Overhauling Amtrak

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by hammersklavier

EDITED TO ADD: The only major thing I would change would be to break Amtrak into seven segments, six each to concentrate on improving passenger rail within specific regional submarkets (Northeast/New England, Midwest, Southeast, Texas, Cascades, and California) and one to run the long-distance routes.

Agree with this. Merge the localized commuter rail agencies into the regional Amtraks. Many of these rail lines, especially out west, are operated by Amtrak anyway. Funding for each commuter network would continue to flow from the existing sources, but this would simplify dispatching, cross-ticketing, signage and wayfinding, etc.

[ardecila]

It doesn't matter that land costs will only increase. We need the national political will to build high speed rail, and that means Midwestern, Western, and Southern cities will need to be linked into the Amtrak network with rail service on legacy lines that is far better than the crap they currently receive.

I should point out that, even in boom times, European unemployment is dramatically higher than the US, so there's a lot more political will for big public works projects that directly create jobs. In the US, Americans are more easily able to find private-sector jobs, so the only leverage for transportation improvements is congestion, convenience, and speed.

[aquablue]

Originally Posted by ardecila

It doesn't matter that land costs will only increase. We need the national political will to build high speed rail, and that means Midwestern, Western, and Southern cities will need to be linked into the Amtrak network with rail service on legacy lines that is far better than the crap they currently receive.

I should point out that, even in boom times, European unemployment is dramatically higher than the US, so there's a lot more political will for big public works projects that directly create jobs. In the US, Americans are more easily able to find private-sector jobs, so the only leverage for transportation improvements is congestion, convenience, and speed.

Military spending is too high. Infrastructure spending too low.

Also, I am not sure how Asia fits in with your unemployment argument regarding HSR. Countries like Korea, Taiwan, Turkey etc. Also, S. America is about to get on the bandwagon with Brazil perhaps starting a system.

Also, I somehow doubt that improving people's legacy lines up to 110 mph will make a huge difference in their interest in funding true HSR lines. I'll believe it when I see it.

[Alon]

Re HSR versus incremental improvements, Spain should be in the same category as France, not Germany and the UK. In all of those countries, there was a medium-speed express intercity service - the original Kodama in Japan, the Mistral in France, etc. Germany and the UK spent money on raising the speed of those medium-speed lines. France and Spain built HSR early. (Spain only opened its first line in '92, but it was also starting from a lower level of development than the parts of Europe that hadn't been fascist since the end of WW2.) Of course it's not as simple as that - France also heavily upgraded the legacy line to Bordeaux and Toulouse and is only now building a full LGV that far southwest, Germany built some strategic bypasses and also upgraded the Berlin-Hamburg line so heavily that with tilting 230 km/h trains it achieves higher average speed than the 300 km/h lines.

Either way, in the NEC, this medium-speed express intercity service already exists. There's demand for it, and there'd be much more demand for faster service.

Of course, it depends on the price of boosting speeds. That's why it's so important to keep costs down. This means that a lot of the wishlist items, even bridge replacements, need to be treated as secondary priorities. The Canton Viaduct is older than the Maryland bridges that Amtrak wants to replace. The priority should be fixing the slowest segments - e.g. Elizabeth, Metuchen, Frankford Junction, New Rochelle - and getting cutting edge rolling stock and systems that can run on mixed-quality track.

[Nexis4Jersey]

Originally Posted by Alon

Re HSR versus incremental improvements, Spain should be in the same category as France, not Germany and the UK. In all of those countries, there was a medium-speed express intercity service - the original Kodama in Japan, the Mistral in France, etc. Germany and the UK spent money on raising the speed of those medium-speed lines. France and Spain built HSR early. (Spain only opened its first line in '92, but it was also starting from a lower level of development than the parts of Europe that hadn't been fascist since the end of WW2.) Of course it's not as simple as that - France also heavily upgraded the legacy line to Bordeaux and Toulouse and is only now building a full LGV that far southwest, Germany built some strategic bypasses and also upgraded the Berlin-Hamburg line so heavily that with tilting 230 km/h trains it achieves higher average speed than the 300 km/h lines.

Either way, in the NEC, this medium-speed express intercity service already exists. There's demand for it, and there'd be much more demand for faster service.

