^Interesting lesson in (an aspect) of railroad jurisprudence I wasn't aware of... I'm not anywhere near the RR expert you are, but it has long seemed to me that America should have some element of "socialism" re its RR's because of situations like this: where the private RR and it's prized clients, like Ford, can trump the public good of fast, efficient rail passenger transportation.... I suspect this scenario exists in many other parts of the country ... except, of course, in the NEC where Amtrak owns practically all of Boston-Washington route (I did read somewhere that don't own the ancient 70-mile stretch from New Rochelle- New Haven -- I'm guessing the Metro-North commuter line owns that stretch although I could be wrong).

(I did read somewhere that don't own the ancient 70-mile stretch from New Rochelle- New Haven -- I'm guessing the Metro-North commuter line owns that stretch although I could be wrong).

 

Yes, actually the Connecticut DOT owns it. Its old overhead catenary wires is what keeps Acela's average speeds to a commuter train's pace. But replacing the overhead system of wires is projected to cost up to $1 billion. But it has to be done anyway since the catenaries are nearing the end of their useful life.

 

Anyhoo....

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2012/03/18/resurrection_of_railway_from_upton_spurs_hopes_of_more_industry/?page=1

In it for the long haul

The slow revival of a local railroad spurs hopes for industry revival

By Jose Martinez

Globe Correspondent / March 18, 2012

 

Engineer Ed Teague slowed the rumbling black-and-yellow diesel electric locomotive from a crawl to a halt outside the Grafton & Upton Railroad Co. yard in Upton as flagman Joe Gillespie climbed down to check Hartford Street for traffic.

 

There are no automated lights or gates along the G&U tracks running north to the resurrected short-haul line’s yard in the north part of Grafton, so the two-man crew on Engine 1751 operates under the stop-and-protect protocol.

This won't happen without taxpayer dollars paying for the track upgrades first, but this may be one of a small number of corridors in the US where this is possible: 

 

Florida East Coast Industries to develop private passenger-rail service

 

A little more than a year ago, Florida Gov. Rick Scott killed the state’s high-speed rail project when he returned federal High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail funds to the U.S. Department of Transportation. Now, a privately owned railroad has plans to implement passenger-rail service connecting Orlando and South Florida.

 

Today, Florida East Coast Industries Inc. (FECI) announced it plans to develop All Aboard Florida, a privately owned, operated and maintained passenger-rail service that would run 240 miles to Miami, Cocoa and Orlando. The service would operate along 200 miles of existing tracks between Miami and Cocoa, and along 40 miles of new track into Orlando. The system eventually could be expanded to include connections to Tampa and Jacksonville. The project will cost about $1 billion.

 

Read more at:

http://www.progressiverailroading.com/passenger_rail/news/Florida-East-Coast-Industries-to-develop-private-passengerrail-service--30360

This won't happen without taxpayer dollars paying for the track upgrades first, but this may be one of a small number of corridors in the US where this is possible: 

 

Florida East Coast Industries to develop private passenger-rail service

 

A little more than a year ago, Florida Gov. Rick Scott killed the state’s high-speed rail project when he returned federal High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail funds to the U.S. Department of Transportation. Now, a privately owned railroad has plans to implement passenger-rail service connecting Orlando and South Florida.

 

Today, Florida East Coast Industries Inc. (FECI) announced it plans to develop All Aboard Florida, a privately owned, operated and maintained passenger-rail service that would run 240 miles to Miami, Cocoa and Orlando. The service would operate along 200 miles of existing tracks between Miami and Cocoa, and along 40 miles of new track into Orlando. The system eventually could be expanded to include connections to Tampa and Jacksonville. The project will cost about $1 billion.

 

Read more at:

http://www.progressiverailroading.com/passenger_rail/news/Florida-East-Coast-Industries-to-develop-private-passengerrail-service--30360

 

While I agree that this might work in only a few places, it's still a game-changer for Florida, which is choking on auto traffic. I do think the cost will be at least double the $1 billion projected by FEC and that the service will take longer to start than the 2014 startup date envisioned. Still, this is a VERY welcome development!

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/03/21/BAPS1NOFAV.DTL

 

Bay Area transportation officials have agreed on a $1.5 billion plan to work with the High-Speed Rail Authority to electrify Caltrain and install advanced train-control systems to build a hybrid rail system accommodating both commuter and high-speed trains.

 

Under the proposal, released late Wednesday, the Bay Area would receive $706 million in state high-speed rail bond money, with the rest of the funds coming from local sales taxes, other state and federal funds, bridge tolls and air district money.

