HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Pacific West > Portland > Transportation & Infrastructure


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #81  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2009, 5:38 PM
llamaorama llamaorama is offline
Unicorn Wizard!
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 3,741
I guess your right, I was thinking along the lines of station stops and how they add to travel time.

Were you thinking something like the Talgo high speed DMU running in Spain that can be modified to meet FRA rules?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talgo#Talgo_XXI

Either way though it seems a good bit of double/triple tracking would be necessary between E. Portland and Vancouver to seperate it from freight trains

Last edited by llamaorama; Jan 22, 2009 at 5:51 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #82  
Old Posted Jan 22, 2009, 12:36 PM
zilfondel zilfondel is offline
Submarine de Nucléar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Missouri
Posts: 4,474
Eugene's never going to have "high speed" rail. There would be no point! Stops are too close together (50 km apart?) and the towns are just way too small.

On the other hand, a frequent service DMU intercity rail service would make more sense. The trains don't need to be high capacity, but they should serve Corvallis (big college town with a rail line running through the middle of downtown) and have a high frequency. Service would be great during Ducks/Beavers game days, when it take 6 hours (or more) to drive from Portland to Eugene.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #83  
Old Posted Jan 22, 2009, 5:53 PM
NewUrbanist NewUrbanist is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by electricron View Post
Even California's proposed HSR train isn't going to go 220 mph along the entire route. It'll only reach that top speed in rural areas in the Valley. Every time it approaches urban and suburban areas, it slows down to 100 mph or less.
Has anyone been to the Central Valley in California? The whole place is full of gap toothed suburban sprawl. The HSR will creep along through this route unless they run it through highly producing, highly valuable agricultural lands. I wonder if future higher density TOD developments will locate at the access points?

Growing up in Bakersfield (no cracks, it's not perfect, but it's my hometown), I would love for the HSR to run through the center of it's downtown. It could be a charming area if it had more activity. The worse thing that could happen is if this line created another suburban transit hub surrounded by moats of parking.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #84  
Old Posted Feb 19, 2009, 10:27 PM
electricron's Avatar
electricron electricron is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Granbury, Texas
Posts: 3,250
Lightbulb Amtrak Cascades set record riders in 2008

From http://www.bizjournals.com/portland/...6/daily30.html
Last year, 774,421 people were carried by the Cascades' train, up 14.4 percent from 2007, which was the service’s second most popular year. The train travels 310 miles between Vancouver, British Columbia, and Eugene, with a one-way trip between those two cities taking around 12 hours, according to an Amtrak schedule.

Not bad for a train averaging ~26 mph. Imagine what it could do if Amtrak could get the trains average speed to 70 or 80 mph?

Are any stimulus funds being spent on the Cascades' tracks?

Well, upon further investigation, I discover the news report was wrong! It's 310 miles between Eugene and Seattle, not Vancouver B.C. The time is 6 hrs and 30 mins, not 12 hours. The actual average speed is ~48 mph not ~ 26 mph. It's also an additional 157 train miles to Vancouver B.C.

How wrong can reporters get?

Last edited by electricron; Feb 20, 2009 at 8:17 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #85  
Old Posted Feb 19, 2009, 11:52 PM
Okstate's Avatar
Okstate Okstate is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: SE PDX
Posts: 1,367
I thought you couldn't go from Eugene to Vancouver in the same day? (By TRAIN)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #86  
Old Posted Feb 20, 2009, 12:08 AM
CUclimber CUclimber is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 113
Quote:
The time is 6 hrs and 30 mins, not 12 hours. The actual average speed is ~79 mph not ~ 26 mph.
Sure, until the train you're on has to sit for an hour and a half outside of Kelso while waiting for a freight train to pass.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #87  
Old Posted Feb 20, 2009, 1:12 AM
pdxman's Avatar
pdxman pdxman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Portland
Posts: 1,037
^^^Or 3 three hours outside of aurora to wait for a freight train to move.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #88  
Old Posted Feb 20, 2009, 6:01 AM
Okstate's Avatar
Okstate Okstate is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: SE PDX
Posts: 1,367
And don't even think about relying on the Coast Starlight while we're on the topic!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #89  
Old Posted Feb 20, 2009, 8:19 AM
electricron's Avatar
electricron electricron is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Granbury, Texas
Posts: 3,250
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by Okstate View Post
And don't even think about relying on the Coast Starlight while we're on the topic!
I won't. Long distance trains are rarely on time. There's just too much that can go wrong and delay the train.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #90  
Old Posted Feb 20, 2009, 6:56 PM
MR. Cosmopolitan's Avatar
MR. Cosmopolitan MR. Cosmopolitan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 144
It would be good if they used faster trains, maybe with 220 mph there could be a possibility to extend it to San Francisco
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #91  
Old Posted Feb 20, 2009, 10:52 PM
zilfondel zilfondel is offline
Submarine de Nucléar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Missouri
Posts: 4,474
Quote:
Originally Posted by MR. Cosmopolitan View Post
It would be good if they used faster trains, maybe with 220 mph there could be a possibility to extend it to San Francisco
I would like it if they could at least start by double-tracking the rail south of Salem! I believe a lot of the Oregon line is single-tracked. Just terrible considering how many freight trains they have running.

