The biggest problem: getting the right of way for this line: This is what may prevent a true, grade-separated HSR line between Boston and Washington, DC.
I am sure you can buy at an enormous cost a new right of way for HSR along this corridor, but it won't serve any of these cities downtowns. Most likely a new corridor will be at least ten miles away, if not twenty miles away from the present corridor's right of way. Furthermore, every NIMBY near the new right of way will be laying lawsuits against the government as they do not desire HSR running anywhere near their homes. You are not going to be running HSR through any of these cities without stopping, and with every stop your HSR train loses 10 mph of average speed. New York City to Boston as is along the present corridor is a distance of around 220 miles. There will be most likely at least ten stops, losing 100 mph of average speed, from 200 MPH to 100 MPH just like that. Suggesting a HSR train will accomplish this journey in around two and a half hours. Why spend a half billion to save 90 minutes journey time? Spending that much when Acela does the same in four hours is unnecessary and not worth the investment... 90 minutes is not the end of the world!!!
@@ronclark9724 nyc to boston currently only has 6 stops (Stamford, New Haven, Providence, Route 128, Boston-BackBay, and Boston-South), so i don’t feel like you would need too terribly many of stops
I honestly like this idea, it would be great it they did this but I highly doubt they would do this. I do agree that the trains should use the Hempstead branch since there wouldn’t be any room on the main line especially since it was recently rebuilt.
Ditch the Hartford to Springfield segment and run HSR northeast from Hartford along Interstate 84 to Sturbridge. Run along Mass Pike on or off existing rail row to BOS.
Just to make it clear: the HSR service will not stop at all LIRR stations along the way. Only service at NY Penn, Jamaica, Farmingdale, Ronkonkoma, Setauket, New Haven, Meriden, Hartford, Springfield, Palmer, Charlton City, Auburn, Worcester, Framingham Center, Boston South. Super Express service will only stop at Jamaica and New Haven. Other trains will alternate stopping, won't make every stop.
Why reduce ridership? As it is most trains leave Boston nearly empty and pick up passengers on the way to New York City before the train fills up. Train routes are LINEAR, not point to point like airlines....
Way, way too many stops for a high speed line. Would this work as an alternative to Amtrak's Northeast Regional service? Yes. But, HST? How much time can you truly save at 220 MPH by making so many stops?
The USA is a transportation embarrassment. Yesterday I rode a similar distance to this in Italy (Florence to Rome). There were 79 trains going every 15 minutes or so. The time was Sub 90 mins and the cost was 11 euros. Oddly the trains were packed. I like this proposal but maybe one stop. 100 stops is not high speed rail.
Europe is a cultural embarrassment with no basis for criticism. America needs to stop saving that shameful continent of wars and proverty. America has great interstate freeways which we enjoy traveling on in our expensive sports cars and luxury SUVs. We value privacy.
High-speed rail and commuter rail can jointly operate on the same trackage especially when the lines are quad tracked. Look at ICE in Germany or even Acela already. lIRR has passing tracks and misty quad tracks. And speeds cannot exceed 100 mph with grade crossings so to be trying high speed there wouldn't be any crossings. HSR is a very safe technology, Japan hasn't had a single fatality in their 60 years of operation
@@triplethreatpodcasts Germany has very few full speed (~186 mi/h)HSR lines and their ICE trains are much slower than the ones in other places as every slow train slows down the high speed ones or reduces capacity of high speed service. In Spain, in addition to the intercity long distance high speed trains there are also more local (medium distance) high speed trains that serves parts of the the lines (unsually within the same autonomous region). Most trains on a busy line like Madrid-Barcelona are direct non stop and the rest stop in Zaragoza (the biggest city between those two) and some in smaller places, depending on size and demand. A small station like Guadalajara-Yepes only gets 4 trains a day in each direction.
