke points where the existing trains must slow down.

There's 187 track miles between Seattle and Portland per Amtrak's train schedules, so the average speed of the trains will increase from 53.4 mph to 62.3 mph after these improvements have been made. That's almost a full 10 mph faster average speed.

WSDOT had already formed a mid-range plan to sequence improvements to increase Cascade train speeds and services. But they didn't have funding identified for most of these improvements. Here's the link:
http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/NR/rdonlyres...dRangePlan.pdf

The only new development is asking the Feds to help fund it sooner, taking advantage of Obama's announced plans to spend more on inter city trains.

To add, I had made an earlier reply suggesting this was likely to occur. I'm not surprised about these recent developments.

[zilfondel]

The most important part of the project is the very high reliability rate, as well as the 8 daily round trips. I'm guessing we would see an enormous jump in usage... and it would probably begin to start competing with the airlines at that point, since the line is downtown - to - downtown.

Also, full build out of the rail improvements would drop the trip time to only 2:30 minutes.


I also read somewhere that Oregon is requesting some rail improvements from PDX to Eugene, but I can't find a solid source yet.

[bvpcvm]

This is absolutely the right way to go about getting something closer to high speed rail. It's realistic politically and financially and will make enough of a difference for people to take notice. I really hope this goes through.

[65MAX]

This is great news! WSDOT was smart to have their HSR plan/schedule mapped out and ready implement. Now that the funding is there, by all means, go for full build out. Getting below 3 hours (and increasing reliability) throws rail into serious competition for auto and air passengers.

Out of curiosity, will this approach Acela speeds? I'm sure someone here knows the stats.

[electricron]

Originally Posted by 65MAX

This is great news! WSDOT was smart to have their HSR plan/schedule mapped out and ready implement. Now that the funding is there, by all means, go for full build out. Getting below 3 hours (and increasing reliability) throws rail into serious competition for auto and air passengers.

Out of curiosity, will this approach Acela speeds? I'm sure someone here knows the stats.

I'm pretty sure Amtrak's NE Corridor will get some stimulus funds as well, which will make it even faster.
Today, the Acela averages 79.4 mph between NYC and D.C. (225 track miles/2 hours, 50 minutes), and 61.4 mph between NYC and Boston (215 miles/3 hours,30 minutes).

Although the Acela Express trainsets are capable of 200 miles per hour (320 km/h) operation, FRA regulations do not permit any speeds above 150 miles per hour (240 km/h) on tracks that are shared with freight and slower passenger trains regardless of circumstances; for Acela Express trains to run above 150 miles per hour (240 km/h), would require purpose built dedicated track in a separate right of way, similar to TGV networks under FRA regulations. Because of the mixed use nature of the NEC, there is no possibility for higher speeds than 150 miles per hour (240 km/h) under FRA regulations on the current NEC. Building a parallel right of way, dedicated to the Acela Express to the current NEC, is politically, socially, and financially unrealistic as of 2008.

To add, there's only two sections of tracks where Acela trains reach their maximum speeds of 150 mph in Rhode Island and Massachusetts, which total 18 miles. There are also many miles of track, especially east of New Haven, that have been upgraded to allow a maximum speed of 110 mph or 125 mph (177 km/h or 201 km/h). South of New York, Acela Express is limited to 135 mph (217 km/h), with many stretches of 125 mph (201 km/h) limits. Several stretches of track there are straight enough to allow 150 mph (241 km/h) speeds. However, the overhead catenary support system which was constructed during the Great Depression, lacks the constant-tension features of the new catenary east of New Haven, and cannot support running speeds over 135 mph (217 km/h).

On July 9, 2007 Amtrak introduced two limited-stop trains. Train 2105 left New York Penn Station at 6:50 AM, made only one stop in Philadelphia, and arrived in Washington at 9:25 AM. Northbound, train 2120 departed Washington at 3:55 PM, stopped in Philadelphia, and arrived in New York at 6:30 PM. This shortened the trip between the two cities to just 2 hours and 35 minutes. Updating the NYC to D.C. to an average of 87 mph is appropriate.

