Unfortunately in 2530 the governor of Texas will cancel the electrification part of the plan and insist that the trains are diesel. The entire project will be canceled one year later when they realize that the oil ran out 450 years before and there was no diesel.
As someone from the Jackson, Mississippi metro area who has used Amtrak to get to New Orleans before, this seems absolutely amazing! I’m surprised that you would even consider us here, most people think that Mississippi is just too rural to have any public transit. This would be the most amazing thing to me.
Someone asked me why bother building in this. Your post is a good retort. No one in this country should feel like the rest of country is overlooking them. If Jackson makes sense at high speed between Houston and Atlanta, then there should be a stop there, and people in Mississippi should get to share in the benefit of such an interstate system. That is my view, anyway.
@@johndoe-un9uq I assume that if something like a semi-national HSR network were ever built it would be under the purview of Amtrak. However, if the federal government built and owned the right of way, this would not exclude leasing trackage rights to private operators. So you might have something like this connecting to a future Brightline network at Jacksonville via Savannah, or something like that. In that scenario, Brightline would be able to run trains from Atlanta to Orlando or some similar type of service.
To be fair it is not that Mississippi is to rural it is that no where has good public transit unless the locals do most of it themselves, and the State government down there has no interest in public transit and is if anything actively hostile to the idea.
Mississippi is of course included in the High Speed Rail System. The elected officials and leaders of the State of Mississippi is on board and its already happening in Mississippi.
Houston New Orleans is a smaller demand corridor than San Francisco to Fresno. I am not trying to discredit this project but it’s often forgotten how big Fresno and Bakersfield are.
@@TysonIke No offense, but why should the majority of California give a shit about a Fresno to San Francisco HSR? This is the biggest problem with California HSR, it's political.
@@alhollywood6486The majority of Cal should care because Merced to Bakersfield then gets you SF to Frenso which then becomes SF to LA which later becomes Sacramento to SD. In short, any transportation network (hwy, rail, air) has to start somewhere & then expand.
I think I see a way to solve the downtown Atlanta station conundrum, since it potentially lies at the nexus of several routes. Lots of tunnels, but the station could be places north of the convention center parallel to the existing railroad tracks following Northside drive to the Norfolk Southern tracks through the Pittsburgh neighborhood until the interstate to the airport.
If I'm reading you correctly, that area over there used to be a rail yard, but has been redeveloped. All of the plans I've seen so far have utilized existing rail ROW to get to the center of Atlanta, but how they're going to wedge double-track electrified in there is not explained.
Yeah, they're aiming for baby steps, but most people in the U.S. think of the very fast trains in other countries when they hear "hsr". That's part of the reason I'm making these videos: to let people know and talk about what setting up a real HSR network would look like.
even worse, sweden let amtrak borrow an X2000 train and they ended up not using it for some reason, meanwhile that model has been the bread and butter of our high-ish speed (200 km/h) service and it's specifically made to allow for higher speeds on track that otherwise wouldn't allow it! the whole train can tilt so you can go faster on too-tight bends without being uncomfortable for passengers, it works really well and has allowed us to get a nice service on the most important routes without needing to build entire new railways, it seems absolutely perfect for america!
@@swedneck we could easily use something akin to the original LRC with selective additions of Intermittent Inductive Automatic Trans Stop and Cab Signaling to increase average speeds significantly.
Personally, I feel like Charlotte to Atlanta is the best one. They’re both big ass hubs that can easily be electrified over the next few years if they just started tomorrow.
It's pretty good. With those coastal southern states growing like they are, the prospect will get better and better. They are in the process, but still early. Guess we'll see what happens in the coming years. That could also be extended to Birmingham, Raleigh-Durham, and Chattanooga according to what's already in the works. Those are all also really early in the process, though.
I assume you meant the one in Florida, not the one in Panama along the canal, otherwise that would be a longer (and more challenging) route that the extension to Lincoln, Nebraska!
Another great one! I absolutely *love* the incorporation of the bypasses! We get to maintain speed and serve “city centers.” Also, great minds think alike. You chose the same Downtown Houston station location I would. (And I would argue Texas Central should use it too!)
I've tried to incorporate feedback I've gotten in previous videos. I don't think a true European-style system is realistic here except in a few places. However, it seems the concept of bypasses can be applied on a small scale without too much extra expense. I had that Houston station location or one by Minute Maid Park. I liked the MMP location a little better, but I felt like the cost savings, intermodal station, and potential through connection to TCR tipped the scales.
This segment would probably look a lot more attractive if it were to connect HSR networks on either end. I'd go farther and say Whole Texas Triangle, and D.C. to Atlanta, then this.
I may have been slightly unclear. It would be a one-seat ride. The local line would be fully compatible with the main line, so express trains from Houston to N.O. would not require a transfer.
Cant help but think about the similarities to the Tokaido shinkansen in terms of geology and challenges surrounding natural disasters, to connect to Texas C. i'd even say to just adapt their system
What about DC to Chicago? Same kinda deal, but tons of different connects and city pairs. This kinda covers keystone at the same time. My thoughts are DC to Harrisburg to State College to Pittsburgh to ... to Chicago (2 ways to go from Pittsburgh, but Columbus always seemed better to me) But then a local connector between Philly and Harrisburg.
I looked at Pittsburgh from the west in my Chicago Hub Network video. It's possible, but its not cheap. That goes from Columbus or Cleveland. I'm holding off on the Keystone Corridor video to take a real good look at Pittsburgh east through the Appalachians, but it looks either very expensive or not real fast. Closing the gap from Chicago to D.C. through Pittsburgh could be a tall order, but around to Buffalo or Chattanooga aren't real satisfying.
For the spur going to Mobile - might as well go all the way to Jax - with a stop in Pensacola and Tallahassee. I could see Brightline eventually extending all the way up to Jax - making for a nearly complete Florida line.
Amazing video!! One small thing, honestly, looking at the approach to the terminal station in New Orleans I'd swallow the bitter pill and connect it to the system. My reasoning being that trains coming from Atlanta or Houston would have a more than good reason to terminate in New Orleans, which also means that the likely setup of 2+2 tracks for the envisoned New Orleans station (2 bypass tracks in the middle) is just not enough, even worse if it's just 2 tracks. The same also goes for potential regional level services in direction of Mobile and/or Baton Rouge and Lafayette. sure trains going from Houston to Mobile via New Orleans would only use the outer station, as would regionals making the loop from Lafayette to Slidell, but simply due to its location New Orleans would most likely be a terminus for a lot of services. Also, even if u find the necessary space for a few more side tracks at the outer station you still have the issue of being very far outside the city center. If properly reworked Union Station gives you 10 terminus tracks and a maintenance facility, both excellent to turn trains around. The good thing is that the row is probably wide enough to afford 3-4 tracks from a certain point before the split going back onto the outer loop onto the freight row. This is good because with a flyover or two you could eliminate conflict points with switches which could significantly complicate operations and cause last mile delays, which often happens in my home country of Germany. Also, regarding Atlanta: If we take your previous Atlanta-Charlotte video into account it's safe to say that a downtown through tunnel with a direct linkup to the airport would be a better option than having a terminus and a ring along I-285. More expensive sure, but MUCH more convenient and also quite a bit faster I'm willing to bet. At that point you might even ask if it is even worth it to connect the airport in Atlanta instead of just directly heading east towards I-20 and then on to Charlotte, most likely underground for a good bit. Me personally I'd like the airport connection, but I also find the direct tunneling towards I-20 option very appealing for time reasons, and also because transit to the airport already exists, and is only 12 minutes slower than the hsr train, goes without saying that that does not take into account the other qualities of the service, which I'm personally unaware of. What are your thoughts on this?
I didn't see where there was room at Union Station in N.O., but if there's a way to do it, I'm all for it. On the Charlotte-Atlanta route, I personally preferred the airport to airport option because of the transit on either end. I put both options in to leave some room for discussion. With that, I like the ring rail coming in the from the west on the Gulf Coast Corridor. I was also keeping Chattanooga from the north in mind since they have a Tier I EIS on that, and also south to Savannah since that's part of the SEHSR Corridor. Mid-Atlanta is pretty packed with rail, so it might be better to leave that to MARTA and interface rather than try to run HSR through there as well.
It looks like that the much talked BR-New Orleans commuter train service may be come a real thing in the next few years. Not HSR (80mph) but it's a start.... I would skip the connection to Atlanta for now and add San Antonio into the route to Mobile.....I doubt any true HSR project is going to happen along the Gulf coast anytime soon though.
I was disappointed by the low bar set for that Baton Rouge-New Orleans line while researching this. You can see in the video, or just by looking at a map, the route is capable of much more than 79mph. Agreed it would likely be a long time before high speed here. As others have commented, you'd probably want Southeast and South Central Corridors done first, then this to link them.
I noticed you picked Jackson! Jackson could serve as a regional hub for regional high-speed rail: Jackson to New Orleans and Baton Rouge. Jackson to Birmingham and Atlanta. Jackson to Shreveport and Dallas / Fort Worth. Jackson to Little Rock. Jackson to Memphis. Jackson to Nashville. Jackson to Mobile and Pensacola. Jackson to Montgomery and Columbus.
Unfortunately it's somewhat isolated and what you get for the money isn't great in other directions. I mainly picked it to improve what I perceived as a deficit in the current corridor. As expressed in the video, I think it serves that purpose. The thing that intrigues me about the south is the growth trend and how the demand for this concept grows over time coupled with the space to built it without astronomical cost. I think there is a strong desire to extend the NEC's capabilities meaningfully to Atlanta. Once that occurs, the paradigm will be much different than current, and this may well drive even more growth in the region. That would increase demand for high or higher speed routes that are basically off the radar at the moment, like connecting New Orleans to Nashville via Jackson and Memphis.
I understand New Orleans is going downhill but having a highspeed rail there may help it a lot. If you centered the Gulf Coast in that historic city then you'd be able to have one connection between Huston and Atlanta as a "true high speed rail." Just some thoughts I had at the 6 min mark (maybe you answer it in video near the end).
The problem though is that Houston and Atlanta metros combined have about 10x the population, so they'd be the big draw on the corridor regardless. This is not to discount New Orleans. It is geographically about in the middle, and it has its tourist draw. It's still important.
@@LucidStew Got it I agree with you on that the two are to large a draw by themselves in many ways. I watched the rest and your plan seems the best way. I wonder if politics within the HSR community played a part in the "current plan."
