High Speed Rail Development in the US « Columbus Underground Messageboard

Columbus Underground Messageboard » General Columbus Discussion » Transit

High Speed Rail Development in the US

[636 posts] [86 contributors]

Topic Rating:

(Total Ratings: )
Rate this topic:

Started 2 years ago by Walker
Latest reply from Cole

Tags:

« Previous 1…303132 Next »

Buster Bluth
Columbus, OH
Login to Send PM

Walker said:
Because the ones in Europe were upgraded from older slower foundations systems and our Governor is unwilling to start with a foundation system that we could eventually build into a high-speed system.

I'm not following the logic as to why you need to upgrade existing track to eventually get to something like ~150mph. The 3C would have been way too slow and failed and probably turned off all of Ohio from trying HSR for another generation or so.

Is is literally impossible to make a plan that starts out with a real HSR, ones with speeds that are impressive to nearly everybody? If I'm driving 80mph on the freeway, a 110mph train isn't going to impress me much. I want to be going double the speed of my car, at a minimum.

Posted 3 months ago #
Walker
The KLD / Downtown
Login to Send PM

Buster Bluth said:
I'm not following the logic as to why you need to upgrade existing track to eventually get to something like ~150mph. The 3C would have been way too slow and failed and probably turned off all of Ohio from trying HSR for another generation or so.

That's an assumption. The 3C could have very well met ridership expectations at slower speeds and made a strong case study for additional funding for improvements. Your definition or my definition of success/failure really doesn't matter. What matters is the more tangible measurements made at the state and federal levels.

Buster Bluth said:
Is is literally impossible to make a plan that starts out with a real HSR, ones with speeds that are impressive to nearly everybody?

Possible? Sure. China's doing it. Probably in Ohio? Not likely.

Buster Bluth said:
If I'm driving 80mph on the freeway, a 110mph train isn't going to impress me much. I want to be going double the speed of my car, at a minimum.

I drove 65mph to Cincinnati and back last weekend, and I would have gladly taken a 45mph train if it mean that I could have gotten work done on my laptop while travelling instead of wasting three hours watching the road. That doesn't mean I'd always take it though, as sometimes the drive has benefits that outweigh the alternatives.

At some point you have to remove your own personal standards from what you'd like to see out of the first phase of a startup system and start thinking about how it will benefit the 11 million Ohioans as a whole. Otherwise, it'll never get built it if has to satisfy every last desire of every single individual.

Posted 3 months ago #
Buster Bluth
Columbus, OH
Login to Send PM

Well I think assuming that it benefits 11 million Ohioans may be a bit of a stretch, no?

I could be clearer. I want HSR as much as the next City Planner, I hope I live to see an Ohio with some super-system of intraurban streetcars and interurban HSR to tie Cincinnati, Dayton, Columbus, Cleveland, and Toledo together. But, I just don't see many suburbanites taking a 45mph train when they can drive 80mph and then drive around the city as they please. I think we can do much better than 45mph average speed; that isn't HSR and doesn't excite many people. Perhaps I am wrong though.

Posted 3 months ago #
joshlapp
SoHud
Login to Send PM

Buster Bluth said:
Well I think assuming that it benefits 11 million Ohioans may be a bit of a stretch, no?

I could be clearer. I want HSR as much as the next City Planner, I hope I live to see an Ohio with some super-system of intraurban streetcars and interurban HSR to tie Cincinnati, Dayton, Columbus, Cleveland, and Toledo together. But, I just don't see many suburbanites taking a 45mph train when they can drive 80mph and then drive around the city as they please. I think we can do much better than 45mph average speed; that isn't HSR and doesn't excite many people. Perhaps I am wrong though.

One big problem is sticker shock. It was $400 million for the 3C. We are talking about perhaps $10 billion or more for true HSR.

Posted 3 months ago #
Walker
The KLD / Downtown
Login to Send PM

Buster Bluth said:
Well I think assuming that it benefits 11 million Ohioans may be a bit of a stretch, no?

Directly benefit? No. Indirectly benefit? Yes.