 

"This is a great leap forward for transportation in our region," said Jim Wunderman, president of the Bay Area Council, a regional business group. "Electrifying Caltrain is one of the top priorities of the CEOs we represent. Electrification will boost ridership, clean up our air and remove thousands of cars a day from Highway 101. At the same time, it lays the foundation for high-speed rail to come to the Bay Area."

 

Caltrain officials have long planned to electrify their rails, which they say will allow them to run faster, more frequent and quieter trains.

 

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/03/21/BAPS1NOFAV.DTL#ixzz1q8cIimmM

 

VEiw HSR as a independent network, but as a integral part of a greatly improved national or regional rail system. 

 

 

Not a state but thought i'd take liberty with it being a major city in North America less than a 2 hr drive from Seattle. Vancouver's mass transit is very impressive and should be a model for other cities.  They have a nice train system that links well with their bus system. Broken into zones one can ride for 90 minutes using whatever bus or train once a ticket is purchased.  Hard to say whether it was the Olympics influence that pushed them to improve the rail system so much or the Chinese money that drives the city to build new condo towers throughout the city.  I noticed public transportation was in much use last Saturday evening. 

It definitely makes a much more pleasant city to visit when transit is easy to use and accessible.

Gov. Jerry Brown to change high-speed rail plan, lower cost by $30 billion

 

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2012/03/31/4380423/gov-jerry-brown-to-change-high.html#storylink=cpy

The Brown administration has lowered the projected cost to build California's high-speed rail line by $30 billion – to $68 billion – as it braces for crucial hearings in the Legislature, according to sources familiar with the plan.

 

The lower estimate is tied to a series of changes to the project, primarily by relying on existing rail lines in and around Los Angeles and the Bay Area.

 

The changes are expected to be announced Monday in Fresno, just five months after the California High-Speed Rail Authority estimated the project could cost $98.5 billion. The business plan underpinning that estimate was widely criticized as inadequate. The critics included lawmakers and the rail authority's own peer review group.

 

Elements of the revised plan were suggested by rail officials weeks ago, including the "blended approach," in which existing tracks in urban areas would be upgraded and eventually used by high-speed rail.

 

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2012/03/31/4380423/gov-jerry-brown-to-change-high.html#storylink=cpy

 

 

SACRAMENTO, Calif.—The agency overseeing California's high-speed rail project has issued a back-to-the-drawing-board business plan that dramatically lowers the system's estimated cost and expands its initial phase, but critics say it still remains too costly and does not deliver what voters intended.

 

An updated business plan to be released Monday by the California High-Speed Rail Authority lowers the projected price tag from the $98 billion the authority proposed last fall to $68.4 billion. Yet even that amount is far higher than the $43 billion promised in the ballot initiative voters approved four years ago, and sources for the project's long-term financing remain unclear.

 

The other major change from last fall's draft plan is a new proposal for the first section of track. The draft plan said the initial section would be built from Madera to Bakersfield in a sparsely populated region of the state, leading critics to dub it the "train to nowhere."

 

Under the revised plan, the first segment would connect the Central Valley city of Merced with the San Fernando Valley some 300 miles to the south, bringing the bullet train to the outskirts of downtown Los Angeles within 10 years. Instead of going straight into California's major cities, the high-speed system would stop short of Los Angeles and the San Francisco Bay area and connect with existing urban commuter rail lines.

 

The updated business plan also devotes up to $2 billion to improve those

Advertisement

existing lines. Linking with the existing systems rather than pushing the high-speed rail line into California's major cities is one of the biggest cost-savers in the new plan, but critics say it does not do what voters intended.

^Smart move by Jerry Brown.  As the article noted, the critics will be pleased by the cuts, and local pols, in SF & LA, will embrace the improved commuter rail tracks in their regions... a win-win.

^Smart move by Jerry Brown.  As the article noted, the critics will be pleased by the cuts, and local pols, in SF & LA, will embrace the improved commuter rail tracks in their regions... a win-win.

 

the consequences of slower speeds on the final legs through the most urban parts of the network. but.... the TGV has to slow down on the last 25km in paris too.

 

I think we should always understand that High-speed through megacities like SF and LA will not be possible without extensive investments tunneling, viaducts and other expensive forms of construction.  for a new start system it is best to start in the least expensive green field segments that yield the greatest bang for the buck, and  look to a longer term upgrade path for the most urban segments of the corridoor.

 

for a HSR segment in Chicago you may require Metra electrify some segments in order for bullet trains to use their rails north of union station, and upgrades to the metra electric lines to add capacity to operate  intercity trains on those lines.

 

At this point the 1500vdc voltage being used on the metra is would be factored into the development of the HSR trains. unlike the electrification of the BART and LA commuter lines which because they are all new could operate at 25k VAC.

