stimulus funds for high speed rail?

Chafford1 wrote:

priamos wrote:

Chafford1 wrote:Using the Jet Train or electric TGVs? I hope the latter.

If I were a US politician I'd be loath to go for the Jet Train: Bombardier has developed a new generation of electric HS trains (the launch client is China - not Canada...) and is no longer marketing the Jet. If anyone bases a "modern" HS line on that old train I predict the press will be unkind to them. That said, if you look at the home page of the Florida HR Rail authority the construction times the foresee for Tampa-Orlando look incredibly tight (four years, start to finish). Seeing as it normally takes around 15 months to get the electrical system up and running, I fear that they may have in mind a "scraped solution".

Given that only half the money required has been allocated, the temptation must be to scale back the project . Bearing in mind the short distances between stops, the 168mph capability from expensive TGVs isn't needed. And 16 daily trains each way (1 an hour?) won't provide a great financial return from an electrified high speed line.

True, but... two observations. First, even on "short" stretches of railway it sometimes pays not to cut too many corners. The frequent TGVs from Paris to Lille have a top speed of 300 km/h despite the only 216 km between the two cities. In terms of "effective velocity" this train covers the distance in precisely one hour - which is very convenient in terms of scheduling. Secondly, and more seriously, I'd strongly warn against committing an error (well, in my view it's an error) that has dogged the German ICE system. Even if one has to "start small" then one should definitely "think big". The German planners repeatedly started by planning for a line between two neighbouring cities whicl clearly having in mind a larger, trans-regional network to follow some day. Never mind what they had in mind! Immediately the discussion got seized by special-interest pleaders howling that "oooOOOOH!! But there's only 200 km between those two cities! Surely it cannot matter whether it takes 55 minutes or 1 hour 5 minutes?" Well... yes it could. Because when, later, one tries to knit together a more serious HS network between a handful of cities then a loss of time of 10 minutes here, 10 minutes there begin to add up. Thus, one should preferably never pander to local interests if one has a national (or, in the US, state wide) solution in mind.

This adds up to the following: if the Floridans are SERIOUS about eventually having a state-wide network connecting Tampa, Orlando, Miami, Palm Springs, Jacksonville and Tallahassee, then.... they should make sure the tracks between Tampa and Orlando are optimised for truly high speeds and with 25 kv electrical catenaries. Otherwise IMO they're going to regret it later.

priamos wrote: True, but... two observations. First, even on "short" stretches of railway it sometimes pays not to cut too many corners. The frequent TGVs from Paris to Lille have a top speed of 300 km/h despite the only 216 km between the two cities. In terms of "effective velocity" this train covers the distance in precisely one hour - which is very convenient in terms of scheduling. Secondly, and more seriously, I'd strongly warn against committing an error (well, in my view it's an error) that has dogged the German ICE system. Even if one has to "start small" then one should definitely "think big". The German planners repeatedly started by planning for a line between two neighbouring cities whicl clearly having in mind a larger, trans-regional network to follow some day. Never mind what they had in mind! Immediately the discussion got seized by special-interest pleaders howling that "oooOOOOH!! But there's only 200 km between those two cities! Surely it cannot matter whether it takes 55 minutes or 1 hour 5 minutes?" Well... yes it could. Because when, later, one tries to knit together a more serious HS network between a handful of cities then a loss of time of 10 minutes here, 10 minutes there begin to add up. Thus, one should preferably never pander to local interests if one has a national (or, in the US, state wide) solution in mind.

This adds up to the following: if the Floridans are SERIOUS about eventually having a state-wide network connecting Tampa, Orlando, Miami, Palm Springs, Jacksonville and Tallahassee, then.... they should make sure the tracks between Tampa and Orlando are optimised for truly high speeds and with 25 kv electrical catenaries. Otherwise IMO they're going to regret it later.

The long-term strategy point is a good one. However, I wonder whether it will be on politicans' radar when the choice due to lack of funding is a lower spec line or none at all.

priamos wrote: If I were a US politician I'd be loath to go for the Jet Train: Bombardier has developed a new generation of electric HS trains (the launch client is China - not Canada...) and is no longer marketing the Jet. If anyone bases a "modern" HS line on that old train I predict the press will be unkind to them.

