Ohio Intercity Rail (3C+D Line, etc)

January 19, 201114 yr

I heard so many people quoting the 39 mph train line. I think that in itself turned a lot of people off even though it wasnt true.

January 20, 201114 yr

The Nation's Outlook on Trains

Bullet trains may be sidetracked, but not commuter rail.

Peter Harkness | January 2011

Why does this country have such a problem with trains that carry people?

It isn’t just the intercity rail system, which is something of a joke everywhere but the Northeast Corridor -- and even there it’s a poor performer by international standards. But it’s also the aging “heavy” rail mass transit systems in cities like Atlanta, Chicago and Washington, D.C., which are facing huge bills for deferred maintenance, forcing service cutbacks and fare increases -- even as ridership has risen to levels not seen in more than 50 years. Light commuter rail has caught on in numerous cities, but there are problems in securing rights of way and controlling costs. Oddly, the bright spot is freight. The nation’s railways don’t handle passengers well, but they do a bang-up job hauling stuff -- much better than most other countries. Most passenger trains must travel on lines owned by thriving railroads, contributing to the congestion many commuter rail systems are experiencing.

The Obama administration is more sympathetic to rail transit than its predecessors. It proposed a historic expansion of the rail passenger system, including building a national high-speed network of bullet trains with an initial $8 billion down payment in stimulus money (with more promised) to a few states for some modest projects to get things going.

January 20, 201114 yr

Is America Finally Ready for High Speed Rail?

http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/sb/ra0111/#/58

January 20, 201114 yr

Just a gripe, but why some of these maps show only connecting routes to get to Detroit is annoying to me.

Why do you have to go to Cleveland or Chicago just to get to Detroit? That takes you hours out of the way. There are quite a few miles of track that run parallel to 75 as you drive north towards Lima/Toledo.

Also - didn't there used to be a train that went between Detroit and points in the South at one point in time?

To the person who was talking about the Chicago to Quincy and Carbondale inclusion. I wonder if that is because of the existing Illinois routes on Amtrak?

January 20, 201114 yr

Because most of Detroit's travel is east-west. Check out the America 2050 report.

The last time a passenger train service from Detroit went south of Toledo was in 1971. There were actually two of them: One was a single Baltimore & Ohio round-trip schedule to/from Cincinnati. The other was a single Norfolk & Western round-trip schedule to/from St. Louis via Fort Wayne. Most of Detroit's trains then, as now, go west to Chicago or east through Canada to Toronto.

"In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck

January 20, 201114 yr

^ Detroit>Cincinnati>Atlanta>Miami along I-75 makes lots of sense to me. Chicago>Atlanta can use the same route since there already exists the connection to Cincinnati.

It seems either Louisville or Cincinnati would be Chicago's logical connection to the south. The other way to bring Detroit into Chicago's path to the south would be Detroit>Toledo>Fort Wayne>Indianapolis>Louisville.

I don't know how this all fits into the existing track layout.

January 21, 201114 yr

Just spotted this blog item. This is why, even though I prefer rail, a quality intercity bus option (like Megabus) is the next best thing.....

When Major Cities Get Disconnected

January 9, 2011

Aside from Greyhound (which is hardly the way anyone wants to travel), there is no rail line connecting Pittsburgh to Detroit, or Cleveland to Columbus, nor will there be thanks to Ohio's new governor. Pittsburgh does connect to Cleveland via Amtrak's Capitol Limited, once per day, and in the middle of the night.

The implication is more than just my inability to take day-trips during my visits home. The real problem is that, for all the talk of megaregions and cooperative metro areas, how can it be truly successful if cities that are so close to each other are so disconnected?

Imagine if there were no long distance transportation options between Washington and Philadelphia, or New York and Boston. These cities are roughly the same distance from each other as Cleveland and Pittsburgh, but the transportation options are at opposite ends of the spectrum.

January 25, 201114 yr

Stops like Crestline amounted to speed bumps on a project whose main weakness was speed. It wasn't really 3C... it was 3C+D, which made sense, but it was also 3C+D+c+r+s and whatever else. Each stop made less and less sense, the more clear it became that travel time between the major markets was a critical issue. Sorry Crestline.

