2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session 2013 special election arts arts and culture author ballot measures bomb books budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration international internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal portland mayor president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes television terrorism theater third parties timber payments transportation union university of oregon violence washington water wildfire women

I think we need to define some terminology here.
High Speed Rail (HSR) according to the Department of Transportation is any rail service, freight or passenger that runs in excess of the current maximum ruling speed of  79 mph.  The section of the North east corridor between D.C. and New York is such an example.
In Europe, HSR refers to passenger rail travel above 135 mph.

I agree with “oldhack“ that U.S. style HSR is well achievable here with a limited investment in the current infrastructure.  There is no need for massive injections of new technology, magnetic levitation, or rocket engines. This was the flawed approach of British Rail in the 1960’s and it was a stuffing disaster.  However, while millions were wasted on ultra light weight, tiling cars and marginal electrification schemes, a small band of locomotive engineers came up with the simple idea of running the diesel multiple units with power cars at each end that have sustained rail service recovery and constant growth in Britain for over 40yrs. Today, Britain is importing its tilting car technology from Italy!

“Sleepy’s” comment on local DMU service is a good one. Once a core corridor service at reasonable speeds (say 2.5 hrs for Portland to Seattle) is in place, the demand for local connecting services grows and can be financed.  In Britain for example, the association of rail operating companies (not the government) is proposing to open 103 new stations this year. Town and City authorities plead to be on the list and offer to give land for the construction of facilities. The companies are taking this action because it increases revenues, not because they are public spirited.

(However, lets not get into a side controversy over the WES DMUs. A subject best left buried.)

posted 2 years, 3 months ago
view in context

So you want to build a (high speed passenger) railroad?

It sounds easy - after all, many other countries have managed to complete the task - but in reality, high speed passenger rail (HSR) is a complex melding of a number of factors. I’ve been a passionate advocate of HSR in various countries for 40yrs  and I’ve found the following to be universally true:

Factor 1. People.
You need lots of people and their desire to travel from A to B. World wide experience has shown that HSR is commercially cheaper than air travel over distances up to 900mi and can be operated without subsidy.  In practice for the North West, that means connecting the city populations of Vancouver BC, Seattle/Tacoma and Portland.  These people (i.e. the public) have to be prepared to support the cause to completion. The Federal Railroad Administration, the current state transportation boards and Amtrak are not included in these ranks.

Factor 2. Route
Straight, flat track with the minimum of curves and bridges. For the North West this translates to the current track along I-5 corridor where the major obstacles are the Columbia River and the curves in Tacoma. Improving this route for HSR operation would involve removing many grade crossings, requiring political will and segregation of freight traffic, requiring the cooperation of the Class A railroads.

Factor 3. Track
HSR can only be run at speed an continuously welded rail (CWR) on a track bed of high quality. Experience with this type of construction is limited in the U.S. and would probably need to be imported along with the technology for regular inspection.

Factor 4. High Speed Train sets
Fortunately the world is awash with first generation high speed train sets. These can be purchased for carry away prices and continue to give many years of reliable service while the U.S. ramps up to produce domestic equipment.  Problems with these sets include the construction of platforms to the correct height and Amtrak’s reluctance to accept fixed train sets.  The insistence that this country must have new, exciting and unproven technology is a major obstacle to HSR development. The reality is that cast offs from more advanced countries are perfectly adequate.  

In summary HSR is economically viable in the North West. It needs political will and completely new and enlightened thinking in our federal and state authorities.  It is not a “boondoggle” or an endless drain on government resources, but it does need a fresh approach and oversight of capital projects. The Oregon and Washington state governments should seize the opportunities presented by the current administration (and the reluctance of other states) to reinvent their processes and invest in an infrastructure development that will benefit the region for a hundred years.

posted 2 years, 3 months ago
view in context