The JetTrain is done, dead, gone. In this day and age, it's simply a political non starter. Remember, in the 90's, oil was 'too cheap to meter' and everyone swore it'd stay that way forever... Today, oil's $80, and everyone's bent out of shape over carbon.

That said, if you look at the home page of the Florida HR Rail authority the construction times the foresee for Tampa-Orlando look incredibly tight (four years, start to finish). Seeing as it normally takes around 15 months to get the electrical system up and running, I fear that they may have in mind a "scraped solution".

It'll be electric. They've already assumed it is.

Chafford1 wrote: Given that only half the money required has been allocated, the temptation must be to scale back the project . Bearing in mind the short distances between stops, the 168mph capability from expensive TGVs isn't needed. And 16 daily trains each way (1 an hour?) won't provide a great financial return from an electrified high speed line.

Then get rid of the signaling system: it's much more expensive than the electrification, per the Authority's own estimates!

In any case, there's no economic justification for HSR in Florida, period. There's no regional/local transit to support it. Even if built, my guess is the system becomes an expensive flop.

What price a diesel hauled 125mph line?

Lower ridership and higher operational costs. For an upfront savings of 300 million? And electricity's gonna get cheaper in Florida if the 4 nuclear units planned get built. Plus - the public's expecting a 'high speed train', not a P-42 pulling a few Amfleets (the ultimate result of decontenting the line). If they see the latter, how will they feel about how their billions were spent?

Nasadowsk wrote: Then get rid of the signaling system: it's much more expensive than the electrification, per the Authority's own estimates!

That's against the law - or at least against the international railway conventions (I don't know about Florida's state laws). If the design speed exceeds 160 km/h then conventional signaling can no longer be used. And, a fully computerised system costs an arm and a leg.

Nasadowsk wrote: In any case, there's no economic justification for HSR in Florida, period. There's no regional/local transit to support it. Even if built, my guess is the system becomes an expensive flop.

Hum... I don't know the fine print of that Federal funding agreement - and from my desk in Paris I cannot read so far... However, it looks to me as if the State of Florida may just have acquired a valuable option. The funding made available is a small part of the cost of a prospective Tampa-Orlando-Miami line, however it's a huge subsidy toward the costs of the first stage between Tampa and Orlando. Now, IF as you say the first stage becomes a major disappointment, would not the Governor be free to say "...therefore we will put the second stage on hold... until further notice"? Like that, the federal government carries a major share of the "downside" in this project.

There is an expiration date on the availability of the federal funds (Sept. 30, 2012, I think), so if FL can't get an agreement in place to provide the other half of the construction costs, then the whole project might disappear into thin air.

The plan proposes to put the operations and maintenance contract up for competitive bid, with no provision for an O & M subsidy from the state. It will be interesting to gauge the interest of the experienced overseas operators in winning the contract. We know that the SNCF has studied FL HSR, (there's a thread in this forum discussing that topic). If the plan is sound and expansion of the system gains strong legislative backing, I think we'll see genuine interest from the experienced operators. But if the plan is based on wild speculation and supported with empty promises, I think we'll see the SNCF and others heading home on the first available flight out of Florida.

Vincent wrote:There is an expiration date on the availability of the federal funds (Sept. 30, 2012, I think), so if FL can't get an agreement in place to provide the other half of the construction costs, then the whole project might disappear into thin air.

Yes, but sorry Vincent, I think you miss my point. The point I was making is contained in your own use of the words "the other half". It is not normal (I think...) for the Federal Government to offer to pay HALF of the construction costs of what is essentially a State project. In this case, however, it can be done because it is enveloped in a much bigger project which aims - or purports to aim - toward HS interlinkage of most of the Sunshine State. If the biiIIIG project does eventually take place then federal money will have financed only a few percent. But if the State of Florida stops after Tampa-Orlando then DC will have paid half of the cost (and I'm confident that the users of the railway will, with time, come up with the other half). Voila... as I said, a nice one-way street for the Governor: he only has to commit real money if Tampa-Orlando is a success and the State legislators decide to proceed with the project.