Recently I ran across a website an engineer did an analysis of how to extend passenger rail service south from Eugene to Ashland, Medford, and to San Fran. The tracks need upgrading, but it wouldn't be all that expensive.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #92  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2009, 7:51 AM
electricron's Avatar
electricron electricron is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Granbury, Texas
Posts: 3,250
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by zilfondel View Post
I would like it if they could at least start by double-tracking the rail south of Salem! I believe a lot of the Oregon line is single-tracked. Just terrible considering how many freight trains they have running.

Recently I ran across a website an engineer did an analysis of how to extend passenger rail service south from Eugene to Ashland, Medford, and to San Fran. The tracks need upgrading, but it wouldn't be all that expensive.
Double tracking a rail line, without building expensive bridges and tunnels, usually costs ~$2 million per mile. ~$1 million for grade work and another ~$1 million for track work. I'll assume the ROW is wide enough to accept the second track. Although, bridges and tunnels will increase the price, how much depends on how many bridges and tunnels are needed.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #93  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2009, 9:43 AM
JordanL JordanL is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,004
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJD View Post
-The Steel Bridge is too sharp a turn for HSR, period.

-If we raze the silos there is plenty of room (approx. 2000 ft.) between the Steel and Broadway bridges (and between the Willamette and Interstate Avenue, approx. 200 ft.) for an HSR station. This is the prominent location for an eastside station due to its proximity to all LRT lines, proposed streetcar and the Rose Quarter transit center.
Razing the silos would be... uhhh... difficult...

They are HEAVILY used, and don't underestimate the impact on Portland's economy that having major shipping routes here provides...

I also have a note:

Today I was planning on taking a trip to Lake Charles, LA to visit my sister and brother-in-law. Checking out my travel options, I looked at Amtrak, Greyhound and Airlines.

Amtrak: 3 days, 14 hours; $280 one way

Greyhound: 2 days, 17 hours; $350 round trip

Airlines: 4 hours; $320 round trip

Who wouldn't take a plane given these options?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #94  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2009, 10:03 PM
MightyAlweg MightyAlweg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Orange County, California
Posts: 160
Quote:
Originally Posted by JordanL View Post

Amtrak: 3 days, 14 hours; $280 one way

Greyhound: 2 days, 17 hours; $350 round trip

Airlines: 4 hours; $320 round trip

Who wouldn't take a plane given these options?
Only railroad buffs or people afraid to fly.

That Amtrak one-way fare was for Coach, you have to add in buying your own meals and drinks in the Lounge Car or Diner for those three days each way. Greyhound would schedule some meal stops where you would also be buying your own food and drink. If you went First Class on Amtrak you could have a small Roomette and your meals would be included in the Dining Car. So a quick check of Amtrak.com just told me the round trip fare on Amtrak from Portland to New Orleans would be;

Amtrak: Seven and a half days of total travel (Empire Builder to Chicago, City of New Orleans to New Orleans and vice versa)

$572 round trip Coach, (unreserved reclining coach seat, no shower facilities), meals not included

$1,161 round trip Sleeping Car Roomette (28 inch wide berth, shared toilets/shower facilities), meals included

$2,324 round trip Sleeping Car Bedroom (38 inch wide berth, private toilet/shower facility), meals included



There's also an element of society that has no official government ID and thus can not board a plane or get past the ticket agents and TSA checkpoints. Those folks go Greyhound, as even Amtrak does cursory ID checks now. Greyhound does not ask for ID on its domestic bus routes.

But if you have a government issued ID card and aren't afraid to present it to officials in public, then flying is the cheapest and fastest way to go for most American travel.

Last edited by MightyAlweg; Feb 23, 2009 at 10:39 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #95  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2009, 10:16 PM
MightyAlweg MightyAlweg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Orange County, California
Posts: 160
Quote:
Originally Posted by electricron View Post
I'll assume the ROW is wide enough to accept the second track. Although, bridges and tunnels will increase the price, how much depends on how many bridges and tunnels are needed.
If we are talking double-tracking from Portland to at least Sacramento, then the answer is "No" as there are hundreds of miles where the ROW is not wide enough for an additional track.

I take Amtrak's Coast Starlight from Los Angeles up to Portland or Seattle about once a year. It's a delightful way to travel if you get a room in the Sleeping Car and then have access to the First Class Lounge Car and the Dining Car. It takes two days to get there, instead of a two hour plane trip. From Eugene the tracks head east into the mountains, then southwest from Klamath Falls past Mount Shasta down to Redding.

The railroad tracks on that route traverse steep grades, many long tunnels, go over slim wooden bridges above roaring rivers, and thread through narrow mountain canyons and passes. That route is truly a marvel of early 20th century railroad engineering, but there is barely enough room for one train, let alone two.

