^ LOL. Yeah when I read the thread title, the first thing I thought was WHAT! How can light rail cost only that much, especially between two distant cities!
Just imagine a small train chugging along at 30 mph in the middle of I-94....
Printable View
^ LOL. Yeah when I read the thread title, the first thing I thought was WHAT! How can light rail cost only that much, especially between two distant cities!
Just imagine a small train chugging along at 30 mph in the middle of I-94....
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto
Trains run on electricity now. They just carry their own electric generator with them. Diesel locomotives use the same electric traction motors that Sprague invented for trolley cars. The diesel engine just drives a generator which makes electricity for the electric motors.
So we can keep pretending there is a limitless supply of diesel fuel...Quote:
Originally Posted by Hermod
...or we can catch up to the rest of the Western world and power our trains directly from overhead catenary.
There's no way in hell we can ever have TRUE high speed rail with diesel locomotives.
The govt never owned the rails. In fact, the govt subsidized the private companies to build the rails. Private companies are buying interstates. For example much of I-80 is privately held in Penn, Indiana, and Ill.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hypestyles
Personally, I think it's about time we nationalized them. I'm sure there are millions of reasons why it's not feasible and will never happen, but I'd welcome it if it did.Quote:
Originally Posted by DetroitPlanner
Nationalize the rails or nationalize the rails and the railroad companies?Quote:
Originally Posted by Bearinabox
We have the most productive and efficient rail freight system in the world.
Would you want the government maintaining the rails like they do the roads?
I'm thinking just the rails would be sufficient. I don't particularly care if the freight companies stay private or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hermod
This could well be true, I don't know. What metrics are you using? Is it more productive because it's just that good, or because it's not competing with passenger service?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hermod
In my experience, they really aren't well-maintained now compared to nationalized rail networks I've ridden in other places.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hermod
Are you thinking I-76 for Penn? I don't think I-80 is private at any point in Pa. There is currently no toll for it, but the state of Pennsylvania is reportedly considering tolling it in the near future.Quote:
Originally Posted by DetroitPlanner
How many miles of main line do they have in Switzerland [[which has very good railroads)Quote:
Originally Posted by Bearinabox
Rail maintenance for freight has a lower standard than rail maintenance for passengers.
Rails get maintained by the freight railroads based on the revenue generated.
All of those containers from Asia being unloaded at west coast ports and railroaded across the country to be reloaded on ships going to Europe are moving on very high class rail. The railroads make a lot of money off of that.
Doesn't Amtrak owned track count as nationalized rail?Quote:
Originally Posted by Bearinabox
This strikes me as a very compelling argument in favor of nationalization. Was it intended as such?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hermod
So if our broke federal government takes over the rails, they will automatically have them upraded to TGV condition? Har-de-har-har!Quote:
Originally Posted by Bearinabox
You cannot think about US railroads and highways based on England or Switzerland. For comparison, you need to look at Russia to get an idea of the magnitude of the distances involved.
Florida Department of Transportation bought the CSX tracks [[old Seaboard Air Line) from West Palm Beach to Miami to operate TriRail [[trash rail). FDOT rents out the tracks for CSX freights and AMTRAK passenger trains and runs a lot of TriRail commuter trains every day. FDOT has CSX maintain the rails under contract because they lack the competence to do it. [[they also contract out the operation and maintenance of TriRail trains to Veolia).
Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed
You're right, had a bit of a brain fart.
That is not what I said.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hermod
The Granholm Administration checks in...
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
October 28, 2010
Contact: Janet Foran, MDOT
517-335-7176 or 517-937-7219
Granholm Says $161 Million for High-Speed Rail Will be Transformational, Create Jobs
LANSING – Governor Jennifer M. Granholm today applauded the announcement from the Obama administration that Michigan will receive $161.1 million for three grants for high-speed rail projects that will support at least 1,200 jobs. The grants are part of the Federal Railroad Administration’s High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail Program.
“This investment is the beginning of a transformation of our state’s high-speed rail transportation system, giving people a travel option that is good for jobs, good for business and good for the environment,” Granholm said. “Train travel provides an alternative to highway travel that reduces congestion, energy use and emissions.”