January 25, 201114 yr

Stops like Crestline amounted to speed bumps on a project whose main weakness was speed. It wasn't really 3C... it was 3C+D, which made sense, but it was also 3C+D+c+r+s and whatever else. Each stop made less and less sense, the more clear it became that travel time between the major markets was a critical issue. Sorry Crestline.

Kindly inform me: How can speed be the weakness for a project that offered the nation's third-fastest average speed for a new-start rail project? Isn't it funny how the other slower projects nationwide somehow managed to either attract ridership in excess of what 3C promised, and/or are getting their rail traffic choke points (for both freight and passenger) addressed with federal funds to offer increasingly higher average speeds? Boy, we sure are smart here in Ohio to refuse that bad 3C train because it would travel faster than all but two of 12 intercity rail services started since 1980.

That, my friend, was the last chance of seeing a new intercity passenger rail service in Ohio for many, many years. If we are lucky, and if the Congressional Tea Partiers aren't successful in eliminating passenger rail services nationwide, we may get a minimal expansion of train service here in Ohio. All Aboard Ohio is going to try for such an expansion later this year by advocating a restructuring of existing services, but it will involve only a single daily train between Cleveland and New York state destinations. And that will be extremely hard to get.

I don't think you and others realize how hard it is to get expanded passenger rail service, especially in a state that is not willing to pay for it. I've been at this since 1983 and I've seen only one new train service in Ohio during that time. You just lost your best chance at it for at least the next five years.

"In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck

January 25, 201114 yr

No doubt it would have attracted ridership. But the issue was attracting popular and political support to get it built. Previous Amtrak projects elsewhere are not relevant benchmarks in this market. Those have nothing to do with the travel options presented to Ohioans in 2010. It's unfortunate that the rigid federal planning structure would not allow us to respond to market concerns and cut stops to increase the average speed upfront.

January 25, 201114 yr

No doubt it would have attracted ridership. But the issue was attracting popular and political support to get it built. Previous Amtrak projects elsewhere are not relevant benchmarks in this market. Those have nothing to do with the travel options presented to Ohioans in 2010. It's unfortunate that the rigid federal planning structure would not allow us to respond to market concerns and cut stops to increase the average speed upfront.

Everyone has to deal with those rigid federal planning requirements. That's not the problem. The problem is Ohio has low self-esteem and is unwilling to accept risk as a condition for growth. And as I've said a million times, you cannot grow without risk.

"In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck

January 25, 201114 yr

No doubt it would have attracted ridership. But the issue was attracting popular and political support to get it built. Previous Amtrak projects elsewhere are not relevant benchmarks in this market. Those have nothing to do with the travel options presented to Ohioans in 2010. It's unfortunate that the rigid federal planning structure would not allow us to respond to market concerns and cut stops to increase the average speed upfront.

Cutting stops would barely decrease the average speed. The average speed was mostly brought down by bad sections of track (and single-tracking bottlenecks), mainly in the Cincinnati area. Adding stops is actually a plus as far as many voters are concerned (at least to a point of diminishing returns, which I don't believe the plan had hit). Each stop adds about 2-3 minutes total to the trip, yet it opens up access to the train for many people that wouldn't have been likely to ride it previously (if they had to drive many miles to the nearest stop).

Besides, I believe this train could have traveled 500 MPH and the voters would have still shot it down. The political climate was slanted towards people aligning themselves with Republicans, as all of the recent elections have shown, and most Republicans want roads, not trains (or at least they have since Obama said he wanted trains).

It's just politics as usual holding us back. The problem is with the system, not the 3C plan.

January 25, 201114 yr

jam40jeff I completely agree with you. I feel that if this was a seperate issue on the ballot that it would have been better informed to people and they would have been able to make the right decision. There was just too much republican alignment with the "we dont like trains" mentality that it was impossible to get done, even though all signs pointed otherwise.

January 25, 201114 yr

Stops like Crestline amounted to speed bumps on a project whose main weakness was speed. It wasn't really 3C... it was 3C+D, which made sense, but it was also 3C+D+c+r+s and whatever else. Each stop made less and less sense, the more clear it became that travel time between the major markets was a critical issue. Sorry Crestline.

