• SEHSR Southeast High Speed Rail Corridor

  • General discussion of passenger rail proposals and systems not otherwise covered in the specific forums in this category, including high speed rail.
General discussion of passenger rail proposals and systems not otherwise covered in the specific forums in this category, including high speed rail.

Moderators: mtuandrew, gprimr1

  • 339 posts
  • 1
  • 19
  • 20
  • 21
  • 22
  • 23
  by Bob Roberts
 
Literalman wrote: Sun Mar 28, 2021 3:35 pm "Charlotte to Raleigh Corridor": I guess that should read "Charlotte to Atlanta"?
Yea, my apologies. I was getting ready to buy tickets for my first train trip back. The post should indeed read Charlotte to Atlanta.
  by electricron
 
How many passengers will they get for passengers traveling beyond Atlanta and Charlotte? It will be extremely nice going 200 mph on a super streamlined trains between these two cities, but if you need to get to Raleigh or Montgomery you will have to transfer to a much slower diesel powered train. Even worse, take a bus, uber, or taxi to interchange between stations in Charlotte and Atlanta.
The HSR draft EIS plans on placing the HSR stations at both city's airports, not in downtown or uptown.
  by MattW
 
Considering that every route through Atlanta I've seen goes through downtown anyways, not having a station there is beyond stupid!
  by scratchyX1
 
electricron wrote: Tue Mar 30, 2021 8:48 am How many passengers will they get for passengers traveling beyond Atlanta and Charlotte? It will be extremely nice going 200 mph on a super streamlined trains between these two cities, but if you need to get to Raleigh or Montgomery you will have to transfer to a much slower diesel powered train. Even worse, take a bus, uber, or taxi to interchange between stations in Charlotte and Atlanta.
The HSR draft EIS plans on placing the HSR stations at both city's airports, not in downtown or uptown.
They seem to forget one of the appeals of rail is that the terminals can be much closer to destination that air travel.
Also see failing of Balt-DC maglev.
  by kitchin
 
The three DC-Balto maglev stations would be closer to the two downtowns than current Amtrak, and inside BWI airport rather than 10 minutes out on the shuttle. Or that's the plan.

I may have misinterpreted what you wrote, though. "Also (I) see" vs. "See also."
  by Bob Roberts
 
electricron wrote: Tue Mar 30, 2021 8:48 am The HSR draft EIS plans on placing the HSR stations at both city's airports, not in downtown or uptown.
I don't believe this is correct. My reading of the EIS reveals multiple mentions of the Charlotte terminus being at the downtown Gateway Station and downtown Atlanta stations are also included in the analysis.

This is from page 0-7 of the Executive Summary:
Greenfield
The Greenfield Corridor Alternative is a 274-mile route primarily on a new “greenfield” dedicated high-speed passenger rail alignment between CLT airport and Athens, GA, then following shared railroad ROW in the approaches to the Charlotte and Atlanta termini. This route serves three stations in North Carolina at Charlotte Gateway, CLT airport, and South Gastonia; two stations in South Carolina at GSP airport and Anderson; and five stations in Georgia in Athens, Suwanee, Doraville, downtown Atlanta,and H-JAIA.
Taken from here: http://www.dot.ga.gov/InvestSmart/Rail/ ... ummary.pdf

Thanks to the ARRA funded Piedmont Improvement Project trains from Atlanta could continue north from Charlotte to Raleigh at 110mph top speeds with relatively minor improvements. On the 'coming soon' S-Line I believe design speeds are intended to be 125mph capable. The NCRR does have the necessary width to build a separate set of true HSR (mostly) within the existing ROW as well.
  by David Benton
 
I guess diesels 110 mph trains could operate under the wires of a HSR system . I think this approach is suitable for the USA. There is an article in the Railway Gazette international that describes single track HSR development as well. In short , it may be better to have longer intergrated sysytems , rather than isolated Full HSR for the USA.
The French did this with the original TGV, using existing 100 mph conventional track into the cities. Vs the Japanese who went with a dedicated . isolated bullet train line. To the extent of been a different gauge to the existing system .
  by electricron
 
David Benton wrote: Tue Mar 30, 2021 6:39 pm I guess diesels 110 mph trains could operate under the wires of a HSR system . I think this approach is suitable for the USA. There is an article in the Railway Gazette international that describes single track HSR development as well. In short , it may be better to have longer intergrated sysytems , rather than isolated Full HSR for the USA.
The French did this with the original TGV, using existing 100 mph conventional track into the cities. Vs the Japanese who went with a dedicated . isolated bullet train line. To the extent of been a different gauge to the existing system .
110 mph trains running on the same tracks as 220 mph trains is a disaster in the making, assuming they are going 110 mph instead of 79 mph. How long does it take a train to go 10 miles, about the average distance between control points?
At 220 mph (your typical HSR speed), it takes 2.7 minutes to go 10 miles.
At 110 mph (your typical higher speed diesel powered intercity rail speed), it takes 5.4 minutes to go 10 miles.
At 80 mph (your typical commuter rail speed), it takes 7.5 minutes to go 10 miles.
At 50 mph (your typical freight train speed), it takes 12 minutes to go 10 miles.

At a maximum on tracks being shared with freight trains, you can only run 5 trains/hour over the track, a train every 12 minutes.
If you want the trains to go faster than approach medium speed on a typical track block signaling system, halve the trains so their is an additional track block in front of the HSR train. Now we are at a train every 24 minutes, less than 3 trains per hour. Of course, after 3 minutes your HSR train will have to proceed at approach medium speeds until the freight trains pulls over into a passing siding. There are many valid reasons why some HSR operators run their trains on dedicated tracks.

The Japanese use dedicated tracks and moving blocks signaling systems, which is how they achieve HSR trains running with headways of less than 3 minutes over the track.

That is also why HSR trains slow down to 79-110 mph on shared tracks with freight trains.
  • 1
  • 19
  • 20
  • 21
  • 22
  • 23