Right, and besides any proposal to elevate the track there has zero chance of being approved by any environmental agency worth its salt too.
Can you imagine blocking out the river front from the downtown with an elevated track structure?
That also explains why for example, the French took the leap from 125mph straight to 170+mph skipping all these 135 and 150 etc. in between. And then of course they skipped on to 186 and 200.
Optimistically it sounds like the NEC planning commission wants to raise the current 150 mph limit, too. The report says that new constant tension cat should be able to support speeds in excess of 150...possibly utilized by new equipment in coming years:
Acela tested out on the test track at that speed, but it is not rated for that speed, nor is it certified by the FRA to operate at that speed. It's not Amtrak that's holding it down to 150.
This can be achieved only on the real straight portions of the alignment of which there are few and far between. The sections up north where 150 is achieved could possibly be cranked up a bit. South of NYP with new CT catenary I think there are only three or four significant segments where higher than 150 speeds would be possible.... County to Ham, Ragan to Prince and two other segments in Maryland that I cannot exactly remember the locations of.
Not sure that disaster is the right word, and some of it just can't be helped. But the East River tunnels have a 50 MPH limit I believe, Harold interlocking in Queens just outside of the tunnels has a 50 MPH limit, when not crossing a switch in reverse. After Gate Interlocking, right where Amtrak splits from the LIRR it's 60 MPH over the bridge into the Bronx, although the big curve requires a slow down to 50MPH.
In the Interim report on improving trip times on the NEC that was released late last week, replacement of the "Pelham Bay Bridge" which I believe is what you are calling the Hutchinson River Bridge was one of the major bridge replacements on the list. The interim report also covers the need to modify some of curves on the Hell Gate line up to New Rochelle for faster speeds, but notes that space is limited to do this. According the report, Amtrak, Metro-North, and ConnDOT are planning potential curve modifications for the New Haven line, but any such work is years and years away.
Add it all up and you're averaging about 50 mph for that 90 mile stretch when you factor in station stops and signals etc. That's certainly a killer for high speed rail between Boston-NY.
You are not going to "upgrade" that 30 mph tunnel. Anything less than a complete new direct ine across Baltimore falls into the "why bother" category, as the savings will be minimal. No way can I see 10 minutese out of any upgrades that do not include MAFOR alignment changes.
The plans that I have seen calls for a new tunnel, not upgrade of the B&P Tunnel. OTOH, I suspect the Union Tunnel might continue to be used as is with some upgrades.
