110 MPH AMTRAK TRAIN

There is an Amfleet car rebuilt as an open obs car!

It is the Beechgrove.  

So much about this just ....  really bugs me.

110mph is NOT high speed for a train.

Going less then 1/2 as fast as other countries is not news.   That is unless the news report is to report just how sad our transportation system is in this country.

How many other countries run passenger trains faster than 110-120mph on track that is shared with freight  and not owned by the passenger railroad?

Bob

Today, a train of any kind running faster than 79 mph outside of the Northeast Corridor is big news. Out here, Amtrak has to run their high tech equipment on what's left of beat up freight tracks. If you want truely high speed rail in this country, who's going to pay for it?? Other countries have dumped a fortune into their passenger systems and they seem to be working quite well.

Today's economy is in the tank, and management heavy Amtrak barely got their new equipment budget paid. Our government and a lot of states don't want high speed rail (NIMBY) roaring thru their pristine acreage, and the class one's echo that sentiment. They said, no stations in our state, no money. Wasn't it Wisconsin's Governor who refused the payout and they gave it to Illinois?

I live not too far from where Amtrak run's the Michigan train thru NW Indiana, and for Amtrak to layout any different track route thru Porter Jct. is going to be mega bucks. Fortunately for me, I'm retired and I know the best spots for watching the new construction.    

There is an Amfleet car rebuilt as an open obs car!

185-190mph on the Eurostar,or TGV and you don't even feel it. They slow to

120mph when approching a station. I don't expect to see that speed in

this country, in my lifetime.

Joe

Lets no forget that whole "travel by plane" idea, what a flop that was!

let's face it, until 2011 Congress has been unwilling to provide Amtrak with anything near the proper funding. Clinging to some outdated notion it can be a money-maker. How can one expect a national passenger system to perform at that level with barely half the dollars it needs, over a period of nearly 40 years?

There appears to be some signs that this congressional attitude is changing, but with the dysfunctional Congress we have now I'm not holding my breath. No small wonder they have a 90% disapproval rating.

The Interstate Highway system has 0.00% recovery.  Waterways have 0.00% recovery......

I'm a skeptic of high speed rail in the US.  Not only do we not have the money, but we don't have the culture.  The latter might change, but it will be decades, I think.  The ONLY country in the world that is nearly the physical size of the US and has attempted HSR is China.  And for all the glowing reports in the railfan community, any serious reading about it in the International/financial press starts to show warts.  Their system for funding their HSP, if it turns out not get nearly as much revenue as projected, will threaten their banking system just as the mortgage crisis did here in the US.  And the promise of passengers is based on speeds they haven't been able to sustain without killing people.  Their saving grace to date, is the massive money pouring into their economy from ... (the) US.  

You can ONLY compare the US to Europe of you throw out the fly over country and most of the south.

I want to look at the numbers some more, but a friend recently sent me a spreadsheet of trains in and out of Columbus, Ohio, in July of 1941 as culled from an Official Guide.  Columbus should be a nice example; much of the nations population lives within about 500 miles of the place, and it was, in those days, nicely connected to the network, being served by PRR, NYC, B&O and C&O and had a beautiful Union Station.

Columbus union station serviced 122 passenger trains daily, or about 60 different trains.   About 30 of those trains were "regional"; they ran about a 250 mile radius. Most of these trains ran only once a day, stopping in town twice a day going each direction.  I had originally wanted to compare to flights out of Port Columbus (airport) today.  But then I realized no flight today mimics those regional trains.  You don't fly to Cleveland, or to Pittsburgh.  

You drive.  And you drive any time of day.

And while I haven't compared to flights, I'm guessing today there are more than 60 flights in and out of Columbus today.

HSP through Columbus, and across Ohio, has been proposed for many years and one of my best friends from childhood was a real booster at some high levels for many years.  But the capital cost is huge, and trying run enough trains to cancel the "car" factor makes the cost even higher.

So today, like it or not, my simple, 45 minute long, no cost, "study" of regional transportation in central Ohio suggests Columbus is better served today then even at a "golden" age of rail transportation (a time period I would LOVE to visit).  I believe the Governor of Ohio made a good choice when he turned down Federal dollars for a train that was doomed to fail, or would have cost Ohio taxpayers many more dollars than the Feds ever put into it.

Ok, I've soap boxed enough :-)  JMHO.

Bob

Bob Bunge makes some very good points.  Just one more question; how much bus service is there in and out of Columbus on a daily basis?