When they lay the track for HSR?

[Philzy]

Obviously over the past few months there has been a lot of talk about more mass transportation – especially rail – high speed rail – etc – with the release of information about the Presidents’ transportation stimulus bill.

I’ve been reading a little about the mention of electrifying current tracks to reduce energy costs. While the cost short term of construction and infrastructure is huge the payoff long term is great.

I notice when visiting Virginia that often I see “double stack” container cars, which makes me think some things would have to change if this was to take place. Being that the Freight railroads own the rails I don’t think this is something they would want to happen as it would mean longer trains and upkeep on more cars that are used to haul less cargo per car.

I’ve been reading a little bit about “right of way” and divided tracks similar to our interstate highway systems being constructed for HSR which seems like a smart idea. I guess what I’m wondering is as new tracks will most likely have to be laid for electrification which will be designated just for passenger use, will they be following existing freight tracks which are tight curved in some spots making for slower speeds or will all new “straight” direct routes be chosen to allow for true HSR and faster rail service?

From what I read in this post, currently Amtrak is a tenant of the freight rails in most spots. If new rails were built then I’m assuming they would own them and maintain them both correct?

I’m sure there is much more to it, however - I may be off my rocker here for saying this, but if our economy is in the toilet and this would create thousands of jobs and help jumpstart the economy, why is this still in the idea stage?

Thoughts?

 

[George Harris]

Book liength answer possible here.

First, for the most part, the railroads own the land under the track, which they realize that is a most valuable asset. Many of these right of ways now also carry fiber optic cables, and sometimes other utilities with the utility owner paying a lease to the railroad. The railroad companies are for the most part not the least bit interested in having somebody else build tracks in their right of way. Aside from loss of the land, they have nightmares about the liability issues.

Electricfication does not of itself require new rights of way. Electrification can be built to clear double stacks. Many places the old Pennsylvania Railroad electrification was between 22 feet and 23 feet above the rail, which will clear double stack containers. However, it migh require a new round of tunnel enlargements and overhead bridge raisings, as many of the current structures will clear the double stack but not double stack plus a space for the electrification.

It is true that in many areas the current alignment will not support high speeds because of the curves. For example, on the line from Washington DC to Richmond, once south of Fredericksburg there are many curves that make any maximum speed limit above 70 mph near meaningless.

Electrification for freight is of very doubtful benefit at the current time in the US, and unlikely to change unless the cost of diesel fuel goes up much faster than the cost of other types of fuels.

why?

1. Electrification is very expensive. Amortization of the fixed cost will take a long time. Also, railroads pay property taxes, in many places very high property taxes. The electrifcation will increase the value of their fixed assets, and hence their property tax bill. The tax bill alone might negate any economic payoff.

2. The weight saving in equipment that is beneificial in passenger service is near meaningless in freight. The ability to get a freight train moving depends primarily on adhesion, which is a percentage of the weigth on powered axles. Less weight = less ability to start a train, or to move it at low speed on steep grades. Generally, electrics used in US freight service in the past had weight added to them to increase their adhesion.

 

[Philzy]

Book liength answer possible here.
First, for the most part, the railroads own the land under the track, which they realize that is a most valuable asset. Many of these right of ways now also carry fiber optic cables, and sometimes other utilities with the utility owner paying a lease to the railroad. The railroad companies are for the most part not the least bit interested in having somebody else build tracks in their right of way. Aside from loss of the land, they have nightmares about the liability issues.

Electricfication does not of itself require new rights of way. Electrification can be built to clear double stacks. Many places the old Pennsylvania Railroad electrification was between 22 feet and 23 feet above the rail, which will clear double stack containers. However, it migh require a new round of tunnel enlargements and overhead bridge raisings, as many of the current structures will clear the double stack but not double stack plus a space for the electrification.

It is true that in many areas the current alignment will not support high speeds because of the curves. For example, on the line from Washington DC to Richmond, once south of Fredericksburg there are many curves that make any maximum speed limit above 70 mph near meaningless.

Electrification for freight is of very doubtful benefit at the current time in the US, and unlikely to change unless the cost of diesel fuel goes up much faster than the cost of other types of fuels.

why?

1. Electrification is very expensive. Amortization of the fixed cost will take a long time. Also, railroads pay property taxes, in many places very high property taxes. The electrifcation will increase the value of their fixed assets, and hence their property tax bill. The tax bill alone might negate any economic payoff.

