Anyone want to speculate as to when State of Michigan will acquire tra

[amtrakwolverine]

The acelas would work fine for HSR if amtrak could come up with the funds to upgrade the cat the curves tracks etc to make them run 150 the whole way.They could bring back the turbo-liners and modify them to use regular diesel like the p42s etc or convert them to overhead cat.

 

[MattW]

For long distance corridors that are only comparable with driving as opposed to flight time, you're right, but in corridors like the NEC, Midwest, California, and Northwest (and potentially many others), much faster trains that can be comparable with or faster than airport+transit+flight times which makes Japanese-style HSTs as you put it, a better idea.

 

[Blue Marble Travel]

What I mean to say is that Amtrak does not NEED Japanese-style HSTs to "catch up to the world".

There is no point in worrying about keeping up with the neighbors. We all have different choices.

But HSRail accomplishes something that no other means of transport does (including Superliners), and it does so economically, despite vast construction costs.

America doesn't "need" electricity. We spent 10 thousand years as a solar civilization, then we have burned stuff for the past 300 years... we could certainly go back to solar (and may have to, since we will have burned up all there is to burn, except each other). But would HSRail bring vast positive change to many people's lives? Yes.

You compared a cramped Shinkansen to a Sightseer Lounge. The comparison is to a 737. And, believe me, the quality of the trip on a TGV (and, I assume, on a Shinkansen) is immesurably better, on pretty much every level there is.

So, perhaps we could be inspired by the neighbors, even if we don't feel the need to keep up with them.

BTW, you did impugne the construction quality of non-American equipment, and have not retracted that. But it does not have an obvious factual base.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

What I mean to say is that Amtrak does not NEED Japanese-style HSTs to "catch up to the world".

There is no point in worrying about keeping up with the neighbors. We all have different choices.

But HSRail accomplishes something that no other means of transport does (including Superliners), and it does so economically, despite vast construction costs.

America doesn't "need" electricity. We spent 10 thousand years as a solar civilization, then we have burned stuff for the past 300 years... we could certainly go back to solar (and may have to, since we will have burned up all there is to burn, except each other). But would HSRail bring vast positive change to many people's lives? Yes.

You compared a cramped Shinkansen to a Sightseer Lounge. The comparison is to a 737. And, believe me, the quality of the trip on a TGV (and, I assume, on a Shinkansen) is immesurably better, on pretty much every level there is.

So, perhaps we could be inspired by the neighbors, even if we don't feel the need to keep up with them.

BTW, you did impugne the construction quality of non-American equipment, and have not retracted that. But it does not have an obvious factual base.

Well, first of all, you are French, as far as I can see. There is no saying you are not biased, but I could be too. Second, the Shinkansen has 5 seats a row in a regular car. That is a significant difference from the TGV.

Could we just stop argueing about this? I feel like we are just wasting time.

 

[Anderson]

What I mean to say is that Amtrak does not NEED Japanese-style HSTs to "catch up to the world". Of course, everything has its pros and cons. But the situation in America more favours the Superliners and orther Amtrak equipment. Just like how a old DC-3 could be superior to a A350 if you have a really short runway with not much traffic. If tyou put Superliners in Europe, they'll probably fail. If you put Shinkansens in the US, they probably fail as well. Since the OP was talking about Amtrak, then I have to prefer Superliners for his argument.

I think it matters greatly where you apply them within the US, and what tracks you're working with. For example, in the realm of the theoretical, how much "damage" could a high-speed train running CHI-DEN do versus one running CHI-STL? What about a linked set of corridors connecting CHI-NYP that happens to feature a much faster train that "goes through" 2-3 times a day (say, with an average speed in the 80-90 MPH range and a through-travel time of 10 hours or so)? And so on.

I'll throw out another thing: In conjunction with some of these "shiny" HSR projects that feature lots and lots of day trains, I would like to see at least one overnight train thrown in so as to allow for nice-and-early arrivals in the destination city. Ideally, alongside all of the CAHSR bullet trains, I'd like to see some sort of revived Lark. But I'm also a very big fan of the "overnight trip" model...if you can cut the trip times down to allow a dinnertime departure (say, 6 PM or later) and a morning arrival around 7-8 AM (depending on the route length, etc.), I would like to see that promoted in conjunction with the gobs and gobs of day trains on the corridors proper. Basically, think the Twilight Shoreliner vs. the Acelas and Regionals.