It's disappointing to see a state like FL which currently does not support rail get such a large funding. IMO the money would have been better spent in CA or in extending the NEC to Richmond and on to Raleigh and Charlotte (including electrification). It is nice however to see that TX did not receive very much .

lpetrich wrote:Just for the Hades of it, I decided to count up which states are involved, even if in a tiny way:

California, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin

I count 25 states, while the press releases I've seen claim 31. I'd like to see which states I'd missed.

If you look at the whitehouse document of awards, look at the very bottom under additional awards, multiple. $6 million was awarded to 9 additional states of which 3 had already gotten some other funds. Thus 25 states plus 6 more is where they get the 31 number from.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/files/documen ... isions.pdf

lpetrich wrote:Here are the press releases on which places will get which money to do what:

Fact Sheet: High Speed Intercity Passenger Rail Program: Pontiac-Detroit-Chicago

$244 million - Additional tracks and related improvements in Illinois and Indiana.

All good stuff -- reading between the lines, Englewood Flyover got funded -- but I wish it had gotten more. The states haven't organized sufficiently for the critical "east of Chicago corridor", so there wasn't much shovel-ready anyway. Maybe the next round of awards (the 'regular' money rather than the 'stimulus' money) will add something like the Grand Crossing connection or the South of the Lake Reroute or the passenger-only tracks in Chicago.

$823 million - Improvements of Chicago - Milwaukee - Madison tracks, planning work on Madison - Minneapolis.

Happy happy joy joy.

$1133 million - Improvements of Chicago - St. Louis - Kansas City tracks, enabling 110-mph service over much of Chi-StL.

They are spending way too damn much money on the UP's Chicago-St. Louis route. Considering that this is the route which sank a pile of money into a failed signalling system already, is painfully indirect on the St. Louis approach, and has terrible routings through the middle of many downtowns.

[qupte]
$400 million - Start of 79-mph passenger service on the "3C Corridor".[/quote]
We'll see how this goes. Could be good, could be terrible.

$598 million - Seattle - Portland - Eugene. Will go from 4 to 6 trains/day between Seattle and Portland, and will do various track improvements, presumably including a downtown-Tacoma bypass of the slow, curvy Point Defiance line.

I wish there were more detail on this one. Judging by the sheer amount of money, they're going to finish the Point Defiance Bypass *and* the Vancouver Yard Bypass, and do quite a lot more in addition to that (Kelso-Martin's Bluff siding? The $94 million in general improvements in track quality?) Extremely good news -- Seattle-Portland is getting to be a showcase corridor.

$2344 million - mainly for CAHSR construction, most likely San Francisco - San Jose, Merced - Fresno - Bakersfield, and Los Angeles - Anaheim.

Also, Capitol Corridor crossover near Davis, relocation of tracks at Sacramento's station, improvements of San Joaquin trainsets, and new track and crossovers for Los Angeles - San Diego.

I wish CAHSR priorities hadn't gotten so politicized -- we all want to see Bakersfield-LA, don't we?

Fact Sheet: High Speed Intercity Passenger Rail Program: Northeast Region

$480 million, with $706 million from other sources - lots of little improvements and plans here and there, like planning for new Baltimore tunnels, eliminating the last three grade crossings on the Philadelphia-Harrisburg line, design of a new bridge in New Jersey near NYC, restoration of Portland - Brunswick track in Maine, etc.

Most of this is rather nice stuff. Portland-Brunswick will certainly be appreciated by Maine. Sealing the PA Main Line should allow for future even greater improvements, and there's also a *bunch* of money to reconfigure interlockings for higher speed operation, which should cause fast, noticeable improvements in trip time. Upstate NY got its second track Albany-Schenectady and a passing track north of Schenectady, plus some planning money. There were enough very small (<$1 million) projects proposed by NYS that there may be more not listed which got funded. A bunch of the other stuff in the Northeast is longstanding and generally desirable projects (Connecticut train reroute, Vermont planning for train reroute).

