Passenger Trains > backsliding on SEHSR

http://www.newsobserver.com/2014/10/23/4258858_two-states-see-slow-start-for.html

With no hope of getting billions for 110-mph SEHSR anytime soon, the focus is shifting toward a simple 79-mph restoration of the pre-1986, ex-SAL direct route between Raleigh and Petersburg. The Carolinian and Silver Star could have a faster schedule and, as a matter of practicality, would avoid the "black hole" between Rocky Mount and Petersburg on the ex-ACL that contributes to late-running trains.

ctillnc Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> http://www.newsobserver.com/2014/10/23/4258858_two
> -states-see-slow-start-for.html
>
> With no hope of getting billions for 110-mph SEHSR
> anytime soon, the focus is shifting toward a
> simple 79-mph restoration of the pre-1986, ex-SAL
> direct route between Raleigh and Petersburg. The
> Carolinian and Silver Star could have a faster
> schedule and, as a matter of practicality, would
> avoid the "black hole" between Rocky Mount and
> Petersburg on the ex-ACL that contributes to
> late-running trains.

Why not 90 mph?

ctillnc Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> http://www.newsobserver.com/2014/10/23/4258858_two
> -states-see-slow-start-for.html
>
> With no hope of getting billions for 110-mph SEHSR
> anytime soon, the focus is shifting toward a
> simple 79-mph restoration of the pre-1986, ex-SAL
> direct route between Raleigh and Petersburg. The
> Carolinian and Silver Star could have a faster
> schedule and, as a matter of practicality, would
> avoid the "black hole" between Rocky Mount and
> Petersburg on the ex-ACL that contributes to
> late-running trains.

Much more practical. If we could only get train speeds back to what they were in the 1950s. . . .

Good, let's get on with it. 110 mph was going to poison the well anyhow for the ultimate HSR.

> Why not 90 mph?

Because of frequent curves along the route. The fastest running time I'm aware of on the SAL Petersburg-Raleigh was 2 hours 10 minutes (the Silver Meteor without any intermediate stop). That's 58 mph average. There just aren't many places where a train can run 90 or even 79 sustained. It's unclear that Class V track would provide a significant decrease in running times. SEHSR would have straightened out most of those curves, but that's precisely why SEHSR is unaffordable at present.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/24/14 07:29 by ctillnc.

This is great news..I applaud Virginia and North Carolina for a common sense plan, but how sad for the US as whole since we have to struggle to get back to where we were in the 50's.....While other countries build HSR without issue...

Steve

What, where is SEHSR?

Other countries are even more socialist that we have become. They all have much higher taxes and much higher gas costs. Where exactly do you expect the money for more HSR to come from? Higher taxes? The Federal Govt. is already over 17 TRILLION in debt. Not the time for new projects like this until the budget deficit is paid down.

Southeast High Speed Rail.http://www.sehsr.org/

andersonb109, first, let me say that I don't necessarily disagree with you on rebuilding this segment of railroad between Petersburg, VA, and Raleigh, NC.

Having said that, I'd be curious to know what your position is on various taxpayer-funded passenger-rail projects. Doesn't matter whether it's federal or state because the money all comes from the same people.

Various commuter-rail services?
NEC Amtrak service?
Long-distance trains?
State-supported shorter-distance trains?
State grants to various rail projects, both passenger and freight?

The list goes on and on.

I don't want to get into all the vast federal projects that we could argue about forever, but I'd be curious to see what federal and state-funded projects you and others on TO think are worthwhile and which aren't.

andersonb109 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Other countries are even more socialist that we
> have become. They all have much higher taxes and
> much higher gas costs. Where exactly do you expect
> the money for more HSR to come from? Higher taxes?
> The Federal Govt. is already over 17 TRILLION in
> debt. Not the time for new projects like this
> until the budget deficit is paid down.

There's nothing inherently wrong with debt. After all, borrowing is how most people fund their homes, education, expansion of small businesses, etc. Incurring public debt to improve infrastructure is the same thing. Highways, seaports, airports, schools, etc. have long been built with funds from bonds. Plus, it's important to remember that one person's debt is another person's asset. If public public borrowing didn't exist, I'll bet your own investment portfolio wouldn't be nearly as healthy. The vast majority of public debt is money owed to, and interest paid to, US investors. And those investors aren't just Warren Buffett or Mitt Romney - they're pension funds, mutual funds, insurance companies, and other entities that hold the savings of average Americans. The issue isn't the debt itself - it's whether any specific investment being made is a sensible one in terms of improving infrastructure in a way that supports economic growth.