The largest grant, for $150 million, will be used to improve rail services along a 135-mile section of track between Dearborn and Kalamazoo that is currently owned by Norfolk Southern Railway. The grant includes funding for possible acquisition of track and infrastructure upgrades, including new signals, crossing improvements and technical timing devices called positive train control. These improvements are intended to stabilize the rail line and restore passenger rail speeds to 79 mph, with future train speeds expected to reach 110 mph on this corridor. Work could begin as early as summer 2011.
A second grant for $7.9 million will remove some of the conflicts between rail passenger travel and freight traffic on the West Detroit Connection. The grant provides funding for building a new bridge over Junction Avenue in west Detroit, constructing 1.3 miles of new connector track, plus construction of three new crossovers and signal improvements. These upgrades are expected to shave travel time for passenger rail by up to 10 minutes and will connect the high-speed passenger line to the Detroit New Center station.
The two grants will improve both existing intercity passenger service and future high-speed intercity passenger service, as well as set the stage for regional services such as the proposed Ann Arbor-to-Detroit passenger rail service.
A third grant, for $3.2 million, will produce a corridor investment plan for the Chicago-Detroit/Pontiac high-speed rail corridor. This includes an environmental impact document that will help pave the way for increased speeds and frequencies on the route. This is an important step for the overall success of the federally designated 304-mile high-speed rail corridor.
We are still paying for the mistake of subsidizing private railways 150 years after they were built. The railways that built this country would have not been possible without government support and investment, just like many other industries such as utilities or aerospace. We let a few individuals/corporations have all the control over the rails, while we the taxpayers foot the bill. Now, 150 years later our federal government [[Amtrak) pays the corporations to use the rails that we built! But it is never too late to fix the mistake and take back control over the railways. The railways should be public, just like the freeways. Private trucks travel on public roads. Imagine if the freeways were privately owned, and public buses paid to use them!! Sounds ridiculous, but it isn't really any different. Unfortunately, it will be extremely hard to take back ownership, because once ownership is given to a private company it is close to impossible to get it back. So the at the very least, the federal government could invest in a completely new passenger railways system. The money would be well spent, for this is not a short term investment, as the system we built 150 years ago is still in place, and probably will be in another 150 years. But again, once ownership is given to private hands it is hard to ever get it back, so having it public from the start is important. The sad thing is that in this day and age our government doesn't see the benefit from making those sorts of massive long-term investments.
The reality was that, in the 19th century, the federal government was land rich and cash poor. In the populated parts of the country, railroads were built without federal government support and were quite prosperous. In the less populated parts of the country, it did not make economic sense to build a railroad as there were no customers and the government couldn't sell the land for farming because it was not economical to ship cash crops. As a result, the railroads were offered a subsidy in federal land as an inducement to build what would otherwise be an unprofitable line of track.Quote:
Originally Posted by casscorridor
The federal government offered railroads "alternate sections" of government lands to build track through sparsely settled lands. In other words, for an east-west rail line, the railroad got one square mile north of the track for the first mile of track, one square mile south of the track for the next mile of track, and so on. The railroad could then sell these lands to settlers.
The government profited by the increase in value of the other government lands near the tracks which the government land offices could sell to settlers at a higher price. The government also profited by the growing rail network linking all parts of the country.
I took the train from St Louis to Birmingham around the 4th of July. What surprised me most was the amount of time it took to get from Dearborn to Birmingham. The train crawled along at 2mph through the junction connection to the Detroit station. There was freight train on a adjacent track. It look about an hour and fifteen minutes to get from Dearborn to Birmingham. The train really didn't pick up speed until it was north of Hamtramck.
I'm thinking the junction up grade mentioned in the arcticle will shave off more than 10 minutes because your seperating passenger trains from freight trains and it might eliminate the sharp curve. I wouldn't be surprised if it ended up being 25 minutes and I don't think I'm exaggerating. If seperate tracks were built from the Detroit station to the Ferndale area, I bet another twenty minute would be shaved off. Do the trains buffs on this form agree with me?
We also went from Birmingham to Chicago, round trip, this past August. The stretch from Dearborn station to Birmingham took One and one-half hours most of the time we were sitting on the rails for long time periods with freight trains. This was on a Friday at 6pm.