I couldn't disagree with you, more. First, these stops take a few minutes at most. Hardly enough to make a dent in the overall speed.

Second, most metro-{Cleveland, Columbus, Cincinnati} residents don't live near the train station and making them drive or take other transportation into city center would be a waste if a stop along the way will do. I routinely take the Amtrak between DC and Pittsburgh and I work in Chantilly. Rockville and Harper's Ferry stops make it possible for people who live and work in the Metro DC area NOT have to travel to Union Station (which I love, but it isn't exactly convenient, especially since they decided not to make the Metro come out here when they first built the system).

Assuming that the majority of your riders would want to go from downtown A to downtown B is a pretty big (and, IMHO, fallacious) assumption. In my own experience, the destination may be downtown but the origin is often otherwise.

In fact, I live along the original Pittsburgh, Ft. Wayne and Chicago Railroad (Pennsylvania RR). five doors down from the old train station (now a VFW). When I don't take the train, one of the reasons is that it is too inconvenient for to get a car, drive downtown, and park, yet the Capitol Limited passes my house twice a day (and there is still a tunnel under the tracks).

Access and convenience are as or more important than speed, in my experience.

By the way, I got an investment newsletter, today. The lead article:

The Four Ways to Profit From $150 Oil

By Dr. Kent Moors, Ph.D., Contributing Writer, Money Morning

Crude oil is about to skyrocket in price.

In fact, I believe we'll be looking at $150-a-barrel oil by mid-summer.

For most U.S. consumers, higher oil will equate to higher expenses, and a bigger drain on the household budget.

MOD EDIT: Added link to article in title.

January 25, 201114 yr

No doubt it would have attracted ridership. But the issue was attracting popular and political support to get it built. Previous Amtrak projects elsewhere are not relevant benchmarks in this market. Those have nothing to do with the travel options presented to Ohioans in 2010. It's unfortunate that the rigid federal planning structure would not allow us to respond to market concerns and cut stops to increase the average speed upfront.

Everyone has to deal with those rigid federal planning requirements. That's not the problem. The problem is Ohio has low self-esteem and is unwilling to accept risk as a condition for growth. And as I've said a million times, you cannot grow without risk.

That is an extremely offensive and sanctimonious sentiment, and therefore a horrible marketing strategy. Or, forget strategy--it's simply a horrible assumption on which to base any marketing strategy, or to explain any failure of marketing strategy. I could just as easily spout equally sanctimonious drivel that Ohio rejected the 3C plan because it has high self-esteem. You can get away with venting that kind of sentiment here, since this forum is one of the virtual temples of the train cult, but to the extent you seriously believe that, ask yourself if that extremely unflattering sentiment might not have been tempering your public advocacy efforts notwithstanding any attempts you might have made to soften your disdain in public.

In a similar vein, I hardly think that insufficient appetite for risk in economic development characterizes a new gubernatorial administration that has proposed to privatize the Ohio Department of Development, among other things. In addition, increasing passenger rail travel options would in many ways be a plan to reduce risk (both because of lower cost per passenger-mile when trains reach a certain capacity) and for simple diversification reasons; it would have been much better to market the 3C as a way of reducing exposure to sudden gasoline price spikes. Ohio's electorate is indeed somewhat temperamentally risk-averse, but it would definitely be possible to come up with a marketing strategy playing into that mentality.

Sometimes the simplest explanation is the best: Ohio rejected the 3C plan largely because it elected a governor with significant personal antipathy to the project in an anti-incumbent wave year. Most Ohioans probably really wouldn't care one way or the other about the project. There were certainly other factors in play as well, ones that are much more legitimate and less patronizing than "low self-esteem" among those who felt differently than you, including the perfectly justified fear of Ohioans (and citizens of many other states) of ever-expanding federal spending (not that the rejection of those dollars actually reduced federal spending, of course--I'm well aware that the decision to reject the grant was materially contrary to Ohio's interests).

January 25, 201114 yr

jam40jeff I completely agree with you. I feel that if this was a seperate issue on the ballot that it would have been better informed to people and they would have been able to make the right decision. There was just too much republican alignment with the "we dont like trains" mentality that it was impossible to get done, even though all signs pointed otherwise.