Traveling long distance has always been expensive for most modes of transportation Cross-country journeys are still the kind of thing you book for a vacation, or holiday trip, but it'll be a *heck* of a lot cheaper & convenient compared to flying & *orders of magnitude* safer than driving Tickets also scale with distance. You'd be crying at the total check if you tried to drive across the entire south in a car. Most people only use segments of large networks like the interstate & this incurs relatively small expenses. It will be very much the same for a high speed network too
Just curious what the route between Chicago or Indy to Nashville is called? Could you do a video about that route? Either that or from Memphis to Gatlinburg? I appreciate it 🙏 Thanks.
An interesting corridor could be Midwest to Florida, considering Florida is a popular vacation spot for Midwesterners, and the options are either to drive or spend a small fortune on flying, and driving down to Florida is almost a rite of passage for midwesterners.
@@tonywalters7298 Louisville to Chattanooga will be very compelling if planned lines ever get that far. Need Brightline to connect to Jacksonville as well. Other way would be through Oklahoma, but this seems less likely.
@@LucidStewA Brightline 125 mph extension to Tampa and a 110-125 mph extension to Jacksonville are two of the top ten routes for HSR or semi-high speed rail.
I'm in favor of long distance HSR routes for two reasons. FIRST, by chaining connections between intermediate population centers that should double as (sub)regional hubs, the continuation of the line to city after city should attract more riders away from short and MEDIUM flights. SECOND, longer trips accommodate full sleep, half-day sessions of work or school, even movie marathons with meals and drinks between. Planes trap a rider in layover and tight-seating situations with few options of activities, whereas trains allow one to move around and do almost anything one would do in their own house, classroom, or workplace. That makes short and medium trips opportunities for work or play, not confined to a seat. One could take an overnighter from Houston to Atlanta or beyond. Tracking the Gulf Coast HSR through New Orleans as presented in this video is great for anybody going to NOLA, but lengthens the ride for everyone else and misses some population centers. Better to create a spur or perpendicular line with matching arrival and departure times, as in having a train departing on every outbound track simultaneously. Individual train cars might detach and reconnect with a train going one of the other directions, as Amtrak used to do, though the process would have to go a heck of a lot faster. With a more successful network, trains would be frequent enough such that no such maneuvers would be necessary because transfers would be reliable The more riders, the more attractive increased frequency and speed, and therefore the greater distance a person can travel in half a day or a night of sleep. I traveled throughout Europe on Eurail this way, almost never had to pay for sleeping accommodations in a sleeper car or hotel/B&B. I spent all my money on food and entertaining myself, waking refreshed each morning, taking showers at stations when I needed. It was far less onerous than I ever imagined, and I came to prefer it over luxury or expediency, because no longer did 3/4 of my trip cost go to a stationary bed. The more that people feel that their intermediate travel needs are met without a car, they will feel comfortable owning an EV for near-home needs. The more that short travel and metropolitan needs feel met, the more likely individuals will feel comfortable skipping car ownership altogether. Renting a medium or smaller car every second or third weekend for the three-day deals is less expensive and eliminates the maintenance headaches compared to owning a car. The family needs too many trips that can't be met by transit and bicycling? That's why EV and EV hybrids are great, as well as vehicle pools for housing complexes and neighborhoods (car sharing). I lived years this way, found I didn't even rent a car more than once a month, but always made sure to add one more day if three days was not enough, in order to run all the shopping and moving errands in a go. We usually made a little local day trip to nearby parks or beaches not served well by transit. It saved so much money, even with monthly transit passes, that I had workmates who thought I got paid twice as much as they did. It's a revelation to discover how much stress vanishes for not owning a car. ONE MORE idea which it amazes me train companies and served cities don't think about: the value of destination stations where people deliberately spend time and money, not because they have nothing else to do during a layover. Every large station should feel like a vibrant town center with great restaurants and other fun stop-over activities like, say, miniature golf, and some of the town's other leisure activities inside the station or close. Long trips become more attractive when scheduling is flexible or portions of trains are unbooked, which accommodate such leisure. Major European stations, and often stations serving medium-size cities, have all the shower, laundry, dry-clean, and similar facilities a passenger could need, with grocery, banking, mail/shipping, pharmacy, bakeries, inside or within a block outside. The main stations in Philadelphia, Los Angeles, Frankfurt (Germany) are great examples of layovers not at all feeling like layovers that even inspire passengers to stop intentionally for a couple of hours to drop some dollars in the local economies. Heck, even gyms with day passes and towels and gym clothes included, spas, art museums, amusement parks, dance clubs, park venues for town/neighborhood events and farmers' markets, and so on, if located within or adjacent to the station, become attractions to passers-through as much as locals. And, of course, hotels for those people who really can't ride and sleep at the same time. :-) [I'm blessed with the ability to sleep better on transit than in a quiet room.] If every American were given a month-long Eurail pass and a thousand euros to live on (plus fare to get to Europe and back, duh), then nearly every American would clamor for all of these facilities to be built at home! Yet more jobs and making travel more pleasant than onerous. In the digital age, with all our technological abilities, transportation with accompanying facilities should make it possible to be homeless without anyone able to tell, and yet a fully productive person within the economy. In fact, a substantial proportion of people who currently vagabond by way of gas-guzzling vehicles would switch, and other people who can't quite swing the vagabond lifestyle they want, could spend more time traveling. Heck, it would probably help tremendously with rent prices, and it could also spread out dollar circulation even more than merely "working from home" in a "flyover" state to escape the places already bogged down by high cost of living. I'm not finding any downsides to improved mobility, reduced pollution, and sharing economic benefits with cities small and large. It's a capitalist way to partially achieve what socialism offers, which should please an awful lot of people who don't know what I mean by socialism. lol Okay, my little blurb turned into a big pro-train diatribe. :) Have fun, y'all. Demand the ability to travel all you want, see all the world you want, without destroying it in the process with pavement and poilution. :)
Rail might take longer than air but it's comfortable. Private individual cars.You wont mind spending a little more time. You can sleep in peace knowing you will not crash.
But what is the demand? How many people on a given day of the year actually need to go from Atlanta to Birmingham, Baton Rouge to Jackson, or from Jackson to New Orleans? That's what this analysis is missing. While projects such as this are often justified on a "Field of Dreams," i.e. if you build it they will come philosophy, we've seen many projects around the world where such demand utterly fails to materialize, as another "bridge to nowhere" fails to produce expected demand.
I do not know the demand. I am only looking at what it might look like, how fast it might go, and how much it might cost. I will be working on attempting to introduce ridership models to future videos, but I do not have a current timeline for that.
It would need to be built. It would be pretty far out for all these things. Realistically in the next 20 years, you might have a slightly better Acela, part of CAHSR Phase 1, Brightline West, Texas Central, Atlanta-Charlotte, and maybe one other Brightline project outside of Florida in terms of operating HSR in the U.S. A lot of these other ideas are mainly to provoke thought; to think about what its going to mean in more practical terms, rather than just cheerlead for it.
when you list the segments and the whole trip for trains you should have also listed how long it takes to get there by car and even plane at same time so diffraces can be seen.
I thought high-speed rail does well under 500 miles. There isn't a city big enough between Houston and Atlanta. I would like to see something for Charlotte NC and Atlanta Georgia. Charlotte is a big financial hub. While Georgia has a big Airport hub. The distance between these cities are not great, so that is a win. There also horrible traffic on the Atlanta end. And would take many cars off the road. Atlanta also has one of best rail transit in the South by far.
Agreed. It's on the far end. I think you'd get plenty of Houston-Atlanta traffic still, but making good connections in between would be key to the corridor as a whole being successful. This is part of the impetus for the Jackson choice in the middle. The south is the fastest growing part of the country. So, the situation down there will evolve as well. Most of these metros will be growing in the decades to come, making the proposition that much more attractive.
@@LucidStew It's not that simple. Certain segments of growth is in the Southern region. North Carolina, Georgia, Florida and Texas. But Alabama, Mississippi is declining significantly in population. South Carolina and Tennessee is pretty flat (excluding Nashville TN of course) when it comes to growth. But Tennessee is a more important region than South Carolina as it is connected to the Midwest. Anyway, applying High Speed Rail is vastly more expensive than traditional rail. So priorities need to be made for selective cities that would see a demand, which I had chosen in my previous comment. If rail was to be expanded, it should be regional (traditional) rail. But I'm going to go further by saying regional rail within the state. It would be state funded and operated, not an Amtrak subsidiary. Back in 2007, I came across some material explaining how North Carolina wanted to connect it major cities with rail. This would be a win win for residences and business travelers in the state. North Carolina is only one of a few states that can do this, because it population is distributed pretty evenly throughout the state. It is already partially done with Amtrak. But Amtrak service is very lacking. And not all the cities are connected properly. Fayetteville NC (which I am presently) runs a separate Amtrak service than the other major cities. So the plan would be to connect Fayetteville to at least Raleigh NC. I also suggest Charlotte NC. Charlotte NC is about 3 1/2 hours from Fayetteville NC driving on secondary roads. Or taking a highway north across North Carolina, which isn't very direct. You could literally draw a straight line from Fayetteville to Charlotte. But course roads don't work like that, but rail could if they could get around property rights. The state that High Speed Rail would do well as a regional system (as you are proposing) is Texas. Texas cities are big enough to support a demand like that. Dallas, Houston, San Antonio and Austin all have above a million people. Even El Paso (smallest big city in Texas) has a bigger population than Charlotte NC. Even Raleigh (NC second biggest city) couldn't support HSR because it population is too small. So Charlotte NC would have to connect to Atlanta GA. And Atlanta is the powerhouse where this could work well. I still propose running a Regional Rail system directly from Raleigh to/from Charlotte without going to Greensboro and Winston Salem NC. I'm sorry for being so long winded. Your ideas are not taken in vain. We do need better transportation. *Definitely* But someone has to pay for the tracks that would carry these HS trains.
I'd presume Amtrak, but if the states could get together adequately they'd be able to pick whatever operator they wanted. The nice thing about having a built-out ROW is you don't need to limit it to one operator. That's also an advantage of the ROW being nationalized. Like an interstate, the government owns it, but anyone willing to pay in one way or the other, and follow the rules, can access it.
Only thing is Bham is actually bigger than NOLA metro wise. NOLA has dipped below 1 million, while Bham sits at almost 1.2 million. Otherwise, great vid.
I like your injection of Jackson as an alternate solution to the to the problem of low population density west of Birmingham. An alternate solution would be to send the route further along the coast Mobile-Pensacola-Crestview before heading north to Dothan-Columbus-Atlanta. That might just be me recreating the extension of the Sunset Limited between New Orleans and Pensacola. I'm not as familiar with the area or the rights of way so I suspect that those concerns likely make the Jackson route much better. There should be good rail service from Atlanta to Birmingham but your right to point out that it's hard to find a good next stop after Birmingham.