Until this improves it's faster to drive to the Dearborn station. The parking is free and safe, you can wait inside and they have restrooms. The problem with Birmingham and Royal Oak is they have no real stations or weather shelters for the passengers, just sidings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkbroch
Free or cheap parking, at least for suburban areas, is an important adaptation for rail in our area. The free parking in Dearborn is why it outboards Detroit for Amtrak.
This weekend, I flew to St. Louis and discovered they have a relatively new light rail system that now has two lines. The first built was from the Airport to Illinois through downtown. The second splits off to an alternative suburb.
Some observations:
Free parking at almost all suburban stations...Great way to encourage use
Honor system rather than turnstyle. Got asked for ticket twice by pairs of security guards [[with private logos on clothes and official vests).
Charged $3.75 from airport, but gave a two hour bus pass as well.
Charged $2.25 for single ride, including to airport or from IF you bought it earlier. Thus, incoming travelers paid a buck more leaving [[was fine with that).....
Connections at all universities and community colleges seemed very important...They all had their own station [[or two)
Very nice experience.
Could we dream of making a system that shoots over to Windsor as one of the spurs?
They included Illinois in this system from the beginning and got their tax base to pay for some of it.
You know, I'm having a lousy morning so I just want to rant...Quote:
Originally Posted by rooms222
How is that ST. LOUIS, a poorer rust-belt city of 350,000 has a light rail system and Detroit doesn't? What a joke. Look how many people in Metro Detroit are crying for basic amenities, and yet we can't get even 3 miles of rail built. I mean, it's laughable. The fact that people are still debating issues like this makes me lose it. Are there still people out there that think that light rail is an unnecessary item? I sincerely hope not. And, it's not just light rail. Detroit just keeps falling further behind. I was in GR over the weekend visiting friends and although they don't have light rail [yet], it is stinking depressing for me, a Detroiter. As small as GR is, it has a functional and clean bus system that runs on time. Sidewalks aren't littered with glass and trash. There are no vacant storefronts. On "Health Hill" or whatever it is that they just built over there, all of their urban planning has a pedestrian-friendly design. GR is more cosmopolitan and actually appears to be a BIGGER city than Detroit because city planners have made it walkable. There's no massive parking lots in the middle of blocks. Public spaces are open and attractive. I just don't get what the problem is here. None of this is news, but I am so tired of the lack of progress on projects like light rail and other things. It's embarassing.
Thanks for letting me rant.
[QUOTE=BrushStart;194694]You know, I'm having a lousy morning so I just want to rant...
How is that ST. LOUIS, a poorer rust-belt city of 350,000 has a light rail system and Detroit doesn't?
That is one of the things I found out about their system- it was a regional, multi-state effort. From the very beginning, the city, county, and counties in Illinois were involved. There was at least one station in Illinois, even if phase one.....
The governmental, financing, and tax details are here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bi-Stat...lopment_Agency
Info about the system is here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MetroLink_[[St._Louis)
That seems at least in part why Chicago seems more interested in a HSR line to St. Louis over one to Detroit.Quote:
Originally Posted by BrushStart
Wow, a softball question in here!
Why does St. Louis have a light rail system and we don't? Easy:
1. They had the POLITICAL WILL to build a system and ask the voters to support the local share of the cost, which also means
2. They RECOGNIZED there would BE A LOCAL CONTRIBUTION and it would NOT BE ZERO DOLLARS and it would HAVE TO COME FROM LOCAL SOURCES.
Various political leaders around Detroit, notably LBP and his crew, try to maintain the fantasy that point 2 has another answer [[constantly asking "who's going to pay for it", when the clear and obvious answer is "we are").
The lack of any real political leadership in the region is why point 1 never gets anywhere. Nobody is trying to improve conditions in metro Detroit at all; our political class is sitting around wondering when the fairy godmother will arrive and make everything all right again.
Remember this when you vote tomorrow. And please do vote.
Are there any candidates on the ballot for any office who will demonstrate political leadership? If anyone knows of any, and feels like persuading me to change my vote, I'm listening.Quote:
Originally Posted by professorscott