You are forgetting the 3C project was already funded with $400-million in 100% federal dollars. What would you have put on a ballot?....and why?

As for the opposition, as close as the election was (less than 2% margin), if Gov. Strickland had stepped up to the plate and fought for his own passenger rail initiative like he should have done, we might be talking differently today. Instead, he went silent until after the election was over and only then did he speak up....too little too late. The opponents arguments were full of holes you could drive a locomotive through. But they kept throwing curveball after curveball and the Governor just stood there without taking a swing, as did the rest of the statewide Democratic candidates.

Despite that, passenger rail will happen in Ohio and it may come sooner if $150-a-barrell oil hits the market (as seanmcl rightly points out). It may take a crisis to embarrass our new Governor and state legislators into taking action.... but an opportunity like Ohio had with the $400-million was a once in a lifetime chance.

January 25, 201114 yr

^^ I don't think that's patronizing, as it implies Ohioans shouldn't have low self-esteem, which is implicitly praising Ohioans.

January 25, 201114 yr

jam40jeff I completely agree with you. I feel that if this was a seperate issue on the ballot that it would have been better informed to people and they would have been able to make the right decision. There was just too much republican alignment with the "we dont like trains" mentality that it was impossible to get done, even though all signs pointed otherwise.

You are forgetting the 3C project was already funded with $400-million in 100% federal dollars. What would you have put on a ballot?....and why?

.... but an opportunity like Ohio had with the $400-million was a once in a lifetime chance.

I dont mean I would have actually put it on the ballot. I just mean as a seperate issue the facts would not have been clouded by political party. If it were to have been straight issue-based, I think it would have ended with more support for 3C.. but since the Rep's were seeking something to stand against, the 3C got more negative press than it deserved.

I think you are right about the last sentence, too.. *shudder* ugh.

January 25, 201114 yr

Gramarye, And I'm beyond offended. I'm sick with the rural and exurban apartheidists who are destroying this state because they have been destroying its cities for 40 years. How many times have you heard Ohio doesn't have the population density for rail? If that isn't low-esteem (if not pathetic ignorance), then please tell me what it is. I've heard too many times that Ohio is a rural state, even though it is in top-10 in population density, and has the same population density as France. But the anti-urban apartheid sees Ohio as a white, rural/exurban, stepford-wives Bible-thumping state not because it's what it is, but because it's what they want it to become. And if you repeat something often enough, they start to believe it.

And if that wasn't enough of a shot between the eyes, the here's an even more damning statement... I believe that Ohio's failure to accept the 3C project is instead indicative of:

> a horde of highway zombies (forget rail cultists!) who believe having 91 percent of Ohioans driving is not good enough (the fact we spend 98% of ODOT's budget on roads is clear that they are pushing this social and highway monopolistic agenda on us, and anyone who doesn't drive does not yet count as a human being who is deserving of access to jobs, education, health care, etc.),

> ignorance of worldwide transition among civilized nations away from roadway investment toward rail and transit (are we that much smarter than the civilized nations of the world who understand the difference between access vs. mobility, or quality-of-life vs. quality-of-business-climate, or the value of time vs. speed),

> general ignorance of demographic changes affecting Ohio (the two largest demographic groups in Ohio are driving less yet Ohio wants to spend more on roads -- now there's a recipe for economic success, retaining residents, and ensuring future economic and political stability!), and

> suicidal blindness toward an onrushing energy crisis so potentially destructive that The Great Recession may be merely The Great Prelude (Ohioans who deny 3C funding are akin to standing on the Titanic because that big, ostentatious ship was a lot more intoxicating than those lifeboats like 3C now look, but we'll see who would have had the more comfortable watercraft by morning).

Given this, I don't find it offensive what these blind/ignorant/stupid/crazy people have done with 3C and are threatening to do with the Cincinnati Streetcar. Instead, I find it criminal. So here's a new slogan for them: "Ohio. It deserves to be dying."

"In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck

January 25, 201114 yr

The sad fact is that most Americans (not just Ohioans) are simply ill-educated about economics. $7 million dollars a year sounds like alot of money (in reality, about $0.58/capita; less than a can of soda) especially when we are talking about something that hasn't even been built, yet. And that, on top of a political tone which saw "hope" turned into "fear", simply made that seem worse. The Republicans (I won't call them fiscal conservatives because they aren't), were able to turn the "fear" of runaway spending and increased taxes into a vote for the status quo.

