# Penn Students Create Ambitious Plan for Rail Service



## MrFSS (Aug 14, 2010)

Amtrak and 11 Northeastern states in May asked the Federal Railroad Administration to do such an environmental study as part of a comprehensive examination of passenger rail's future in the corridor.

That could pave the way for more federal funding and more ambitious planning for high-speed service.

Amtrak calls its current Acela trains "high-speed," based on service that can reach 135 m.p.h. between New York and Washington and 150 m.p.h. for a brief stretch between New York and Boston. But the average speed for the Acela trains is considerably lower: 81 m.p.h. between New York and Washington and 65 m.p.h. between New York and Boston.

*FULL STORY*


----------



## Birdy (Aug 15, 2010)

The Penn study looks pretty decent. If a mere upgrade is so expensive, the full treatment needs to be seriously considered. Its way better than that FRA map with its odd gaps that you see popping up now and again.


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (Aug 20, 2010)

They're proposing to be content with an hour and forty five minutes from Boston to Manhattan. In other words, they're proposing to keep that trip long enough that it will be an intercity trip taken relatively infrequently by any given passenger.

That trip is only 231 miles on the current alignment. With a sufficiently straight new alignment, it should be possible to reduce Boston to Manhattan train travel time to the commuter rail range of about an hour. (Possibly a bit less than an hour if the trains operate at 300 MPH or more; possibly a bit more if the trains are limited to 220 MPH and have to take a conventional route through the suburbs into the downtowns.)

If 37 minutes from downtown Philadelphia to Manhattan is practical, there ought to be trains that start on some of the more popular conventional speed commuter rail routes in Philadelphia, possibly at points no more than 53 minutes from downtown Philadelphia, and then run through to Manhattan on the high speed tracks. (Actually, probably a bit less than 53 minutes to account for dwell time in downtown Philadelphia.) That would increase the number of stations within a 90 minute one seat ride of downtown Manhattan.

It's interesting that they propose to spend lots of money to get the high speed trains to stop at the Philadelphia Airport, but the new T F Green Airport Station right along the existing NEC that's supposed to begin operation next month or so still isn't supposed to get intercity service according to their plan. Is this based upon some careful analysis of T F Green being a smaller airport, or is it an oversight? (It presumably isn't that they think installing the catenary over the platform tracks would be too expensive, although the cost of the catenary is what's keeping the Northeast Regional away in the short term.)


----------



## jis (Aug 20, 2010)

If you really want to get to Boston fast, you would not conceive of an inland cow-path, albeit with gentler curves. You'd follow LIRR more or less straight ROW to Riverhead and then a new straight ROW to orient Point and tunnel to east of Groton CT and join in with the straighter portions of the NEC at just east of Westerley. That will be a shorter distance and provide a truly HSR.

Do some tunneling around Providence to hit TF Green as well as downtown Providence. Forget about Hartford and New Haven.

BTW Terryville is miles and miles from SUNY at Stony Brook. Who are they kidding? Besides it should be interesting to see the rich Port Jeff and North Shore NIMBY's dismantle the plan to dig through and under their pristine village.  Whereas heading straight east from Ronkonkoma to Riverhead is through relatively lightly populated areas and farmlands. Heck one could even conceivably follow the LIE alignment in that area which is remarkably straight.


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (Aug 20, 2010)

I had also somehow been under the impression that there were some Long Island residents who were opposed to any sort of bridge or tunnel from anywhere in the eastern 2/3 of Long Island to Connecticut.


----------



## birdy (Aug 21, 2010)

An hour and forty five minutes to cover 231 miles not good enough? That seems in line with most high speed rail systems, which typically average a little over 100 mph with stops, doesnt it?


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (Aug 28, 2010)

Is there an example of an existing 186+ MPH HSR system that takes more than 90 minutes to get from one end of the 186+ MPH track to the other?


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (Aug 28, 2010)

I was just looking at the shape of the track from Trenton to Newark Airport on Google Maps.

Most of it seems pretty straight. The problem that is obvious to me for 220 or 250 MPH running is that there are occasional curves which are too tight. Mostly this is where the direction of the tangent track changes, but the track also avoids the center of Metuchen.

Would it be practical to build two track tunnels maybe 100-200 feet deep under Metuchen and at each of the other tighter than ideal curves, with the tunnels curved to allow 250 MPH operation, and move the center express tracks into those tunnels? If so, are there any issues with ROW width that would prevent 250 MPH operation on the tangent portions of the express tracks that are currently on the surface? (Obviously some catenary replacement would be needed for faster speeds, but that cost may not be all that significant compared to tunneling costs.)


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (Sep 3, 2010)

In looking at Google Maps, I'm wondering if this might be a viable high speed route from Trenton to downtown Philadelphia:

Follow the existing track from the Trenton platforms to the vicinity of the yard in Pennsylvania that NJT uses for overnight layovers for the Trenton trains; this is close enough to the Trenton stop that it may not matter if the first mile or two is not high speed. Follow the tangent track for a few miles on the surface. Somewhere around Sesame Place Amusement Park or Oxford Valley road, enter a tunnel maybe 5-8 miles long which very gradually curves to come out a bit beyond Neshaminy Falls, lined up with the tangent track. There's freight track from Neshaminy Falls to approximately Cheltenham; it appears that starting a mile or so before Cheltenham where this track curves off, there is also abandoned right of way that is nearly tangent just about all the way to St Christopher's Hospital for Children, where there's a relatively sharp curve connecting that abandoned right of way to the NEC. But the route from Neshaminy Falls to the hospital looks very nearly straight except at the very ends.