Note, the Acela trains lose 8 mph average speed when stopping at more train stations. Upgrading catenary poles south of New York would allow 15 mph faster speeds on much of the existing tracks. So, there's plenty of upgrades Amtrak could make to make Acela trains faster, if they had the money.

[WestCoast]

while I am annoyed at so many 'half-measures' that HSR endures in this country, I do agree that getting something going, faster and more often, is a good step.

If we see ridership spike big time, as the train is almost competitive with the car.... then all of a suddent 250mph trains start to be possible.


I can't believe it's so difficult to do when we can spend billions on a single aircraft carrier to bomb other countries, but what do I know about running the government.

[electricron]

Originally Posted by WestCoast

while I am annoyed at so many 'half-measures' that HSR endures in this country, I do agree that getting something going, faster and more often, is a good step.

If we see ridership spike big time, as the train is almost competitive with the car.... then all of a sudden 250 mph trains start to be possible.


I can't believe it's so difficult to do when we can spend billions on a single aircraft carrier to bomb other countries, but what do I know about running the government.

The major problem with high speed rail development in America is that the government doesn't own the freight railroads, nor their right of ways.

Aircraft carriers are owned by the US government. It's far easier to spend money on something you own, than to spend money on something you don't won. In Europe and Asia, many of the railroads are owned by the governments. It's been much easier for them to spend money on the right of ways they own.

There's a major problem with developing 220 mph plus trains in America. First, there's Federal Regulations limiting passenger train speeds to 150 mph on shared tracks, with either slower moving freight trains and slower moving passenger trains. Therefore, the cheap and easy solution to use existing freight and commuter rail lines limits HSR to 150 mph. Believe it or not, Acela locomotives are capable of 200 mph speeds, but you will not ever see them go that fast because they share their tracks with slower moving freight and commuter trains.
Therefore, to build 200 mph plus trains, you need dedicated tracks, which is very expensive, and in many cases politically unacceptable, especially for those losing land by eminent domain proceedings.

[Okstate]

^ The truth hurts....alright lets begin plan B: High Speed Monorail.

[65MAX]

Originally Posted by electricron

..... Therefore, to build 200 mph plus trains, you need dedicated tracks, which is very expensive, and in many cases politically unacceptable......

For now, yes. But I'm sure that will change as rail becomes more popular here.

[JordanL]

Originally Posted by 65MAX

For now, yes. But I'm sure that will change as rail becomes more popular here.

Maybe we should all just wait for Scotty to beam us up?

[65MAX]

I'm pretty sure that HSR in the US will happen long before transporter beams. But hey, if you want to wait that long....

[JordanL]

Originally Posted by 65MAX

I'm pretty sure that HSR in the US will happen long before transporter beams. But hey, if you want to wait that long....

It seems that's been the plan up to this point...

We really need dedicated tracks for HSR...

[65MAX]

Yes, absolutely agree. I just think it'll happen sooner than most people do. It only took 20 years to build most of the interstates nationwide, once they were made into a priority by Eisenhower. Obama can do the same with HSR, at least in the regional corridors already designated. California's will have dedicated tracks and no at-grade crossings built within mostly existing ROWs. No reason that can't be done here as well, incrementally of course.

[electricron]

Originally Posted by 65MAX

Yes, absolutely agree. I just think it'll happen sooner than most people do. It only took 20 years to build most of the interstates nationwide, once they were made into a priority by Eisenhower. Obama can do the same with HSR, at least in the regional corridors already designated. California's will have dedicated tracks and no at-grade crossings built within mostly existing ROWs. No reason that can't be done here as well, incrementally of course.

California advantage is that government agencies already own much of the corridor rows leading into the major cities.
They plan to use CalTrain's row on the peninsular from San Francisco, and Metrolink's row from Los Angeles. In the urban areas, where row are much more expensive, the govenrment already owns and control most.

That's not necessarily true elsewhere in the USA where the freight railroad corporations own most of the rows into cities. Although there are corridors owned by Amtrak and some commuter lines, especially in the NE.

[urbanlife]

Originally Posted by 65MAX

Yes, absolutely agree. I just think it'll happen sooner than most people do. It only took 20 years to build most of the interstates nationwide, once they were made into a priority by Eisenhower. Obama can do the same with HSR, at least in the regional corridors already designated. California's will have dedicated tracks and no at-grade crossings built within mostly existing ROWs. No reason that can't be done here as well, incrementally of course.