Buster Bluth said:
I could be clearer. I want HSR as much as the next City Planner, I hope I live to see an Ohio with some super-system of intraurban streetcars and interurban HSR to tie Cincinnati, Dayton, Columbus, Cleveland, and Toledo together. But, I just don't see many suburbanites taking a 45mph train when they can drive 80mph and then drive around the city as they please. I think we can do much better than 45mph average speed; that isn't HSR and doesn't excite many people. Perhaps I am wrong though.

I don't see many suburbanites (or rural dwellers) taking trains either, but we don't need 100% of the population to be on board for alternate transit options to be viable. We don't even need a majority of them. No roadway is built expecting everyone to drive on it. It's there to serve a smaller portion of a population even though it's funded by all. Same goes for bike lanes and sidewalks and airports.

The 3C in it's slow format could have easily served business commuters, students, the elderly, the disabled, weekend travelers, and many other demographics. Personally, I probably would not have been a frequent rider with my family of four because driving our car would be cheaper overall, but that doesn't mean that there isn't a significant number of other people who would benefit. And indirectly, drivers benefit from fewer cars on the road, which relieves congestion.

Anyway, I agree with you that we should be able to do better than what was proposed with the 3C, but unfortunately that's not the economic reality of the United States that we live in today. We have to take a first step eventually before we can make a giant leap. And our discussion is all for naught anyway, because our governor made it clear that Ohio will not be taking that first step anytime soon.

Posted 3 months ago #
gramarye
In Exile
Login to Send PM

joshlapp said:
One big problem is sticker shock. It was $400 million for the 3C. We are talking about perhaps $10 billion or more for true HSR.

This.

The 3C system was reasonable not because it was going to be a great system but because it was going to be a good system with a great value. (By contrast, the budget for reconstructing the 70-71 split, which despite all its complexity is just two freeway interchanges, has mushroomed into the multiple billions.) The fact that much of the infrastructure was also in place also meant that there were fewer variables with the potential to blow up into massive delays and cost overruns.

Right now, the ambitious project in California is providing as much fodder for opponents of rail as it is for supporters of rail. The projected completion date for the system has been pushed back to something like fifteen years out, and the estimated costs of the project are already in the upper atmosphere and accelerating to the point of escape velocity.

Posted 3 months ago #
johnwirtz
Evanston, IL
Login to Send PM

Buster Bluth said:
Well I think assuming that it benefits 11 million Ohioans may be a bit of a stretch, no?

I could be clearer. I want HSR as much as the next City Planner, I hope I live to see an Ohio with some super-system of intraurban streetcars and interurban HSR to tie Cincinnati, Dayton, Columbus, Cleveland, and Toledo together. But, I just don't see many suburbanites taking a 45mph train when they can drive 80mph and then drive around the city as they please. I think we can do much better than 45mph average speed; that isn't HSR and doesn't excite many people. Perhaps I am wrong though.

I don't want any streetcars unless they go at least double the speed limit, probably 50-60 MPH on High Street minimum.

Posted 3 months ago #
gramarye
In Exile
Login to Send PM

johnwirtz said:
I don't want any streetcars unless they go at least double the speed limit, probably 50-60 MPH on High Street minimum.

That's not fair to BB (or anyone).

Streetcars are not just miniaturized intercity passenger rail systems. They often get lumped together because people think that anything that moves on rails must be like anything else that moves on rails, but they are very different systems.

Even most of the supporters of the slower 3C system would want to see higher-speed (110+ mph) trains on it eventually. I don't know of anyone who would want to see 60mph streetcars along High.

Posted 3 months ago #
Brant
Gahanna
Login to Send PM

johnwirtz said:
I don't want any streetcars unless they go at least double the speed limit, probably 50-60 MPH on High Street minimum.

Funny :)

Posted 3 months ago #
johnwirtz
Evanston, IL
Login to Send PM

gramarye said:
That's not fair to BB (or anyone).