Of course, it depends on the price of boosting speeds. That's why it's so important to keep costs down. This means that a lot of the wishlist items, even bridge replacements, need to be treated as secondary priorities. The Canton Viaduct is older than the Maryland bridges that Amtrak wants to replace. The priority should be fixing the slowest segments - e.g. Elizabeth, Metuchen, Frankford Junction, New Rochelle - and getting cutting edge rolling stock and systems that can run on mixed-quality track.

Metuchen is fine and can handle up to 140mph , Elizabeth will be replaced along with station hopefully later this decade.... From New Haven to New York Penn will be replaced or rehabbed in terms of bridges , and grade seperation in New Rochelle and at South Norwalk and Waterbury upgraded Interlocks... Canton was just rehabbed and is a state landmark , you can build a Bridge next to it preferable pre-cast... Frankford JCT ,will be grade seperated and prepped for the Tunnel to Market East and Freight upgrades... The Inland Bypass is still needed , but it needs to be re-thought. Your not going to get support by bypassing all the Important towns along the I-84 Corridor or between Providence and Hartford which has a decent commuter shed i'm told. There should be regional service that services all the towns and cities next to the HSR service....

[Alon]

Metuchen is not fine and cannot handle 140 mph. The current limit is 100 mph (I can forward you the track map with the speed limit), and there's very little room for increasing that with higher cant limit. Go to Google Earth and compute the curve radius; it's not one that any train in regular revenue service in the world can safely take at 140 mph.

The point of not building gratuitous tunnels like Market East and the transition tunnels from New Rochelle to I-84 is that at $100 billion, it's not worth it and Congress will never find the money. At $10 billion, it becomes a realistic possibility. On the margin, the question should always be "how many minutes does this extra $100 million save?", and the answer toward the end is measured in seconds. The B & P replacement saves about 1.5 minutes using Acela trainsets, or about 2 using more modern stock (the better the trains accelerate, the worse a speed limit in the station throat affects travel time), and is estimated to cost $750 million. With the capacity gains, and the reduced squeal coming from lack of very tight curves, and the reduced maintenance costs coming from said squeal, it becomes worth it. The Market East tunnel, in comparison, is about $10 billion for another 2 minutes of time savings relative to straightening Frankford within ROW and squeezing extra speed out of the existing line.

[Nexis4Jersey]

Originally Posted by Alon

Metuchen is not fine and cannot handle 140 mph. The current limit is 100 mph (I can forward you the track map with the speed limit), and there's very little room for increasing that with higher cant limit. Go to Google Earth and compute the curve radius; it's not one that any train in regular revenue service in the world can safely take at 140 mph.

The point of not building gratuitous tunnels like Market East and the transition tunnels from New Rochelle to I-84 is that at $100 billion, it's not worth it and Congress will never find the money. At $10 billion, it becomes a realistic possibility. On the margin, the question should always be "how many minutes does this extra $100 million save?", and the answer toward the end is measured in seconds. The B & P replacement saves about 1.5 minutes using Acela trainsets, or about 2 using more modern stock (the better the trains accelerate, the worse a speed limit in the station throat affects travel time), and is estimated to cost $750 million. With the capacity gains, and the reduced squeal coming from lack of very tight curves, and the reduced maintenance costs coming from said squeal, it becomes worth it. The Market East tunnel, in comparison, is about $10 billion for another 2 minutes of time savings relative to straightening Frankford within ROW and squeezing extra speed out of the existing line.

Which tracks Maps do you have , the ones the Rail community had were taken down. The Acela does 110mph through Metuchen....I guess some Straighten is required for the curves but its not as bad as Elizabeth....

I don't see the Problem with Market East , Charles Center , Wilmington South , or the Inland NEC... The Inland NEC would fill a much needed travel void in New England which was never completed and would of course bypass the congested / curvy coast. Most of Philly , Baltimore and Wilmington's plans run through cheap , poor land , except near the stations but this cheap , poor land makes tunneling cheaper then say 2nd Ave line. Sure the land is soft , but tunneling advancements make this easy and not a complex job...hence why I don't see Philly being a problem nor costly....same with Baltimore or Wilmington.... What happened to building big in this country why do we need to look at downsizing every project in this region....its starting to drive me nuts.... The Cost of the 151 billion is divided into various projects , Old NEC upgrade , New NEC , Keystone , Regional upgrades and misc things so about 2,780+ miles of new tracks , bridges , tunnels , stations , rolling stock... Not bad , also its not all Fed , some is state about 15-20 billion and some will be private... If PA removed its stupid PPP ban Market East would probably get built with Private funding...

