Southeast Corridor High Speed Rail

So what do you recommend?

I don't think you were ever given a choice, beyond local transit taxes. Most of this comes from the state government (ie NCDOT) not your local County. That's where most of the money is from, at least.

Trains of course. Especially with cross-hudson transit, things would/will improve if the Gateway tunnels are built (which in effect would allow NJT and Amtrak to double the amount of trains they pass through into NYC. This includes limited-stop NJT trains running on top of local trains).

Commuter rails (or bus rapid transit) can be faster than commuting by car regardless. As long as service is frequent and reliable.

This

AFAIK the thing is that passenger rail is hardly lucrative. Industrial rail is way more cost efficient because there's nearly always wood chips or coal or granite or some shit that needs to be long hauled by train where the really heavy stuff starts to pay off in comparison to trying to transport by truck (due to how far you can drag X weight on a train per dollar versus a truck).

The rail in Macon still runs wood chips and coal and granite, but that's about it - and it's only one one ancient line that runs along the river. Motherfucker comes by my house 4 times a day

Doesn't the US really need to replace it's aging rail road tracks?

It all depends on the density and traffic congestion. California is spending $80 billion on a train because all the existing freeways and airports there are clogged up and cannot be expanded. The same is true of Newark, O'hare, and Hartsfield which is why NJ, Illinois and Georgia are doing their own projects.

I mean, consider when Amtrak had to be formed: 1971. Back then the 747 was new and airports didn't have half the traffic they do today.

(in regards to the image, all coal and oil used for power generation is delivered by rail)

Not really. When the railroads were first built they were built to handle massive steam locomotives which were heavy and long. As a result most American train tracks are ridiculously overbuilt for the jobs they are given. This is how the railroads had no problem implementing diesels or longer (ie 100+ car) trains, because the track was built in such a manner where it could withstand the punishment. The larger problem is track speed, because there is no demand to straighten curves (especially when heavy freight trains are more affected by gradient).

For comparison, the rest of the world's rail networks are optimized for passenger transit so tracks tend to be straighter but less engineered. A good example is in bridge design: europeans and chinese build10+ story viaducts for 200 mph trains (which are very lightweight) but they can't handle the weight American rail infrastructure does.

What would it take to straighted the curves?

For another point of comparison, a 10-car TGV Duplex weighs about 415 US tons but a single GE 9-44cw weighs 210 US tons. Which is to say a typical two locomotive American train (common for longer trains) weighs more than an entire high speed train.

Also, American trains benefit from a massive loading gauge permitting double stack containers while everyone else can't do that.

So what would it take to set things right?

So would something like this blow Euro Rail out of the water? Are these the curves you're talking about?

There is nothing wrong with high speed trains and bankrupting the oilkikes.

t. the civilized world

Money. Lots of money.

It doesn't happen because ultimately freight rail's benefit is the low cost per ton/mile. A single train operator can do the job of over 200 truck drivers. And again, it comes down to gradient: steep grades mean shorter trains (because wheels slip). Most euro-spec passenger trains can easily take slopes of 4-5%, but American freight railroads don't even build anything over 2% anymore, and areas with 3% grades are either abandoned (ie turned into rail trails) or improved (ie, Cajon Pass outside LA).

But on the flip side of this the US's loading gauge is massive (mentioned here ) while it's a major constraint on european trains.

Were wee talking about trillions?

Yes, in a sense. My point is that America took a different approach to it's railroads than the rest of the world. American railroads are optimized for freight transport, while everyone else optimizes it for passenger transit. There's really no "better" option here, American railroads are overengineered but also slow. European (and asian) railroads are fast but don't have the same capacity (in tonnage) as American ones do. Likewise, getting to place to place in europe or asia by train is easy, but hard to move bulk cargo. In America, bulk cargo is no problem but passenger rail is unreliable and inconsistent.

I love trains.

Should we bite the bullet to referb the rail to give Americans the ability to not only haul freight,but passengers effectively as well?