Maybe in the initial route planning, disregard the environmental aspect of the HSR route. After the most efficient and convenient route (s) has been chosen, then figure out how to minimize the adverse environmental impacts, preferably eliminating them altogether. When the route would go through a wetland area, figure out how to put it there without affecting the alligators and crayfish. No grade crossings, no sharing the trackage with freight services. Put in a spur route from Baton Rouge to New Orleans to Mobile, Tallahassee and Jacksonville. Put in medium speed connector line from Atlanta down to the gulf coast. I realize I have just advocated the tripling of the plan, but a bare minimum system will always be a bare minimum system. While we are at it, a route from Houston across to El Paso, Tucson, Phoenix, and Las Vegas. May as well tie in Salt Lake City to Las Angeles with a connection to Brightline. Fifty years ago when I was in College, we would sit around eating pizza and drinking beer, discussing the best way to improve public transportation in the US. Still not enough money for the projects and a lot more people to move. Don't give up the dream. Your voice is critical.
Yeah, I think the planning might work better if they actually forward more than one route for closer analysis(like Tier 2 level) rather than picking one in the route alternatives phase. I really formed this opinion while making my Atlanta-Charlotte video because from my perspective, the official route they chose for going into Atlanta was going to be extremely difficult. They punted on that part until the Tier 2 phase of analysis. Of course at some point you just need to pick a route and move on because it becomes to expensive, time consuming and inefficient.
@@LucidStew Another aspect they seem to forget is where are the riders going to come from? A mighty river needs feeder streams to keep it flowing. When the local and regional planners don't include bus routes and regional rail lines to connect the outliers, and sufficient car rentals at each station, the proposal falls flat. How are you going to get from outlying towns to the main line? Once you arrive at Phoenix, how do you get to the Grand Canyon? How do you get from Oklahoma City to Los Angeles? That last one is easy. Take Amtrak south from OK City to San Antonio, then wait for the Amtrak to LA, which runs East one day and West the next. If the train coming south is 30 minutes late, you have a 48 hour layover in San Antonio. You need at least two trains per day, each way, even it it's only a four car consist. These issues can all be worked out, but it will take total buy in from local, State, and regional planning boards to make it happen. If we can convince the hometown Billionaires they can make a profit after the first year of operation, we have a chance of getting the county commissioners to at least think about studying the proposal. I may seem cynical, but I am an eternal optimist. I think that once the project gets started, local people will figure out a way to overcome the obstacles and help make HSR a reality. Forget the Box, think Outside! I'm with you.
@@onetwothreeabcThat is a good idea for a 9 hour ride. Perhaps a sleeper night train would be popular. Right now a thrice weekly Houston to Atlanta Amtrak trip takes 36-72 hours on 2-3 trains with 10-12 hours of layovers. Though the honorable LucidStew advocates a leap forward to HSR, but with the populations stiil not high enough, 800 miles is way, way too long for HSR despite a theoritical 5 hour trip. The alternatve would be two-three daily train trips of 10 hours averaging 80 mph on 110-125 tracks. There are three other ciities that are much better candidates than Houston or Dallas for Atlanta to connect to via HSR (or even perhaps semii-high speed) in preferencial order: Charlotte, Nashviille, and Savannah.
How does your high-speed rail route compare to High Sped Rail Alliance rail routes? What makes more sense? Is electrification worth it for that long of a distance? Lots of other things to consider.
They don't really have much considered for this particular area. However, from what I've seen of them they're a lot more focused on the next iterative step. I can respect that they're more anchored in political reality. These videos are more to show what a true HSR network would look like in these areas and what they would possibly cost.
This plan completely leaves out Florida. A line along the lines of the former Pensacola and Atlantic Railroad, starting in Mobile, and serving Pensacola, Destin-Ft. Walton, Tallahassee, and Jacksonville should be in the mix. Another line connecting to it and serving Gainesville, Ocala, Brooksville, Tampa, Bradenton, and Sarasota would be good. From Jacksonville it could connect to Brightline, which would go all the way to Miami.
@@LucidStew I think your alteration to include Jackson makes even more sense in the context of creating a southern branch from Baton Rouge south through New Orleans to Jacksonville. Ideally, if you could have a cross platform transfer, it could be nearly seamless.
HSR between Houston and Jacksonville Florida would be nice who has connections to Atlanta... I would let brightline handle it and call it brightline gulf...
Okay... so... love the video and your bypassing of New Orleans from the highspeed mainline is understandable given the set-up you've described here, but the map at 17:27 is ludicrous. (this is not meant to be mean or nasty, just pointing some things out) First off, the "nearest rail transit" location you indicated here is in the middle of a residential neighborhood that is about a mile and a half from the actual passenger rail terminal. New Orleans Union Station is located in the heart of downtown, directly adjacent to the Superdome and in the shadow of multiple hotels and office buildings. Next up, at the far left of the map you completely ignore the existing railway ROW that feeds that station. Some of this trackage is municipally owned (I believe, could be wrong) and would definitely be used for any proposed BR-NO regional/commuter rail (not to mention there has been some interest in an Amtrak Long-Distance route from New Orleans to Dallas-Fort Worth). Now, while the existing New Orleans Union Station is currently set-up as a terminus and the area around it might seem tight, there are multiple avenues to construct a through running station (similar to the retrofitting of Los Angeles Union Station) in and around the Postal Sorting facility and Superdome's "out parcel" properties. I get that following highways and interstates to find ROW in a load of situations makes sense, but following Interstate 610 is too far removed from downtown. If you were the (hypothetical) Federal HSR planner coming to me the (hypothetical) local New Orleans politician or City Manager I would ask why we are ignoring a retrofit/conversion of the existing New Orleans Union station to through running instead of redeveloping some working-to-middle-income neighborhoods... the main draw of the city is downtown tourism and business. Literally the "Proposed Station" site you've selected defeats the entire purpose of running this train. City planners and citizens would expect this project to better funnel tourists from Houston and Atlanta directly into the downtown core. Even if Federal dollars went into a comprehensive "Muni Metro" type LRT or "Skytrain" type light-metro system to connect up the city (which we should build anyways) to compliment and feed the HSR you propose here... locals are not going to want tourists (Texans of all people!) clogging it up -as they currently do our roads. I'm not saying it's a bad plan, but there are some cost savings you are missing as well as some costs I don't think you have considered. Finally... the cost of running trains through "all the marshes" might be a bit more than you suspect generally. Two points come to to mind: 1.) Interstate 10, as it crosses the Atchafalaya Basin, is carried by the third longest road bridge in the world... while I agree it needs to be built, that's one hell of an regional rail/HSR bridge (literally the I-10 bridge was so long they had to factor in the curvature of the Earth while designing it). 2.) Crossing the Mississippi in Baton Rouge will be a multi-billion dollar bear all on its own and I don't think that has been factored into your calculations here. There is a rail bridge crossing the river in BR but it's the older US 190 bridge (the one upriver), not the I-10 bridge (the one downriver). Both are nearing the end of their life cycles so replacement is coming and the addition of even regional rail would be a phenomenal, but here's the added cost: both have to be high enough to accommodate ocean-going vessels in regular river traffic. This raises their decks and thus the shallow grade needed to run up the HSR to get into the Capital. A dedicated tunnel under the river and continuing subterranean route into downtown Baton Rouge might be a better plan. It could reemerge directly into interstate ROW somewhere before the Interstate 10-12 split on the south-side of the city. Just some thoughts! Stuff like this always gets messy and, like I said, I love your videos! Keep 'em coming!
You're making a lot assumptions about my process based on the result, but none of them are correct. I simply came to a conclusion you find ridiculous. With the LA Union Station example, through tracks already exist there. It's just that the station branches off the main line into a terminus currently. In making the station a through station, all they're doing is connecting the south end of the station back into the main line. You don't have that in N.O., it's just a terminus. When you say convert it to a through station, where exactly is it going? Underground? There are 12 blocks of city between there and the river. I looked at it and didn't see a solution. Perhaps you see one I'm still not seeing. Taking another look now with the benefit of the feedback, it looks very possible to have the setup I envisioned, but with a wye to New Orleans Union Station as a terminus, which would work fine on a local branch line. This video was my first attempt to envision a more European style system, so it doesn't surprise me I missed a few ideas.
must build someday a though high speed station new orleans station. new orleans is a major tourist trap of a place is the home of delta bluese andj azz music its airport is named for lois armstrong. also you save alot of money is fewer road accident with everyone that goes to mardi gras goes home by train. but thought new orleans service could be a second or third step in a mutli step building plan
12:15 Jackson to New Orleans: why would you deviate across the North Shore of Lake Pontchartrain between Hammond and Slidell? There’s no existing rail there. Improve the existing CN line between Hammond and New Orleans along the western and southern shores of the lake. The vast majority of that route is uninhabited swamp, so it’ll be cheaper to acquire and improve.
This is explained by the rest of the video, but the short answer is that Jackson isn't part of the corridor. It was something I added on, so I'm certainly not going to design the entire corridor around it. The broader concept was using Interstate 12 as an east-west mainline, with a slower speed loop around the lake and to Baton Rouge given the difficulty of trying to get through New Orleans at speed.
These are great plans and it's a good analysis, unfortunately, the problem is conservatives in the south and Republican representatives, they would not allow it. They look at trains as too European and therefore socialist/communist. It's retarded and shameful, but it's where we're at as a country now.
Times will be achanging for much faster interciity HSR systems. Florida has semi-high speed Brightline. Texas, Georgia and North Carolina are very good candidates for HSR.
Nearly all of the eastern networks are able to be connected. I think of this in terms of the Interstate Highway System and my personal experience with it. I've driven some very long distances on the interstates and that would not have been possible had they not been so thoroughly connected. Some of those interstates travel through nothing and for very long stretches connect nothing all that special, but there they are because what you travel through isn't really the point most of the time. It's about connecting two end points. Now, if a person looking to travel by rail is not from this region, and they're not connected to this region, then very much so it wouldn't make much sense to them. But, connect this to where they are and that changes.
It's not just a thing being bought. It's an investment in infrastructure that will allow parts of the country to better urbanized. This would be one part. For a basic system east coast to Texas and Chicago,and then west coast, you're probably looking at $1 trillion. That's part of the purpose of these videos: to talk about costs semi-realistically. At the same time though, when we talk about upgrading an airport or adding a lane to a freeway for 10 miles at $5 billion, this isn't viewed as a huge amount anymore, like you said.
@@LucidStew Adding a lane to a freeway for 10 miles at $5 billion, you might as build a heavy rail or regional railway. At one train every 2 minutes that's the equivalent of 20 lanes!
knowing that his video is to promote American railtravel, I do not understand the use of so many European train shots. Is there really no free US footage aviable? 09:25 can be shot in the USA though? (instead of England, now used). It is a simple shot of trains moving in/out of a station.
