NPR: High Speed Rail on Empire Corridor?

Regarding CSX, they are largely correct in the sense that if you're looking to go along the river route, you'll need to use their ROW. If you could grab enough of the West Shore, could that substitute? I don't know.

Clearly, CSX is positioning themselves for something, or being obstinate. I don't know which.

Dave Becker

I'll bet on "positioning".

CSX has been quite willing to discuss "sharing" their ROW with passenger operators, with one proviso: Bring your checkbook, and a big insurance policy.

Most of which is totally fair and honest, or at least arguable (their stance on insurance in FLA was pretty ridiculous) It's their property, they get the crap taxed out of them for owning it, and until recently, if they allowed somebody else to improve it for high speed service, their tax bill would have risen sharply. They would be fools not to remind people that it's theirs.

Beyond that, I don't share the dismissive attitude on this thread. We have a chance here to do some achievable, common sense things that people have been talking (and talking, and talking...) about for years. This is the part of the US that has population density comparable to Europe. There is already a ROW from NYC to Albany that hosted 100 mph service in the past, and has a little bit currently. Eliminate some grade crossings, cut some kind of scheduling deal with Metro North, and there's no reason you couldn't have a 1:45 train ride to NYC in short order. And even more important than the trip time in the timetable, you could actually deliver on it.

West of Schenctady, the population density drops, but you have four current and former ROWs to work with (NYC main, West Shore, Thruway, Canal Corp). Start by adding a third main to an ROW that used to have 4, and eliminate as many grade crossings as you can. Install more high speed crossovers. Combine that with a (very likely) carbon tax that raises the price of jet fuel, and you have an airline competitive service at least as far as SYR and ROC, maybe more.

Make the train connect to something. Why does Schenectady have a separate bus station and train station? Why is the CDTA bus connection in Rennsselaer so crappy?

Then, move on incrementally and remove speed restrictions. Bypass Little Falls using an elevated structure on the Thruway ROW. Get rid of ALL the grade crossings. Yes, eventually, maybe electrify. But that's not essential at moderate high speed. Britain does pretty well with the west coast mainline, and that's dieselized.

The RRs are not doomed to failure and irrelevance. People WILL use trains if they do something useful. Geez, even sun belt towns have learned that.

You are glossing over or ignoring several key issues. First, true the ROW used to have 4 tracks. In some places it's only 2, other places 3, some places there actually are some industries. So it's not as simple as just plunking down another track.

"Eliminate as many grade crossings as you can" sounds great. Any idea how much that would cost (on top of this extra track you're going to produce?)

"Put a carbon tax on jet fuel." Why stop there? How about a $1000 surcharge on every new car? And $500 a year for registration of existing vehicles. Maybe a $250 annual fee for a drivers license. And make every road a toll road, not just the Thruway. OK - I'm making a point by stretching a bit. But ANYTHING could be done if we tax the crap out of everyone and everything. Why should airlines pay a tax to subsidize their competition? It's preposterous!

Electrify. Raised bypasses. Eliminate all crossings. Who in the WORLD do you propose to have PAY all the money this would take? And WHY? WHY? WHY? We don't NEED something that costs that much, it would be a VERY FOOLISH waste of dollars we don't have and which would have to come from all of us. "People will use trains if they do something useful". They do - they haul freight. Passenger service was proved unneeded many years ago, with the exception of high-density corridors and commuter needs. (I'll even go as far as saying Albany-NYC might be worth SOME improvement.)

But high speed rail across the state is a pipe dream with no benefit to the vast majority of citizens except to lighten their wallets. It may be fun to dream about what could be done, in a physical sense, but the fantasy needs to stop, and people need to get real, when it comes to evaluating what GOOD it would accomplish. If we get to spending huge amounts on such foolishness, someday folks will wake up to a fancy set of rails in a state which has come to a halt because nobody can afford anything any more.

I have no desire or intention to give up my auto. It's far more convenient than a train could ever be. If we get to the point where the government mandates what form of transportation we can use, we will be one step closer to no freedom at all.

I'm very torn. I'd feel much better if there were more passenger trains state and nationwide. I'd feel much better if the Buffalo subway went someplace, or if the Southtowns of Erie County otherwise connected to Buffalo. Or, if you could get to Schenectady from Albany at a higher speed than now. Or get passengers to the Adirondacks somehow...and not threaten the service with extinction. I think there are other issues that are more pressing.'

However, I think you'll see HSR become more valuable, and some sort of Halo service has value.