Honestly Trump should had focus exclusively on our infrastructure.

Rail,Ports,New Airports,dredge out the rivers,10 gigabit internet connection to every house in the country,roads,New sewer and Water lines, Replace aging POTS with new infrastructure that compatible with internet infrastructure,ect.

Well if you want a serious answer:

Tolling the Interstate system would immediately cause the existing railroads to jump on passenger service, as Greyhound would get screwed out of business. Same if the airlines are regulated again, allowing the old monopolies to reform (this would make air travel more expensive, but it'd also mean better service and likely faster aircraft. Note how all the airlines dropped their supersonic travel plans after deregulation happened). Doing so would also mean less subsidies for air and auto transport.

When it comes to focusing just on rail infrastructure, the federal government's specific priorities should be to eliminate certain bottlenecks (namely Tehachapi Pass, Cajon Pass, Cascade Pass, Lookout Pass, Soldier Summit, Rollins Pass) all of which would cost a huge amount of money to fix (think Gotthard Base Tunnel levels of engineering). Likewise freight rail electrification which would make the system as a whole more efficient, quieter and much cleaner.

Why were electric rails abandoned like your pictures?

In the case of Penn Central, the railroad went bankrupt due to outdated pricing regulations making them noncompetitive (such as mandatory price ceilings for certain cargo, or requirements that their trains service certain towns at certain times of day) while the new federally funded FREEway system took much of their business. Most of this was wiped away in the 80s. In the case of the Milwaukee Road, their management decided in the late 60s that oil was just better because it was more fault-tolerant (say, due to differed maintence). Then the 1973 oil crisis happened and they went bankrupt.

I've got to doubt that. Sure American railroads can make mammoth trains of doublestacks but you're talking about a country where it takes 3 days for freight trains to traverse Chicago which is America's biggest rail hub. Even within Chicago, there are well trafficked rail lines that still have hand thrown switches.

Euro railroads have advanced signaling and widespread adoption of freight electrification enabling train frequencies every couple of minutes. That has to beat a mammoth train of doublestacks coming in maybe bi-hourly.

What about freight to ports?>>8083144

Does this have to do with unions perhaps?

Anything to dissolve the distinction between states. Everywhere will be the same. Liberal and full of brown people. GG.

Chicago isn't even that bad, especially when all major RRs are working to fix it. The real congestion is alongside the I-81 corridor because there isn't a huge pool of money to fix it like there is in Chicago.

Wrong, because in europe freight trains can only run during the night hours after passenger trains run. This is where the hard caps on tonnage, length and height become a major factor (especially when the amount of transloading facilities is much smaller as well). In America trains may be slow but they can run at all hours to almost any place which is immensely more efficient. It's a 24/7 system.

No, RR unions have not been a problem since the infamous '85/halloween agreement. This is why BLET people don't like newer UTU people.

brown people don't have trains

Not wrong unless you're speaking exclusively of high speed rail. In vid related, there are passenger and freight trains being heavily intermixed on a busy line.

yes to the detriment of both. Most of Europe's HSR lines (especially those in France) don't allow such mixing.

Trains are cool as fuck, anyone who disagrees knows nothing about C Y B E R / A E S T H E T I C S.

Do all of these bottle necks need tunnels?

PA here.
Doesn't help me much, I only have relatives in Memphis.

Either tunnels or lots of earthmoving to achieve a mostly straight 2% grade. The two biggest problems are Cajon Pass and Cascade Pass which are the entrances to Los Angeles and Seattle. This would make the three main transcontinental routes (the Sunset Limited/Southwest Chief lines and the Empire Builder) work far better. Tehachapi Pass, Donner Pass, Soldier Summit and Rollins Pass are the third (and original) transcontinental route which if modernized would also alleviate congestion networkwide.