 

metra like Caltrain has been unwilling to carry the cost of electrification of their lines ,but if they can spend someone else money to upgrade they change their tune, especially since the price of fuel in going up not down.

Maybe a better example is the Eurostar into London. From 1993-2003, it used 90 mph tracks for nearly 70 miles from the Channel Tunnel to Central London. Then from 2003-2007 it used 186 mph tracks on the first section of High Speed 1 for 46 miles from the Channel Tunnel to Fawkham Junction in North Kent. Those 46 miles cost $11 billion build. Understandably the most expensive section was for the last 24 miles into Central London. Nearly half of it was built UNDER London. It cost $9.3 billion to build.

 

If you want to see London by train, better stick with the classic national rail services! And if you want to railfan, er trainspot, the Eurostar/Javelin HS1 line, ride out from Fenchurch Station near the Tower of London to Rainham Junction.  That's a good spot to catch some action. In 2009 I stood on this pedestrian bridge which leads to the adjacent conventional train station and enjoyed these sights and sounds.....

 

EDIT: For orientation, the first train is coming out of London, the last two trains are heading into London.

 

Maybe a better example is the Eurostar into London. From 1993-2003, it used 90 mph tracks for nearly 70 miles from the Channel Tunnel to Central London. Then from 2003-2007 it used 186 mph tracks on the first section of High Speed 1 for 46 miles from the Channel Tunnel to Fawkham Junction in North Kent. Those 46 miles cost $11 billion build. Understandably the most expensive section was for the last 24 miles into Central London. Nearly half of it was built UNDER London. It cost $9.3 billion to build.

 

If you want to see London by train, better stick with the classic national rail services! And if you want to railfan, er trainspot, the Eurostar/Javelin HS1 line, ride out from Fenchurch Station near the Tower of London to Rainham Junction.  That's a good spot to catch some action. In 2009 I stood on this pedestrian bridge which leads to the adjacent conventional train station and enjoyed these sights and sounds.....

 

EDIT: For orientation, the first train is coming out of London, the last two trains are heading into London.

 

 

you read my mind. 

 

It  took a decade to finish HS1, I have ridden eurostar 4 times from 2001 to , every time I rode it was faster than the last.  because of the cost of construction, the concept of constant incrementalism.    IMO the biggest obstacle to true HSR in the US is the lack of electrification of our rail network.

 

even with Euro star that had an existing electrified network to start with which made it possible to operate service once the Channel tunnel was built.  is it no surprise that the only High speed corridor operating in the US has been electrified for over 100 years.  In order for passenger to be suscessful at attracting enough ridership to make it vialble to attract investment it needs to go faster, to go faster we need electrification, form a cost perspective eletrification expensive, and not cost effectvie unless you are running alot of trains. with alot of people.

 

California's predicament should be a wake  up call for all proponents of HSR.

 

The political environment combined with the very long lead times in building out a high-speed network puts IMO a high premium on short term results than long-term results.  in order to keep the public's trust and their money, planning  must be more focused on showing benefits to the public, and less on longer term visions.  unlike the interstate freeway system which before it's completion was being used by drivers, HSR in the US will be useless until the final mile of a segment is completed, leaving a large gap between project go ahead and project competition that makes it vulnerable to politics.

 

after reasearching the current alignment, I cannot figure out why the easiest cheapest route was not chosen, using the I5 corridor which is owned by the state, is flatter, and has far fewer obstacles than the current alignment.

 

I would hope that a midwest proposal would better consider these realities.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

An HSR system for Ohio could incorporate commuter rail into the various city approaches.  These approaches could be built first, and could be electrified to the same standards as each other and the eventual cross-state link.  I didn't pay much attention to the Columbus and Cleveland approaches in the 3C's plan, but the Cincinnati approach will inevitably be very expensive, even without a totally dedicated ROW like what was proposed back in the early 1980's.

 

KJP, didn't you post that drawing a few years ago?  There was a tunnel north of Union Terminal and a viaduct over one of the freight railroads for about ten miles.  I didn't save it to my computer. 

An HSR system for Ohio could incorporate commuter rail into the various city approaches.  These approaches could be built first, and could be electrified to the same standards as each other and the eventual cross-state link.  I didn't pay much attention to the Columbus and Cleveland approaches in the 3C's plan, but the Cincinnati approach will inevitably be very expensive, even without a totally dedicated ROW like what was proposed back in the early 1980's.

 

KJP, didn't you post that drawing a few years ago?  There was a tunnel north of Union Terminal and a viaduct over one of the freight railroads for about ten miles.  I didn't save it to my computer.

 

making a Series of hops to eventually reach the desired goal. example would be cleveland -> Toledo -> Toledo -> Detroit Toledo-> Fort Wayne.