Amtrak used to run between New Orleans and Jacksonville. That is the REAL Gulf Coast corridor. Georgia never touches the Gulf. Hint: Florida is the third most populous state (bigger than New York). Second Hint: the US Dept of Transportation recently agreed to spend $550 MILLION for highway and bridge improvements on Interstate 10 in Mobile, Alabama (the largest federal infrastructure grant in Alabama history). Magically, Mobile has now voted to support Amtrak use of the train station and rail lines to reintroduce passenger rail service, while explicitly saying there was no quid pro quo between the two situations (laughter ensues ...).
unfortunately, the only map you need to focus on is population density. high speed rail only works when it travels along a highly dense corridor. based on that map, it would only make sense in along east coast and west cost. the most economic case would be to upgrade existing medium speed rail infrastructure so that one day, it can operate at high speed when the economic case arises. often people who argue for high speed rail forget is that the costs of maintaining trains and rail infrastructure exponentially increases above a certain speed. (fyi, high speed is generally between 110-185 mph) if you're talking medium speed (~110mph max), then yes there are plenty of opportunities to connect distant metropolitan cities.
Much like the interstate highway system, the more there is and the more cities that are connected, the more infill will make sense. Also, it must be considered that the south is growing quickly, and the current demographic situation will evolve by the time anything like this is built. The economic case accounts for now, not 20-30 years from now or when ever its done. The speeds are suggestions based on current, proven technology. If maintenance costs are a concern, 10-15% slower is still reasonably competitive in the target range. The more important issue is the dedicated ROW and getting away from freight. These two factors severely limit passenger rail speed anywhere Amtrak doesn't own the ROW. If you're going to build dedicated passenger ROW, you may as well electrify it. Arguments over what route should have what speed in order to optimize them are fine by me.
@@LucidStew High speed rail and heavy freight rail are two entirely different beasts unlike roads. Medium speed (that's a max of like 110~120 mph) rail and heavy freight rail can run on the same track. Right of way is never going to allow high speed on the tracks designed for freight based on current technologies. I just assumed you knew what high speed meant. Your video should be titled, "Amtrak should purchase rail owned by freight train operators" and just remove any mention of 'high speed' to keep it simple.
At least time isn't metric as well, then there'd be a real issue. Thankfully distance conversion is easy. It's things like acre-feet that really go off the rails
@@michaeljones7927 Except that the entire rest of the world uses metric. But hey we're Americans what do we care about the rest of the world? - And besides: how many feet in the mile??? Do you have to look that up or do you know it by heart?
@@paulbadics3500 I have never seen that as a standard anywhere. Most common I've seen is top speed of 250kph on new track and 200kph on existing. For convenience, this usually translates to 150mph and 125mph in Imperial.
You mean the Central Valley part or the whole thing? Not even G-d himself could get the whole thing done in 5 years, and our leaders here are very, very, very far away from Godliness.
Unlimited cash can do a lot, and it might help you build more of it in parallel, but after a certain point you will become limited by: - Physics - Supply Chain weakness - labor market issues TBMs only dig so fast, their is only so much concrete made every day (although the more complicated stuff would probably be an issue first, 800A breakers have a 1year lead time), and there are only so many people qualified to design, approve, inspect, and commission this system. With unlimited cash it might be possible, but the bill would easily be in the trillions, not to mention the side effects of what you would do to the supply chain. With unlimited cash it still would not be worth it to rush the project to completion in only 5 years.
Just stop it. CAHSR will go down as one of the biggest corrupt boondoggles this country has ever seen. And it will not change the politics or California one single bit. Fortunately, there are at least some private companies that are trying to get HSR done in a realistic matrix
Completely opposite of what HSR stands for: too many stops, utilizing existing right of way, connect directly to other transit system, connect to international airports. Because of high number of stations, people will assume and expect that will bring more revenue but it will be completely opposite. HSR is not and should not operate like freight railroad where it can reach every small communities to deliver goods and services. All the HSR projects are for and should be about connecting major metropolitan cities. To acheive this, the system must: 1. Have limited amount of stations (reduces travel time) 2. Separated and away from airports (to avoid the huge crowd, congestion, and other traffic problems) (Does anyone see NY Penn Station & JFK Int'l Airport together, Chicago Union Station & Chicago O'Hare Int'l Airport together, or Los Angeles Union Station & Los Angeles Int'l Airport together?) 3. Tunnel should be an option to make sure the train travels staight line as possible What happened to FL when GA doesn't even touch the Gulf of Mexico? To complete the HSR in CA, hire more people and get them off the streets and couches and give them those construction jobs.
8 main line stations for 892 miles of track. How many would you have? The major cities are Houston and Atlanta. Maybe New Orleans if you're generous. If you only stop there, you may as well fly. Nothing stops a line from operating both local and express trains. As shown it would only connect to 3 airports. Tunnelling is too expensive to use regularly and the vast majority of this route can be done at-grade. Florida isn't part of this corridor. The tracks in Florida were damaged in 2006 during Hurricane Katrina and have no be reconnected to these service lines.
Drives me crazy that people never think about local and express service when building an HSR corridor. For that reason I am in favor of CAHSR going through the Central Valley. You can always run non stop trains but you can’t change the right of way once it’s built.
>on stops The Tokaido Shinkansen literally has 17 stations across ~320 miles of track. Most trains are the Nozomi express which stops at 6 stations. All stations get the local Kodama every ~30 mins and the Limited Hikari fills pads out the schedule. >on airports The TGV connects to Charles De Gaulle airport because people across France/the EU travel to Paris to catch a flight.
@@Whatneeds2bsaidExactly, I've taken the TGV direct from Geneve via Lyon to CDG to fly to JFK. Much more convenient than TGV to Gare de Lyon & then RER to CDG. Also, flown into FRK & jumpd straight onto a ICE service to Berlin. Lots of other egs. Very common in Europe to use HSR services direct to/from airports.
@@LucidStewSeems your HSR cost estimates outside of California are about $110 miiillion per mile. Thus far it seems CAHSR on flat valley land is about $200 million per mile. What would you range guestimate it would cost per mile for expensive tunnel work?
@@highlymedicated2438A lot of great music was produced out of Muscle Shoals' FAME studios back in the day. A favorite song was Boz Skaggs 'Loan Me A Dime' with Duane Allman on guitar. Apparently Huntsville 'Rocket City' is a nice town too.
Alabama 99.1 people/sq mile median household income 52k population growth 2010-2020 5.1% Mississippi 63.5 people/sq mile median household income 43.6k population growth 2010-2020 -0.2% Louisiana 106.9 people/sq mile median household income 50k population growth 2010-2020 2.7%
I like it. I think it really opens up Louisiana and Mississippi. Would be even better connecting from Mobile into Florida. The south is growing fast. Better to get the infrastructure in before its more expensive.
@LucidStew seems like it would make much more sense after building out high-speed rail services in Houston and Atlanta. If only there was a case study on developing high-speed rail in low density region as a precursor to connecting distant large cities.
@@gregory596 I can agree on that. I don't think you'd want to lead with this. Probably after a Southeast corridor build out and Texas triangle substantially complete.
I had two reasons for that: 1) there isn't room for double-tracked electric in the freight ROW there or at the terminal. 2) its a terminus and it needs to be a through station or have a capable wye. Again, no room for that in addition to existing freight rail. I would have very much liked to put a station closer to downtown.
I am aware that I mixed up MARTA and METRA at 18:40 . I apologize to any Atlantans or Chicagoans whose sensibilities were exceeded by this mistake.
Stew's Boo Boo's
@@trademark4537 thankfully that's only for the Stew's News videos, or I'd be in trouble. 😅
It will be ready 500-550 years from now, have faith.
Unfortunately in 2530 the governor of Texas will cancel the electrification part of the plan and insist that the trains are diesel. The entire project will be canceled one year later when they realize that the oil ran out 450 years before and there was no diesel.
@@FakeSchrodingersCat not to worry, comrade. We can make diesel from beef tallow.
@@JohnGeorgeBauerBuis But using anything but oil is socialism according to Texan Republicans.
As someone from the Jackson, Mississippi metro area who has used Amtrak to get to New Orleans before, this seems absolutely amazing! I’m surprised that you would even consider us here, most people think that Mississippi is just too rural to have any public transit. This would be the most amazing thing to me.
Someone asked me why bother building in this. Your post is a good retort. No one in this country should feel like the rest of country is overlooking them. If Jackson makes sense at high speed between Houston and Atlanta, then there should be a stop there, and people in Mississippi should get to share in the benefit of such an interstate system. That is my view, anyway.
Quick question would Amtrak own the trains that run between the cities @@LucidStew
@@johndoe-un9uq I assume that if something like a semi-national HSR network were ever built it would be under the purview of Amtrak. However, if the federal government built and owned the right of way, this would not exclude leasing trackage rights to private operators. So you might have something like this connecting to a future Brightline network at Jacksonville via Savannah, or something like that. In that scenario, Brightline would be able to run trains from Atlanta to Orlando or some similar type of service.
To be fair it is not that Mississippi is to rural it is that no where has good public transit unless the locals do most of it themselves, and the State government down there has no interest in public transit and is if anything actively hostile to the idea.
Mississippi is of course included in the High Speed Rail System. The elected officials and leaders of the State of Mississippi is on board and its already happening in Mississippi.
Houston to New Orleans has a lot of demographic similarities to LA to Vegas. Would be interesting to see.
Houston New Orleans is a smaller demand corridor than San Francisco to Fresno. I am not trying to discredit this project but it’s often forgotten how big Fresno and Bakersfield are.
@@TysonIke No offense, but why should the majority of California give a shit about a Fresno to San Francisco HSR? This is the biggest problem with California HSR, it's political.
@@alhollywood6486The majority of Cal should care because Merced to Bakersfield then gets you SF to Frenso which then becomes SF to LA which later becomes Sacramento to SD. In short, any transportation network (hwy, rail, air) has to start somewhere & then expand.
@@yappofloyd1905 Funny! Where can I see your standup? This material is gold.
But does it have the tourism?
I think I see a way to solve the downtown Atlanta station conundrum, since it potentially lies at the nexus of several routes. Lots of tunnels, but the station could be places north of the convention center parallel to the existing railroad tracks following Northside drive to the Norfolk Southern tracks through the Pittsburgh neighborhood until the interstate to the airport.
If I'm reading you correctly, that area over there used to be a rail yard, but has been redeveloped. All of the plans I've seen so far have utilized existing rail ROW to get to the center of Atlanta, but how they're going to wedge double-track electrified in there is not explained.