2. The weight saving in equipment that is beneificial in passenger service is near meaningless in freight. The ability to get a freight train moving depends primarily on adhesion, which is a percentage of the weigth on powered axles. Less weight = less ability to start a train, or to move it at low speed on steep grades. Generally, electrics used in US freight service in the past had weight added to them to increase their adhesion.

See this is the stuff that I wanted to know, and find fascinating. I never would have thought about issues with adhesion or taxation of the property itself.

So then, if highspeed rail was to come about sooner than later one might guess that entirely new track routes would be built and only partially being close to older freight lines as needed I’m guessing.

In addition I guess if the government wanted to get the freight lines to upgrade their rails as well as electrify them, the best way to go about it would be to offer an incentive of types and a tax break to keep their costs low.

 

[AlanB]

In addition I guess if the government wanted to get the freight lines to upgrade their rails as well as electrify them, the best way to go about it would be to offer an incentive of types and a tax break to keep their costs low.

Yes, that would be the way to do it. However, it would be difficult, since most of the effort would be coming from the Federal Government. Most of the states however see the RR's as a cash cow, and tax the ROW's very heavily. NY used to be one of the worst states for doing that, until they wanted HSR on their own via the Turboliner program. CSX wouldn't let NY State do any track improvements, until they repealed the excessive taxes that NY levied against CSX property.

And it was excessive. I seem to recall that in terms of track miles, CSX had less track than in most of the other states that CSX served. Yet CSX paid the highest amount of property tax to NY.

Needless to say that after several years of discussion in the legislature, they did finally lower the RR tax rate to a more reasonable level. Unfortunately for NY State, the Turboliner deal fell apart before many of those track improvements were ever done. Although a few did get done, and a few more are now on the table if not under construction.

In any event, it could be tough for the Fed to convince other states to lower those taxes. Legislature's just love cash cows.

 

[lyke99]

Looking at the Trains Magazine website, it seems their next issue will have an article about electrification.

 

[Philzy]

Looking at the Trains Magazine website, it seems their next issue will have an article about electrification.

awesome! I look forward to reading it!

thanks for the heads up!

 

[battalion51]

Part of the issue you have with electric operations is the high fixed costs that you have for maintenance. In all reality it only makes sense to electrify in high traffic areas, like the Northeast Corridor. Unfortunately with the way population and travel densities are in this country there are very few locations where electrification makes sense. IIRC the Joint Powers Board in the Bay Area is going to electrify the CalTrain line. This move makes sense because of the number of moves that are made on the line each day. This is just a rough number, but you're probably going to want an excess of 50 trains a day to make electrification truly worthwhile.

 

[Philzy]

Part of the issue you have with electric operations is the high fixed costs that you have for maintenance. In all reality it only makes sense to electrify in high traffic areas, like the Northeast Corridor. Unfortunately with the way population and travel densities are in this country there are very few locations where electrification makes sense. IIRC the Joint Powers Board in the Bay Area is going to electrify the CalTrain line. This move makes sense because of the number of moves that are made on the line each day. This is just a rough number, but you're probably going to want an excess of 50 trains a day to make electrification truly worthwhile.

I remember hearing about this, does that mean that they will have to do away with the double decker cars or will they jsut have a higher clearance or can they clear a standard set height whatever that may be...?

What changes would that forecast for the Coast Daylight if that ever gets off the ground? change of equipment in San Jose or just an engine change or?

 

[jis]

I remember hearing about this, does that mean that they will have to do away with the double decker cars or will they jsut have a higher clearance or can they clear a standard set height whatever that may be...?

No the double-deckers will not go away. The wires will be higher. Actually it is only marginally more expensive to string the wires 23' above rails to allow even autoracks and doublestacks enough clearance than to string them 20 feet above rails that gives clearance for Superliners but not the Plate H and K stuff. The real additional cost is in getting the additional civil clearance in place over the track. This is not a huge issue as things stand along the Caltrain alignment.

 

[Mark]

The old Milwaukee Road was the largest electrified freight RR totaling some 650 miles. From what I've read, the Milwaukee ended up spending more money on converting to a diesel fleet than they would if they had properly maintained the track and infrastructure. There are a variety of reasons for that roads failure but some believe that large scale electrification for freight RRs can work.