 

[Blue Marble Travel]

What I mean to say is that Amtrak does not NEED Japanese-style HSTs to "catch up to the world".

There is no point in worrying about keeping up with the neighbors. We all have different choices.

But HSRail accomplishes something that no other means of transport does (including Superliners), and it does so economically, despite vast construction costs.

America doesn't "need" electricity. We spent 10 thousand years as a solar civilization, then we have burned stuff for the past 300 years... we could certainly go back to solar (and may have to, since we will have burned up all there is to burn, except each other). But would HSRail bring vast positive change to many people's lives? Yes.

You compared a cramped Shinkansen to a Sightseer Lounge. The comparison is to a 737. And, believe me, the quality of the trip on a TGV (and, I assume, on a Shinkansen) is immesurably better, on pretty much every level there is.

So, perhaps we could be inspired by the neighbors, even if we don't feel the need to keep up with them.

BTW, you did impugne the construction quality of non-American equipment, and have not retracted that. But it does not have an obvious factual base.

Well, first of all, you are French, as far as I can see. There is no saying you are not biased, but I could be too. Second, the Shinkansen has 5 seats a row in a regular car. That is a significant difference from the TGV.

Could we just stop argueing about this? I feel like we are just wasting time.

I am American, born and brought up in the US, and a former Amtrak employee, SA on the Superliners out of Chicago.

Yes, of course we can stop. Sorry to waste your time. But maybe others were interested...

 

[jis]

Jishnu didn't even say that the Shikansen was better. He was only stating facts. What I'm looking for are opinions. Who is saying that he likes Shinkansens?

I like Shinkansens (I've never ridden one, but I am sure I would like them if I did). I like them because, per previous post, if I have to make the same trip 100 times in a year, I'm kinda into getting through it quickly. I have done NY - DC oh, 500 times? If you put a daily Superliner run there (waving a wand to remove technical obstacles), it will not be the most crowded train on the route (and I will not be on it, unless I have a very agreeable traveling companion). Implying that other people also "prefer" the Acela, or even aged Amfleet stock with air cushion suspension. Imagine what they would do if a TGV service were on that line? 90-minute run, $72 "high bucket" fare...

For that matter, do you prefer Superliners, or the Lexington Avenue IRT? For me, it depends. If I have to get from Union Square to Grand Central in a hurry, I would vote for the Kawasaki subway stock, even if you had a Superliner set lined up for me on the local track. (That's a funny image. OK, maybe once...)

Very well put Blue Marble. In my opinion the choice being forced is a false one as you explain so well and hence I did not bother to respond.

Also a categorical statement that the USA does not need HSR is clearly dubious. Afterall with the few examples that we have it is clear that when even borderline HSR service is provided and run well - people are willing to pay much more for it to have the convenience and the speed. One could go so far as to say that Amtrak's skin to some extent has been saved in Congress by the positive cash flow above the rails that flows from Acela service, the only rail service in the US that has been consistently positive above the rails in the US and indeed the Americas, for several years. It also effectively subsidizes those nice Superliner services in the rest of the system. More such service elsewhere will help and enhance LD services to a larger extent going forward.

Does this mean that every service in the US should be HSR or semi-HSR? Of course not. Does this mean that Superliners are not very good for LD service? Of course not. Everything has its place. Similarly it would be crazy to try to operate Superliners on the CAHSR as the only service. Incidentally, I am also a great fan of feeder services like the Saratoga and North Creek, or the Grand Canyon Railraod, or even trains like the Heartland Flyer and the Philadelphia - Atlantic City through ticketed service on NJT. It's the combination of all these that makes a viable network. Network connectivity is the key to overall success.

Now coming back to the original topic of this thread, which was unceremoniously hijacked as happens so often.....