I wonder how many of those who believed that 58 cents/year is a bad investment pay $29 or more/month to get cable TV?

January 25, 201114 yr

^^ serenity

January 25, 201114 yr

Serenity vv

"In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck

January 25, 201114 yr

It's true that many Americans, including intelligent, college-educated Americans, lack an understanding of basic economic principles. One should be careful about always assuming that the ignorant one are always everyone other than ourselves, though. I have twenty-five hours of formal undergraduate economics education, another three at the professional school level, and some various other professional exposure to law & economics concepts, and still maintain a healthy professional skepticism about my own grasp of the subject (and an even greater skepticism of those who can't engage in the same self-interrogation).

However, the fact that average Americans are not economists shouldn't automatically spell doom for rail projects or guarantee dollars to road projects.

January 25, 201114 yr

However, the fact that average Americans are not economists shouldn't automatically spell doom for rail projects or guarantee dollars to road projects.

But a basic understanding of the principles that underly the economy is critical to understanding what our politicians are doing in the name of "recovery". As a small business owner, I understand the need for capital, especially when business is bad. Sure, you can cut costs to a point, but you can't cut costs to zero and still be in business. To stay in business and grow, you need capital.

Now capital is not easy to get right now, in spite of the fact that businesses are sitting on loads of it. Government becomes the last resort. And here is the irony. As government spends less, business becomes more uncertain.

Consider the scuttled plan to build DMU's in Ohio (as well as Forest City's scuttled plans for development). When the Feds were going spend $400 million, other businesses were willing to spend to get a piece of the pie. When Ohio refused the funds, private capital walked away.

My prediction is that at no time during Kasich's administration will the private economic investment in Ohio will come close to what was forecast for the 3-C.

Businesses understand that assuming short term debt is often times necessary for long term growth. As long as your projections for revenue are reasonable, assuming risk becomes reasonable (and, more importantly, not assuming risk can spell doom for your enterprise). People understood that too, at one time. Your house, essentially, put you in debt but the investment appeared safe. The reason that it wasn't, for many, is not a reason to abandon the principle. Governments can run deficits for long periods of time; people can't and they shouldn't expect their goverment to behave as they would.

January 25, 201114 yr

Of course, 3-C wasn't killed by average Americans lacking knowledge in economics. It was killed by a Wall Street banker, who ought to know better.

January 25, 201114 yr

Of course, 3-C wasn't killed by average Americans lacking knowledge in economics. It was killed by a Wall Street banker, who ought to know better.

Very likely he did. One of the interesting thing about this last election was how often the electorate was lied to in order to play to their prejudices. And we can't exclude the power of lobbies who have a lot more to give a campaign than the citizens of Crestline.

January 26, 201114 yr

If Ohio democrats had turned out for the midterms, we'd have both Strickland and a more favorable legislature, and we'd have 3C. 3C should have been the perfect wedge issue to motivate democratic voters but that didn't happen. Pro-rail liberal democrats didn't get behind 3C. That's why we don't have it, not because of lies or lobbyists. Most republican voters were already against it on a conceptual level. What was any lobbyist going to tell them that they didn't already believe? But democrats, who were perfectly aware of 3C and Strickland's support of it, were not motivated to turn out. This wasn't a issue of countering the other side, this was an issue of rallying the base.

The next democratic candidate for governor needs to be armed with a rail proposal that will motivate rank and file democrats. For the most part, those voters don't live in Crestline or Sharonville. But thousands upon thousands live in the northern tier of the state. If getting passenger rail into Cincinnati is such a logistical and political conundrum, then screw it. At least initially. Develop a plan that provides maximum service to the areas most likely to assure its political success. That means serving Toledo and Youngstown before Cincinnati, and certainly before serving every right-leaning car-dependent small town along the way. It probably means serving Columbus too, but only in a way that's competitive with driving down 71. And that pretty much means non-stop.

