Hey, there! Log in / Register
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
Supertrain
He's right, you know. For all that the Acela's capable of, it's barely faster than the old and busted Metroliners that still operate on the same route, the culprits being poor infrastructure and the back and forth of the tracks, mainly through Connecticut. Germany, France, and Japan are obvious reference points for high speed rail, but even the UK's rather dated InterCity 125s and 225s can outrun Acela by virtue of relatively straight rails and decent bridges.
Nevertheless, in an ironic twist of fate, it was the utter destruction of their rail systems during World War II that allowed France, Germany, and Japan to rebuild with an eye to the future. If southern Connecticut had been pummeled into dust during the 40s, I'm sure we'd have a laser-straight piece of rail from Providence to New York, but instead we've got 300 years of uninterrupted development.
Boston to Albany to NYC?
Too late, natch, but wouldn't that route have been a lot easier to put truly high-speed rail on?
Why do you say that?
It sure doesn't look any shorter.
Straighter
Straight track means faster speeds. They'd also be able to stay out of some large areas with it. Unfortunately, they wouldn't be able to go through NYC as easily, and I'm sure that that was one of their biggest selling points.
Longer, actually, as the crow flies
Two sides of a triangle and all that. But the big problem along the Connecticut coast is all the curves. That's why they had to install those anti-nausea/anti-sway mechanisms - because they couldn't straighten out the track, and that's what really slows down the trains. Whereas the route from here to Albany and then from there to New York seems pretty straight.
all tracks
lead to New Haven
Germany's rail lines
In general rail lines in Germany aren't any less curvy than ours (with some exceptions to lines built in the last 30 years). German trains are much lighter than ours and don't have the same crash standards the US has (which makes them more vulnerable to breaking up in the event of an accident), making it easier to get to high speeed on existing lines without significant track upgrades. The Deutsche Bahn's ICE (Inter City Express) trains were revolutionary in this regard. The FRA imposes strict crash standards on US passenger rail cars, making them safer in the event of a crash, but adding much more weight to trains, which requires track upgrades.
I wish Kerry would show the
I wish Kerry would show the same concern for rail in other places than between his home and his office.
How about the 79mph federal speed limit imposed on passenger trains throughout much of the country? How about a governmentally owned infrastructure for rail traffic, ala car or air?
Acela Isn't the Only Priority
Cascading from Portland to Seattle to Vancouver here ...
These are very popular trains and they would benefit from some improvements that would drop the time to cover the distances from 3 to 4 hours to 2 to 3 hours. Every train I have been on has been sold out with a standby line.
People like to use trains between moderately close cities. Express runs and limited runs would improve the situation a lot, particularly between SFO and PDX and PDX and SEA. Unfortunately, stuff like Kerry is proposing doesn't help the real problem, which is chronic underfunding of the ENTIRE system and a lack of systematic study of where rail might pull loading from plane travel and under what conditions.