 

chicago -> Gary  Gary -> Fort Wayne  Gary -> Indianapolis

 

this is how the interstate highway system was built.

 

the issue is selling the public on such an abstract goal.

 

I would Sy that Cleveland and by extension the state of Ohio, should be focused on making those connections that make sense, focusing on city pairs,  but always planning for trains that can go through those cities.

 

focusing on common standards, voltages, gauges, etc, to maintain compatibility.

 

For cleveland the City pairs that are most obvious are:

Akron

Pittsburgh

Columbus

Toledo.

Buffalo.

Detroit.

 

I think the idea of using existing Rail ROW, for True HSR, may not be the way to go, but to use Public ROW, I.E. interstate Hwy ROWs which could be procured at 0 cost, and corridors that may better suited for high-speed rail, than existing rail ROW.  especially outside of urban areas. where land for new corridors are less expensive.

 

while 220mph would be nice between cle and Akron it is not needed.  but longer legs between cle and Columbus would require greater speeds.

 

curiously the US senate Transportation Bill mandated that all states develop comprehensive Rail plans, I think it was passenger and freight Rail.

 

either way, I think the opportunity to develop robust commuter rail services on the back bone of HSR, is definitely possible, it would increase the usage of the Rails, and the stations.  allow greater utilization of infrastructure.

 

 

>this is how the interstate highway system was built.

 

 

The interstates were not built in the fashion you describe.  For example, there was already considerable planning and about 10 miles of construction in Hamilton County completed for Cincinnati-Dayton and Cincinnati-Columbus superhighways before 1956.  I-75 and I-71 were built very quickly after passage of the bill, which increased the federal gasoline tax and shifted it entirely to the new highway trust fund, with the entire length of I-75 opening in 1963 and 100 miles of I-71 between the outskirts of Cincinnati and Columbus by 1965 (I-71 had a 5~ mile gap within Cincinnati city limits until about 1972).  So construction of the interstates, while in phases, followed one another very quickly, with no delays due to lack of funds.  There also, of course, was never a public vote on the whole interstate highway program. 

 

The thing that people need to keep in mind is that if we do a statewide ballot initiative like California did, the way to get the public's attention is with speed.  People pay attention when you say 125mph, but they pay a lot more attention when you say 180mph.  Even if just 20 miles between the 3c's hit this speed, it will capture the public's attention much more than a run of the same time with a lower top speed.

 

 

jmecklenborg, you're forgetting that California voters had passed and invested a $2 billion bond issue for passenger rail development in 1990. That not only funded the tracks, signals, equipment purchases, stations and other infrastructure that created the nation's second-busiest (Santa Barbara-LA-San Diego), third-busiest (Bay Area-Sacramento) and fifth-busiest (Bay Area-Bakersfield) Amtrak routes in the nation. It also created a political constituency for taking passenger rail development to the next level.

 

And why did Californians pass the 1990 bond issue? Because Californians were already riding trains in large numbers and would probably ride more of them. How'd they know that? Because since the mid-1970s, California took a chance and started providing state support to expand existing Amtrak train services on the LA-San Diego route (from 2.33 trains per day to seven daily) and the Bay Area-Bakersfield route (from one train per day to three daily).

 

And why did California's state government do that? Because they had a few daytime trains Californians could use, and they were riding them. So state leaders figured they try adding some additional trains to routes that already had existing tracks, stations, and support facilities to see what would happen. And if they didn't ride, not much was lost and they could return to that baseline of service.

 

We in Ohio are trying to get to that baseline show that Ohioans will ride trains. We are trying to show that we're not from outer space for suggesting that Ohio should have trains. That is what former Ohio Gov. George Voinovich's Chief of Staff Paul Misfud said to the Ohio Rail Development Commission in 1996 when it voted to OK $60 million for 3C, Cleveland-Akron-Canton and Cleveland-Pittsburgh train services. Misfud said ORDC was in outer space for asking for $60 million. ORDC backed down and rescinded the request.

 

And, as we all know, current Gov. John Kasich said anyone wanting better train service must belong to a "train cult." After all, who in the world would want good train services? The answer to that is: just about everyone else except a populous state that pretends to be a backwoods, backwards and back-pedaling enclave that is trying to scare off anyone who wants something more than big-box stores, clogged eight-lane roads with two left-turn lanes at major cross-streets, or the local church being the largest social setting in your neighborhood.