You could write off Charles-Baltimore but I don't see that going over well with the Transit/Rail Advocates of that region which want Amtrak to do more....even bigger plans , same with the New England Rail Advocates which are very happy with the latest plan....the only grip is the lack of Regional Rail service between Providence and Waterbury...and no new Providence station but there happy with the rest. They don't want to really keep the Shoreline , which seems to be a regional wide agreement as a bad line... Inland has a ton of support , theres a question of in and around Providence to Boston. The North-South Tunnel proposal has divided the community... People like me think it should go through so the T could through run and lessen the strain on South Station along with Through HSR and Intercity Rail to New Hampshire and Maine... Others think its a waste , I would sacrifice Charles-Baltimore if the North-South Tunnel was added in.

Baltimore Penn Station is being expanded so MARC can expand service along with Amtrak , it will come with the Tunnel Replacements... But theres very little I know about the project.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by Alon

Either way, in the NEC, this medium-speed express intercity service already exists. There's demand for it, and there'd be much more demand for faster service.

The NEC must grapple with the rest of the country. I don't think it's realistic to expect Congress to hand the Northeast $100bn of rail spending and leave the rest of the country out of it.

This is (partly) why I think we need to upgrade legacy lines in the Midwest, South, and West before building 300km/h HSR in the Northeast. California's struggles have thrown the political problem into the light.

[hammersklavier]

You must look at these things as an engineer. It's not just enough to make an investment; you must also make the most productive investment possible. And to do that, you have to balance benefits against costs. The most productive investments have the highest benefit relative to cost; they are not necessarily those with the highest costs or the highest absolute benefits. Don't be fooled by the numbers: crunch them.

Engineering isn't about making political coalitions. It's about making the numbers work. It's about understanding what the best possible project actually is, rather than just taking what someone else says ipso facto.

[Nexis4Jersey]

Originally Posted by hammersklavier

You must look at these things as an engineer. It's not just enough to make an investment; you must also make the most productive investment possible. And to do that, you have to balance benefits against costs. The most productive investments have the highest benefit relative to cost; they are not necessarily those with the highest costs or the highest absolute benefits. Don't be fooled by the numbers: crunch them.

Engineering isn't about making political coalitions. It's about making the numbers work. It's about understanding what the best possible project actually is, rather than just taking what someone else says ipso facto.

May I ask if your an Engineer? I look at this from a Rail Prescriptive which I have extensive knowledge of what works and what doesn't and things that should be done... Sometimes I feel like there's a disconnect between Engineers and Urban Planners and the Rail community , often plans come with flaws or skip important populated areas.... So to say an Engineer would have a better view then say a Rail employee or volunteer isn't all that correct... Why is Philly the only region complaining about the New and Expanded plan , everyone else loves it...? Sure some stations will be bypassed by with a New station but the old station will be getting more services not less.... Ive noticed quite a few people in Philly and along Coastal CT suggest Amtrak is abandoning them and thats not the case...HSR is splitting from Intercity , in most cases more services like Downstate Delaware , Cape Codder , Northwestern , Lehigh and Lackawanna are all new lines along with Ethan Allen , Vermonter , Berkshires , Concord Express... PA and Northeast are getting more not less...it disgusts me that the PA Rail community is making sound like Amtrak is abandoning 30th street when its not the only station that is being dropped is Cornwall Heights... Of course the PA Rail community is one of the largest , and I can't say the whole community is twisting the words but there's a vocal few that are....

[Alon]

I don't know which Philly transit activists you've talked to, but the ones I know via Philadelphia2050 are completely meh about Market East. There was no local demand for it; the Penn Design people came up with it on the theory that HSR stations should always be put in the CBD, Amtrak seems to have adopted it, and now the proposal is $10 billion heavier for no real reason. 30th Street Station is where it is because the PRR found it better to have a station that could be used by through-trains from New York to Washington than to have all trains head into Broad Street/Suburban Station. Although not all decisions from that era are good ideas today, that decision is in line with recent practices from Japan, France, and Spain, in which a near-CBD station with good transit connections to the CBD is good enough if it's too hard or too operationally constraining to enter the CBD.

