Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Relating to HSR in North America

Expand Messages
  • J.H. Crawford
    Ron Dawson asked me to post this: ... High speed rail lines (ou LGV) would be ok using existing Interstate right of ways (ROW) as for acessing down town
    Message 1 of 1 , Nov 14, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      Ron Dawson asked me to post this:


      Hohmeister wrote:
      >Solution 2: visa versa--freight on existing lines, passengers on
      >Interstate Rail. Can the curves on the Interstate system handle 180
      >mph? This would move passenger train stations slightly away from
      >downtown, but a quick light-rail connection would solve that. Anyway,
      >many cities are sprawled so far that the area around the Interstate is
      >suburban sprawl--which could eventually become carfree urban, would
      >would essentially put the train station in a good location.

      High speed rail lines (ou LGV) would be ok using existing Interstate right
      of ways (ROW) as for acessing down town locations you can use existing
      track.

      >Another minor issue with Interstate Rail for passengers is that there
      >would be some transfers in very weird places. For example, the
      >intersection of I-10 and I-75 is in an extremely remote area, and
      >there really isn't anything near it. This station, although a major
      >station, would wind up a "transfer only" station, kinda like some
      >middle-of-nowhere Interstate rest stops: heavily used, but only one
      >way to get in and out, and aside from that, nothing significant
      >around.

      In a situation like this between I-10 and I-75, we'll call it "Lake City
      Jct." and pretty much have through routing of trains.

      Dyer & Rauterkus wrote:
      >High speed rail works in effective models (hunch) when the stops are >more
      >than 100-miles apart. The more distance between A-and-B the better.

      >Who needs to take a 6-minute trip that used to be 20 only to wait in
      > >airport
      >lines with security for 2-3 hours?

      Though helping to improve connections between air and rail does make things
      better off long term, such as IATA codes (http://www.iata.org/codes) for
      major train stations.

      >>=v= What we need truly high-speed rail for (think TGV) is to
      >>replace airline traffic. Chicago and L.A.'s airports are far
      >>too busy, and in San Francisco it's so out of hand they're
      >>planning to fill in the Bay to make more runways. There are so
      >>many trips from San Fran to L.A. that it's insane *not* to put
      >>in high-speed rail there. Chicago to the East Coast also comes
      >>to mind.

      Then take a look at this map. http://www.rail2000.org/hsr/map/index.html



      -- ### --

      J.H. Crawford Carfree Cities
      postmaster@... Carfree.com
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.