Our City Online

Messageboard - Transportation

NOTE: You are viewing an archived version of the Columbus Underground forums/messageboard. As of 05/22/16 they have been closed to new comments and replies, but will remain accessible for archived searches and reference. For more information CLICK HERE

Columbus-Chicago Passenger Rail

Home Forums General Columbus Discussion Transportation Columbus-Chicago Passenger Rail

Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 248 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #507323

    peanutnozone
    Participant

    MRipley said:
    So you don’t think that the same type of security screening will be required for high-volume passenger rail if it were to become popular?

    I live near a station in the NE corridor, I’ve never been checked for or screened for ANYTHING in DC, Baltimore, Philly or New York. EVER. Just asked for the ticket once I’m on board.

    I really think once some form of rail is introduced to Columbus, people will marvel at the ease of getting on the train and the comparative speeds (and faster) versus driving. Plus getting to Columbus by train? Yes, please.

    #507324

    ricospaz
    Participant

    Graybeak said:
    I think the more important question is:
    If a train leaves Chicago traveling east at 110 miles per hour towards Cleveland at 8:37 am, and another train leaves Cleveland towards Chicago at 110 miles per hour, at what point will they arrive in Ft. Wayne to meet for lunch?

    You didn’t state the time the Cleveland train was leaving! haha

    #507325

    peanutnozone
    Participant

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_Madrid_train_bombings

    How coincidental. I was going to post something about this but I didn’t think it was relevant, but since it was brought up, I lived in Spain for the better part of 2007 in Toledo, about 75 km from Madrid. On weekends I made the 25 minute quick train ride into Madrid frequently. On the Toledo boarding, if you had a carry on (as I always did) it went through a conveyor scanner, which was at the pace of boarding so it didn’t slow you down, the entire train boarded in less than 5 minutes. On the Madrid side, the same. Nothing you had to walk through on either side. This was after the above mentioned attack, so I don’t know if three years later they decided to bring security down. Anyway, let’s just get this up and running! A Chicago – Columbus route makes a lot of sense.

    #507326

    columbusmike
    Participant

    rus said:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_Madrid_train_bombings

    Apples and oranges. You’re looking for very small amounts of explosives for aircraft travel vs backpacks with 22-lbs of explosives for the Madrid train bombings.

    #507327
    rus
    rus
    Participant

    peanutnozone said:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_Madrid_train_bombings

    How coincidental. I was going to post something about this but I didn’t think it was relevant, but since it was brought up, I lived in Spain for the better part of 2007 in Toledo, about 75 km from Madrid. On weekends I made the 25 minute quick train ride into Madrid frequently. On the Toledo boarding, if you had a carry on (as I always did) it went through a conveyor scanner, which was at the pace of boarding so it didn’t slow you down, the entire train boarded in less than 5 minutes. On the Madrid side, the same. Nothing you had to walk through on either side. This was after the above mentioned attack, so I don’t know if three years later they decided to bring security down. Anyway, let’s just get this up and running! A Chicago – Columbus route makes a lot of sense.

    I’m not saying airline style hassles would be effective or needed, but I doubt that the TSA wouldn’t want to expand their operations to include rail should that become as popular as air travel.

    #507328

    Twixlen
    Participant

    NEOBuckeye said:
    Personally, I don’t think we can or will tear down our Interstate highways anytime soon, though some innerbelts will certainly come down over the next decade or two. But the days of cheap, short-distance (<400 miles) domestic flights are numbered. That might not be so big of a deal, however, when a train can effectively get you from Columbus to New York or Chicago within the same or a shorter time frame, particularly once you take airport processing (e.g. baggage, security checks, etc.) and similar hassles into consideration.

    Interestingly… heard this story on NPR last night on the way home about how they’re looking to take down the highway that runs through Syracuse, NY – 81 is bridged thru town, literally dividing the city.

    It felt really familiar.

    A City Faces Its Berlin Wall

    #507329
    Walker Evans
    Walker Evans
    Keymaster

    Twixlen said:
    Interestingly… heard this story on NPR last night on the way home about how they’re looking to take down the highway that runs through Syracuse, NY – 81 is bridged thru town, literally dividing the city.

    It felt really familiar.

    A City Faces Its Berlin Wall

    Will add that link to the growing list, here:

    Urban Highway Removal

    #507330

    NerosNeptune
    Participant

    rus said:
    I’m not saying airline style hassles would be effective or needed, but I doubt that the TSA wouldn’t want to expand their operations to include rail should that become as popular as air travel.

    Rail is pretty popular on the east coast, and there aren’t any airline style hassles.

    #507331
    Steve
    Steve
    Participant

    The only problem we will run into after implementation (making 110 mph very difficult) is the same problem that Amtrak runs into all over the country: the dreaded freight trains.

    Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for freight. Just not when passenger and freight are on the same rails. They are toxic to each other.

    Nonetheless, I would love to see this a reality! I visit my siblings in Chicago all the time and it would be a fantastic trip via rail. :) :)

    Over time, we may eventually see an Acela-style prioritization on the rails (ie separate freight and passenger).

    #507332

    MRipley
    Participant

    columbusmike said:
    I would hope not. The dangers of extremely small explosives on a highly-pressurized aircraft vs a train are very different.

    NerosNeptune said:
    Rail is pretty popular on the east coast, and there aren’t any airline style hassles.

    Reading this article seems to indicate that it’s because it’s simply not feasable to operate airport style screening methods at rail stations. I’m sure people said the same thing about airline security before 9/11.

    https://www.ble-t.org/pr/news/headline.asp?id=16903

    #507333
    rus
    rus
    Participant

    MRipley said:
    Reading this article seems to indicate that it’s because it’s simply not feasable to operate airport style screening methods at rail stations. I’m sure people said the same thing about airline security before 9/11.

    https://www.ble-t.org/pr/news/headline.asp?id=16903

    Right. It’s more a political idea than a practical concern; bureaucracy likes to survive and expand, like any other group in that regard.

    #507334

    NerosNeptune
    Participant

    A lot of people pack onto a bus, too.. I don’t think we’ll see security screenings at bus stops. Or subways in NYC. At least I hope we never live in that world.

    #507335
    rus
    rus
    Participant

    NerosNeptune said:
    A lot of people pack onto a bus, too.. I don’t think we’ll see security screenings at bus stops. Or subways in NYC. At least I hope we never live in that world.

    Subways, you say?

    http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2005/07/searching_bags.html

    #507336

    NerosNeptune
    Participant

    Hadn’t heard about that.. though it says they will just randomly search bags, which I guess I would expect. Still different than going through a security line.

    #507337
    rus
    rus
    Participant

    NerosNeptune said:
    Hadn’t heard about that.. though it says they will just randomly search bags, which I guess I would expect. Still different than going through a security line.

    Sure, and a subway is different than interstate travel by rail. Call me a cynic, but it would be in the TSA’s interest to expand into rail if airline travel declines in favor of rail.

Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 248 total)

The forum ‘Transportation’ is closed to new topics and replies.

Subscribe below: