how to leverage an American high-speed rail network.

 

I wanted to toss out some Ideas on how to increase the profitability of high Speed rail in the US.

 

The differences between US Rail and Rail in the rest of the world are immense the cost.

 

America is far more dependent on Rail for Freight than Europe.

America has an almost entirely non electrified Rail network, depending on Diesel for fueling Rail.

America rail system covers distances not covered by any other country.

 

New thinking about deploying HSR in the US.

 

the cost of deployment are extremely high and unlikely to be fully funded purely by government grants, if possible to use government backed low to zero interest bonds to develop how to pay those loans back ASAP.

 

I propose 3 things

1. Creation of a HSR standard For north America that better meets the needs of our very-very new network.

2. HSR standard the Uses all modern technology (positive Train Control) to allow mixed Use of Electrified Freight and HSR Passenger Train in the same corridors.

3. Leveraging New right-of ways to increase system revenue.

 

1. The creation of a US HSR standard would aid in the deployment of HSR rail in the US.

Standardizing design, operation, and deployment, much like the FAA does for Airlines would do wonders to reduce risks of HSR in the US. Also increases the economies of scale for contractors, train operators, designers, etc.  most importantly it would prevent the fragmentation of standards that are bound to happen when HSR systems are developed on a regional level.

 

2. Allow Freight use on HSR lines.

Because of the expense of deploying a HSR it makes sense to look at ways to increase utilization of the network, due to the distances between US cities the frequency of Use will be much lower than that of EU trunk lines.  According to MHSRA study, you would be looking at a max of 46 or 23 trains in each direction per day 18 hours per day.  It should be possible on most lines to fit in electrified Freight on the corridors, much like Amtrak today, with the difference being passenger trains would always have priority over freight. 

The advantages over the current right of ways, freight currently uses are:

 

Speed- HSR lines are designed for much greater speed, they will not cruise at 250 mph. but higher than the diesel trains could travel today.

Lower cost- Electrified rail is a more efficient way to move freight, the costs of electricity would be more stable than that of diesel.  the operating cost of electric is less than diesel, most of the maintenance cost is in the shared ROW not the locomotives.

Less congestion - all new ROW means less congestion on the lines than existing conventional rail lines. They would bypass major cities of the most part

 

The preferred freight type would be inter-modal, container traffic, with connections either to existing inter modal facilities which are usually outside of major cities or with connections to non-electrified Freight Rail.  Due to the economic benefits of Double stack containerized freight trains, I would look to move the catenary higher like they are doing in India, to allow for electrified double stack freight trains.  The technology exists today to use HSR passenger rail on 7.45 meter height catenary, vs the conventional 5.5 meters above the rail catenary.  By moving the wire you allow for future double deck passenger trains, because all next-generation HSR train designs use self-propelled cars, raising the Wires allows for double deck trains to be used.

 

http://www.rdso.indianrailways.gov.in/works/uploads/File/Railway%20_Gazette_Double_Stack%20Container%281%29.pdf

 

Leveraging new ROW for new Revenue: The Areas these new ROW will be constructed open an opportunity for HSR to share these ROWs with Telecoms and new high tension lines to strengthen the nation's electrical grid.  There may also be opportunities for gas pipelines and other below ground utilities that could be sold at a profit.

It important to not simply see the network as only a way to move people faster but as a opportunity to our national infrastructure in general.  Look for as many ways to make money from this investment not just passenger fares.

 

the unknowns would be how much load would be too much for HSR corridors, and add too much to the maintenance costs of the system.

 

what are the restrictions for mixed use, Freight, and passenger traffic, It ought to be possible because It is common in the EU to operate medium and low speed passenger traffic on High-speed corridors.

 

Near term, for regional networks like the North East corridor, and Chicago hub you may not need to aggressively seek other uses for the Corridors, but for longer inter-regional routes like Chicago to NYC, or Chicago to the West coast.  It become more important to make sure fleet compatibility and maximize Revenue beyond passenger rail.  Either way the current position of US passenger Rail means we can afford to look outside the Box, and do things differently than the rest of the world.