It’s a shame 110 MPH is considered the target speed to an already hypothetical “HSR” train route when they’ve had 200MPH+ trains in Asia for decades.
Yeah, they're aiming for baby steps, but most people in the U.S. think of the very fast trains in other countries when they hear "hsr". That's part of the reason I'm making these videos: to let people know and talk about what setting up a real HSR network would look like.
@@mrxman581 And progress on it is so slow, and cost escalation so high, that the threat to have it scuttled and cancelled is very, very real.
even worse, sweden let amtrak borrow an X2000 train and they ended up not using it for some reason, meanwhile that model has been the bread and butter of our high-ish speed (200 km/h) service and it's specifically made to allow for higher speeds on track that otherwise wouldn't allow it!
the whole train can tilt so you can go faster on too-tight bends without being uncomfortable for passengers, it works really well and has allowed us to get a nice service on the most important routes without needing to build entire new railways, it seems absolutely perfect for america!
@@swedneck we could easily use something akin to the original LRC with selective additions of Intermittent Inductive Automatic Trans Stop and Cab Signaling to increase average speeds significantly.
Personally, I feel like Charlotte to Atlanta is the best one. They’re both big ass hubs that can easily be electrified over the next few years if they just started tomorrow.
It's pretty good. With those coastal southern states growing like they are, the prospect will get better and better. They are in the process, but still early. Guess we'll see what happens in the coming years. That could also be extended to Birmingham, Raleigh-Durham, and Chattanooga according to what's already in the works. Those are all also really early in the process, though.
I want to see Pensacola -> Destin -> Panama City in my lifetime
Connected to Lincoln, NB of course...
@@LucidStew I don’t think that would be a feasible route extension
@@gumbyshrimp2606 Might be a video in that. Direct line.
I assume you meant the one in Florida, not the one in Panama along the canal, otherwise that would be a longer (and more challenging) route that the extension to Lincoln, Nebraska!
@@JohnGeorgeBauerBuis it can be done
This is great content. Keep up the good work.
Another great one! I absolutely *love* the incorporation of the bypasses! We get to maintain speed and serve “city centers.”
Also, great minds think alike. You chose the same Downtown Houston station location I would. (And I would argue Texas Central should use it too!)
I've tried to incorporate feedback I've gotten in previous videos. I don't think a true European-style system is realistic here except in a few places. However, it seems the concept of bypasses can be applied on a small scale without too much extra expense.
I had that Houston station location or one by Minute Maid Park. I liked the MMP location a little better, but I felt like the cost savings, intermodal station, and potential through connection to TCR tipped the scales.
Need to get the Dallas to Houston segment first.
This segment would probably look a lot more attractive if it were to connect HSR networks on either end. I'd go farther and say Whole Texas Triangle, and D.C. to Atlanta, then this.
I'm worried how many Houstonians wouldn't take the train to Nawlins when they find out they'd have to get off in Red Stick and switch to a local.
I may have been slightly unclear. It would be a one-seat ride. The local line would be fully compatible with the main line, so express trains from Houston to N.O. would not require a transfer.
Please don't call us "Nawlins" 🤢🤢🤢
Cant help but think about the similarities to the Tokaido shinkansen in terms of geology and challenges surrounding natural disasters, to connect to Texas C. i'd even say to just adapt their system
I really enjoy these videos of yours. Thanks for producing them. Greetings from Bremen Germany
Thanks for saying so and thanks for watching.
What about DC to Chicago? Same kinda deal, but tons of different connects and city pairs.
This kinda covers keystone at the same time.
My thoughts are DC to Harrisburg to State College to Pittsburgh to ... to Chicago (2 ways to go from Pittsburgh, but Columbus always seemed better to me)
But then a local connector between Philly and Harrisburg.
I looked at Pittsburgh from the west in my Chicago Hub Network video. It's possible, but its not cheap. That goes from Columbus or Cleveland. I'm holding off on the Keystone Corridor video to take a real good look at Pittsburgh east through the Appalachians, but it looks either very expensive or not real fast. Closing the gap from Chicago to D.C. through Pittsburgh could be a tall order, but around to Buffalo or Chattanooga aren't real satisfying.
Chicago to DC with a branch to Baltimore, with the splits at Frederick.
For the spur going to Mobile - might as well go all the way to Jax - with a stop in Pensacola and Tallahassee. I could see Brightline eventually extending all the way up to Jax - making for a nearly complete Florida line.
Amazing video!!
One small thing, honestly, looking at the approach to the terminal station in New Orleans I'd swallow the bitter pill and connect it to the system. My reasoning being that trains coming from Atlanta or Houston would have a more than good reason to terminate in New Orleans, which also means that the likely setup of 2+2 tracks for the envisoned New Orleans station (2 bypass tracks in the middle) is just not enough, even worse if it's just 2 tracks.
The same also goes for potential regional level services in direction of Mobile and/or Baton Rouge and Lafayette.
sure trains going from Houston to Mobile via New Orleans would only use the outer station, as would regionals making the loop from Lafayette to Slidell, but simply due to its location New Orleans would most likely be a terminus for a lot of services.
Also, even if u find the necessary space for a few more side tracks at the outer station you still have the issue of being very far outside the city center.
If properly reworked Union Station gives you 10 terminus tracks and a maintenance facility, both excellent to turn trains around.
The good thing is that the row is probably wide enough to afford 3-4 tracks from a certain point before the split going back onto the outer loop onto the freight row.
This is good because with a flyover or two you could eliminate conflict points with switches which could significantly complicate operations and cause last mile delays, which often happens in my home country of Germany.
Also, regarding Atlanta:
If we take your previous Atlanta-Charlotte video into account it's safe to say that a downtown through tunnel with a direct linkup to the airport would be a better option than having a terminus and a ring along I-285. More expensive sure, but MUCH more convenient and also quite a bit faster I'm willing to bet.
At that point you might even ask if it is even worth it to connect the airport in Atlanta instead of just directly heading east towards I-20 and then on to Charlotte, most likely underground for a good bit.
Me personally I'd like the airport connection, but I also find the direct tunneling towards I-20 option very appealing for time reasons, and also because transit to the airport already exists, and is only 12 minutes slower than the hsr train, goes without saying that that does not take into account the other qualities of the service, which I'm personally unaware of.
What are your thoughts on this?
I didn't see where there was room at Union Station in N.O., but if there's a way to do it, I'm all for it.
On the Charlotte-Atlanta route, I personally preferred the airport to airport option because of the transit on either end. I put both options in to leave some room for discussion. With that, I like the ring rail coming in the from the west on the Gulf Coast Corridor. I was also keeping Chattanooga from the north in mind since they have a Tier I EIS on that, and also south to Savannah since that's part of the SEHSR Corridor. Mid-Atlanta is pretty packed with rail, so it might be better to leave that to MARTA and interface rather than try to run HSR through there as well.
@@LucidStew ahhh okay I see, thanks for the reply🙌🏼🙌🏼
It looks like that the much talked BR-New Orleans commuter train service may be come a real thing in the next few years. Not HSR (80mph) but it's a start.... I would skip the connection to Atlanta for now and add San Antonio into the route to Mobile.....I doubt any true HSR project is going to happen along the Gulf coast anytime soon though.
I was disappointed by the low bar set for that Baton Rouge-New Orleans line while researching this. You can see in the video, or just by looking at a map, the route is capable of much more than 79mph. Agreed it would likely be a long time before high speed here. As others have commented, you'd probably want Southeast and South Central Corridors done first, then this to link them.
@@LucidStew Yeah ..But I'll take this. 'Loozeanna" considers anything but building "more lanes" communism.
I noticed you picked Jackson! Jackson could serve as a regional hub for regional high-speed rail: Jackson to New Orleans and Baton Rouge. Jackson to Birmingham and Atlanta. Jackson to Shreveport and Dallas / Fort Worth. Jackson to Little Rock. Jackson to Memphis. Jackson to Nashville. Jackson to Mobile and Pensacola. Jackson to Montgomery and Columbus.
Unfortunately it's somewhat isolated and what you get for the money isn't great in other directions. I mainly picked it to improve what I perceived as a deficit in the current corridor. As expressed in the video, I think it serves that purpose. The thing that intrigues me about the south is the growth trend and how the demand for this concept grows over time coupled with the space to built it without astronomical cost. I think there is a strong desire to extend the NEC's capabilities meaningfully to Atlanta. Once that occurs, the paradigm will be much different than current, and this may well drive even more growth in the region. That would increase demand for high or higher speed routes that are basically off the radar at the moment, like connecting New Orleans to Nashville via Jackson and Memphis.
Jackson, MS will never be a hub for anything.
I understand New Orleans is going downhill but having a highspeed rail there may help it a lot. If you centered the Gulf Coast in that historic city then you'd be able to have one connection between Huston and Atlanta as a "true high speed rail." Just some thoughts I had at the 6 min mark (maybe you answer it in video near the end).
The problem though is that Houston and Atlanta metros combined have about 10x the population, so they'd be the big draw on the corridor regardless. This is not to discount New Orleans. It is geographically about in the middle, and it has its tourist draw. It's still important.
@@LucidStew Got it I agree with you on that the two are to large a draw by themselves in many ways. I watched the rest and your plan seems the best way. I wonder if politics within the HSR community played a part in the "current plan."
I don’t believe most people understand how expensive a ticket will be on these fantasy rail lines.
It's similar to comparable air fare.
Traveling long distance has always been expensive for most modes of transportation
Cross-country journeys are still the kind of thing you book for a vacation, or holiday trip, but it'll be a *heck* of a lot cheaper & convenient compared to flying & *orders of magnitude* safer than driving
Tickets also scale with distance. You'd be crying at the total check if you tried to drive across the entire south in a car. Most people only use segments of large networks like the interstate & this incurs relatively small expenses. It will be very much the same for a high speed network too
Just curious what the route between Chicago or Indy to Nashville is called?
Could you do a video about that route?
Either that or from Memphis to Gatlinburg?
I appreciate it 🙏
Thanks.
Chicago-Louisville is in the Chicago Hub Network. Nashville is not on an HSR corridor, nor Memphis.
An interesting corridor could be Midwest to Florida, considering Florida is a popular vacation spot for Midwesterners, and the options are either to drive or spend a small fortune on flying, and driving down to Florida is almost a rite of passage for midwesterners.
@@tonywalters7298 Louisville to Chattanooga will be very compelling if planned lines ever get that far. Need Brightline to connect to Jacksonville as well. Other way would be through Oklahoma, but this seems less likely.
@@LucidStewA Brightline 125 mph extension to Tampa and a 110-125 mph extension to Jacksonville are two of the top ten routes for HSR or semi-high speed rail.
I'm in favor of long distance HSR routes for two reasons.