Eisenhower had the luxury of being able to run highways through every bad or rundown neighborhood in this country which also made it much easier to move quickly at it.

Though I do think Obama will do a great job laying the foundation to get HSR moving in the right direction and on a very fast pace. I would say that within 20 we will see many regional areas connected with HSR, but I think it will be closer to 50 years before it sees its at its peak in this country...or at least, that is what I hope. Personally I am much more interested in seeing cities go back to their streetcar ways and maximize light rail and other forms of rail throughout each region.

[65MAX]

Yes, I meant 20 years to get the regional areas already designated as HSR corridors built, not HSR nationwide.

[CouvScott]

One speaker: Northwest transportation project needs to be made top priority if it is to move ahead
POSTED: 04:00 AM PDT Friday, May 29, 2009
BY JUSTIN CARINCI

Before his trip to Portland on Wednesday, the mayor of Vancouver, B.C., did what everyone traveling by train between the two cities must do: He stayed overnight in Seattle. And, like most people, Gregor Robertson drove instead of catching the single passenger train to Seattle.

His destination: the opening ceremonies for Cascadia Rail Week, an effort to bring better train service to the region between Vancouver, B.C., and Eugene.

Robertson joined other local leaders on a rail field trip that started with a ride on the Amtrak Cascades train between Seattle and Portland on Wednesday morning. After speeches and panel discussions in the Ecotrust Building, the tour continued with a ride on TriMet WES and MAX trains and, somewhat incongruously, a plane ride back to Seattle.

There’s actually no dissonance, said Bill Wyatt, executive director of the Port of Portland, reflecting the participatory spirit in the room. The port, which operates Portland International Airport, doesn’t see high-speed passenger rail between Portland and Seattle as a threat.

“Nothing could be further from the truth,” Wyatt said. “High-speed rail in this corridor would be a terrific addition to our region.”

As for the chances of the United States developing a high-speed rail network that actually would compete with airports, speakers said not to hold your breath. U.S. Rep. Peter DeFazio dreamed that dream, but conceded that he probably won’t live to see it realized.

“If I could take a train from Washington, D.C., and not get on a miserable airline again, it would be the happiest day of my life,” DeFazio said.

Trains in Spain’s system could cover the distance between Portland and Seattle in 1 hour, 10 minutes, DeFazio said. That’s a great goal, others said – if you define “great” as meaning “the enemy of good.”

Before trains can break 220 mph, however, they need to at least move faster than the current limit of 79 mph – Amtrak’s current ceiling, said Jim Howell, a planner with the Association of Oregon Rail and Transit Advocates. Other countries improved their existing systems instead of making a costly leap straight to super-fast trains.

“They started with … frequent, reliable service,” Howell said. “And, from that, they built ridership, and, from that, they developed high-speed rail.”

If Amtrak trains exceed 110 mph, said Kirk Fredrickson with the Washington Department of Transportation – even if only along certain stretches of the corridor – travel times will improve.

“If we reduce travel times between cities, people are going to come to rail,” Fredrickson said.

Even incremental steps will be difficult to achieve without a serious commitment from a dizzying array of agencies and advocates, other speakers said. And ceremonial agreements like the one Robertson and Portland Mayor Sam Adams signed Wednesday go only so far.

A better regional rail system can’t just be a priority, said Ethan Seltzer, director of Portland State University’s School of Urban Studies and Planning. It needs to be the top priority for the agencies involved – and that means making sacrifices.

Will local governments delay, scale back or even abandon expensive local projects such as the Columbia River Crossing or the Alaskan Way Viaduct replacement to make the region’s rail system more effective? Seltzer asked.

“I can’t see that happening yet,” he said afterward. “Until we’re willing to say we’ll do this now instead of something else, we’ll be right back here in 10 to 15 years.”

[WestCoast]

Spent some time in Europe over the last few weeks and got to experience lots of high speed rail.

Went 300km/hr on the TGV from Brussels to Paris.

It's amazing, and so frustrating how the US has none of this.