Top Regional / Commuter Rail Networks by 2050

Midwestern Regional Rail Network - OH - IN - IL - MI - WI - MN - MO - KS - NE - ND - SD

Size in 2012 : 527.7 Mi

Size by 2050 : 2740 Mi

Electric lines in 2012 : 76 Mi

Electric lines by 2050 : 890 Mi

Number of lines in 2012 : 12

Number of lines by 2050 : 36

Top Speed 2012 : 100mph

Top Speed 2050 : 125mph

Daily Ridership in 2012 : 304,600

Daily Ridership in 2030 : 780,000

 

Northeastern Regional Rail Network - NJ - NY - CT - DE - MA - RI - NH - ME - VT - PA - MD - DC - VA

Size in 2012 : 3493 Mi

Size by 2050 : 9,300 Mi

Electric lines in 2012 : 2150 Mi

Electric lines by 2050 : 8,400 Mi

Number of lines in 2012 : 64

Number of lines by 2050 : 134

Top Speed in 2012 : 125mph

Top Speed in 2012 : 125mph

Daily Ridership in 2012 : 1.6 Million

Daily Ridership by 2030 : 3.6 Million

 

California Regional Rail Network

Size in 2012 : 716 Mi

Size by 2050 : 892 Mi

Number of lines in 2012 : 12

Number of lines by 2050 : 17

Electric lines in 2012 : 0 Mi

Electric lines by 2050 : 630 Mi

Top Speed in 2012 : 90mph

Top Speed in by 2050 : 125mph

Daily Ridership in 2012 : 107,500

Daily Ridership by 2030 : 480,200

Way to go Dearborn!! Boo Ohio!!!

 

 

http://www.fra.dot.gov/roa/press_releases/fp_FRA%2014-12.shtml

 

Federal Railroad Administrator Szabo Joins Senator Carl Levin, Congressman John Dingell to Help Revitalize Downtown Dearborn

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

U.S.Department of Transportation

Office of Public Affairs

Washington, D.C.

www.dot.gov/affairs/briefing.htm

News

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

FRA 14-12

Tuesday, April 10, 2012

Contact: Mike England

Tel.: (202) 285-2212

 

DEARBORN, Mich. – Federal Railroad Administrator Joseph C. Szabo today joined Senator Carl Levin and Congressman John Dingell to break ground on a new $28.2 million federally-funded intermodal train and bus station that will help revitalize downtown Dearborn and provide greater connectivity for residents throughout the region.

 

The project will consolidate Dearborn’s two passenger rail facilities into a pedestrian-friendly, intermodal station in the West Downtown section of the city, supporting President Obama’s vision to create livable cities by providing greater access to passenger rail service.

 

“When we invest in transportation, we’re not only preparing our infrastructure to meet the demands of moving a growing population, but strengthening our economy as well,” said U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood.

 

The new station will serve local residents and students at the University of Michigan–Dearborn and Henry Ford Community College and also accommodate tourists via a new pedestrian overpass at the Henry Ford Museum/Greenfield Village, Dearborn’s largest tourist attraction with 1.7 million visitors every year. The intermodal facility will be designed for the planned Ann Arbor–Detroit commuter rail as well as future high-speed intercity passenger rail service. It will also accommodate city, regional and intercity bus systems; local and tourist shuttles; bicycle and greenway linkages; and, auto, taxi, and limousine connections to Detroit International Airport.

 

“This new Intermodal Station will serve as Dearborn’s gateway to a modern 110 mile per hour regional passenger rail system,” said Administrator Szabo. “By 2015, nearly 80 percent of the Chicago-Detroit corridor will see sustained speeds of 110 MPH – with all new high-performance equipment – allowing travelers to check email, read or relax while speeding past cars on the interstate. This new facility will provide seamless connections from rail to other transportation options, providing a boon to tourists, students and business travelers alike.”

 

The new Dearborn station will continue to serve Amtrak’s Wolverine passenger rail service, which provides three round trips daily between Pontiac, Mich., and Chicago, Ill. In 2010, Dearborn’s current station ranked third in Amtrak ridership in Michigan with more than 82,000 travelers.

 

The Chicago to Detroit line is part of the Midwest Regional Rail Network, a nine state plan to connect the 40 most populated cities in the Midwest with fast, frequent and affordable passenger rail service.

 

The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) and its 32 state partners are making great progress on High-Speed and Intercity Passenger Rail Program projects across the country. With $10.1 billion in federal funding, they’re moving forward with 154 projects, laying the foundation for a 21st century passenger rail network.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/10/nyregion/report-disputes-christies-reason-for-halting-tunnel-project-in-2010.html?hpw=&pagewanted=all

 

Report Disputes Christie’s Basis for Halting Tunnel

By KATE ZERNIKE

Published: April 10, 2012

 

The report by the Government Accountability Office, to be released this week, found that while Mr. Christie said that state transportation officials had revised cost estimates for the tunnel to at least $11 billion and potentially more than $14 billion, the range of estimates had in fact remained unchanged in the two years before he announced in 2010 that he was shutting down the project. And state transportation officials, the report says, had said the cost would be no more than $10 billion.