FIRST, by chaining connections between intermediate population centers that should double as (sub)regional hubs, the continuation of the line to city after city should attract more riders away from short and MEDIUM flights.
SECOND, longer trips accommodate full sleep, half-day sessions of work or school, even movie marathons with meals and drinks between. Planes trap a rider in layover and tight-seating situations with few options of activities, whereas trains allow one to move around and do almost anything one would do in their own house, classroom, or workplace. That makes short and medium trips opportunities for work or play, not confined to a seat. One could take an overnighter from Houston to Atlanta or beyond.
Tracking the Gulf Coast HSR through New Orleans as presented in this video is great for anybody going to NOLA, but lengthens the ride for everyone else and misses some population centers. Better to create a spur or perpendicular line with matching arrival and departure times, as in having a train departing on every outbound track simultaneously. Individual train cars might detach and reconnect with a train going one of the other directions, as Amtrak used to do, though the process would have to go a heck of a lot faster. With a more successful network, trains would be frequent enough such that no such maneuvers would be necessary because transfers would be reliable
The more riders, the more attractive increased frequency and speed, and therefore the greater distance a person can travel in half a day or a night of sleep. I traveled throughout Europe on Eurail this way, almost never had to pay for sleeping accommodations in a sleeper car or hotel/B&B. I spent all my money on food and entertaining myself, waking refreshed each morning, taking showers at stations when I needed. It was far less onerous than I ever imagined, and I came to prefer it over luxury or expediency, because no longer did 3/4 of my trip cost go to a stationary bed.
The more that people feel that their intermediate travel needs are met without a car, they will feel comfortable owning an EV for near-home needs. The more that short travel and metropolitan needs feel met, the more likely individuals will feel comfortable skipping car ownership altogether.
Renting a medium or smaller car every second or third weekend for the three-day deals is less expensive and eliminates the maintenance headaches compared to owning a car. The family needs too many trips that can't be met by transit and bicycling? That's why EV and EV hybrids are great, as well as vehicle pools for housing complexes and neighborhoods (car sharing). I lived years this way, found I didn't even rent a car more than once a month, but always made sure to add one more day if three days was not enough, in order to run all the shopping and moving errands in a go. We usually made a little local day trip to nearby parks or beaches not served well by transit. It saved so much money, even with monthly transit passes, that I had workmates who thought I got paid twice as much as they did. It's a revelation to discover how much stress vanishes for not owning a car.
ONE MORE idea which it amazes me train companies and served cities don't think about: the value of destination stations where people deliberately spend time and money, not because they have nothing else to do during a layover. Every large station should feel like a vibrant town center with great restaurants and other fun stop-over activities like, say, miniature golf, and some of the town's other leisure activities inside the station or close. Long trips become more attractive when scheduling is flexible or portions of trains are unbooked, which accommodate such leisure. Major European stations, and often stations serving medium-size cities, have all the shower, laundry, dry-clean, and similar facilities a passenger could need, with grocery, banking, mail/shipping, pharmacy, bakeries, inside or within a block outside. The main stations in Philadelphia, Los Angeles, Frankfurt (Germany) are great examples of layovers not at all feeling like layovers that even inspire passengers to stop intentionally for a couple of hours to drop some dollars in the local economies. Heck, even gyms with day passes and towels and gym clothes included, spas, art museums, amusement parks, dance clubs, park venues for town/neighborhood events and farmers' markets, and so on, if located within or adjacent to the station, become attractions to passers-through as much as locals. And, of course, hotels for those people who really can't ride and sleep at the same time. :-) [I'm blessed with the ability to sleep better on transit than in a quiet room.]
If every American were given a month-long Eurail pass and a thousand euros to live on (plus fare to get to Europe and back, duh), then nearly every American would clamor for all of these facilities to be built at home! Yet more jobs and making travel more pleasant than onerous. In the digital age, with all our technological abilities, transportation with accompanying facilities should make it possible to be homeless without anyone able to tell, and yet a fully productive person within the economy. In fact, a substantial proportion of people who currently vagabond by way of gas-guzzling vehicles would switch, and other people who can't quite swing the vagabond lifestyle they want, could spend more time traveling. Heck, it would probably help tremendously with rent prices, and it could also spread out dollar circulation even more than merely "working from home" in a "flyover" state to escape the places already bogged down by high cost of living. I'm not finding any downsides to improved mobility, reduced pollution, and sharing economic benefits with cities small and large. It's a capitalist way to partially achieve what socialism offers, which should please an awful lot of people who don't know what I mean by socialism. lol
Okay, my little blurb turned into a big pro-train diatribe. :)
Have fun, y'all. Demand the ability to travel all you want, see all the world you want, without destroying it in the process with pavement and poilution. :)
Rail might take longer than air but it's comfortable. Private individual cars.You wont mind spending a little more time. You can sleep in peace knowing you will not crash.
But what is the demand? How many people on a given day of the year actually need to go from Atlanta to Birmingham, Baton Rouge to Jackson, or from Jackson to New Orleans? That's what this analysis is missing.
While projects such as this are often justified on a "Field of Dreams," i.e. if you build it they will come philosophy, we've seen many projects around the world where such demand utterly fails to materialize, as another "bridge to nowhere" fails to produce expected demand.
I do not know the demand. I am only looking at what it might look like, how fast it might go, and how much it might cost. I will be working on attempting to introduce ridership models to future videos, but I do not have a current timeline for that.
sound ok but with Brightline now to Orlando what happens if it goes to Pensacola with no track between it and Mobile?
It would need to be built. It would be pretty far out for all these things. Realistically in the next 20 years, you might have a slightly better Acela, part of CAHSR Phase 1, Brightline West, Texas Central, Atlanta-Charlotte, and maybe one other Brightline project outside of Florida in terms of operating HSR in the U.S. A lot of these other ideas are mainly to provoke thought; to think about what its going to mean in more practical terms, rather than just cheerlead for it.
when you list the segments and the whole trip for trains you should have also listed how long it takes to get there by car and even plane at same time so diffraces can be seen.
The general rule of thumb for this class of HSR: under ~200 miles car may be faster and over ~600 miles air travel may be faster.
At 5:25 there is a more generalized chart, but I see your point and will consider it in future videos.
I thought high-speed rail does well under 500 miles. There isn't a city big enough between Houston and Atlanta.
I would like to see something for Charlotte NC and Atlanta Georgia. Charlotte is a big financial hub. While Georgia has a big Airport hub. The distance between these cities are not great, so that is a win. There also horrible traffic on the Atlanta end. And would take many cars off the road. Atlanta also has one of best rail transit in the South by far.
I would like to see HSR for Raleigh NC and Charlotte NC. And Nashville TN and Atlanta GA.
Check his channel, he already did a video for Atlanta to Charlotte!
Agreed. It's on the far end. I think you'd get plenty of Houston-Atlanta traffic still, but making good connections in between would be key to the corridor as a whole being successful. This is part of the impetus for the Jackson choice in the middle. The south is the fastest growing part of the country. So, the situation down there will evolve as well. Most of these metros will be growing in the decades to come, making the proposition that much more attractive.
@@LucidStew It's not that simple. Certain segments of growth is in the Southern region. North Carolina, Georgia, Florida and Texas. But Alabama, Mississippi is declining significantly in population. South Carolina and Tennessee is pretty flat (excluding Nashville TN of course) when it comes to growth. But Tennessee is a more important region than South Carolina as it is connected to the Midwest.
Anyway, applying High Speed Rail is vastly more expensive than traditional rail. So priorities need to be made for selective cities that would see a demand, which I had chosen in my previous comment.
If rail was to be expanded, it should be regional (traditional) rail. But I'm going to go further by saying regional rail within the state. It would be state funded and operated, not an Amtrak subsidiary.
Back in 2007, I came across some material explaining how North Carolina wanted to connect it major cities with rail.
This would be a win win for residences and business travelers in the state.
North Carolina is only one of a few states that can do this, because it population is distributed pretty evenly throughout the state.
It is already partially done with Amtrak. But Amtrak service is very lacking. And not all the cities are connected properly.
Fayetteville NC (which I am presently) runs a separate Amtrak service than the other major cities. So the plan would be to connect Fayetteville to at least Raleigh NC. I also suggest Charlotte NC. Charlotte NC is about 3 1/2 hours from Fayetteville NC driving on secondary roads. Or taking a highway north across North Carolina, which isn't very direct. You could literally draw a straight line from Fayetteville to Charlotte. But course roads don't work like that, but rail could if they could get around property rights.
The state that High Speed Rail would do well as a regional system (as you are proposing) is Texas. Texas cities are big enough to support a demand like that. Dallas, Houston, San Antonio and Austin all have above a million people. Even El Paso (smallest big city in Texas) has a bigger population than Charlotte NC.
Even Raleigh (NC second biggest city) couldn't support HSR because it population is too small. So Charlotte NC would have to connect to Atlanta GA. And Atlanta is the powerhouse where this could work well.
I still propose running a Regional Rail system directly from Raleigh to/from Charlotte without going to Greensboro and Winston Salem NC.
I'm sorry for being so long winded. Your ideas are not taken in vain. We do need better transportation. *Definitely* But someone has to pay for the tracks that would carry these HS trains.
That's not saying much unfortunately. And the Republican state government wants everyone in their cars. 🤬
Your outro is always funny!
Interesting discussion as usual :)
Another issue that is hardly mentioned is, would this hsr being given to a private operator like Bright line, Amtrak or a state run entity?
I'd presume Amtrak, but if the states could get together adequately they'd be able to pick whatever operator they wanted. The nice thing about having a built-out ROW is you don't need to limit it to one operator. That's also an advantage of the ROW being nationalized. Like an interstate, the government owns it, but anyone willing to pay in one way or the other, and follow the rules, can access it.
Only thing is Bham is actually bigger than NOLA metro wise. NOLA has dipped below 1 million, while Bham sits at almost 1.2 million. Otherwise, great vid.
Why not have the HSR line go from New Orleans to Mobile to Birmingham?
That would exclude Mississippi aside from the 40 miles along the coast.
I like your injection of Jackson as an alternate solution to the to the problem of low population density west of Birmingham. An alternate solution would be to send the route further along the coast Mobile-Pensacola-Crestview before heading north to Dothan-Columbus-Atlanta. That might just be me recreating the extension of the Sunset Limited between New Orleans and Pensacola. I'm not as familiar with the area or the rights of way so I suspect that those concerns likely make the Jackson route much better. There should be good rail service from Atlanta to Birmingham but your right to point out that it's hard to find a good next stop after Birmingham.
I had the assumption in the back of my mind that this would eventually be reconnected to Jacksonville from Mobile one way or the other.
