# Colorado HSR / Advanced Guideway System plans



## afigg (Nov 8, 2012)

Have not heard from Colorado in a while with respect to HSR, but Colorado DOT is still working on plans for a high speed rail line along the I-70 corridor. But they are looking at Advanced Guideway Systems, not necessarily a standard HSR system according to this newspaper article.



> The Colorado Department of Transportation is eying the future by developing the plan to build an advanced guideway system (AGS) — basically high speed trains — along the Interstate 70 corridor to connect to other systems planned for the Front Range.
> 
> Last week, representatives from CDOT's Division of Transit and Rail met with consultants, Eagle County staff, and Commissioners Peter Runyon and Sara Fisher. Representatives from Vail and Avon were also at the meeting. The CDOT members said the goal is to have the AGS operational by 2025.


Having a completed rail line by 2025 is rather ambitious, especially if they have not settled on the technology. If they select a specific guideway design that is not conventional 4'8" track or compatible with HSR trains, that would prevent the tracks into the mountains from ever being used for a future HSR line to Salt Lake City or Las Vegas such as Xpress West has proposed for future expansions.

Here is a political element that comes into play with AGS plans such as this:



> Some impacts CDOT promised to investigate include those on communities and the airport. An AGS might result in more people living in the mountains and commuting to Denver on the system. That could change the nature of a community. Further, Eagle County Regional Airport Director Greg Phillips said there will surely be some impact on flight service at the airport.
> “We want to be wary about collapsing air service here,” he said. “If it becomes so easy to get to Denver International Airport, where a flight might be cheaper, people might just go there instead. Part of this study should consider that impact to the airport.”


Too bad, but if the AGS or HSR line collapses air service to a regional airport and consolidates it at Denver International, so be it. Besides, the long term economic and air service prospects for regional airports such as Eagle County are rather poor with higher oil prices.


----------



## Anderson (Nov 8, 2012)

I'm going to be a bit of a buzzkiller here, but if there's one thing I'd like the Feds to lean on, it's keeping everyone to standard gauge, broadly compatible trackage for new (non-LRT) systems unless there's a _very_ good reason to switch. I know there are some legacy systems that're too much of a hassle to switch over, and that's fine, but incompatible gauges just cause trouble.

With that said, I'm glad that CO is looking at _something_ on this front...they've been the most mysteriously quiet area around on this front.

As to the airports...eh, I'm not going to be sorry to see outlying airports drop service. Honestly, a quick connection to Denver might actually serve folks in Eagle County better even if the airport goes bust...but it's not like we're not seeing this phenomenon elsewhere (witness Pittsburgh International...or, really, Newport News International after Southwest pulled out). You've got lots of overbuilt airport capacity as it is.


----------



## CHamilton (Jun 14, 2013)

From NARP:



> *A planning group convened by the Colorado Department of Transportation and the Federal Railroad Administration had identified five potential passenger high speed rail routes. The $2.8 million alternatives study is part of an effort to deal with Colorado’s explosive growth.*"Long term, we need to provide travel choices for Coloradans," CDOT’s transit and rail program manager David Krutsinger told reporters. "On the Front Range, we expect 2 million more people by the year 2040."
> 
> [See an enhanced map of the five proposals]
> 
> ...


----------



## John Bredin (Jun 14, 2013)

What is the logic, if that word applies, to two of the scenarios not serving downtown Denver via its Union Station?! Do more people actualy go to Ft. Collins or Pueblo (served in all five scenarios) than Denver city center, or it is that the minds behind this proposal believe the old "nobody goes downtown anymore" canard?


----------



## Anderson (Jun 16, 2013)

Part of the logic is undoubtedly that there's already a substantial mass transit network in Denver, so you would probably have it meet one or more of those lines (or extend some of those lines to meet it). What puzzles me is that scenario 2 is cheaper than scenario 1 in spite of covering all the same territory and adding more track length. My guess is that it's down to the mix of AGS and HSR.

The other element here is that it is _entirely_ possible that you might see an additional Amtrak station added at wherever the HSR meets the CZ's route.


----------



## CHamilton (Nov 20, 2013)

High-speed rail from Fort Collins to Springs would cost $9.8 billion





> GOLDEN — A proposed high-speed rail system from Fort Collins to DIA and then south to Colorado Springs would cost about $9.8 billion and carry roughly 13 million passengers a year, according to planners Tuesday night.
> 
> That scenario is the most favored among those being considered as part of a overall push to connect the Front Range and Interstate 70 west to Eagle County with some form of high-speed rail.