January 26, 201114 yr

Even with Strickland re-elected and the House remaining Democratic, Obama still would have pulled back the funds for 3C because a needed supermajority vote by the State Controlling Board wasn't likely. Please read my earlier message on this subject.

And to deny the role of lobbyists is to deny who runs elected officials, especially legislators. Ohio is still very much a "pay to play" state.

"In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck

January 26, 201114 yr

And to deny the role of lobbyists is to deny who runs elected officials, especially legislators. Ohio is still very much a "pay to play" state.

It isn't just Ohio. Drive from PA to MD and you see poster after poster: "Coal: More and more green, but always red white and blue." The message is clear. To support the status quo (meaning the status quo for the last 50 years), is to support America. It is no longer political rhetoric, it is background noise, the elevator music that we listen to as we go through our lives.

The message is, that the way of life that we have, today, is to be defended. We've forgotten that adaptation to change was what made us great. The clipper ships that we developed were the fastest sailing vessels in the world. They established our dominance as a purveyor of goods, worldwide. But they succeeded only because we were willing to throw out ideas that didn't work in favor of ideas that might.

Funny that we are willing to discard some of the marvels of American architecture, like New York Penn Station, the demolation of which led to the architectural preservation movement in the US, but we won't throw away the automobile. Why, because what was once a necessity, the trains, became a luxury. And what was, once, a luxury, has become a necessity.

And the sad fact is that none of us seems to resent that. None of seems to resent that where, once, no one would think of spending $20,000 for a five year rail pass, we now spend that for something that works maybe, two, or three hours a day, maybe for five years, maybe more. But far more than what mass transit would have cost us.

Ironically, part of the undoing of the railroads was the influence of the Robber Barons who could make or break whole communities and even whole industries. Their problem was that they could not figure out how to make us aware of how we benefited from and shared in their prosperity.

Today's transportation interests are more concerned about how easy it is for us to get to WalMart. What they should be thinking about is how easy it is for the goods to get from the manufacturer to WalMart because most of the costs that we pay is the cost of shipping (between 50 and 75% depending upon whether the goods are bulk or finished).

January 26, 201114 yr

Best take-away quote from the State of the Union re; High Speed Rail... "It can even be faster than flying... without the pat down."

Love it! :clap: :clap: :clap:

January 26, 201114 yr

noozer- noticed that too! lets keep our fingers crossed to see what kind of projects might be able to be funded!

January 26, 201114 yr

Of course, 3-C wasn't killed by average Americans lacking knowledge in economics. It was killed by a Wall Street banker, who ought to know better.

The underlying premise here is that Wall Street bankers are a somehow more intelligent or economically savvy form of life.

I might question that premise ...

January 26, 201114 yr

However, the fact that average Americans are not economists shouldn't automatically spell doom for rail projects or guarantee dollars to road projects.

But a basic understanding of the principles that underly the economy is critical to understanding what our politicians are doing in the name of "recovery". As a small business owner, I understand the need for capital, especially when business is bad. Sure, you can cut costs to a point, but you can't cut costs to zero and still be in business. To stay in business and grow, you need capital.

Now capital is not easy to get right now, in spite of the fact that businesses are sitting on loads of it. Government becomes the last resort. And here is the irony. As government spends less, business becomes more uncertain.

Consider the scuttled plan to build DMU's in Ohio (as well as Forest City's scuttled plans for development). When the Feds were going spend $400 million, other businesses were willing to spend to get a piece of the pie. When Ohio refused the funds, private capital walked away.

All this makes sense to me, and I didn't mean for anything I wrote above to imply otherwise.

Businesses understand that assuming short term debt is often times necessary for long term growth. As long as your projections for revenue are reasonable, assuming risk becomes reasonable (and, more importantly, not assuming risk can spell doom for your enterprise). People understood that too, at one time. Your house, essentially, put you in debt but the investment appeared safe. The reason that it wasn't, for many, is not a reason to abandon the principle. Governments can run deficits for long periods of time; people can't and they shouldn't expect their goverment to behave as they would.

This is a bit different, but it goes beyond the ambit of 3C.

January 26, 201114 yr

From an e-mail sent by our friends and colleagues at MHSRA.......

__________

During his State of the Union address, President Obama set a goal of connecting 80% of Americans by high-speed train within 25 years.