@@triplethreatpodcasts Quad track on this corridor? How many homes and commercial properties are you going to demolish? HSR in Europe is on separate right of way with either twin or single tracks. Again if you build HSR along side one side of the present right of way, how will the freight railroads serve their customers on that side? COMMERCE trumps passengers, and always HAVE...
@@triplethreatpodcasts Japan is NOT the large nation of the United States. Some two thirds of their population lives within a 250 miles corridor from Kobe to Tokyo... It takes a truck driver SIX days to drive across America from LA to Boston legally... America is not a TINY nation like Germany where one can drive across the nation within one day from dawn to dusk... Amtrak's northeast corridor is electrified with overhead lines, both the Pennsylvania Railroad and the New Haven Railroad went bankrupt within a year of building those electric corridors...
@@ronclark9724 it's already quad tracked to floral park and triple after that, I was not suggesting we quad tracking, I was saying it already is where it would be needed. Sorry to confuse you
Aside from the extremely high cost associated with this plan, the sheer number of intermediate stops would work against the intent of improving end to end time.
@@Urban_Man Train routes are linear, picking up passengers on their way to New York City and dropping off passengers on their way to Boston, they are not point to point like airlines...
You never will as this nitwit doesn't understand the freight railroads serve their customers on both sides of the right of way, not one side... Building HSR alongside one side of the present right of way is STUPID... While HSR advocates do not like to acknowledge this, freight is much more important to the economy than passengers arriving quicker to their destinations. COMMERCE trumps passengers, and always HAVE...
You can also check out:
HSR Playlist(Proposals, system explained, etc.)
th-cam.com/play/PLzoyscyhpo0M6dCaYTSy6AbMOKLwe4f6S.html&si=YSX1UP8d6XRFeDTk
The biggest problem: getting the right of way for this line: This is what may prevent a true, grade-separated HSR line between Boston and Washington, DC.
I am sure you can buy at an enormous cost a new right of way for HSR along this corridor, but it won't serve any of these cities downtowns. Most likely a new corridor will be at least ten miles away, if not twenty miles away from the present corridor's right of way. Furthermore, every NIMBY near the new right of way will be laying lawsuits against the government as they do not desire HSR running anywhere near their homes. You are not going to be running HSR through any of these cities without stopping, and with every stop your HSR train loses 10 mph of average speed. New York City to Boston as is along the present corridor is a distance of around 220 miles. There will be most likely at least ten stops, losing 100 mph of average speed, from 200 MPH to 100 MPH just like that. Suggesting a HSR train will accomplish this journey in around two and a half hours. Why spend a half billion to save 90 minutes journey time? Spending that much when Acela does the same in four hours is unnecessary and not worth the investment... 90 minutes is not the end of the world!!!
@@ronclark9724 nyc to boston currently only has 6 stops (Stamford, New Haven, Providence, Route 128, Boston-BackBay, and Boston-South), so i don’t feel like you would need too terribly many of stops
I honestly like this idea, it would be great it they did this but I highly doubt they would do this. I do agree that the trains should use the Hempstead branch since there wouldn’t be any room on the main line especially since it was recently rebuilt.
Ditch the Hartford to Springfield segment and run HSR northeast from Hartford along Interstate 84 to Sturbridge. Run along Mass Pike on or off existing rail row to BOS.
It would be awesome if Jamaica has a HSR line, I use this station a lot
Just to make it clear: the HSR service will not stop at all LIRR stations along the way. Only service at NY Penn, Jamaica, Farmingdale, Ronkonkoma, Setauket, New Haven, Meriden, Hartford, Springfield, Palmer, Charlton City, Auburn, Worcester, Framingham Center, Boston South.
Super Express service will only stop at Jamaica and New Haven. Other trains will alternate stopping, won't make every stop.
Why reduce ridership? As it is most trains leave Boston nearly empty and pick up passengers on the way to New York City before the train fills up. Train routes are LINEAR, not point to point like airlines....
LIRR's stop spacing is for commuter trains to handle, HSR can't maintain high speed if stopping so much
A competitive time will attract people who fly between NY and Boston to take the HSR.