After wrestling with the problem for the past many years, I came to believe that America needs a two-tiered rail system.
1. a cargo system with enlarged cars 16+ ft wide, 80+ ft long, and capable over moving ~500 gross tons. This system should also allow for slow speed light rail for the sake of tourism.
2. an elevated high speed light rail, electrified, 250-300 mph is within our current technology if we decide to develop it. The faster the trains run, the more useful the system would be, and the more people it could carry.

The cost of the system would be prohibitive, yes, but the pay back would be 10 times what we put into it, as long as it were an extremely robust transportation system. Expected lifespan of such a system for the continental U.S. should be indefinite, certainly on the order of centuries.

You've already been helped, the Keystone Corridor's modernization was completed in 2015 which is why it runs (or at least, is legally capable of running) at 125 mph now. It's a completely sealed corridor (no grade crossings), if it wasn't for Kaisch nixing Ohio HSR you'd probably have a 200 mph train to Chicago.

Along with the fact that 35-40% of goods is shipped by trains in the US… We need trains how they are.

This and the deregulation in the 80s which stopped price fixing are the reasons why we ship more tons by freight rail than the supposedly pro-train Europe and China and we ship more of our freight as a percentage by rail as well. In Europe they ship shit mostly by truck in America all the industry has moved to rural areas and small downs with access to large rail yards which have high capacity, low usage, and essentially no maintenance because they are so over engineered.

Highspeed passanger trains are almost always worthless and often a massive money trap as they in Japan.

Go fuck yourself.

There's no reason for 16 foot wide cars, when intermodal containers are only 10x9x50. Also 80+ foot cars already exist, usually as centerbeams for bulk lumber. And elevated rail sounds great until you look at Eniment Domain costs inside cities. Which brings up the thing that historically has broken Amtrak: many large cities removed their stations and the streetcar networks that serviced them.

Take a look at Oakland, California for example: it's station is now in a fucking street with no bus service but 50 years ago they had a 6+ platform terminal with both light rail and ferry access. The old station had it's streetcars removed in the 60s (local homeowners got +6 feet to their backyards) and the regular train tracks removed when the Nimitz Freeway was expanded to ten lanes in the 90s. As a result, their train service is piss poor (especially compared to nearby San Jose and Sacramento) because they just don't support it.

They ride them.

No, they don't have trains. Most of south america's and africa's railroads have fallen into disrepair after they gained independence. The few exceptions include Mexico (due to US influence) and SA (as their trains are electrified, which means less maintence and less fuel needed).

Good point. I was think of the brown people in america.

Electrification is unworkable for freight rail in the U.S.

The distances and train density (both in terms of mass per train and in terms of number of trains per distance) are too great to make it viable.

The Trans-Siberian railway is about three times the length of the longest American railway and it's fully electrified from Moscow to Vladivostok. Works pretty damn well for the Russians.

They just pay off European companies to deal with maintaining them.

We ship more volume because our rail routes are longer and therefore more lucrative. America has not had an Iron Curtain and incompatible rail gauges preventing long haul rail development.

HSR is not all passenger rail, well developed commuter rail systems make a big difference. Even NYC's decrepit commuter rail systems manage 1 million riders a day. You can't deny that's effective.

Are you really into trains or do you actually work on trains? Or autism in true form, because that info off the top of your head is fucking incredible. Either way, keep it up user.

Probably a 1chan autist.

Could be simple autism.

I'm very interested in transportation, city planning, and stuff like that, and spend a lot of my free time compiling information like this for my own edification, and it's just autism, not a job. I thought we were all like that.

That first pic always gets me. How can train that large be used like that on a public street?

These projects are funded by taxpayers, and I'm a taxpayer. So keeping up on it is rather important because I don't want my tax money going down the toilet. And there's nothing "autistic" about transportation policy given that it's where your gas taxes go.

There are no laws against "street running" trains, oftentimes the RR company itself owns the street underneath as well. It's common in hole-in-the-wall towns because it's a holdover from the nineteenth century when shops would get their deliveries directly from trains (which would stop in the street and unload).

Oakland does it because Oakland is run by fucking retards.