We applaud the President for establishing this bold and visionary goal. High-speed trains are a critical investment in our future. They will cut travel times and cost while reducing hassle, making it easier for people to meet more often, leading to a more productive and more innovative economy.

As we have seen in the past year, achieving the President's goal will not be easy.

We are looking forward to working with the President to create a bold vision for high-speed rail in the Midwest and helping to identify innovative ways to finance this critical asset.

Rick Harnish

Executive Director

Midwest High Speed Rail Association

"In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck

January 26, 201114 yr

OK, here's a revised version of my earlier ideal. All Aboard Ohio is getting behind the Midwest High Speed Rail Association's call for Milwaukee-Chicago-Toledo-Detroit-Cleveland as the initial 220-mph high-speed rail route in the Midwest -- with the condition that a 90-mph interim service be provided during the 10- to 20-year planning/design/property acquisition/construction period of the 220-mph rail project, and that it be the first phase of a Midwest-East Coast rail corridor with branches to Detroit and to Baltimore/Washington....

Comparing the "large open spaces" of the U.S. to Europe or Japan....

And while I don't have a similar U.S. vs China comparison map, the distance between Beijing and Shanghai (4.5 hours by HSR) is similar to Chicago to Philadelphia (800 miles)....

"In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck

January 26, 201114 yr

I honestly feel like this was the kind of mainstream bump HSR has needed for a long time; very excited to hear the prez talking about this as major means of job creation. With florida and Cali systems nearly under construction, there will be clear cut "couldve been us" examples in the states for the next round of debates on this topic.

Seems to me like its time to reorganize and put together a plan that is as bold as Cali and florida and really come up with a strategy to get 80% of ohioans with access to HSR in 25 years to coincide with the prez's goal. Schedule it out and show the big vision/make that the overall goal to build on and how it can/should be judged by the public so that we are in line with the rest of the country. maybe even push ours to be 20 years, not 25 so we can beat the rest of the country, not just "keep up".

Seems like the first step should be a true HSR 'flagship' line that makes political and economic sense and build the thing to true hsr standards. Columbus/(Akron)/Cleveland or Toledo/Cleveland/Pittsburgh or seem to be logical. Obviously one trunk line could be extended to connect to points south or Chicago/NY. Forget fighting exclusively with the freight guys; build a new ROW with freeway and/ or purchased portions of existing rail ROW.

In the short term, get local connecting transit projects going and focus these systems around a future agreed upon rail station location.

I know it sounds pie in the sky, but i think thats what it needs to be get support. Not even the pragmatic approach has worked, so go big or go home. I think if someone in Ohio comes up with a solid plan and a way to fund this over time, the public will get behind it (and support funding with bonds/sales tax) as will the feds.

January 26, 201114 yr

I honestly feel like this was the kind of mainstream bump HSR has needed for a long time; very excited to hear the prez talking about this as major means of job creation. With florida and Cali systems nearly under construction, there will be clear cut "couldve been us" examples in the states for the next round of debates on this topic.

Seems to me like its time to reorganize and put together a plan that is as bold as Cali and florida and really come up with a strategy to get 80% of ohioans with access to HSR in 25 years to coincide with the prez's goal. Schedule it out and show the big vision/make that the overall goal to build on and how it can/should be judged by the public so that we are in line with the rest of the country. maybe even push ours to be 20 years, not 25 so we can beat the rest of the country, not just "keep up".

Seems like the first step should be a true HSR 'flagship' line that makes political and economic sense and build the thing to true hsr standards. Columbus/(Akron)/Cleveland or Toledo/Cleveland/Pittsburgh or seem to be logical. Obviously one trunk line could be extended to connect to points south or Chicago/NY. Forget fighting exclusively with the freight guys; build a new ROW with freeway and/ or purchased portions of existing rail ROW.

In the short term, get local connecting transit projects going and focus these systems around a future agreed upon rail station location.

I know it sounds pie in the sky, but i think thats what it needs to be get support. Not even the pragmatic approach has worked, so go big or go home. I think if someone in Ohio comes up with a solid plan and a way to fund this over time, the public will get behind it (and support funding with bonds/sales tax) as will the feds.