 

Mr. Christie also misstated New Jersey’s share of the costs: he said the state would pay 70 percent of the project; the report found that New Jersey was paying 14.4 percent. And while the governor said that an agreement with the federal government would require the state to pay all cost overruns, the report found that there was no final agreement, and that the federal government had made several offers to share those costs.

 

You mean a GOP governor lied about the reasons why a passenger rail project was cancelled? That NEVER happens!! :)

 

"Wait, the 3C trains wouldn't run at 39 mph and would instead be the nation's third-fastest new train service in more than 30 years? Why didn't the media report this challenge to Kasich's lie?"

http://freepdfhosting.com/4808eafeb0.pdf

^

There was a big writeup in the Daily Kos progressive blog about this:

 

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/04/10/1082150/-Chris-Christie-s-reasons-for-halting-the-Hudson-River-tunnel-to-New-York-Made-up-says-report?showAll=yes

ODOT policy discussion moved here:

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,4500.0.html

Paul Krugman, professor of economics and columnist:

...

Mr. Christie’s big move — the one that will define his record — was his unilateral decision back in 2010 to cancel work that was already under way on a new rail tunnel linking New Jersey with New York. At the time, Mr. Christie claimed that he was just being fiscally responsible, while critics said that he had canceled the project just so he could raid it for funds.

 

Now the independent Government Accountability Office has weighed in with a report on the controversy, and it confirms everything the critics were saying.

 

Much press coverage of the new report focuses, understandably, on the evidence that Mr. Christie made false statements about the tunnel’s financing and cost. The governor asserted that the projected costs were rising sharply; the report tells us that this simply wasn’t true. The governor claimed that New Jersey was being asked to pay for 70 percent of a project that would shower benefits on residents of New York; in fact, the bulk of the financing would have come either from the federal government or from the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which collects revenue from residents of both states.

 

But while it’s important to document Mr. Christie’s mendacity, it’s even more important to understand the utter folly of his decision. The new report drives home just how necessary, and very much overdue, the tunnel project was and is. Demand for public transit is rising across America, reflecting both population growth and shifting preferences in an era of high gas prices. Yet New Jersey is linked to New York by just two single-track tunnels built a century ago — tunnels that run at 100 percent of capacity during peak hours. How could this situation not call for new investment? ...

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/13/opinion/krugman-cannibalize-the-future.html?_r=1&emc=tnt&tntemail0=y

Liar, liar, from gas to tire, there's no road they don't admire.....

 

Friday, April 13, 2012

Christie, Walker, Kasich, and Scott All Deceived the Public to Kill Rail

by Angie Schmitt

 

Wisconsin, Ohio, New Jersey, Florida — the Republican governors in each of these states recently aborted a major rail project claiming it was too expensive. Their methods were remarkably similar; their justifications aligned. In many ways, it was like they were all working from the same playbook.

 

Now that the Government Accountability Office has exposed New Jersey Governor Chris Christie’s distortions (a.k.a. lies) to justify killing the ARC rail tunnel project to Manhattan, it makes you wonder if similar investigations in Wisconsin, Ohio and Florida would reveal the same.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://dc.streetsblog.org/2012/04/13/christie-walker-kasich-and-scott-all-deceived-the-public-to-kill-rail/

Liar, liar, from gas to tire, there's no road they don't admire.....

 

Now THAT is funny!!!  :laugh:

NOTE: What's significant about this story from Missouri is that this is a state that took a big step up to the plate to support a very similar route to what was proposed in Ohio... two large urban end points with the state capital in between...and they have succeeeded.  The "Missouri River Runner" service (Kansas City-Jefferson City- St. Louis) is highly successful and seeing steady gains in ridership beyond projections.  Now, the Missouri DOT is holding a second round of public meetings on it's proposed State Rail Plan, which calls for both expansion of service and more infrastructure/equipment investment on the River Runner route, but also adding new routes.  Meanwhile, Ohio does nothing.

 

Missouri state rail plan proposes baby steps toward revival of passenger service for Hannibal

Posted: Apr 13, 2012 7:36 AM EDT

Herald-Whig Staff Writer

 

HANNIBAL, Mo. -- Missouri's 20-year state rail plan, in its latest proposed iteration, calls for laying the groundwork for passenger rail service between Hannibal and Quincy, Ill.

 

Missouri Department of Transportation officials unveiled the state rail plan during a public meeting Thursday afternoon at the Hannibal Nutrition Center that was attended by about 20 city officials, community leaders and rail enthusiasts.