Likewise, the Providence-area activists I know of didn't care much for HSR to Woonsocket. Of course based on city size the highest benefit comes from having a line from New Haven to Hartford cutting east to Providence and then to Boston, but the terrain is hilly and it's much cheaper to leave Hartford out and follow I-95. Until recently I'd thought that cutting Providence instead and following I-91/84/90 like in the Penn Design plan was a good second option, but the Penn Design plan has several tunnels whereas an I-95 route could be done without tunnels north of New Haven, and just two difficult bridges.

The importance of a working knowledge of best industry practices worldwide is that the rail discipline works by apprenticeship; too many insiders in the US today were taught by people who are used to FRA regulations, multi-conductor regional trains, separate concourses and ticket machines at each station for different kinds of trains, non-clockface schedules, long turnaround times, etc. This way, you have people who are convinced that the Providence Line is at capacity and the only way to program more intercity trains is to triple-track nearly the entire line.

[Nexis4Jersey]

In other news , look at these sexy beasts....they actually look lighter...

[Busy Bee]

Originally Posted by Nexis4Jersey

In other news , look at these sexy beasts....they actually look lighter...

Wait, is that at the Siemens plant in Kassel? Where did you find this pic?

[Nexis4Jersey]

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

Wait, is that at the Siemens plant in Kassel? Where did you find this pic?

It was on one of the many Amtrak articles i read daily , its being made in IL and CA....

[M II A II R II K]

Amtrak promises improvements in 2013

Read More: http://thehill.com/blogs/transportat...ements-in-2013

Amtrak is promising to make major improvements to its infrastructure and development of high-speed rail programs in the Northeast United States in 2013. The announcement comes after a year in which Republicans in the House sought repeatedly to deny the national passenger rail service funding from the federal government that it has received since its inception in 1971. Amtrak CEO Joe Boardman said Thursday that his company was pushing ahead with its upgrade plans, despite the GOP's attacks.

- Among the 2013 plans for Amtrak is the completion of a bridge replacement the company says will enable it to run faster trains in the Northeast Corridor. Other plans include receipt of the first of 70 new electric locomotives and 130 new rails cars, and the addition of a new round-trip route between New York and Washington, D.C., on the company's Acela high-speed trains. Amtrak said it was also complete the installation of automatic Positive Train Control (PTC) systems that will enable all its trains to be controlled electronically in the Northeast Corridor and Pennsylvania's Keystone corridor. Amtrak pointed out that the developments follow a year that saw it set a new ridership record.

.....

[Alon]

Wait, they're still buying locomotives instead of EMUs?

Sigh.

[Nexis4Jersey]

Originally Posted by Alon

Wait, they're still buying locomotives instead of EMUs?

Sigh.

Yes for Amtrak Regional , Vermonter , Keystone , and misc Movements....along with newer Euro-looking push - pull cars...

[Busy Bee]

Have any pics or renderings of the midwest locos or rolling stock been released yet?

[afiggatt]

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

Have any pics or renderings of the midwest locos or rolling stock been released yet?

The RFP for the diesel locomotives has still not been released, let along an order placed, so there are no renderings of the Next Gen diesel locomotives available, except perhaps for a proposed image from the likely bidders (GE, EMD).

As for the bi-level corridor cars, the order contract was just placed with Nippon-Sharyo a couple of months ago. There is a Nippon-Sharyo press release with an image of a bi-level coach-cab car, but it is likely a general rendering based on the proposal, not the final pre-production design.

BTW, for the source for the news article on Amtrak's plans for 2013, the Amtrak news release can be here (5 page press release with just the PR highlights).

[Busy Bee]

If bilevel cars are inevitable for midwest service, I'd live to see something as sleek as these Dutch trains, only diesel (unfortunately) and with an loco designed to aesthetically match the rake, only without passenger windows of course.


http://www.info4security.com/Picture...ins_Conway.jpg

or these great Stadler KISS:


http://www.bahnbilder.de/1024/stadle...orn-533145.jpg

or Talgo:


http://www.oiko.phnet.fi/images/Talgo-22-Helsinki.jpg