With the completion of 110mph conversion of the entire Wolverine Corridor, the running time from Chicago to Toledo, with a little track improvement on the Dearborn - Toledo section could be brought down to within a couple of hours of the Chicago - Toledo running time via NS. This could open up the possibility of routing possibly the Lake Shore via Dearborn opening up a significant number of new city-pairs for single seat ride. And if the Lake Shore were to run ahead of the Cap eastbound and behind th Cap westbound then it would open up significant number of city pairs with one change too.

 

[Anderson]

jls: The biggest problem with moving the Lake Shore over to MI is that you've got enough bad track TOL-DET to slow things down way too much. Amtrak looked at this option last year and tossed it...but I wish they could run something via MI for just the reasons you suggested

 

[jis]

jls: The biggest problem with moving the Lake Shore over to MI is that you've got enough bad track TOL-DET to slow things down way too much. Amtrak looked at this option last year and tossed it...but I wish they could run something via MI for just the reasons you suggested

As I said, in order for this to become feasible would be to fix up the track between Toledo and Dearborn. I don't expect such a train to make a backup move to get to Detroit. That would be a waste and untenable.

Speaking of bad track.... I got my skeleton rearranged on the Lake Shore Limited yesterday on the Amtrak owned and maintained Post Road trackage that connects the CSX ex-Boston and Albany, Boston Line to Albany/Rensselaer station.

 

[lmctrouble]

I'd just like to get from Flint to the East coast without having to go to Chicago first, drive to Toledo or ride the bus. If you're going west the train is very convenient - if you're going east it's a pain in the patooty.

 

[George Harris]

I do not know why many people think foreign trains are superior to American ones. They may look cool and all, but their durability is very poor. Japan throws away its high-speed trains after a dozen years and so . . .

What brought this on? I do not consider what you are saying here true. As someone else has said, the original Shinkansen trainset have run far more than a dozen years. There is a certain amount of tenchnical obsolence, but that is not the same as being worn out.

Yes, they have 3+2 seating rather than 2+2, but they are also a little over a foot wider than the Superliner / Amfleet cars. Their seats are quite comfortable.

Some of the Shinkansen routes in Japan are served by overnight train on the nearby parallel standard railway.

Try them sometimes, both the Shinkansen and the parallel standard railway.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

I do not know why many people think foreign trains are superior to American ones. They may look cool and all, but their durability is very poor. Japan throws away its high-speed trains after a dozen years and so . . .

What brought this on? I do not consider what you are saying here true. As someone else has said, the original Shinkansen trainset have run far more than a dozen years. There is a certain amount of tenchnical obsolence, but that is not the same as being worn out.

Yes, they have 3+2 seating rather than 2+2, but they are also a little over a foot wider than the Superliner / Amfleet cars. Their seats are quite comfortable.

Some of the Shinkansen routes in Japan are served by overnight train on the nearby parallel standard railway.

Try them sometimes, both the Shinkansen and the parallel standard railway.

Look, the OP started the arguement passively in the first place. I just disagreed with some of his ideas. I am not willing to argue more about this and I don't think anybody else is. Why do you want to waste us more time?! What's the big deal, anyway?

 

[jis]

I do not know why many people think foreign trains are superior to American ones. They may look cool and all, but their durability is very poor. Japan throws away its high-speed trains after a dozen years and so . . .

What brought this on? I do not consider what you are saying here true. As someone else has said, the original Shinkansen trainset have run far more than a dozen years. There is a certain amount of tenchnical obsolence, but that is not the same as being worn out.

Yes, they have 3+2 seating rather than 2+2, but they are also a little over a foot wider than the Superliner / Amfleet cars. Their seats are quite comfortable.

Some of the Shinkansen routes in Japan are served by overnight train on the nearby parallel standard railway.

Try them sometimes, both the Shinkansen and the parallel standard railway.

What I find really nice about Shinkansen's is the quality of service from the train staff. Every member of staff starting from the Engineer up front to the ticket collectors are immaculately dressed and wearing spotless white gloves. When a ticket collector walks into a car, he or she bows to everyone, then goes about very politely scanning tickets. When finally when done with the car, at the exit door, he turns back towards the passengers, bows and then exits the car. A very unique Japanese thing.