Ohio has a plan. Read the Ohio Hub Plan in detail at: http://www.dot.state.oh.us/Divisions/Rail/Programs/passenger/Pages/HighSpeedPassengerRaildefault.aspx

January 26, 201114 yr

Keep it about 3C please.

“All truly great thoughts are conceived while walking.”
-Friedrich Nietzsche

January 26, 201114 yr

And how's this for a comparison (sources: Wikipedia, Mongabay)?

Jinghu (Beijing-Shanghai) High-Speed Railway

Stations and their county-level city or district populations:

Beijing = 13.3 million

Langfang = 0.7 million

Tianjin = 3.8 million

Cangzhou = 0.5 million

Dezhou = 0.4 million

Jinan = 2 million

Taishan = 0.6 million

Qufu = 0.1 million

Zaozhuang = 0.5 million

Xuzhou = 1.8 million

Suzhou = 0.2 million

Bengbu = 1.1 million

Chuzhou = 0.1 million

Nanjing = 3 million

Zhenjiang = 0.6 million

Changzhou = 1 million

Wuxi = 1.1 million

Suzhou = 1 million

Kunshan = 0.7 million

Shanghai = 19 million

TOTAL = 51.5 million people along 818 miles (62,958 people per route-mile)

Midwest-East Coast (Chicago-New York with branches to Detroit, Washington) High-Speed Railway

Potential stations and their Consolidated/Primary Metropolitan Statistical Area populations:

Chicago = 9.7 million

Fort Wayne = 0.6 million

Toledo = 0.7 million

Detroit = 5.7 million

Cleveland = 2.3 million

Akron-Canton = 1.1 million

Youngstown-Warren = 0.7 million

Pittsburgh = 2.9 million

Altoona = 0.1 million

Harrisburg = 0.5 million

Baltimore = 2.7 million

Washington DC = 5.4 million

Philadelphia = 5.8 million

New York = 22.2 million

TOTAL = 60.4 million people along 1075 miles (56,186 people per route-mile)

"In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck

January 26, 201114 yr

Seems like the first step should be a true HSR 'flagship' line that makes political and economic sense and build the thing to true hsr standards. Columbus/(Akron)/Cleveland or Toledo/Cleveland/Pittsburgh or seem to be logical. Obviously one trunk line could be extended to connect to points south or Chicago/NY. Forget fighting exclusively with the freight guys; build a new ROW with freeway and/ or purchased portions of existing rail ROW.

.....I know it sounds pie in the sky, but i think thats what it needs to be get support.

See my posting in the ideal high-speed network thread, comparing Midwest-East Coast with Beijing-Shanghai.

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,12036.msg540020.html#msg540020

"In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck

January 26, 201114 yr

cool. this gets the imagination moving. the more ohio can align itself with NY and Chicago, the better a chance this has of moving forward.

January 26, 201114 yr

Considering the growth directions along the east coast, I think connections to points south of Washington, D.C. is going to be more important than into the NE, especially beyond NYC. I think we should be considering pathways into North Carolina as well D.C. and points north.

January 26, 201114 yr

Except that there's no active plan for true high-speed rail south of Washington DC as there is for reaching Boston. However, there is planning underway and funding for incremental development of 110-mph passenger rail from Washington DC south to North Carolina. That's probably sufficient for now, until North Carolina gets a city with 5-6 million people as Metro Boston offers.

EDIT: here's a couple more graphics based on the Beijing-Shanghai service which will offer a 4-hour travel time for super-express trains over the full 800-mile route (how's that for a Sputnik wake-up call?)....

"In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck

January 26, 201114 yr

Ive heard that HSR will be a discussion point of the presidents 2012 budget. Any chance this first phase midwest 220 line will be a part of it? Chicago, Wisconsin and Ohio have obvious political advantages over other legs of the hub network.

January 27, 201114 yr

I understand that it hasn't been planned as yet, but this is going to cost an immense amount of money and it needs to be built for the America of 2050 or 2100, not 2030.

Sign In

Ohio Intercity Rail (3C+D Line, etc)

Featured Replies

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Most Popular Posts

KJP

KJP

KJP

Posted Images

Create an account or sign in to comment

Recently Browsing 0

Account

Navigation

Search