$620 million - DC-Richmond: 11 mi of high-speed-capable track,

Wow. I didn't expect the Virginia Third Track FB-XR (other reports indicate it's this one, not the Franconia Hill one) to get HSR money. I guess that's Virginia's quota. There are so many other bottlenecks DC-Richmond, and for some reason Virginia is letting CSX have ownership of the new lines, so they're not really a very good deal.

Richmond-Raleigh: 4 crossovers

No S-line money then. That's the A-line 'congestion mitigation'.

Raleigh-Charlotte: 30 projects, making possible 90-mph service with double the number of trains per day.

Looks like that will bring them close to finishing the North Carolina Railroad passenger upgrades masterplan. Just need that Charlotte station (and more grade separations)....

$1250 million - for a Tampa-Orlando line.

I am going to reserve judgment until we see whether the planners decide to screw their heads on correctly. Let me see if I have this right:

An HSR line to Orlando. Which crosses the existing Amtrak/funded commuter rail line (SunRail). With no transfer station (shuttle buses, apparently?!?). And doesn't reach downtown Orlando, only the Airport. It's also an HSR line to Tampa. Which stops at a brand new station separate from Amtrak's stop at Tampa Union Station. Amtrak won't be redirected to the new station. It'll stop at Lakeland. Separately from Amtrak, and in a highway median. It'll stop at Disneyworld. Oh, wait, except so far away it will require shuttle buses.

Have I got this straight?

electricron wrote:

superbad wrote:so being(specifically FL And CA) that these projects are shovel ready, how soon will we see some construction in these tow states.. this is very exciting..

Florida asked for $2.5 Billion, but got just half that. I have no idea what-so-ever where Florida is going to get the other half. Therefore, that trains will not be leaving the train station anytime soon.

California estimates it'll take $42 Billion to build its complete system. I assume $2.5 Billion is enough to build 88 miles of HSR tracks as in Florida. California HSR does have financial resources to match the Feds,

Specifically, they have $10 billion in bonding authority. So assume they can build *440* miles of HSR tracks. Then cut that in half to cover land acquisition costs. But that's only on fairly flat areas; divide by 10 instead to get the number of miles of tunnel it would cover (44).

Expect them to build the Central Valley track in its entirety, plus whatever other segments they can afford. At that point they can say "See, we need to connect a big city to this, give us more money...."

neroden wrote:It'll stop at Disneyworld. Oh, wait, except so far away it will require shuttle buses.

Have I got this straight?

Blame Disney for this one; with only a few exceptions, any two parts of the sprawling resort are only connected by road. The most non-bus hotel connections to any park are 4-5: Magic Kingdom with three by monorail and one by boat, and Hollywood Studios (and Epcot's back entrance) with five by boat. Chances are you'd end up on a bus anyway, no matter where the high-speed rail stops on Disney property, so you might as well use the direct I-4 corridor.

I found it. State to get only a dribble of high-speed rail money | ajc.com

Georgia high-speed rail advocates were despondent Wednesday, fearing Georgia would get little or none of the money because it has lagged on rail development while other states have invested.

More than $80 million in federal funds for a commuter rail line south of Atlanta have sat idle for years.

The money to be announced today would pay for three feasibility studies, at $250,000 each.

“This is pitiful,” said U.S. Rep. David Scott (D-Ga.).

With so little commitment by Georgia state politicians, what did they expect?

However, seeing Florida get funding but not Georgia may goose those politicians into action.

Looking at the FRA's interactive map of proposals, I find the patterns I've noticed earlier. The Atlantic-Gulf Belt, Greater Chicagoland, and the scattering of western corridors.

The Atlantic part of the Atlantic-Gulf Belt has the most activity, with lots of Northeast developments and Virginia and North Carolina developing their Southeast Corridor as an extension of the Northeast Corridor. However, South Carolina and Georgia and Gulf-state politicians have remained uninterested, doing little to support the extension of the SEC to Atlanta and beyond. Florida is an exception, but it's well off the main line.

I call it the belt because it's a main line that's thick with branches off of it -- a main line extending about 2400 miles from Auburn, ME to San Antonio, TX.