----------



## Anderson (Nov 20, 2013)

..and the odds of a system succeeding which doesn't bother going downtown in some meaningful form are?


----------



## chakk (Nov 20, 2013)

Some of the cost differences in the various proposals come from how many miles of tunnels will need to be built in the mountains to keep the grades at a reasonable level. Some of the propulsion systems being considered would require that grades be kept below a few percent, which would require more miles of tunnel to cross the Continental Divide at a lower elevation. Highway Interstate 70 has a 7% grade from the twin bore Eisenhower Tunnel at the Continental Divide (each bore is approximately 1.7 miles long) down the west slope to the town of Silverthorne.

To lower the grade, the railroad route would have to go underground much farther west (and exit on the east side of the divide much farther east).

My bet is that the listed costs would turn out to be gross underestimates of what the true costs of construction would turn out to be.


----------



## jis (Nov 21, 2013)

Anderson said:


> I'm going to be a bit of a buzzkiller here, but if there's one thing I'd like the Feds to lean on, it's keeping everyone to standard gauge, broadly compatible trackage for new (non-LRT) systems unless there's a _very_ good reason to switch. I know there are some legacy systems that're too much of a hassle to switch over, and that's fine, but incompatible gauges just cause trouble.
> 
> With that said, I'm glad that CO is looking at _something_ on this front...they've been the most mysteriously quiet area around on this front.
> 
> As to the airports...eh, I'm not going to be sorry to see outlying airports drop service. Honestly, a quick connection to Denver might actually serve folks in Eagle County better even if the airport goes bust...but it's not like we're not seeing this phenomenon elsewhere (witness Pittsburgh International...or, really, Newport News International after Southwest pulled out). You've got lots of overbuilt airport capacity as it is.


It is called an AGS instead of HSR for a reason. The intention apparently is to keep the option open at least for the DIA - Vail segment to use non standard guideway system allowing for much higher gradients than steel wheel on steel rail, ostensibly to reduce the need for tunneling and thus contain cost, So the business about "standard gauge" for such a segment will probably be irrelevant. And frankly given the way things are, unless they use federal money the feds will have relatively little control. Since this will be a system unconnected with the interstate railway system, STB will probably wash its hands off of it. And if (a big if) they can show that an AGS will work out to be cheaper than standard rail, there is no one in Washington DC today who will object.


----------



## George Harris (Nov 21, 2013)

Vail - denver - DIA, and Ft. Collins - Denver - Colorado Springs - Pueblo? Where are the people to get the ridership needed to justify the expense?


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Nov 22, 2013)

George Harris said:


> Vail - denver - DIA, and Ft. Collins - Denver - Colorado Springs - Pueblo? Where are the people to get the ridership needed to justify the expense?


If you build it they will come. By airway and highway anyway.


----------



## Shawn Ryu (Nov 22, 2013)

George Harris said:


> Vail - denver - DIA, and Ft. Collins - Denver - Colorado Springs - Pueblo? Where are the people to get the ridership needed to justify the expense?


I think they should try it with NON HSR system first. Is there a freight train track that goes between all those cities? Put a train on there and see how that does.


----------



## Anderson (Nov 23, 2013)

Shawn Ryu said:


> George Harris said:
> 
> 
> > Vail - denver - DIA, and Ft. Collins - Denver - Colorado Springs - Pueblo? Where are the people to get the ridership needed to justify the expense?
> ...


The issue is that BNSF uses directional running on two single-track lines south of Denver, IIRC. UP does the same thing with the ex-SP and ex-WP lines over the Sierras, but in that case the _Zephyr_ is grandfathered in.


----------



## jphjaxfl (Nov 23, 2013)

Anderson said:


> Shawn Ryu said:
> 
> 
> > George Harris said:
> ...


In pre-Amtrak days, the passenger trains south of Denver to Pueblo used directional running too. The last train that lasted until A-Day was Santa Fe's Denver-Lajunta train. Not too many years before, however, a section of the Denver Zephyr ran between Denver and Colorado Springs and there was Texas Zephyr and Colorado Eagle. In Colorado Springs, southbound trains of all railroads used DRG&W Station while northbound trains used the Santa Fe Station. It worked well for a number of years. I ate lunch in one of the former passenger train stations (DRG&W) in Colorado Springs which became a nice restaurant.


----------



## George Harris (Nov 25, 2013)

Shawn Ryu said:


> George Harris said:
> 
> 
> > Vail - denver - DIA, and Ft. Collins - Denver - Colorado Springs - Pueblo? Where are the people to get the ridership needed to justify the expense?
> ...


It would be so excruiatingly that it would have no ridership other than fanatic railfans.


----------

