[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/n/ - Transportation

Name
Options
Comment
Verification
4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
File
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.
  • There are 31 posters in this thread.

05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
06/20/16New 4chan Banner Contest with a chance to win a 4chan Pass! See the contest page for details.
[Hide] [Show All]



File: cq5dam.web.900.450[1].jpg (89 KB, 900x450)
89 KB
89 KB JPG
https://www.al.com/news/2019/06/amtrak-set-to-return-to-gulf-coast.html

>Amtrak is expected to return to the Gulf Coast within 24 months, linking a new passenger rail between New Orleans and Mobile.

>U.S. Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Miss., announced Friday the awarding of a $33 million grant from the Federal Railroad Administration to fund infrastructure and capacity improvements that will enable Amtrak’s Gulf Coast return.

>The service has been suspended for 14 years since Hurricane Katrina wrecked much of the rail line in 2005.

Based.
>>
More expensive than flying and takes longer than driving.
>>
>>1344828
Exactly why we need high-speed rail in this country.
Even Brightline, which isn’t even very fast, is faster than flying and driving.
>>
>>1344831
Amtrak needs ro-ro automobile cars like European trains. I would actually take Amtrak long distance. Take my car and get a bedroom with a private bath.
>>
>>1344828
>train
>takes longer than driving
Is this really a thing with mutt trains? Even 70mph rural stuff here in Bongland is still faster than driving.
>>
>>1344831
I think it would be cheaper & easier to tone down the security theater that really hurts travel times on shorter flights, than to try to build high speed rail in the US. Even California with their dense population in a nice line down the coast couldn't get HSR to work. Plus at the rate batteries are improving, by the time the HSR network is built, electric short haul planes will be available and easily beat HSR on price and speed.
>>
File: 24acela_graphic1.gif (70 KB, 1400x353)
70 KB
70 KB GIF
>>1344836
Pretty much yes - on our interstates you can easily do 80+ mph the whole way (and if not for horshit nannystate speeding laws most of them would be fine with 100+ mph speeds) while few trains here will manage that as an average speed. Plus cars take you from directly from point a to point b, while of course with a train trip you have to factor in the time spent going to and from the train station.
>>
File: file.png (909 KB, 800x599)
909 KB
909 KB PNG
>>1344841
I'm not all too familiar with American trains so correct me if I'm wrong, but
>not able to lay straighter track
sounds a bit like an excuse, our track here is hardly very straight and has been around for well over 100 years and our trains can still do 125mph and take corners fast by tilting (APT, Class 390) so the average speed is higher.

>while of course with a train trip you have to factor in the time spent going to and from the train station
This doesn't apply very much in the UK, there are train stations everywhere (2,566 of them in around the same area as Oregon) and even literally who stations normally get at least an hourly service for both directions.
>>
>>1344841
>>1344851
Oh, for some more context, that 2,566 is just National Rail stations and doesn't include local stuff like trams and undergrounds.
>>
>>1344854
>Comparing a country smaller than the state of Minnesota to the entire US.
>>
File: brainlet16.jpg (76 KB, 645x671)
76 KB
76 KB JPG
>>1344828
>implying anyone takes Amtrak because it's practical
>not just because they can't/don't want to drive
>or for the leisure experience
since when do we have these kinds of turbobrainlets on /n/, this used to be a high-iq board
>>
File: you.png (7 KB, 207x243)
7 KB
7 KB PNG
>>1344943
>>
>>1344851
In burgerland the problem isn't so much straighter tracks, but a) track maintenance which depends on the private companies who own the track, so this has to be negotiated with them, and b) getting trains to go faster than 79 mph needs a different sort of certification, which is often too much of a hassle plus too much cost in upkeep, as it's no use for freight trains.
>>
>>1344854
The problem with that is in that there isn't infrastructure for "easy train access" nor desire for it. Or if there is desire, there isn't enough of it. Even if you put the train station at an easily-walkable location, you're still excluding the huge population of people who drive into the city from regional areas up to 2 hours away by car. So for a sizeable portion of the populations surrounding major areas, the train station being easily reached doesn't mean much as it would only be easily reached by car for many people who might use it.