 

The rail plan, updated every five years, calls for $10 million in spending on preliminary engineering and environmental reviews for rail corridors serving several key Missouri cities, including Hannibal.

 

It proposes $620 million in planning for future passenger rail service, along with a total of $509 million in ongoing support and enhancements for current passenger rail service.

 

Read more at: http://www.whig.com/story/17408187/missouri-state-rail-plan-proposes-baby-steps-toward-revival-of-passenger-rail-service-for-hannibal

NOTE: What's significant about this story from Missouri is that this is a state that took a big step up to the plate to support a very similar route to what was proposed in Ohio... two large urban end points with the state capital in between...and they have succeeeded.  The "Missouri River Runner" service (Kansas City-Jefferson City- St. Louis) is highly successful and seeing steady gains in ridership beyond projections.  Now, the Missouri DOT is holding a second round of public meetings on it's proposed State Rail Plan, which calls for both expansion of service and more infrastructure/equipment investment on the River Runner route, but also adding new routes.  Meanwhile, Ohio does nothing.

 

Missouri state rail plan proposes baby steps toward revival of passenger service for Hannibal

Posted: Apr 13, 2012 7:36 AM EDT

Herald-Whig Staff Writer

 

HANNIBAL, Mo. -- Missouri's 20-year state rail plan, in its latest proposed iteration, calls for laying the groundwork for passenger rail service between Hannibal and Quincy, Ill.

 

Missouri Department of Transportation officials unveiled the state rail plan during a public meeting Thursday afternoon at the Hannibal Nutrition Center that was attended by about 20 city officials, community leaders and rail enthusiasts.

 

The rail plan, updated every five years, calls for $10 million in spending on preliminary engineering and environmental reviews for rail corridors serving several key Missouri cities, including Hannibal.

 

It proposes $620 million in planning for future passenger rail service, along with a total of $509 million in ongoing support and enhancements for current passenger rail service.

 

Read more at: http://www.whig.com/story/17408187/missouri-state-rail-plan-proposes-baby-steps-toward-revival-of-passenger-rail-service-for-hannibal

 

MDOT just announced the groundbreaking for a $20 million, 1200 ft bridge over the Gasconade River, just east of Jefferson City. This is for a second track next to the existing main and will close the last gap in what will be a double track main line from St. Louis to Jeff City. I imagine that once the trackwork is done we might see additional frequencies.

 

Meanwhile, Ohio plods along...bah... :-( 

 

What a blunder this state made and it's becoming more and more obvious that Ohio really shot itself in the foot. Imagine what might have been: Four 3C roundtrips daily at a top speed pf 79 mph (avg 50-60 mph), new stations at the stops along the route, connections to local transit, new development at Riverside and Dayton (among others) creating thousands of jobs, connections at Cleveland to rescheduled Amtrak service, greater car-free mobility...sigh...

 

Mallory for Governor!!!

beam it up scottie!  :clap:

 

mayorial candidate scott stringer pimps bringing back the commuter tax  :clap:

and reviving the triboro X subway route plan, which uses existing right of ways:

 

 

 

..."None of this will be easy," Stringer said. "But when you think about what an infrastructure bank and a renewed commuter tax could do for this region, the benefits are endless. We'll spare our kids and grandkids a lifetime of skyrocketing fares. We'll stop piling up billions in debt."

 

With more assured funding, Stringer noted, the MTA could launch projects that would transform the face of public transportation in New York City:

 

•The agency could expand the Bus Rapid Transit network, which currently runs along Fordham Road in the Bronx and First and Second Avenues in Manhattan, and has cut travel time and increased ridership.

 

•The MTA could build light rail systems, a cheaper, more efficient update to the subways of old. Light rail could be used to connect underserved areas like Red Hook, CarrollGardens and the Navy Yard in Brooklyn, or provide a much needed rail link to LaGuardia Airport.

 

•To help connect growing job centers outside of Manhattan, the agency could also consider revisiting the proposed "X Line" subway, which would connect all of the City's existing subway lines except three, and join Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx, which no other subway line does today. "Here's why it is not a pipe dream: The line is built entirely along existing rights of way," Stringer noted.

 

"We need to decide whether we are going to accept the unsustainable status quo, or whether we are going to set the MTA on a path to financial security," the Borough President said. "We need to decide whether we are going to build a transportation infrastructure for the 21st century and explore solutions that protect middle class workers from shouldering most of the burden. The time to act is now."

