Check these out. Initial studies on potential rail corridors in the southeast. Lots of good, real world, estimates of cost and ridership, revenues and expenses. (Now, all I have to do is find time to read them myself!)
Only took a brief look.
79mph vs. 110mph - Can only decrease trip time between Charlotte and Atlanta by five minutes because of curvature (without massive spending on realignment).
It seems to me if tax dollars are going to be spent, it would be wiser that they go toward the total elimination of grade crossings. If it’s in the tea leaves to have a significant daily passenger service, then why not “tweak” at the locations where it makes sense (to reduce the slowest running for freight and passenger), and focus on offering a couple round trips of conveniently timed, reliable, good service each day with the 79mph there to support reliable trip times.
I agree, remove level crossings for both roads and rails and work on other bottle necks. In some cases reducing the max speed a bit and removing major bottle necks will increase the average speed and make transit times more consistant. Higher speed turnouts can be very usefull ti increase the average speed of a train. Bot a 10 mile stretch of signifacantly higher speed often doesn’t help much if the train has to slow again for turnouts or signals.
[#ditto]Good post 440cuin: The sound of reason is always welcome when the art of railroading shows itself . I agree with you on consistancy, availability and dependability as the key to successfull service. Just seeing the speed indicator rise on occasion to the three didget range is but a small part of true high speed service - piouslion[^][tup]
Absolutely; elimination of grade crossings. Also I would recommend is making sure to avoid single tracking or at least provide longer passing sidings with plenty of cross overs; use those long european style high-speed switches so trains don’t have to slow down at the apon changing tracks; TRACK MAINTAINENCE the most important thing; make sure that the line is safe from natural disasters like mud slides; avalanches (winter) and floods;
If it is the intention to increase speeds for even intermodals to go to 70mph in some spots like out west, there needs to be the appropriate FRA regulations followed including the appropriate signaling. Make sure that the tracks support it (is the rail heavy enough, is the bridges stucturally safe enough for the speeds, is the fill too high) etc.
What North Carolina is doing.
This is from Raleigh to Charlotte, not Charlotte to Atlanta though.
Charlotte to Atlanta seems to me as a candidate for tilt-trains (talgos?)
Real encouraging what North Carolina is doing!
Looks familiar Blueridgefront, just like I saw on the first ones in I saw in 97 when I was still an inspector putting down asphalt with NCDOT’s Div.9. It would be nice if the Palmetto State, The Old Dominion and my native Peach States would contribute toward this most worthy endevor. It’s a great route that hosted the best of the Southern’s varnish from the Morganization of the Terminal to the last days of Claytor. Such a service would do it justice.
Good ideas!
Now if some people could just convince Governor Jeb Bu***hat this is viable in Florida, progress can be made!
The “Florida Funnel” junction is a pain and would need to be worked at to solve some conjection issues that take place. You can’t run more Amtrak trains if you are going to be fighting over track time with a bunch of waiting CSX trains.
I hear you Junction fan, but just a little over 2 decades back there were even more Amtrak trains than there are now with sections running north and southbound.