I'm of the opinion that there isn't one answer to high speed rail in the US.  It is such a huge complex undertaking based on regional needs, political whims, and economic conditions that I don't see how a US policy would be supported or funded.  The failings I see here off the bat are that there is no discerning the levels of high speed rail.  I believe current policy is that at track speed above 125mph rail and freight must be separate.  U.S. freight trains are quite heavy, the heaviest in the world in fact.  I don't think you want these lumbering double stacked behemoths putting excess strain on track designed for over 150mph.  Hopefully the passenger high speed rail trains are much lighter. 

  My preference of a train policy in the US is to add the appropriate level of high speed to the corridors that need high speed.  We need to bring the rest of the nation up to speed on regular 79-110mph train travel first.  I don't foresee bullet trains leaving Atlanta any time soon..  We should be striving to link all cities in the US that area over 150k people and under 70 miles away from each other first with trains, whatever kind of train.

 

I'm of the opinion that there isn't one answer to high speed rail in the US.  It is such a huge complex undertaking based on regional needs, political whims, and economic conditions that I don't see how a US policy would be supported or funded.  The failings I see here off the bat are that there is no discerning the levels of high speed rail.  I believe current policy is that at track speed above 125mph rail and freight must be separate.  U.S. freight trains are quite heavy, the heaviest in the world in fact.  I don't think you want these lumbering double stacked behemoths putting excess strain on track designed for over 150mph.  Hopefully the passenger high speed rail trains are much lighter. 

  My preference of a train policy in the US is to add the appropriate level of high speed to the corridors that need high speed.  We need to bring the rest of the nation up to speed on regular 79-110mph train travel first.  I don't foresee bullet trains leaving Atlanta any time soon..  We should be striving to link all cities in the US that area over 150k people and under 70 miles away from each other first with trains, whatever kind of train.

 

 

 

I agree, the greatest issue is to get speeds above 95mph requires dedicated ROW, more importantly require electrification.  pushing for the electrification of not just passenger line but also Fright lines greatly reduce the cost of expanding passenger Rail.

 

Our country unlike Europe or Japan does not have places with existing electrification. so all of our lines must have new construction from the hinterland to the center of cities, which are the most expensive per mile to build.  if We can make HSR part of wider effort to electrify freight rail, you could sacrifice the speed of dedicated HSR corridors, for the greater access that electrifying existing Fright rail corridors would give you.

There is a lot of talk about the future electrification of freight rail in the US as a means to reduce oil dependency and speed of freight travel in the Future.  the side benefit of this would be to open those routes to high speed trains at a albeit slower speeds, the benefit would be  to reduce the costs of bring a HSR network online.

http://www.theoildrum.com/node/4301

http://www.joc.com/rail-intermodal/special-report-electrifying-freight-rail

http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/Articles%202005/SuperiorRail.pdf

the key to A Us brand of electrification is to set our Catenary wires high enough to not interfere with the diesel Fright trains of today.  that means A height greater than that of a double stack trains.  If you create that standard you could operate Diesel trains and electrified trains on the same rails.  also eliminate the need for flyovers between different modes of trains.

the way I see it there will be  demand for < 80 MPH trains that can operate on non-electrified ROWs.  the issue is to make the leap to 150 and higher require dedicated ROW, there is a 5-10 % premium to go from 150 to 220mph operation.

bluntly if you go high speed it makes sense to go up to 250mph.

http://www.midwesthsr.org/sites/default/files/pdf/MHSRA_2011_Economic_Study_Technical_Report.pdf

 

To the appropriateness of fright on HSR line, it happens in Europe today. The axle design limits on the TGV are 17 Tonnes per axle, the limit for US Freight is 22.5 tonnes per axle, The thing higher speeds load the Rails some case are even more  than Freight does.  Even If you could  not run  Double Stack  Freight on HSR lines you could definitely run Freight after hours at lower speeds (80mph) and Still be extremely competitive with existing Freight lines.  especially for parcel services like UPS, USPS, etc., it increases the overall capacity of freight along the corridor. 

For me the opportunity is to get big rail, (BNSF, CSX, etc.)  to buy into electrification, You may be able to seek federal loans of grants to electrify rail, as a national transportation national  security issue, in exchange for allowing more passenger traffic and PTC on the electrified lines.   

GE can build Dual mode freight locomotives that can operate on diesel and high voltage Electric.