Because the cars are considerably wider than American ones they appear to be spacious even with 3+2 seating. And the Green Cars are a special treat in and of themselves. The newer Series 700 sets are also appointed with much more modern ambiance. And they really are much smoother running than anything in the US.

Compared to Shinkansens, the TGV's although 2+2 in 2nd Class appear somewhat more cramped. Incidentally the 1st Gen TGVs from the Sud-Est family have just been refurbished and repainted in the standard Blue and Grey and speeds upped to 300kph, and the soldier on 31 years after they entered service. AFAIK all but one of the 111 sets put into service in the in the 80's are still in active service today. And they continue in service requiring more exacting maintenance to continue operating safely at 300kph.

I still look back fondly at my first TGV experience which was on TGV Atlantique out of Gare Montparnasse. I had just arrived in Paris that morning in fall of 1991. After checking into the hotel, I immediately hoofed it over to Montparnasse, bought a round trip ticket to Tours, and was on the next TGV headed out that way. It was one of the more exhilarating train riding experiences that I ever recall in my life. Since then of course there have been many more, including the one last year on TGV Est to Mulhouse (from Paris Gare d l'Est) to visit the French National Railway Museum. This time things have moved along and the max speed was 200mph (320kph). There should be a trip report sitting on this site somewhere.

 

[afigg]

As I said, in order for this to become feasible would be to fix up the track between Toledo and Dearborn. I don't expect such a train to make a backup move to get to Detroit. That would be a waste and untenable.

Speaking of bad track.... I got my skeleton rearranged on the Lake Shore Limited yesterday on the Amtrak owned and maintained Post Road trackage that connects the CSX ex-Boston and Albany, Boston Line to Albany/Rensselaer station.

Are there any estimates or studies on what it would take to fix up and maintain the track between Toledo and Dearborn to, say, 60 mph speeds? The distance is only about 50 miles, so if it is a matter of basic maintenance, it may be a manageable cost.

Almost all of the Toledo to Dearborn route is in Michigan. The political leadership in Michigan is supportive of passenger rail and is putting up state matching funds for the track and station upgrades. If Michigan has a state rail fund, similar to what VA has, perhaps they could be persuaded to provide funds for fixing up the Toledo to Dearborn tracks to maintain freight rail options and, if Amtrak makes the offer, train service from Michigan to either via upper state NY or Pittsburgh to the east coast. I think the presence of a 110 mph line in Michigan with growing ridership will open the door to adding service to other cities from Michigan. Why not trains to northern Ohio and Toronto?

 

[afigg]

Saw this press release on the US DOT website and figured this older thread was a good place to post it rather than start a new thread. See U.S. Transportation Secretary LaHood Announces $15.8 Million Funding Agreement to Eliminate Detroit Rail Bottleneck.

This project was one of the remaining unobligated HSIPR projects. As I recall, fixing the choke point with new connecting track was supposed to save up to 10 minutes off of the Wolverine trip times, so this is a significant project for the corridor. Worth noting that the state of Michigan is providing 1/2 of the funding at $7.9 million, so MI should be put into the list of states that is willing to provide state money to support passenger rail.

 

[Mackensen]

Saw this press release on the US DOT website and figured this older thread was a good place to post it rather than start a new thread. See U.S. Transportation Secretary LaHood Announces $15.8 Million Funding Agreement to Eliminate Detroit Rail Bottleneck.

This project was one of the remaining unobligated HSIPR projects. As I recall, fixing the choke point with new connecting track was supposed to save up to 10 minutes off of the Wolverine trip times, so this is a significant project for the corridor. Worth noting that the state of Michigan is providing 1/2 of the funding at $7.9 million, so MI should be put into the list of states that is willing to provide state money to support passenger rail.

There's nothing new about that; it goes all the way back to the 70s when Governor Milliken found money for the Empire State Express/Niagara Rainbow. It's operated a pair of state-supported trains for decades. I'd say the big missing piece is the resumption of Detroit-Lansing-Grand Rapids over the ex-C&O. It's been talked about off and on over the years and it's still an all-CSX route. I have no idea what condition that track is in.