It's unfortunate that you're that attached to your car. I suspect we're all about to have to make some big changes in how we view transportation.

Dave Becker

It amazes me how fast people forget recent history. I remember $4.50 a gallon gas. It broke my back last summer, and I'm sure those price will be back again soon, if not worse than that.

The airplane and automobile are done with gas at that price. It doesn't take a crystal ball to see the future at this point. We already pay huge taxes in NYS now, and I really don't see any good for all the money we pay. If we have to pay, make it for something that will do us some good. Make cuts in other areas, take more money out of the gas tax. The days of taking our personal automobiles on anything but short trips are almost over. Airplanes will be for high capacity (ie Airbus A380), overseas trips only.

To me, it just makes common sense to link the biggest city and metro area in the country with the rest of the big cities in the same state.

This map makes it plain as day why.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:New_Y ... on_Map.png

From that map, you can see that the whole corridor will meld into one huge metro area. Some may be in denial, right now, but the jobs most people will be able to get won't support the cost of living in the NYC area. And prices are NOT going to decrease. The living wage will. That has been the pattern since at least 1971.

Everybody is different. From my point, I very seldom go to other large cities in NY State. Once in a while to Buffalo (to 2 different destinations there, neither of which is close to rail), that's about it. Yes, I am very attached to my vehicles and the flexibility they represent. To me it's a quality of life issue. I go to a couple other states for business, the better half and I love to travel, and virtually every place we go is not adjacent to rail. So even if we took a train it would still require a taxi, car rental or some other "transload" at destination. That's just not acceptable to me.

As for gas, I hate high prices as much as the next person but it would take far more than $4 a gallon to get me even considering alternative modes. I value the freedom to change plans as we wish, start earlier or later, change destination or route. These are basic freedoms which we enjoy in this country and should not feel guilty about. Despite its faults this is the best country in the world and the fact that we are free and able to move about at will is a very important freedom to me.

I accept the need to subsidize some commuter and corridor passenger service. If it were possible to have 200 MPH passenger trains rather than 79 MPH ones at the same or slightly higher cost, that's fine. But the fantasy of putting high speed rail all across the state comes at such a high cost that a reality check is in order. What is the financial return on such investment? How will the economy of the state be aided if you can get from A to B in 2 1/2 hours rather than 4, WHEN THE ENORMOUS COST IS FACTORED IN? And if speed is that critical, we have airlines already in place which offer even quicker service. Instead of a "carbon tax" on airline fuel, the public good would be better served - if speed is your goal - to subsidize the airline's fuel to lower ticket prices and allow more people to fly. Not saying I advocate this, but it would make FAR more sense than spending billions on high speed rail - for a fraction of the cost of new HSR, they could make air travel across the state a fraction of what it is, and still save taxpayer dollars.

If gas goes back to $4 a gallon, I will deal with it. (One easy way to save about 30 cents a gallon is to move out of NY, which is becoming more and more attractive). We have rail service now for those who need it, and air service for those in a hurry. Can anybody honestly believe we NEED - really NEED - faster trains, when they come at a cost so large the average person cannot comprehend the numbers?

You make some good points, but alot of them are based on how things are right now.

I'm trying to look forward, to see what our needs maybe in the future. If our so-called leaders had of done this 50 years ago, things may not be the way they are today.

It's not hard for me to see right now that things are going to have to change. Why wait untill we have no choices left?

I can see the day, within my lifetime, when $4+ gas will be a good memory. We will all wish we built a high-speed rail network when that happens.

I agree $4 gas will soon be a fond memory, but not for the reasons you do. My guess is that when the incredible spending binge we are only beginning finally takes effect, the inflation will raise minimum wage to over $10 an hour, a loaf of bread will be $5, and a gallon of gas will be correspondingly higher.

With all the shrill "green" hysteria today, instead of high speed rail how about a passenger train which uses less (or no) oil? I personally don't think it's critical but if someone were to take the proposed HSR costs and apply them to numerous other endeavors the return would be far better financially, and of value to far more people.

How about "Tom Swift and the Solar-Powered Locomotive" ?