Greater Chicagoland has gotten support for 4 lines, 3 lines from Chicago and a fourth one at an offset. There is a curious absence: Chicago - Indianapolis - Louisville. Wisconsin, Illinois, Michigan, and even Ohio politicians have been willing to support rail-line improvement in a big way, but Indiana ones have been slow on that. Could this be a case of political fashion?


That map shows some possible lines connecting the Atlantic-Gulf Belt and Greater Chicagoland: Kansas City - Wichita - Oklahoma City, and Louisville - Nashville - Chattanooga - Atlanta. I think that the latter line is a long shot -- it goes through some mountains and it connects two states that have not done all that much for passenger rail. There's perhaps more of a chance for the former line, since its route is mostly flatland, and since Missouri and Oklahoma have done a little bit more for their trains.

However, it does not show the northeastern possible connections that are mentioned in the Ohio Hub proposals: Cleveland - Erie - Buffalo, Cleveland - Pittsburgh, Columbus - Pittsburgh.


The west continues to have scattered corridors, with the odd addition of Phoenix-Tucson. Why not a Riverside - Palm Springs - Phoenix line? That would create a Greater California network that includes Nevada and Arizona.

IMHO, here's the most sensible strategy for FDOT to follow right now:

1. Take the federal funds, and use them to build a double-tracked HSR corridor from Tampa to Orlando. Ensure that the track's geometry is adequate for 180mph, but skip the electrification for now. Seriously. It'll be years before there are really enough trains running to justify the capital cost of electrification, and nobody in Florida cares about carbon emissions anyway. Jetrain is good enough for now. It can always be electrified later.

2. Acquire CSX's corridor between West Palm Beach and Auburndale, and also acquire what used to be a rail corridor from Auburndale Junction north to the HSR line at I-4 (it's obvious what I'm talking about if you look at Google Earth). Build a single new track from West Palm Beach to the HSR line, and connect it to the southern HSR track to both the east and west.

For the next 25 years or so, HSR trains (based on Jetrain) use the northern track to run back and forth between Tampa and Orlando at 150mph. ISR trains (possibly using Acela-like equipment) run 110-125mph on the southern HSR track between Tampa/Orlando and Auburndale, 110mph from Auburndale to WPB, and 80mph the rest of the way down to Miami.

The HSR line is double-tracked the entire way, but the stations all have 4 tracks. Initially, the two northern tracks through the station are for Tampa-Orlando HSR, and the two southern tracks through the station are for ISR trains to and from Miami. Trains headed in opposite directions are timed to arrive at the station simultaneously, so they can pass each other & continue onward. At this point, the Tampa-Orlando HSR trains, and ISR trains to/from Miami, run completely independently of each other. They never cross paths or share tracks, because the FRA won't allow them to (unless there's some magic passenger trainset I'm not aware of that's massive enough to legally share tracks with freight trains, but not SO massive that it's prohibited from sharing tracks with a HSR train).

Someday, when it's HSR all the way to Miami, FDOT launches commuter rail using trainsets that can legally share tracks with HSR and repurposes the tracks & platforms -- the inner tracks for intercity trains, the outer tracks for commuter trains. The commuter rail exists as two lines... one runs from Lakeland to Tampa, one runs from Auburndale to Orlando (eventually, Sanford & Deland). To accommodate the Orlando-area commuter rail, another branch is built from the HSR corridor north along the existing CSX corridor to at least downtown Orlando, if not further north. The track goes down into an open cut just south of the East-West Expressway, and runs in a trench through downtown (to avoid completely screwing up traffic heading to and from downtown Orlando from I-4).

Over the next 25-40 years, the track to Miami gets upgraded to HSR standards and grade-separated. Initially, it'll be SFRC that gets upgraded to alleviate gridlock caused by increasingly frequent trains holding up traffic. At some point, FDOT will realize they're already built half of what they need for 100% HSR, and they'll finish the job all the way. At THAT point, the tracks will be electrified.