Pensacola -> Destin -> Panama City -> Tallahassee -> north to Atlanta or east to Jacksonville
@@gumbyshrimp2606 Is there a viable branch north to Atlanta from the Sunset Limited right of way in the Florida panhandle?
Maybe in the initial route planning, disregard the environmental aspect of the HSR route. After the most efficient and convenient route (s) has been chosen, then figure out how to minimize the adverse environmental impacts, preferably eliminating them altogether. When the route would go through a wetland area, figure out how to put it there without affecting the alligators and crayfish. No grade crossings, no sharing the trackage with freight services. Put in a spur route from Baton Rouge to New Orleans to Mobile, Tallahassee and Jacksonville. Put in medium speed connector line from Atlanta down to the gulf coast. I realize I have just advocated the tripling of the plan, but a bare minimum system will always be a bare minimum system. While we are at it, a route from Houston across to El Paso, Tucson, Phoenix, and Las Vegas. May as well tie in Salt Lake City to Las Angeles with a connection to Brightline. Fifty years ago when I was in College, we would sit around eating pizza and drinking beer, discussing the best way to improve public transportation in the US. Still not enough money for the projects and a lot more people to move. Don't give up the dream. Your voice is critical.
Yeah, I think the planning might work better if they actually forward more than one route for closer analysis(like Tier 2 level) rather than picking one in the route alternatives phase. I really formed this opinion while making my Atlanta-Charlotte video because from my perspective, the official route they chose for going into Atlanta was going to be extremely difficult. They punted on that part until the Tier 2 phase of analysis. Of course at some point you just need to pick a route and move on because it becomes to expensive, time consuming and inefficient.
@@LucidStew Another aspect they seem to forget is where are the riders going to come from? A mighty river needs feeder streams to keep it flowing. When the local and regional planners don't include bus routes and regional rail lines to connect the outliers, and sufficient car rentals at each station, the proposal falls flat. How are you going to get from outlying towns to the main line? Once you arrive at Phoenix, how do you get to the Grand Canyon? How do you get from Oklahoma City to Los Angeles? That last one is easy. Take Amtrak south from OK City to San Antonio, then wait for the Amtrak to LA, which runs East one day and West the next. If the train coming south is 30 minutes late, you have a 48 hour layover in San Antonio. You need at least two trains per day, each way, even it it's only a four car consist. These issues can all be worked out, but it will take total buy in from local, State, and regional planning boards to make it happen. If we can convince the hometown Billionaires they can make a profit after the first year of operation, we have a chance of getting the county commissioners to at least think about studying the proposal. I may seem cynical, but I am an eternal optimist. I think that once the project gets started, local people will figure out a way to overcome the obstacles and help make HSR a reality. Forget the Box, think Outside! I'm with you.
How about just making an overnight, direct service between Atlanta and Houston for now?
I will only accept true high speed rail. :D
@@LucidStewyeah, with these distances it's high speed or bust.
@@LucidStew Make a 90mph overnight, direct service between Houston and Atlanta. I'll take it.
@@onetwothreeabc compared to most Amtrak services, very many things would be welcome improvements.
@@onetwothreeabcThat is a good idea for a 9 hour ride. Perhaps a sleeper night train would be popular. Right now a thrice weekly Houston to Atlanta Amtrak trip takes 36-72 hours on 2-3 trains with 10-12 hours of layovers. Though the honorable LucidStew advocates a leap forward to HSR, but with the populations stiil not high enough, 800 miles is way, way too long for HSR despite a theoritical 5 hour trip.
The alternatve would be two-three daily train trips of 10 hours averaging 80 mph on 110-125 tracks. There are three other ciities that are much better candidates than Houston or Dallas for Atlanta to connect to via HSR (or even perhaps semii-high speed) in preferencial order: Charlotte, Nashviille, and Savannah.
How does your high-speed rail route compare to High Sped Rail Alliance rail routes? What makes more sense? Is electrification worth it for that long of a distance? Lots of other things to consider.
They don't really have much considered for this particular area. However, from what I've seen of them they're a lot more focused on the next iterative step. I can respect that they're more anchored in political reality. These videos are more to show what a true HSR network would look like in these areas and what they would possibly cost.
@@LucidStewYour focus IS great on what could be. Good job.
electrification is always viable
Houston areas only about 7.3million regional wise
Amtrak silver service next?
This plan completely leaves out Florida. A line along the lines of the former Pensacola and Atlantic Railroad, starting in Mobile, and serving Pensacola, Destin-Ft. Walton, Tallahassee, and Jacksonville should be in the mix. Another line connecting to it and serving Gainesville, Ocala, Brooksville, Tampa, Bradenton, and Sarasota would be good. From Jacksonville it could connect to Brightline, which would go all the way to Miami.
Florida isn't in the corridor. The assumption is that eventually it will be extended to Jacksonville along the former Sunset Limited route.
@@LucidStew I think your alteration to include Jackson makes even more sense in the context of creating a southern branch from Baton Rouge south through New Orleans to Jacksonville. Ideally, if you could have a cross platform transfer, it could be nearly seamless.
HTL to Nola HSR I’ve been SAYIN this!!!!!!
HSR between Houston and Jacksonville Florida would be nice who has connections to Atlanta...
I would let brightline handle it and call it brightline gulf...
Okay... so... love the video and your bypassing of New Orleans from the highspeed mainline is understandable given the set-up you've described here, but the map at 17:27 is ludicrous.
(this is not meant to be mean or nasty, just pointing some things out)
First off, the "nearest rail transit" location you indicated here is in the middle of a residential neighborhood that is about a mile and a half from the actual passenger rail terminal. New Orleans Union Station is located in the heart of downtown, directly adjacent to the Superdome and in the shadow of multiple hotels and office buildings.
Next up, at the far left of the map you completely ignore the existing railway ROW that feeds that station. Some of this trackage is municipally owned (I believe, could be wrong) and would definitely be used for any proposed BR-NO regional/commuter rail (not to mention there has been some interest in an Amtrak Long-Distance route from New Orleans to Dallas-Fort Worth). Now, while the existing New Orleans Union Station is currently set-up as a terminus and the area around it might seem tight, there are multiple avenues to construct a through running station (similar to the retrofitting of Los Angeles Union Station) in and around the Postal Sorting facility and Superdome's "out parcel" properties.
I get that following highways and interstates to find ROW in a load of situations makes sense, but following Interstate 610 is too far removed from downtown.
If you were the (hypothetical) Federal HSR planner coming to me the (hypothetical) local New Orleans politician or City Manager I would ask why we are ignoring a retrofit/conversion of the existing New Orleans Union station to through running instead of redeveloping some working-to-middle-income neighborhoods... the main draw of the city is downtown tourism and business. Literally the "Proposed Station" site you've selected defeats the entire purpose of running this train. City planners and citizens would expect this project to better funnel tourists from Houston and Atlanta directly into the downtown core. Even if Federal dollars went into a comprehensive "Muni Metro" type LRT or "Skytrain" type light-metro system to connect up the city (which we should build anyways) to compliment and feed the HSR you propose here... locals are not going to want tourists (Texans of all people!) clogging it up -as they currently do our roads.
I'm not saying it's a bad plan, but there are some cost savings you are missing as well as some costs I don't think you have considered.
Finally... the cost of running trains through "all the marshes" might be a bit more than you suspect generally. Two points come to to mind:
1.) Interstate 10, as it crosses the Atchafalaya Basin, is carried by the third longest road bridge in the world... while I agree it needs to be built, that's one hell of an regional rail/HSR bridge (literally the I-10 bridge was so long they had to factor in the curvature of the Earth while designing it).
2.) Crossing the Mississippi in Baton Rouge will be a multi-billion dollar bear all on its own and I don't think that has been factored into your calculations here. There is a rail bridge crossing the river in BR but it's the older US 190 bridge (the one upriver), not the I-10 bridge (the one downriver). Both are nearing the end of their life cycles so replacement is coming and the addition of even regional rail would be a phenomenal, but here's the added cost: both have to be high enough to accommodate ocean-going vessels in regular river traffic. This raises their decks and thus the shallow grade needed to run up the HSR to get into the Capital. A dedicated tunnel under the river and continuing subterranean route into downtown Baton Rouge might be a better plan. It could reemerge directly into interstate ROW somewhere before the Interstate 10-12 split on the south-side of the city.
Just some thoughts! Stuff like this always gets messy and, like I said, I love your videos! Keep 'em coming!
You're making a lot assumptions about my process based on the result, but none of them are correct. I simply came to a conclusion you find ridiculous.
With the LA Union Station example, through tracks already exist there. It's just that the station branches off the main line into a terminus currently. In making the station a through station, all they're doing is connecting the south end of the station back into the main line.
You don't have that in N.O., it's just a terminus. When you say convert it to a through station, where exactly is it going? Underground? There are 12 blocks of city between there and the river. I looked at it and didn't see a solution. Perhaps you see one I'm still not seeing. Taking another look now with the benefit of the feedback, it looks very possible to have the setup I envisioned, but with a wye to New Orleans Union Station as a terminus, which would work fine on a local branch line. This video was my first attempt to envision a more European style system, so it doesn't surprise me I missed a few ideas.
@@LucidStew no big deal! Like I said this wasn't meant to be an attack or anything; love your stuff!
Zero chance any government find a megaproject through the south’s ‘Blackbelt’
Maybe now, but things will change.
must build someday a though high speed station new orleans station. new orleans is a major tourist trap of a place is the home of delta bluese andj azz music its airport is named for lois armstrong. also you save alot of money is fewer road accident with everyone that goes to mardi gras goes home by train. but thought new orleans service could be a second or third step in a mutli step building plan
Better To CREATE A OCEAN LINER futro Ship train farie thing Highspeed Super ship from miami round off the coast of florida up and over to texas
12:15 Jackson to New Orleans: why would you deviate across the North Shore of Lake Pontchartrain between Hammond and Slidell? There’s no existing rail there.
Improve the existing CN line between Hammond and New Orleans along the western and southern shores of the lake. The vast majority of that route is uninhabited swamp, so it’ll be cheaper to acquire and improve.
This is explained by the rest of the video, but the short answer is that Jackson isn't part of the corridor. It was something I added on, so I'm certainly not going to design the entire corridor around it. The broader concept was using Interstate 12 as an east-west mainline, with a slower speed loop around the lake and to Baton Rouge given the difficulty of trying to get through New Orleans at speed.
These are great plans and it's a good analysis, unfortunately, the problem is conservatives in the south and Republican representatives, they would not allow it. They look at trains as too European and therefore socialist/communist. It's retarded and shameful, but it's where we're at as a country now.
Times will be achanging for much faster interciity HSR systems. Florida has semi-high speed Brightline. Texas, Georgia and North Carolina are very good candidates for HSR.