The abandoned right of way is not entirely free from encroachment, but it looks mostly intact, and selective tunneling and/or reclaiming that right of way may be just as cost effective as any of the alternatives.

Phase 1 could be to just connect this to the existing NEC in downtown Philadelphia, and phase 2 could be to build a tunnel from this right of way to Market East.


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (Sep 3, 2010)

jis said:


> Do some tunneling around Providence to hit TF Green as well as downtown Providence. Forget about Hartford and New Haven.


Do you figure the votes of the Senators from Connecticut will have any effect on what gets built?


----------



## amamba (Sep 4, 2010)

Is the TF Green station right on the NEC? For some reason I thought it was on a spur. I do know that the MBTA will be starting that service very soon. It would be GREAT if amtrak could somehow utilize the station as well, but probably unlikely unless some investment is made.


----------



## Eric S (Sep 4, 2010)

amamba said:


> Is the TF Green station right on the NEC? For some reason I thought it was on a spur. I do know that the MBTA will be starting that service very soon. It would be GREAT if amtrak could somehow utilize the station as well, but probably unlikely unless some investment is made.


From what I've read, the station is on the NEC, but its platform (or platforms?) is served by an unelectrified station track/siding. So, unless/until Amtrak or MBTA/RIDOT install catenary on the station track/siding, Amtrak will not be stopping there.


----------



## AlanB (Sep 4, 2010)

Eric S said:


> amamba said:
> 
> 
> > Is the TF Green station right on the NEC? For some reason I thought it was on a spur. I do know that the MBTA will be starting that service very soon. It would be GREAT if amtrak could somehow utilize the station as well, but probably unlikely unless some investment is made.
> ...


Exactly correct!


----------



## mfastx (Sep 4, 2010)

AlanB said:


> Exactly correct!









Sorry couldn't resist.


----------



## amamba (Sep 4, 2010)

AlanB said:


> Eric S said:
> 
> 
> > amamba said:
> ...


What freaking idiot came up with that idea? Why not just do the electrified portion all at once? I wonder how much extra $$$ it would cost to make it accessible for amtrak. I also wonder how much neogiatation would need to be made with amtrak to make it a regular stop on NEC regional trains. What would it add, maybe 5 minutes to the entire route from BOS - WAS?

Edited to add: Seriously though, the government officials that run this state are like the blind leading the blind. The governor has been making these grand statements about how the intermodal station which they are calling "interlink" will really improve accessibility to the airport, but with 2 runs a day by the MBTA that is not really improving it that much. Adding all the NEC regionals and getting amtrak involved as well would be a vast improvement and provide more opportunities for people to take the train.


----------



## jis (Sep 5, 2010)

Joel N. Weber II said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> > Do some tunneling around Providence to hit TF Green as well as downtown Providence. Forget about Hartford and New Haven.
> ...


No. Because there is no chance of this getting the vote even from the NY and NJ Senators.


----------



## George Harris (Sep 6, 2010)

Joel N. Weber II said:


> Is there an example of an existing 186+ MPH HSR system that takes more than 90 minutes to get from one end of the 186+ MPH track to the other?


Taiwan high speed rialway: 95 minutes Taipei downtown to Kaohsiung, 210 miles. two stops, one of them east side suburban Taipei. Speed limit 300 km/h = 186 mph.

Anybody that thinks we are going to get a 1h45m run between NYC and Boston under the current political environment is smoking something other than tobacco, even fogetting teh cost, which probably far outweighs the benefits given what they have now. The money would be far better spent somewhere else in the country than in the part that is already more than well serviced with multiple forms of public transport.


----------



## mfastx (Sep 7, 2010)

George Harris said:


> Anybody that thinks we are going to get a 1h45m run between NYC and Boston under the current political environment is smoking something other than tobacco, even fogetting teh cost, which probably far outweighs the benefits given what they have now. *The money would be far better spent somewhere else in the country than in the part that is already more than well serviced with multiple forms of public transport*.


Agreed. I don't know why the NEC wants so much funding, when other parts of the country would kill to have what the NEC has right now. That's like giving tax cuts to the rich. The NEC by far has the best rail service in the country, we need to focus on connecting other major cities with service similar to the NEC. Why help the best?


----------



## Crescent ATN & TCL (Sep 7, 2010)

mfastx said:


> George Harris said:
> 
> 
> > Anybody that thinks we are going to get a 1h45m run between NYC and Boston under the current political environment is smoking something other than tobacco, even fogetting teh cost, which probably far outweighs the benefits given what they have now. *The money would be far better spent somewhere else in the country than in the part that is already more than well serviced with multiple forms of public transport*.
> ...


To me for the east the best idea would be as follows:

Take the NEC and expand the electrification down to Newport News, once thats done run Acelas all the way down from Boston.

Next extend down the Crescent's route to ATL

Then down the Silver's route to Orlando, Tampa and Miami with a tie in to the FL high speed rail system.

Then work on getting to Chicago.

Once all of that is done the framework for highspeed rail will be in place. Take two major points on the expanded NEC and build a true high speed line between them by-passing the old route. Leave the Regionals on the old line and put 220-250mph trains on the highspeed lines.

As for the freight railroads, the first time Amtrak mentions a deal to rebuild their lines to NEC standards with catenary they will step aside. The freight railroads are seriously considering electrification. If Amtrak can pay for double tracking and electrification they won't mind the extra traffic.

Of course all of this would take a long time and alot of federal subsidies. In the end you would get highspeed passenger and freight rail on an all electric system with true high speed passenger rail between the larger cities on dedicated corridors.


----------