You might then ask why not take cars over planes, since you must drive to the airport? The difference is that airports are already firmly entrenched in the U.S. and are faster by far than cars for most long trips (some will debate the line at which you change from driving to flying, I know a guy who prefers driving to flying unless it extends beyond a single 24 hour day in driving time, but people have different tolerances for long-distance driving). Airports have everything well set up already.
>>
>>1344831
>Even Brightline, which isn’t even very fast, is faster than flying and driving.
That's wrong tho. I save 15 minutes driving over brightline due to the stupid routing brightline takes opposed to the Florida turnpike.
>>
>>1344851
>This doesn't apply very much in the UK, there are train stations everywhere
You end up having the issue like I had in New york. I stayed in flushing and it took me 30 mins to get to LGA via MTA. If I used an Uber that goes down to 7 mins.
>>
>>1344951
So now you may say "well if airports can do it than trains can too". The problem is just an uphill battle (literally in some geography) and to convince people in the U.S. that trains are a good idea. The trains in the U.S. are shit, and also rare to even find beyond major cities. They are slow, they don't go to many places, they are expensive (comparable to flying given flying is much faster). The reputation is poor, so even if people have been on US trains, they have no reason to say "oh yeah, we want better trains", really unless they are train fans anyway. They say "flying is better" beyond that US trains don't ever search you for drug possession.

And the final nail in the coffin is that a huge swath of Americans associate public transport with inefficiency, slow speeds, and poor people/sickness/getting mugged/any bad thing you can think of. Where I'm from, you are a second-class citizen if you don't own a car, and more than you would think feel it is better that way than to be stuck elbow to elbow with the dirty homeless or whoever else is on public.

I would like it to be different, to see good trains operating at high speeds in many areas, and clean, orderly small trains servicing between the smaller local areas, but it just can't work right now. There just isn't the critical mass of want and need. As far as the U.S. right now, it's just not on the table. You can see the stumbling blocks of the HSR projects in the US right now as proof of that.
>>
>>1344956
LGA is notorious for being poorly served by transit though
>>
Most Amtrak trains share tracks with private railroads who don’t want some twice a day passenger train screwing up their profitable freight operations. CSX is notorious for letting Amtrak sit on sidings for hours and has ruined the northeast to Florida trains which were always fast and popular in the past.
So without separate ROW higher speed rail is impossible. For a local example, Detroit-Chicago is an ideal distance to n burgerland for passenger rail but near me the tracks go right through downtown Ypsilanti, slicing diagonally across all the main streets, then make sharp curves along the Huron River in Ann Arbor. Imagine the NIMBY-ism in trying to straighten that line out and eliminate grade crossings, even with a local population that thinks more and better passenger trains would be a good thing.
>>
>>1344835
They have such a service from DC to Orlando. I've only heard good reviews from family members who have used it. Too bad they won't expand it.
>>
>>1344944
The “Green New Deal” proposal as well as a general increase in public awareness of the climate crisis have brought multitudes of shills out of the woodwork. It’s all over the internet these days, and it isn’t just ignorant boomers regurgitating Koch Industries talking points anymore.
>>
>>1344835
THIS SO MUCH

I'd use it and take a roomette if they offered this between CHI-LAUPT.
>>
Any expansion of the rail network is good news.
I’m hoping it extends to Tallahassee and Brightline connects to it.
>>
>>1344971
It annoys me tho that those who speak out in favour of public transit and environmental awareness do so in clinically retarded ways like said green new deal, or going on and on about muh climate change, which, whether one believes it or not, should not be what worries us, but simply the extreme pollution which we're exposing ourselves and our surrounding nature to ffs.
I consider myself fairly conservative, and I'm pro public transit precisely because of that, because it's something that helps conserve our environment, as well as our traditional values of being around our fellow citizens instead of enclosed in little bubbles to get away from le riffraff. Hell, I don't much care for the whole global warming / climate change fearmongering, and yet I probably care more about environmental issues than most people who do regurgitate all that stuff to feel good about themselves and then drive around in their hybrid cars thinking they're doing a great way for the environment, while I don't even own a car (and if I did I wouldn't use it systematically to go everywhere).
I sometimes wonder whether most of the relevant people purporting to care about the environment aren't just disinfo shills or controlled op who just want to make environmentalism look bad with retarded proposal and exaggerated fearmongering about the world ending in 10 years because of global warming.
>>
>>1345001
Oh, wow! Look at this totally reasonable anon who is actually a *conservative* but he supports (sensible) environmentalism and transit solutions, just like us! And he’s a level-headed moderate, not like those kooky radical leftist environmentalists (the *actual* shills, y’know) who are saying all of those crazy things like how the world is going to end in 10 years (because that’s what they say, y’know).