I have a high speed rail already
NY to LA in 1 hour via stratosphere jet would be nice.
Way, way too many stops for a high speed line. Would this work as an alternative to Amtrak's Northeast Regional service? Yes. But, HST? How much time can you truly save at 220 MPH by making so many stops?
The express only make 2 stops, Jamaica and New Haven
The USA is a transportation embarrassment. Yesterday I rode a similar distance to this in Italy (Florence to Rome). There were 79 trains going every 15 minutes or so. The time was Sub 90 mins and the cost was 11 euros. Oddly the trains were packed. I like this proposal but maybe one stop. 100 stops is not high speed rail.
It will not make all the LIRR stops. HSR will only service selected stops, the super express will only stop at Jamaica and New Haven in between.
Europe is a cultural embarrassment with no basis for criticism. America needs to stop saving that shameful continent of wars and proverty. America has great interstate freeways which we enjoy traveling on in our expensive sports cars and luxury SUVs. We value privacy.
i have to disagree, lirr serves 80 mph max speed plus way to dangers for people and railroad crossings. a normal amtrak train would just do fine.
High-speed rail and commuter rail can jointly operate on the same trackage especially when the lines are quad tracked. Look at ICE in Germany or even Acela already. lIRR has passing tracks and misty quad tracks. And speeds cannot exceed 100 mph with grade crossings so to be trying high speed there wouldn't be any crossings. HSR is a very safe technology, Japan hasn't had a single fatality in their 60 years of operation
@@triplethreatpodcasts Germany has very few full speed (~186 mi/h)HSR lines and their ICE trains are much slower than the ones in other places as every slow train slows down the high speed ones or reduces capacity of high speed service.
In Spain, in addition to the intercity long distance high speed trains there are also more local (medium distance) high speed trains that serves parts of the the lines (unsually within the same autonomous region). Most trains on a busy line like Madrid-Barcelona are direct non stop and the rest stop in Zaragoza (the biggest city between those two) and some in smaller places, depending on size and demand. A small station like Guadalajara-Yepes only gets 4 trains a day in each direction.
@@triplethreatpodcasts Quad track on this corridor? How many homes and commercial properties are you going to demolish? HSR in Europe is on separate right of way with either twin or single tracks. Again if you build HSR along side one side of the present right of way, how will the freight railroads serve their customers on that side? COMMERCE trumps passengers, and always HAVE...
@@triplethreatpodcasts Japan is NOT the large nation of the United States. Some two thirds of their population lives within a 250 miles corridor from Kobe to Tokyo... It takes a truck driver SIX days to drive across America from LA to Boston legally... America is not a TINY nation like Germany where one can drive across the nation within one day from dawn to dusk... Amtrak's northeast corridor is electrified with overhead lines, both the Pennsylvania Railroad and the New Haven Railroad went bankrupt within a year of building those electric corridors...
@@ronclark9724 it's already quad tracked to floral park and triple after that, I was not suggesting we quad tracking, I was saying it already is where it would be needed. Sorry to confuse you
Aside from the extremely high cost associated with this plan, the sheer number of intermediate stops would work against the intent of improving end to end time.
Express will just make 2 stops in between
@@Urban_Man Train routes are linear, picking up passengers on their way to New York City and dropping off passengers on their way to Boston, they are not point to point like airlines...
I love high speed trains, but displacing hundreds of homes? A 90 mile tunnel? This is dead on arrival my dude.
19 mile
it likely would not require displacing that many homes, I tried to displace as less as I could
🛤️faaan 😃
I'll believe it when I see it, and I don't I'll see it
You never will as this nitwit doesn't understand the freight railroads serve their customers on both sides of the right of way, not one side... Building HSR alongside one side of the present right of way is STUPID... While HSR advocates do not like to acknowledge this, freight is much more important to the economy than passengers arriving quicker to their destinations. COMMERCE trumps passengers, and always HAVE...