Dave

Wikipedia states "On June 30, 2014, public debt held by the public was approximately $12.6 trillion or about 74% of Q1 2014 GDP. Intragovernmental holdings stood at $5.1 trillion (30%), giving a combined total public debt of $17.6 trillion or about 103% of Q1 2014 GDP. $6.0 trillion or approximately 48% of the debt held by the public was owned by foreign investors, the largest of which were the People's Republic of China and Japan at about $1.3 trillion and $1.2 trillion respectively."

ctillnc Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Wikipedia states "On June 30, 2014, public debt
> held by the public was approximately $12.6
> trillion or about 74% of Q1 2014 GDP.
> Intragovernmental holdings stood at $5.1 trillion
> (30%), giving a combined total public debt of
> $17.6 trillion or about 103% of Q1 2014 GDP. $6.0
> trillion or approximately 48% of the debt held by
> the public was owned by foreign investors, the
> largest of which were the People's Republic of
> China and Japan at about $1.3 trillion and $1.2
> trillion respectively."

I'm pretty sure "intragovernmental holdings" largely consists of US government bonds purchased with surplus funds from the Social Security Trust Fund - i.e. money we in effect owe ourselves.

Dave

ctillnc Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > Why not 90 mph?
>
> Because of frequent curves along the route. The
> fastest running time I'm aware of on the SAL
> Petersburg-Raleigh was 2 hours 10 minutes (the
> Silver Meteor without any intermediate stop).
> That's 58 mph average. There just aren't many
> places where a train can run 90 or even 79
> sustained. It's unclear that Class V track would
> provide a significant decrease in running times.
> SEHSR would have straightened out most of those
> curves, but that's precisely why SEHSR is
> unaffordable at present.

I have a May 1959 Official Guide which shows the Silver Star carded at 128 minutes each way Petersburg - Raleigh (135.5 miles), and the Silver Meteor a minute faster. That's an average of 64 MPH....quite respectable for a heavy train on a less than straight/flat railroad. I wonder if tilting equipment might allow even faster times? Unfortunately transit times over the RF&P have slowed as traffic has increased, but if the current best time of 115 minutes (Amtrak 89) could become the norm, 4.5 hour timings over the full Washington to Raleigh route might be possible.

Dave

Speed, to an extent will be some what irrelevant. The Star already sits 30 mins in Savannah, and the carrier is not going to permit Amtrak to adjust the entire schedule because a new route shaves off even more time. We once tried to adjust the Meteors schedule by 3 mins, carrier denied it.

Posted from Android

All along the objective of SEHSR has been 4 hours flat Raleigh-DC, supplemented by 2 hrs 30 minutes Charlotte-Raleigh. Given the limitations of the ex-RF&P, the only way they could achieve the objective is to rebuild Petersburg-Raleigh for sustained 110 mph.

My guess is that if the S-line is put back in at 79 mph, you'll see something like 2:20 Petersburg-Raleigh. It won't be as fast as the best SAL time for several reasons: the Burgess cutoff is longer than the abandoned SAL route through downtown Petersburg, the Ettrick station is farther north than the SAL station, and there will be at least one intermediate station stop (probably Henderson NC) that the Silver Meteor and Silver Star often skipped. 2:20 means saving about 35 minutes from the current Selma-Rocky Mount routing. That said, to kv1guy's point, it would be possible to tighten up the current schedule if somebody pays to reinstall the missing second track between Collier Yard and Rocky Mount. That would cost a lot less than putting the S-line back into operation.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/25/14 07:32 by ctillnc.

ctillnc Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> .... That said, to kv1guy's point, it would be
> possible to tighten up the current schedule if
> somebody pays to reinstall the missing second
> track between Collier Yard and Rocky Mount. That
> would cost a lot less than putting the S-line back
> into operation.

Something to think about, and it could be completed sooner, too.

> Something to think about, and it could be completed sooner, too.

But they won't. Improving the A-line instead of rebuilding the S-line would mean a reversal of every position SEHSR has taken. SEHSR also rejected an intermediate option running Raleigh-Norlina-Weldon-Petersburg. Would have cost a lot less than billions to straighten the S-line in southern Virginia. The HSR purists wouldn't go for it.

That said, there is ARRA money to install a few new crossovers on the A-line. Those will help, but they won't make the difference between night and day.

At least some states are actually smart on resurrecting rights of way and upgrades compared to CA HSR which wants their own right of way in most of it's areas and still haven't broken ground yet!

ctillnc Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > Why not 90 mph?
>
> Because of frequent curves along the route. The
> fastest running time I'm aware of on the SAL
> Petersburg-Raleigh was 2 hours 10 minutes (the
> Silver Meteor without any intermediate stop).
> That's 58 mph average. There just aren't many
> places where a train can run 90 or even 79
> sustained. It's unclear that Class V track would
> provide a significant decrease in running times.
> SEHSR would have straightened out most of those
> curves, but that's precisely why SEHSR is
> unaffordable at present.

No, why not ease the curves with longer spirals and run at 6" superelevation and 5" unbalance? This would probably let most of them be 90 mph.