If the current West Coast railroad routes were to be double-tracked between Eugene and the Bay Area, the costs would be in the Billions. Heck, the tracks that cross and hug the Willamette south of Oregon City are narrow and winding and would present a massive engineering challenge just to get another track to Salem.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #96  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2009, 10:20 PM
Okstate's Avatar
Okstate Okstate is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: SE PDX
Posts: 1,367
Quote:
Originally Posted by JordanL View Post

Amtrak: 3 days, 14 hours; $280 one way

Greyhound: 2 days, 17 hours; $350 round trip

Airlines: 4 hours; $320 round trip

Who wouldn't take a plane given these options?
Funny, i've always wondered that too. One time in Eugene I saw the coast starlight (from Cali) stop & let the passengers off for a minutes while the Eugenians were loading up & thought to myself...wow, all these people can afford cross country train travel? They looked like they just escaped prison! What gives?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #97  
Old Posted Feb 24, 2009, 12:33 AM
PacificNW's Avatar
PacificNW PacificNW is online now
"Native Born"
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Gilbert, Arizona
Posts: 3,093
↑ I don't know whether to take your comment "just escaped prison" personally offensive, or not. I take the Cascades to Seattle a few times a year. My step dad worked for Union Pacific so I road the rails, as a kid and teenager, many times. I have never spent time in prison. Riding a train gives me the opportunity to see the scenery at a leisurely pace.
__________________
Native
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #98  
Old Posted Feb 24, 2009, 1:46 AM
NJD's Avatar
NJD NJD is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Portland
Posts: 632
Quote:
Razing the silos would be... uhhh... difficult...

They are HEAVILY used, and don't underestimate the impact on Portland's economy that having major shipping routes here provides...
^ My source says the city has talked to the new(ish) owners of the silos (and Vulcan who owns the old Red Lion site next door), and that the owners of the silos would be willing to negotiate especially if it involved building new silos further downstream where the river sees less traffic and has fewer bridges to navigate around. No real talks will occur until HSR Cascades is actually approved, which the NARP has tentatively slated for the 2nd run of federally funded HSR lines (which means at least a decade away from design starts). I cannot confirm this, but the source is reliable.

As for ticket prices, they are a prime example of basic business demand pricing. Remember that the French TGV is very modern, reliable, affordable, and a profitable branch of their Department of Transportation. Until there is adequate ridership (and competition) the prices will stay high, and there will be more and more demand as Americans stop subsidizing autos and airplanes and start wanting more comfortable, safer and more modern alternatives to driving and flying. Rail is the most efficient means of transport other than by sea. On an even playing field with autos and airlines, after a comparable system gets built, the railroad will be cheapest, safest and most comfortable means of travel.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #99  
Old Posted Feb 24, 2009, 3:10 AM
electricron's Avatar
electricron electricron is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Granbury, Texas
Posts: 3,250
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by MightyAlweg View Post
If we are talking double-tracking from Portland to at least Sacramento, then the answer is "No" as there are hundreds of miles where the ROW is not wide enough for an additional track.

I take Amtrak's Coast Starlight from Los Angeles up to Portland or Seattle about once a year. It's a delightful way to travel if you get a room in the Sleeping Car and then have access to the First Class Lounge Car and the Dining Car. It takes two days to get there, instead of a two hour plane trip. From Eugene the tracks head east into the mountains, then southwest from Klamath Falls past Mount Shasta down to Redding.

The railroad tracks on that route traverse steep grades, many long tunnels, go over slim wooden bridges above roaring rivers, and thread through narrow mountain canyons and passes. That route is truly a marvel of early 20th century railroad engineering, but there is barely enough room for one train, let alone two.

If the current West Coast railroad routes were to be double-tracked between Eugene and the Bay Area, the costs would be in the Billions. Heck, the tracks that cross and hug the Willamette south of Oregon City are narrow and winding and would present a massive engineering challenge just to get another track to Salem.
I wasn't talking about going all the way to Sacramento from Portland, just south to Eugene and north to Vancouver, where the existing Cascades trains run.

The distance between Portland and Sacramento, per Amtrak schedules is 637 miles, much too far for a high speed train.
The time it would take a 120 mph train to travel 637 miles is 5 hours and 19 minutes. That's not including the additional 187 miles to Seattle and an additional 157 miles to Vancouver.
The time it would take a 220 mph train to travel 637 miles is 2 hours and 54 minutes. That's not including the additional 187 miles to Seattle and an additional 157 miles to Vancouver.

That's far longer than the 2-3 hours travel time for high speed rail to be competitive with flying.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #100  
Old Posted Feb 24, 2009, 7:02 AM
Okstate's Avatar
Okstate Okstate is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: SE PDX
Posts: 1,367
Quote:
Originally Posted by PacificNW View Post
↑ I don't know whether to take your comment "just escaped prison" personally offensive, or not.
I was actually specifically referring to the coast starlight route. I've ridden on the cascades as well numerous times & the comparison can't be made with the cascades. Maybe it was a rare occurrence. I've certainly hung out with my fair share of bad apples in my day & there were vast similarities.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Pacific West > Portland > Transportation & Infrastructure
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:03 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.