[Moved to the High Speed Rail Forum - omv]

BR&P has it about right. New york State's railroads were expanding when long ago the state was still growing. Empire it no longer is. With a creeping and slowly expanding government tax burden chasing business
(and the people) from our midst, to now invest (how many M, B, Trillion)$$$ in what is at best a speculative enterprise is behond foolish. Seeing the the liquidation sale signs on Magna Powertrain (nee New Venture/ Process Gear) in Syracuse is gut wrenching. Mr Shumer if your reading this(highly unlikely), I'd be happy to have the Amtrak Turbo's do their thing between Al & NYC as touted. This would be a great start to see IF the State were actually serious about a plausable service. We invested over 12 Mil in that deal ( a paltry sum in the Obama age) and received what? I wish people would stop calling 110,125 "high speed". That standard is long past. I'm pro train for sure but pro reality even more so. People are not leaving this great state because we don't have suffient rail service and a 125 mph Buff to Albany one won't bring them back. Ok, fire away.

I am taking the inflation from the bailouts into account. That's why I said the living wage will decrease. They may raise the minimum wage to $10 an hour, but it won't matter if the price for food, clothing, gas, ect. increase.

I'm not one of those people that thinks we are running out of oil, or that the easy to get oil has already been found or anything related to that.

I see oil kind of like gold; a product that has real value. Who knows what the price of oil will be with our post-bailout inflated dollars. One thing is certain, we won't be able to use automobiles the way we use them now. The price spike last year happened before the two major bailouts.

We should be building the alternatives now. High speed rail linking major cities is one of them.

From the 2/25 Rail Link

"N.Y. RAIL STUDY ENDED: A state Senate task force launched by then-Majority Leader Joseph L. Bruno in 2005 to investigate and facilitate development of high-speed rail in upstate New York is shutting down.
The $5 million Senate appropriation for the task force has funded work by consultants who have studied a number of issues related to passenger rail service.
Recommendations stemming from the task force’s first study were the basis for a Department of Transportation plan for $22 million in improvements to rail infrastructure between New York City and Rensselaer.
The work, most of which is under contract, includes stabilization of a rock slope that slows trains to a crawl just north of New York City, the addition of a fourth track and extended platforms at Rensselaer Rail Station, and demolition of two former Amtrak stations just north of the new station.
The High-Speed Rail Task Force also has completed studies on the ownership and control of railroad tracks, a key issue as changes in rail service are contemplated and negotiated, and other prospects for rail improvement.
Much of the work has been done in consultation with other agencies, including DOT; the Capital District Transportation Authority, which provides bus service in the region; Metro North Railroad, a commuter rail line in the Hudson Valley; Amtrak, the national passenger rail service; and the Capital District Transportation Committee, the region’s transportation planning group.
Project manager James Cartin said about $600,000 of the original task force appropriation remains, but no further work has been requested.
Cartin said the studies commissioned by the task force, which is housed in the Rensselaer Rail Station offices of CDTA, have been deliberately designed to consider more than infrastructure.
“We outlined a comprehensive strategy to look at all aspects of intercity passenger service, and not just infrastructure,” Cartin said.
He said the task force, which operated originally under the volunteer direction of John Egan, who now heads the state’s Office of General Services, also advocated for plans that could deliver short-range improvements, such as more on-time service and expanded express service, as well as longer range big ideas.
Bruno initially established the task force with talk of “bullet trains” that would resemble high-speed rail service in Europe and Japan.
He later embraced shorter-term goals, such as improving the punctuality and availability of trains. (Albany Times-Union)"

The fastest trains run in Russia are 35 to 40 miles an hours.

Nonsense

I am not against the idea of HSR in isolation; it's just difficult for me to honestly say that this is the number one top of mind priority considering "everything else" that is going on (most if not all of which is out of scope of this discussion board).

Sure, if HSR were to appear, I'd be on board with my family-- sometime between one and four times a year. HSR doesn't increase the number of vacation days I get, or decrease the opportunity cost of spending the time and money to bring my family to New York City (which would be my destination) versus all of the other Multiple Competing Priorities I have.

It would be interesting to consider that HSR would suddenly make the entire corridor a Bedroom Community for NYC, but I'm not sure that would be a desired impact for either some New York City people ("isn't Yonkers 'upstate'?") or Western New Yorkers ("You visit New York City? You're not dead?"). I think some serious Attitude Adjustment would be needed, and that's not a new obstacle by any means.

Incidentally, there is an article in the most recent issue of The Atlantic magazine that makes the point about "collapse" into mega-city areas; the author groups Western New York not with NYC but Toronto, a "Tor-Buff-Chester." The author of the piece is from Toronto, which I think explains this grouping more than any logical argument I could come up with.

If we staged a race between Albany and Buffalo by AMTRAK and Greyhound right now who would win? High speed rail has to wipe out bus competition and use the NY Thruway as the high speed right of way. What's the big rush to go to either of those places anyway?