By the way, literally and unironically kill yourself.
>>
>>1345012
Trains aren't green bigot. They're made of metals and petrochemicals that wouldn't exist without the exploitation of fossil fuels and third world slave labour. "Moderates" make me fucking sick. Have you heard of fucking climate change or peak oil? Kys
>>
>>1345027
Are you getting paid or do you unironically do it for free?
>>
I'm a moderate who drives a truck and supports any and all rail projects we can implement.

Clean tech, infrastructure and urbanism are really good for America's economy and they save us money.
>>
>>1345036
David "Get's hot and sucks the cock" Brock?
>>
>>1345037
Fuck your truck and your economy you climate denying racist cunt.
>>
>>1345074
Haha, just like one of those lib-tards would say!
>>
>>1345074
You /pol/ trolls are gonna have to do better than that.

Or you could, you know, just have better opinions.
>>
>>1345012
your meds
take them
>>
>>1345012
Tronald Dump detected
>>
>>1344943
Mate, the first point is absolutely irrelevant to the issue of straight track and I already mentioned what you said in the second one.
Learn to read?

>>1344947
Fair enough. The train companies are private here but the infrastructure is owned and managed by the government.

>>1344951
>the train station being easily reached doesn't mean much as it would only be easily reached by car for many people who might use it
I'll have to disagree with you there somewhat, plenty of people commute to work here by driving to the train station and then getting the train, and we even have stations designed specifically for those people (Parkways).

>>1344956
Well, it certainly isn't an issue here.
>>
>train systems are expanding around the country
>urban infill development is the most popular kind for the last 10 years straight

No wonders cagers on this board are butthurt all the time.
>>
>>1345181
>Impotent reee'ing about cagers in a train thread

Sad shit anon
>>
>>1344955
>turnpike
He probably meant FTL to MIA, not anything about Orlando, which doesn't exist yet.
>>
Now you'll be able to go from LA to Jacksonville again, based.

This single line could tie together CAHSR, Colorado/front range rail, SEHSR and Brightline all into one integrated system.
>>
>>1344968
Those use frieght train autorack cars. Which need their own dock, loaded before being put on the train, and deny car owners access to vehicles.
>>
I rode this pre Katrina. Lots of coastal bridges and swamps but eastbound it was in the middle of the night so I couldn’t see anything. I got to see west of New Orleans though and it was Mardi Gras day so everyone along the tracks in Cajun country was partying, then the ride down bed the Huey P. Long bridge.
>>
>>1344837
the problem is the US cant build HSR cheaply
we need to hire TGV consultants or something to keep the cost of construction down, even if that means lobbying politicians to get shitty laws repealed
>>
>>1344851
like someone else said, private companies own most of the rail, amtrak has to lease it
many rail companies illegally give their trains precedence, causing delays
the only way around this is for amtrak to build their own, but there isnt the political will to dump money on amtrak to get that to happen (these lines will likely never make ROI due to low population densities). this is also why long-distance HSR will never exist outside NEC
>>
>>1345419
How feasible would nationalisation of the track be?
>>
>>1345430
that would be seen as socialist, even if the private companies were allowed to use the tracks without paying for upkeep. never underestimate the power of >muh freedoms in american politics.
even if nationalization were politically feasible, though, congress would inevitably starve funding for track upkeep until conditions got really bad and cost a ton of money to repair
>>
>>1345430
>>1345436

Nationalization will never happen, there is zero political will for it. It's a bad idea for passenger service too. Except for a few routes, most rail lines in the US were laid out well over a century ago and it would take hundreds of billions of dollars to straighten them out and prepare them for high speed operation and even then you'd still have to run freight on them which beats the infrastructure up. Building new passenger-only high speed lines is preferable but again, very expensive.

There will never be a national high speed rail network because after a certain distance even the fastest trains can't come close to the speed of airliners. A few new corridors make some sense, but a NY-Chicago-LA high speed rail line, for example, is counterproductive and why nationalization isn't the best solution, or even an okay one.
>>
>>1345419
>this is also why long-distance HSR will never exist outside NEC
It's under construction right now in California.
HSR is under construction from Orlando to Miami right now as well.

