NPR: High Speed Rail on Empire Corridor?

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/stor ... =101073906

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood says high-speed rail could be a signature issue for Obama. "I do think this is the transformational issue for this administration when it comes to transportation," LaHood said. "I think President Obama would like to be known as the high-speed rail president, and I think he can be."

On this morning's Morning Edition... Empire Corridor is listed on map.

Oh brother - how about fixing up the infrastructure we already have instead of pursuing pipe dreams! You want high speed rail, go to Japan or France!

I'd bet dollars to doughnuts, that the great bulk of the HSR $13B gets spent in and around Obama's home state.

Which has a rail network that serves its ENTIRE state and fewer physical barriers then New York. Places in Illinois' equivalent of the Southern Tier already have passenger service while plenty of state money in New York continues to find its way to studies funding one weekends worth of trains to Cortland.

From Rochester NY Democrat & Chronicle Feb.25,2009:
N.Y. high-speed rail project closer to reality
http://www.democratandchronicle.com/app ... 9902250318
"...One thing that's off the table is more studies. "It's been studied to death," Slaughter said."
"...CSX, which did not return a call seeking comment, made it clear that the rights of way necessary for new tracks for high speed rail lines are theirs, Slaughter said. CSX owns the existing rail lines and Amtrak trains yield to CSX freight trains, Slaughter said. The new lines could make 10 round trips a day between Buffalo and Albany instead of today's four round trips. ..."

Trains don't move faster than the slowest one ahead of them. I believe trailer and container trains are allowed 70mph. Anybody experience a wait riding Amtrak on CSX or Conrail, when the passenger was held for a freight? Amtrak is given a priority only if they're running on time.

The choices we have to make is do we want to do something that could go 200 miles an hour that would require new rights of way or take existing rights of way and make improvements to those,”

Note the words "...or TAKE existing rights of way..." Apparently private property does not pose much of an obstacle for these folks. Take peoples money, take peoples land, and build something that will require the taking of more peoples money in the future, for something the vast majority will never need or use.

yeah, exactly.... put it to bed already

BR&P knows the score.

On second thought (ie; furthermore), who except politicians looking to avoid being caught with their pants down, needs to be hurtled towards Albany at over 110 mph ? And more frankly, you can keep the "great armpit" of NY state 8 hours away from me. Why should my wife or I want to rush to a wormy apple ? For the opera... drugs on 54th& C ave... shopping... ghettos... arts... WHAT FOR !???

{recoiling in a politely compromising position for the ensuing blow back}

American "high speed" 110? 125? The Euro's must just laugh when they read this stuff. How about some studies to see if 125mph freight is fesible? Hurry, lets go quickly. Hey but no "pork' on them trains, we're
doing transparency remember.

O-6-O wrote:American "high speed" 110? 125? The Euro's must just laugh when they read this stuff. How about some studies to see if 125mph freight is fesible? Hurry, lets go quickly. Hey but no "pork' on them trains, we're
doing transparency remember.

At leased were 2ed to none on some highspeed rail behind Western Europe. The fastest trains run in Russia are 35 to 40 miles an hours. Africa might as well take a month to go 5 miles.

We all know pork exists, and that these studies have been done and done again...ad nauseum. A market supposedly exists between Albany and New York. Ours is not to wonder why...

Let's keep it here and limit the injection of humor about the clientele.

Dave Becker

bluegrass-express wrote:I believe trailer and container trains are allowed 70mph.

Freight trains are 50 mph max. Intermodel are 60 mph max. You were thinking of CR days which allow intermodel trains go 69 mph, and freight (if I remember right) were allowed to go at 59, except for certain cars such as empty gonadola, coal hoppers, etc (some cars have limit on speed. I haven't checked CSX's book to see if they still do that.

bluegrass-express wrote:From Rochester NY Democrat & Chronicle Feb.25,2009:
N.Y. high-speed rail project closer to reality
http://www.democratandchronicle.com/app ... 9902250318
"...One thing that's off the table is more studies. "It's been studied to death," Slaughter said."
"...CSX, which did not return a call seeking comment, made it clear that the rights of way necessary for new tracks for high speed rail lines are theirs, Slaughter said. CSX owns the existing rail lines and Amtrak trains yield to CSX freight trains, Slaughter said. The new lines could make 10 round trips a day between Buffalo and Albany instead of today's four round trips. ..."

I read the D&C piece and I took the CSX passage as being obstructionist. "We own the ROW and we'll decide... oops, we already have-- no." If I'm reading this correctly, that attitude would be just begging for an eminent domain land grab.

However, I also need to remember that the D&C is hardly a bastion of journalistic excellence these days and the CSX input could be out of context, or wrong. It's not helpful that they didn't return the phone call asking for a quote (not that it would have made it into print).

As much as a railroad fan as I am, I'm not sure this is the best use of resources. Gas prices back at $4 or $5 would make this a somewhat easier sell.

umtrr-author wrote: As much as a railroad fan as I am, I'm not sure this is the best use of resources. Gas prices back at $4 or $5 would make this a somewhat easier sell.

When gas was $4 or $5, I recall reading/hearing news that transit and Amtrak patronage was up dramatically.
Or you could promise to run it with Alcos or steam, then everyone would be on board. Or trackside just taking pictures.
Some countries/states/regions/cities with the foresight to include appropriate transportation modes in their planning see community development where they want it. What I've learned is that when you focus growth in corridors, mass transit or something like high speed rail has side benefits. You don't want to invest, you don't get anything back.
Maybe Otto and Don think New York's exodus of population means we're doing something right?