Streetcars are not just miniaturized intercity passenger rail systems. They often get lumped together because people think that anything that moves on rails must be like anything else that moves on rails, but they are very different systems.

Even most of the supporters of the slower 3C system would want to see higher-speed (110+ mph) trains on it eventually. I don't know of anyone who would want to see 60mph streetcars along High.

You know I know what streetcars are and do. I was trying to illustrate the irony that BB seems to find value with intracity transit that is slower than cars, but not intercity transit. Sure, they serve different trip purposes, but they're both transit, and people would use both for many of the same reasons. A faster 3C would be better than a slower 3C, but it doesn't necessarily have to be faster than a car to have value and be well used.

Posted 3 months ago #
GCrites80s
5xNW
Login to Send PM

Did you know that I can probably run up ten flights of stairs faster than an elevator that has to stop at every floor? Did you know that an elevator costs $250,000? We could be using that money to build more, longer stairs.

Posted 3 months ago #
johnwirtz
Evanston, IL
Login to Send PM

GCrites80s said:
Did you know that I can probably run up ten flights of stairs faster than an elevator that has to stop at every floor? Did you know that an elevator costs $250,000? We could be using that money to build more, longer stairs.

Or longer legs

Posted 3 months ago #
Mercurius
First Avenue
Login to Send PM

johnwirtz said:
You know I know what streetcars are and do. I was trying to illustrate the irony that BB seems to find value with intracity transit that is slower than cars, but not intercity transit. Sure, they serve different trip purposes, but they're both transit, and people would use both for many of the same reasons. A faster 3C would be better than a slower 3C, but it doesn't necessarily have to be faster than a car to have value and be well used.

http://visually.visually.netdna-cdn.com/USInterstatesasaSubwayMap_4f32a6dc9a6f0.jpg

Posted 3 months ago #
Walker
The KLD / Downtown
Login to Send PM

Very cool map. ;)

Posted 3 months ago #
johnwirtz
Evanston, IL
Login to Send PM

I saw that earlier this week, although I don't recall who linked to it. I like maps.

Posted 3 months ago #
Mercurius
First Avenue
Login to Send PM

johnwirtz said:
I saw that earlier this week, although I don't recall who linked to it. I like maps.

What, you think you're better than me! You sound like one of those condescending train rider types.

Posted 3 months ago #
johnwirtz
Evanston, IL
Login to Send PM

Mercurius said:
What, you think you're better than me! You sound like one of those condescending train rider types.

Let me clarify. Cool post!

Posted 3 months ago #
lifeontwowheels
Highland West
Login to Send PM

Drove up to Akron to watch my sister dive at MAC finals. Not a bad drive but can't help thinking how much better it would have been to pass the time reading a book and sipping coffee (or a cold beer).

Posted 3 months ago #
cheap
Westgate
Login to Send PM

lifeontwowheels said:
Drove up to Akron to watch my sister dive at MAC finals. Not a bad drive but can't help thinking how much better it would have been to pass the time reading a book and sipping coffee (or a cold beer).

yeah,but you can drive your car butt naked.

try that on a train.

Posted 3 months ago #
NEOBuckeye
Ohio At-Large
Login to Send PM

lifeontwowheels said:
Drove up to Akron to watch my sister dive at MAC finals. Not a bad drive but can't help thinking how much better it would have been to pass the time reading a book and sipping coffee (or a cold beer).

+1
I've made that drive more times than I can count. Columbus to Akron (or Cleveland) and back via I-71 is really not a terrible drive, and Goasis on Rt. 250 through Ashland is a nice half-way point if you need to make a stop along the way. Still, a train ride would make for a relaxing and far more productive trip.

I always figured we might see a direct line between Columbus and Cleveland, with Cleveland serving as the main hub in a spoke and hub system for NE Ohio that connects to Akron, Canton, Youngstown, etc. Oh well, maybe in 15 years or so once Ohio gets a chief executive whose vision and outlook are based in 21st century limited resource realities instead of some illusory 1950s "Ozzie and Harriet" suburban & car-driven fantasy.

Posted 3 months ago #