Currently Amtrak is upgrading its DC-Baltimore route to go faster as well.
>>
>>1345441
>It's under construction right now in California.
Part of it in the middle of nowhere is. The whole project is seemingly in limbo. The one in Florida is going to happen before CAHSR
>>
>>1345430

0/10 because the RRs make money now. However, the government could buy up abandoned ROWs and use those. But this strategy is not fullproof as not all of the US has abandoned track.

Though I disagree with >>1345419, giving Amtrak it's own lines is more than feasible. California is already doing it with CAHSR, which will naturally expand northward to Eugene/Amtrak Cascades who is also considering building their own track. Xpresswest will also have their own track entirely into Las Vegas. In general new track makes sense going east, as it would demand new base tunnels into Reno, Tuscon and Phoenix. From there new track can be run alongside the existing track because it's a desert, and this is likely to scare private RRs into not screwing around anymore because they are afraid of the government potentially allowing Amtrak to move freight (which is a remote plausibility, but one they have to consider).
>>
>>1345453

>The whole project is seemingly in limbo.

Only because Trump is trying to stop CHSRA's EIRs from being processed, but this is unlikely to continue. Already Congress is, again, going to reallocate the money to CAHSR and instruct USDOT to move forward on it. Combined with the lawsuit from CA, they don't have much room other than to pay out on schedule as they promised to. At the very most it leads to a 6-8 month delay, as what happened when House Republicans tried this same thing with Caltrain in 2017. And despite owning both the House, Senate, White House and Supreme Court Democrats managed to force the money to be granted. Hence why he's now trying to do it through both USDOT and the EPA, but this strategy will also not work because Democrats will threaten to not allow the EPA to approve oil pipelines or freight grants until they process CA's EIRs.

My point is that CHSRA has been to this rodeo before and knows how to handle it. And back at home, CA has more than enough of a budget surplus plus cap and trade tax money to keep construction going without any delays. This will become more obvious in about a year when the approvals for the Pacheco Tunnels come through and the state begins preconstruction work outside Gilroy, with actual construction work to the Caltrain tracks (specifically addition of two new tracks, fully separting passenger trains and freight) between Diridon and Gilroy.
>>
>>1345523
I'll believe when it opens
>>
>>1345524

Figure the whole thing that started this was the confusion over plans to put the existing San Joaquins on the new track, which means you can get half-HSR between Merced and Bakersfield within 1-2 years as the tunnels are built and wires setup for full HSR in 4-5 years followed by the final build out to LA in 10.
>>
>>1344956
It's a lot better now that the SBS
>>
>>1345524
It won't. At least not in the next 15 years.
>>
>>1345777
California takes decades to build a slightly faster train on one route. At 150 million per mile.

China builds national network of true HSR. At 30 million per mile.
>>
>>1345783
To be fair, the Chinese have basically slave labour at their disposal to build it so cheaply.
>>
>>1345441
the orlando-miami line is only happening because lots of track can be upgraded and the population density is high
CA line might be cancelled due to cost projections. highways have cost overruns all the time and nobody cares, but rail always shit for it, so it's going to be an uphill battle
>>
File: hot air balloon.jpg (134 KB, 1200x1596)
134 KB
134 KB JPG
>>1344971
>>1345001
>>1345012
>>1345167
Every scientist and transportation department: "we need to move a lot of people in an efficient way and protect the environment from pollution"
Europe: "alright, let's build a railroad"
USA: *political discussion starts*
>>
>>1345848
This is hardly true, there is also shitloads of political discussion here.
>>
>>1345848
Not a euro but agree with >>1345853
I've been following the HS2 in the UK and boy is there a lot of politics going on there, same as CAHSR with construction already going on but discussion continuing.
>>
>>1345437
>nationalization
>bad idea
kys corporate cocksucker
>>
>>1345848
At least we can all agree that autos ought to be banned, or at-least the petrol taxes should be high enough to prevent the overwhelming majority from owning one.
>>
>>1345884
Good luck with that, Erin Brockovich.
>>
>>1345893
>implying
white trash are the people fighting nationalization you cunt
>>
File: CSG7WbAW0AAWkWM.jpg (137 KB, 600x830)
137 KB
137 KB JPG
>>1345881
Bong here that you're replying to.
HS2 was actually the main reason why I replied what I did, the idea that "lol just build the railroad!" happens is completely retarded. This also applies in the rest of Europe as well from what I've seen/read.