2:07 a+ pun
I didn't catch myself until after I had exported the video. :D
When you look at the reasons people say HSR would be in rregions instead of a network and you'll see why thiis project doesn't make any sense.
Nearly all of the eastern networks are able to be connected. I think of this in terms of the Interstate Highway System and my personal experience with it. I've driven some very long distances on the interstates and that would not have been possible had they not been so thoroughly connected. Some of those interstates travel through nothing and for very long stretches connect nothing all that special, but there they are because what you travel through isn't really the point most of the time. It's about connecting two end points. Now, if a person looking to travel by rail is not from this region, and they're not connected to this region, then very much so it wouldn't make much sense to them. But, connect this to where they are and that changes.
I think we’re numb to how much $1,000,000,000 actually gets us … $98 billion??
It's not just a thing being bought. It's an investment in infrastructure that will allow parts of the country to better urbanized. This would be one part. For a basic system east coast to Texas and Chicago,and then west coast, you're probably looking at $1 trillion. That's part of the purpose of these videos: to talk about costs semi-realistically. At the same time though, when we talk about upgrading an airport or adding a lane to a freeway for 10 miles at $5 billion, this isn't viewed as a huge amount anymore, like you said.
@@LucidStew Adding a lane to a freeway for 10 miles at $5 billion, you might as build a heavy rail or regional railway. At one train every 2 minutes that's the equivalent of 20 lanes!
I don’t see this actually happening.
why?
Moreee
next one will probably be about 3 weeks.
knowing that his video is to promote American railtravel, I do not understand the use of so many European train shots. Is there really no free US footage aviable? 09:25 can be shot in the USA though? (instead of England, now used). It is a simple shot of trains moving in/out of a station.
Why does it matter where it is? It's illustrative of a point.
Amtrak used to run between New Orleans and Jacksonville. That is the REAL Gulf Coast corridor. Georgia never touches the Gulf. Hint: Florida is the third most populous state (bigger than New York).
Second Hint: the US Dept of Transportation recently agreed to spend $550 MILLION for highway and bridge improvements on Interstate 10 in Mobile, Alabama (the largest federal infrastructure grant in Alabama history). Magically, Mobile has now voted to support Amtrak use of the train station and rail lines to reintroduce passenger rail service, while explicitly saying there was no quid pro quo between the two situations (laughter ensues ...).
The FRA defines the corridor as running to Atlanta.
unfortunately, the only map you need to focus on is population density. high speed rail only works when it travels along a highly dense corridor. based on that map, it would only make sense in along east coast and west cost. the most economic case would be to upgrade existing medium speed rail infrastructure so that one day, it can operate at high speed when the economic case arises. often people who argue for high speed rail forget is that the costs of maintaining trains and rail infrastructure exponentially increases above a certain speed. (fyi, high speed is generally between 110-185 mph) if you're talking medium speed (~110mph max), then yes there are plenty of opportunities to connect distant metropolitan cities.
Much like the interstate highway system, the more there is and the more cities that are connected, the more infill will make sense. Also, it must be considered that the south is growing quickly, and the current demographic situation will evolve by the time anything like this is built.
The economic case accounts for now, not 20-30 years from now or when ever its done. The speeds are suggestions based on current, proven technology. If maintenance costs are a concern, 10-15% slower is still reasonably competitive in the target range. The more important issue is the dedicated ROW and getting away from freight. These two factors severely limit passenger rail speed anywhere Amtrak doesn't own the ROW. If you're going to build dedicated passenger ROW, you may as well electrify it. Arguments over what route should have what speed in order to optimize them are fine by me.
@@LucidStew High speed rail and heavy freight rail are two entirely different beasts unlike roads. Medium speed (that's a max of like 110~120 mph) rail and heavy freight rail can run on the same track. Right of way is never going to allow high speed on the tracks designed for freight based on current technologies. I just assumed you knew what high speed meant. Your video should be titled, "Amtrak should purchase rail owned by freight train operators" and just remove any mention of 'high speed' to keep it simple.
Hey! Someone stole your Chicago hub video and edits on TH-cam!
Really? Whats it called?
n/m, I found it. thanks for the heads up.
Np I reported it multiple times hope you can get it copyrighted
@@Sosski I left a comment on it and now the video is gone, so maybe they took it down.
It's depressing that it's still "miles" in the US...
At least time isn't metric as well, then there'd be a real issue. Thankfully distance conversion is easy. It's things like acre-feet that really go off the rails
But...we think, plan, and work using inches, feet, and miles. AND IT'S NOT A PROBLEM.
@@michaeljones7927 Except that the entire rest of the world uses metric. But hey we're Americans what do we care about the rest of the world? - And besides: how many feet in the mile??? Do you have to look that up or do you know it by heart?
110-150mph is NOT HSR
why not?
Your wrong and right. high speed rail is considered anything from 120+ miles per hour.
By comparible international standards true HSR should be at least 250km for most of the line & more like 300km in fastest sections
@@paulbadics3500 I have never seen that as a standard anywhere. Most common I've seen is top speed of 250kph on new track and 200kph on existing. For convenience, this usually translates to 150mph and 125mph in Imperial.
Metra 😂😂 its MARTA
see the pinned comment
Obviously, it's impossible to complete CAHSR within five years at thtis point even with unlimited cash...
will be a short video then 😄
You mean the Central Valley part or the whole thing? Not even G-d himself could get the whole thing done in 5 years, and our leaders here are very, very, very far away from Godliness.
With unlimited cash, and repealing "Buy America" policy, it can be done in 5 years.
Unlimited cash can do a lot, and it might help you build more of it in parallel, but after a certain point you will become limited by:
- Physics
- Supply Chain weakness
- labor market issues
TBMs only dig so fast, their is only so much concrete made every day (although the more complicated stuff would probably be an issue first, 800A breakers have a 1year lead time), and there are only so many people qualified to design, approve, inspect, and commission this system.
With unlimited cash it might be possible, but the bill would easily be in the trillions, not to mention the side effects of what you would do to the supply chain. With unlimited cash it still would not be worth it to rush the project to completion in only 5 years.
Just stop it. CAHSR will go down as one of the biggest corrupt boondoggles this country has ever seen. And it will not change the politics or California one single bit. Fortunately, there are at least some private companies that are trying to get HSR done in a realistic matrix
Completely opposite of what HSR stands for: too many stops, utilizing existing right of way, connect directly to other transit system, connect to international airports. Because of high number of stations, people will assume and expect that will bring more revenue but it will be completely opposite. HSR is not and should not operate like freight railroad where it can reach every small communities to deliver goods and services. All the HSR projects are for and should be about connecting major metropolitan cities. To acheive this, the system must:
1. Have limited amount of stations (reduces travel time)
2. Separated and away from airports (to avoid the huge crowd, congestion, and other traffic problems)
(Does anyone see NY Penn Station & JFK Int'l Airport together, Chicago Union Station & Chicago O'Hare Int'l Airport together, or Los Angeles Union Station & Los Angeles Int'l Airport together?)
3. Tunnel should be an option to make sure the train travels staight line as possible
What happened to FL when GA doesn't even touch the Gulf of Mexico?
To complete the HSR in CA, hire more people and get them off the streets and couches and give them those construction jobs.
8 main line stations for 892 miles of track. How many would you have? The major cities are Houston and Atlanta. Maybe New Orleans if you're generous. If you only stop there, you may as well fly. Nothing stops a line from operating both local and express trains. As shown it would only connect to 3 airports. Tunnelling is too expensive to use regularly and the vast majority of this route can be done at-grade.
Florida isn't part of this corridor. The tracks in Florida were damaged in 2006 during Hurricane Katrina and have no be reconnected to these service lines.
Drives me crazy that people never think about local and express service when building an HSR corridor.
For that reason I am in favor of CAHSR going through the Central Valley. You can always run non stop trains but you can’t change the right of way once it’s built.
>on stops
The Tokaido Shinkansen literally has 17 stations across ~320 miles of track. Most trains are the Nozomi express which stops at 6 stations. All stations get the local Kodama every ~30 mins and the Limited Hikari fills pads out the schedule.
>on airports
The TGV connects to Charles De Gaulle airport because people across France/the EU travel to Paris to catch a flight.
@@Whatneeds2bsaidExactly, I've taken the TGV direct from Geneve via Lyon to CDG to fly to JFK. Much more convenient than TGV to Gare de Lyon & then RER to CDG. Also, flown into FRK & jumpd straight onto a ICE service to Berlin. Lots of other egs. Very common in Europe to use HSR services direct to/from airports.
@@LucidStewSeems your HSR cost estimates outside of California are about $110 miiillion per mile. Thus far it seems CAHSR on flat valley land is about $200 million per mile. What would you range guestimate it would cost per mile for expensive tunnel work?
never going to ger it done Cost of Labour.
Wrong. Alabama's the poorest most depressed most rural state in the united states
What about Muscle Shoals on the Gulf Coast?
@@davidjackson7281 that's a really nice quiet city and clean. I could live there
@@highlymedicated2438A lot of great music was produced out of Muscle Shoals' FAME studios back in the day. A favorite song was Boz Skaggs 'Loan Me A Dime' with Duane Allman on guitar. Apparently Huntsville 'Rocket City' is a nice town too.
Alabama
99.1 people/sq mile
median household income 52k
population growth 2010-2020 5.1%
Mississippi
63.5 people/sq mile
median household income 43.6k
population growth 2010-2020 -0.2%
Louisiana
106.9 people/sq mile
median household income 50k
population growth 2010-2020 2.7%
Always thought Muscle Shoals was on the coast like Mobile. Boy was I wrong. It's in the opposite direction in the northwest corner.
Sorry, but I think this one is a pass. It's too much money and not enough benefit.
I like it. I think it really opens up Louisiana and Mississippi. Would be even better connecting from Mobile into Florida. The south is growing fast. Better to get the infrastructure in before its more expensive.
@LucidStew seems like it would make much more sense after building out high-speed rail services in Houston and Atlanta.
If only there was a case study on developing high-speed rail in low density region as a precursor to connecting distant large cities.
@@gregory596 I can agree on that. I don't think you'd want to lead with this. Probably after a Southeast corridor build out and Texas triangle substantially complete.
@@LucidStewAgreed.
Why not route the train to Union Passenger Terminal in the CBD? of New Orleans?
I had two reasons for that: 1) there isn't room for double-tracked electric in the freight ROW there or at the terminal. 2) its a terminus and it needs to be a through station or have a capable wye. Again, no room for that in addition to existing freight rail.
I would have very much liked to put a station closer to downtown.
@@LucidStew And that's not going to happen because we have a sports complex and a god damned freeway right there!