To be safe, FDOT hedges its bets and holds off on ordering ANY rolling stock -- Jetrain or otherwise -- until it has the corridor acquisition and construction completely funded, approved, and nailed down -- Tampa to Orlando, Auburndale to Miami. If funds run short, it concentrates on the Tampa-Orlando HSR track, and the new connector track between the HSR line and Auburndale Junction. Rationale: it can ALWAYS start with 110mph trains along the whole route (limping along the single track that already exists at 79mph south of Auburndale if necessary).

Alternatively, if FDOT decides that it really wants to follow the coastal alignment for the Miami HSR train someday, it would STILL be to its benefit to build the connector between the new HSR line and Auburndale, lease the track south to West Palm beach from CSX for 25 years, and run hourly 79mph trains to Miami for now. Even at 79mph, Orlando's only 240 miles from Miami. Worst-case, they could shave 30-60 minutes from the Miami-Orlando time by doubling the number of trains, and having the Miami trains just skip all the stations south of West Palm Beach (the other trains would stop at the same stations Amtrak does now... WPB, Boynton, Boca, Ft. Lauderdale. It might as well do Hollywood since it woudn't be delaying Miami passengers (they'd be on the train that ran nonstop south of WPB), and Hollywood is actually a more popular Amtrak station than Fort Lauderdale (mostly, because your car is less likely to get broken into there than it is at Ft. Lauderdale station)

This idea isn't quite as sexy as 180mph "bullet trains", but I think it would deliver a MUCH better return on the funds spent than blindly throwing $3+ billion on a short HSR line that will be the laughing stock of white-elephant projects if it literally does nothing but run back and forth between Tampa and Orlando. FDOT can build the first step of a financially-viable passenger rail system that will eventually span the state, or it can literally burn its political and financial capital on a single project that will get it ridiculed forever.

miamicanes wrote:IMHO, here's the most sensible strategy for FDOT to follow right now:

1. Take the federal funds, and use them to build a double-tracked HSR corridor from Tampa to Orlando. Ensure that the track's geometry is adequate for 180mph, but skip the electrification for now. Seriously. It'll be years before there are really enough trains running to justify the capital cost of electrification, and nobody in Florida cares about carbon emissions anyway. Jetrain is good enough for now. It can always be electrified later.

Better yet, buy the Rohr Turboliners for next to nothing! Amtrak's got 'em for sale... They're capable of 150 mph, and wouldn't be required to meet FRA Tier II specs on a dedicated ROW.

Does anyone happen to know... is it even theoretically possible to build a passenger train that could legally share tracks with both freight trains and TGV-type trains, even though freight trains and TGV-type trains themselves can't share tracks? In other words, some happy middle ground for a passenger trainset that's rugged enough to run with the "big boy" freight trains, without ending up classified as de-facto freight trains themselves, and can legally inhabit both worlds and run on both sets of tracks? The trains I'm thinking of wouldn't even necessarily have to themselves be high speed... just legally capable of running at some speed while sharing the tracks with HSR and freight trains.

Besides solving the obvious problem of how to run trains from Orlando and Tampa to Miami without having actual HSR tracks every inch of the way today, it would also nicely solve the longer-term "Jacksonville Problem". Let's face it.. .if brand new HSR tracks to southeast Florida (with 6 million people living south of West Palm Beach, and MAJOR tourist traffic between Miami and Orlando) are cost prohibitive, HSR tracks to Jacksonville (with barely a million spread over the entire metro area, almost no tourism to speak of compared to Miami & Orlando, and some expensive river crossings to boot) aren't even in the realm of fantasy. That's Florida's harsh reality. Any rail "solution" that makes it impossible to run trains directly from Tampa & Orlando to Jacksonville and Miami is a non-starter. If seamless statewide connectivity requires settling for 150mph Acela-type trains everywhere, including the shiny new tracks between Tampa and Orlando, instead of 180mph trains... so be it. At the end of the day, it would be inconceivably stupid to paint ourselves into a corner and limit our present options just to be politically correct and shave 5-7 minutes off the time it takes to get from Orlando to Tampa. When you factor in old ladies taking extra time to get off of trains and other random delays, the real-world difference between a 180mph train and a 150mph train for a trip that's only ~90 miles long is almost below the margin of error.