Most of the controversy in the UK though is if it will really deliver value for money, as it (mostly) follows the WCML, which is already one of the best railway sections in the UK and how the money (£50bn+) could be better spent, like electrifying the rest of the railway and ordering new rolling stock.
>>
>>1345884
Nationalization would not help passenger service, but it would make freight service more expensive and even shittier by introducing a new government bureaucracy

Believe it or not the private sector can do a number of things better than the government can
>>
>>1345894
see
>>1345911
>>
>>1345940
Just make an argument for nationalizing freight railroads in America bro
>>
File: P1110578.jpg (329 KB, 1600x1200)
329 KB
329 KB JPG
>>1345907
Why do britongs trains have similar interior to soviet ones?
>>
>>1345944
There isn't one, especially if the USA is going to run it. If I were a shipper, and I had a significant amount of product that required an expeditious mode of transport, I should be looking for a train to ship by. And BNSF can currently do that. But if it were US government run, deferred maintenance and derailments/delays would be the name of the game, and I would ship exclusively by truck to avoid that hassle.
>>
>>1345957
Literally no other trains look like that though.
The reason it looks like that is because it's a literal bus (pic related) put on a freight wagon. They were built in the 80s when British Rail needed trains but had no money.
They're (finally) being scrapped though by the end of this year.
>>
>>1345907
>>1345957
>>1345979

why do people think this looks bad? It looks old, but as long as there's air conditioning and dehumidifcation nobody is going to care if the seats are wood benches.
>>
>>1346046
There is neither of those, what do you think the windows are for?
Also, I can tell you don't use trains very often. Literally no one wants to sit on a hard as fuck seat for more than 10 minutes, let alone several hours.
>>
>>1346049

I sit on a hard as fuck train seat for about 4-5 hours per day, it's ok so long as the AC is working.
>>
>>1346050
What shithole do you live in?
Also, as I already said, there is no AC, and low backed seats are uncomfortable as fuck.
>>
>>1346051

Chowchilla, CA. Nothing worse than having to sit and bake in an oven for ~2 hours because there's no AC. Everything smells and gets sticky too.
>>
>>1346052
To be fair, the no AC thing isn't that big of an issue considering the temperature most of the time in Bongland, but fuck me is it loud when all the windows are open and you're going through a tunnel at 70mph.
It's just older rolling stock that still don't have AC anyway, all newer stuff does.
>>
>>1344841
>28 miles of 150mph allowed on the whole line
And here I thought the acela express would run on a proper high speed line
>>
>>1345333
That makes sense and it's about what I'd expect. Did you really want to sit in your car on a train for 40+ hours?
>>
>>1346300
No, but European automobile train cars don't make people sit in their cars either. They have a second floor and people can go up there to sit.

So you drive onto the train. Lock your car and go to your seat or sleeper room.
>>
>>1346308
It makes more sense in America to repurpose existing freight infrastructure, especially if it's just for one train. IIRC the Amtrak service was originally a private venture called Autotrain, which was profitable for a few years before an economic dip that caused them to sell to Amtrak, which still operates it as a profitable route. That might be why the service hasn't expanded, either. I'm not sure about this, but Amtrak's mandate to maintain pre-existing passenger service may not allow expanding new routes.
>>
>>1344817
>Federal Grant
No wonder it costs an arm and a leg
>>
https://boston.curbed.com/2019/6/12/18656927/new-york-city-to-berkshires-amtrak-pittsfield

Amtrak’s upgrading Acela between DC and Baltimore and offering a new route from NYC to New England.
America really has done a lot of rail projects in the last year, I hope it picks up steam.

They’re researching a Cascadia HSR project right now.
>>
>>1346310
All they have to do is add an articulated car or two, two the head end of high volume long distance routes. Like the California Zephyr. Pour some ramps at major terminals. Then sell the service.
>>
>>1346318
You guys gonna vote for Zogald Blormph next year?
>>
>>1346318
Nothing matters until they replace the Pennsylvania-built tunnels under the Hudson. They’re crumbling but in order to do repairs they have to take one out of service, which would cause a total bottleneck. They should have built more tunnels decades ago and now the only high-ish speed rail corridor in the U.S. could be severed for years. Not just Amtrak but New Jersey Transit would he be hosed.
>>
>>1346339
You need a separate stub track or siding which can be blue flagged while loading, the ramps themselves (which are motorized), and the personnel to spot the cars and load and unload them. Not impossible, but given Amtrak didn't come up with the Auto Train concept and hasn't expanded it, it seems like they're just not going to.
>>
>>1346370
https://youtu.be/tiXSdfj5-bM
>>
>>1346374
That has a much wider loading gauge than possible in the US
>>
>>1346375
American bog standard autorack car.

Not as wide as the chunnel shuttle. Still enough for people to walk beside cars.
>>
>>1346374
I can't imagine any company would be insane enough to allow the average American driver to self-load and self-unload their vehicle as in the video.

>>1346378
I'd bet a majority of Americans would be unable to open the door enough to remove their girth from their car.
>>
>>1346384
Passenger train loading guage is 10 feet wide. Cars and SUVs tend to be 6 to 6.5 feet wide. A 3500 dually pick up truck is 8 feet wide at the rear fender flares.

So there is space to clear.

Fatties and handicapped will have to have staff drive their car on.
>>
>>1346386
>>1346384
Also interior parking spaces in decks are 20 x 10 feet.
>>
>>1346386
>If you are over 275lbs soaking wet, you are a fat fuck and must have a driver load your vehicle for you.

Should go over well, lol
>>
>>1346386
>>1346387
That leaves less than 2 feet per side for your average American to extricate themselves, not including the width of the door itself. I'm still skeptical.
>>
>>1346378
>>1346384
>>1346386

There isn't much room to walk inside an autorack. Not the vertical clearance because it's a tri-level. Would you want people and the families squeezing their fat asses past your car? I wouldn't. Then they still have to be chained down.
>>
>>1344828
by far the most comfortable though
>>
>Cagers: AMERICA’S NEVER GONNA BUILD MORE HIGH-SPEED RAIL IT AINT NEVER GONNA HAPPEN
>America: builds more high-speed rail in multiple regions
>>
>>1346703

NEC: Amtrak is stuck in the equivalent of development hell trying to create true HSR up there, billions and billions sunk into it, still not HSR

Florida: Not HSR

Texas: Going nowhere fast

California: Lol
>>
>>1346703
They probably don't realize how many cities are expanding their light rail systems right now too.
>>
>>1346310

Amtrak has such a huge back catalog they can easily expand new routes though. In fact they're usually required to study restarting them every 4-5 years due to mandates given to them by Congress. Some quick examples:

>Broadway Limited (NYC-Chicago)
>North Coast Hiawatha (southern Montana)
>Pioneer (eastern Oregon, southern Idaho and Utah)
>Daylight Limited (SF-LA)

In every case it doesn't happen because individual states don't want to pony up the money, for a variety of reasons:

>Ohio elected an anti-HSR Governor (John Kaisch) who killed their project in committee, PA electrified their part of the system though
>Montana doesn't want to pay for new rail service in the most sparsely populated part of their state
>Oregon is preoccupied with Cascades service, Utah is concerned with services operating south to Vegas and east to Denver
>California chose an inland route for CAHSR because the coastal route has problems in regards to the Air Force and Prop 20

Likewise all the important routes with immediate ridership potential were given back to the states who finance them. Some examples:

>Illinois Service, which is where ILHSR is borne from
>the Capitols/Capitol Corridor
>the Surfliner
>Piedmont service
>>
>>1345797
They also have much more effective methods of dealing with NIMBYs.
>>
>>1345520
Amtrak will never move freight, it's literally against their charter.
>>
>>1345808
The Orlando extension is all new track
>>
>>1346367
I'm fuming because the approach to the planned replacement tunnels is curvier and slower than the existing tunnels.
>>
>>1347823
Imagine a government-run freight railroad though


>>1347827
Oh well. Not like a train's going to be hauling ass through there anyway
>>
>>1347933
>Imagine a government-run freight railroad though
Imagine the kvetching from the trucking industry.(Nevermind the massive subsidy the NHS is to them)

>Oh well. Not like a train's going to be hauling ass through there anyway
I suppose it's to be expected since the Gateway project is pretty much dusted off plans from ARC, and that was designed for slower NJT commuter trains.
>>
>>1347933
>Imagine a government-run freight railroad though

Loses money constantly. Overpriced service. Terrible employees. Everything takes forever.
>>
>>1347986
>(Nevermind the massive subsidy the NHS is to them)

Oh I don't care about that, the idea of a government owned & operated freight railroad is so bad I laugh thinking about it



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.