 

 

more:

http://www.mbpo.org/release_details.asp?id=1939

 

Imagine if that looped around through New Jersey, connecting all of the NJT commuter rail routes and Amtrak's Northeast Corridor. A circle route could be amazing thing for Greater NYC. Of course, Chris "I don't ride bicycles, I eat them" Christie would probably hate it.

not sure if this is the right Topic but

 

http://www.freep.com/article/20120423/NEWS01/120423048/Woodward-Avenue-light-rail-line-M-1-Rail-Group?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE

 

Woodward light rail line group says it will pay for first 10 years of operations

 

The private-sector group that wants to build a 3-mile light rail line on Woodward Avenue from downtown Detroit to the New Center said today it has raised all of the money it will need to build the line – and is pledging to fund the operations of the system privately for the first 10 years after it’s built.

 

The M-1 Rail Group outlined the details in a report it has sent to the federal government. The group of private investors and philanthropic groups behind the effort said they would commit to paying the estimated $5.1 million annual cost of operating the Woodward rail line through 2025.

 

That’s a significant step for the project. How to pay for operating the system has been a key point of contention in a city that’s now under a consent deal with the state to oversee its finances and plans to slash millions from its annual appropriations for the city’s bus system.

not sure if this is the right Topic but

 

 

As good as any!

some construction pics and info on the fulton street transit center in downtown manhattan:

 

 

 

Fulton Street Transit Center: MTA Releases New Photos Of Massive Transportation Hub (PHOTOS)

 

Posted: 04/11/2012 3:35 pm Updated: 04/11/2012 3:35 pm

 

 

 

 

In December, we got our first glimpse of the giant skylight inside the massive, glass-walled, "spectacular," Fulton Street Transit Center--the under construction transportation hub downtown which will connect 10 subway lines and feature 70,000 square feet of shops, restaurants and office space.

 

Then in February we saw some mesmerizing renderings of the Center including one which showed, as DNAinfo described, a "pedestrian passageway beneath Dey Street, opening in November, which will have a mirrored wall that will show hazy reflections of the shapes and colors of everyone who walks past it."

 

And today, we're happy to report the MTA has released new photos from the construction, showing the Center slowly but surely taking shape. Take a look below at the new photos, which show winding staircases and a more progress on the skylight, also called the "oculus."

 

Scheduled to open in June of 2014, the Center will be just a few blocks away from the new One World Trade Center (which in a few weeks will surpass the Empire State building as the city's tallest) and the 9/11 memorial.

 

 

 

more:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/11/fulton-street-transit-center_n_1418648.html

 

i wish they would have put the $7.5B and all this effort toward the 2nd avenue subway, but anyway....below is a very interesting and informative new grand central east side access construction video (project update 2):

 

 

^ The latest in a series of videos about the progress being made in the MTA/LIRR East Side Access (ESA) project. When completed, ESA will reduce commuting times by as much as 40 minutes a day for about 160,000 customers who currently travel to Penn Station and then must take a subway, bus or walk to the East Side. It will also reduce passenger crowding levels at Penn Station and thereby enable Metro-North trains to access Penn Station for the first time.

 

 

i wish they would have put the $7.5B and all this effort toward the 2nd avenue subway, but anyway....below is a very interesting and informative new grand central east side access construction video (project update 2):

 

 

^ The latest in a series of videos about the progress being made in the MTA/LIRR East Side Access (ESA) project. When completed, ESA will reduce commuting times by as much as 40 minutes a day for about 160,000 customers who currently travel to Penn Station and then must take a subway, bus or walk to the East Side. It will also reduce passenger crowding levels at Penn Station and thereby enable Metro-North trains to access Penn Station for the first time.

 

awesome work going on there, thanks for posting.

Michigan hops aboard $4 million study into high-speed rail between Detroit, Chicago

Published: Sunday, May 06, 2012, 4:32 PM    Updated: Sunday, May 06, 2012, 5:28 PM

By Zane McMillin | [email protected] MLive.com

 

Michigan leaders have signed onto a $4 million high-speed rail study that will explore ways to hasten passenger train travel between Detroit and Chicago, federal authorities announced last week.

 

Michigan will join Indiana, Illinois and Norfolk Southern Railway in contributing $200,000 each to the study, which also is expected to examine how to cut down on freight and passenger train congestion along the Detroit-to-Chicago line. The bulk of the study will be funded through a $3.2 million Federal Railroad Administration grant.

 

In a news release issued Friday by the U.S. Department of Transportation, Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder lauded the high-speed rail plans as essential to bolstering the state’s economy.

 

Read more at: http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2012/05/michigan_hops_aboard_4_million.html

Don't blame Chicago. Blame Congress......

 

Freight Train Late? Blame Chicago

May 7, 2012 1:03 pm

By JOHN SCHWARTZ / The New York Times

 

CHICAGO -- When it comes to rail traffic, Chicago is America's speed bump.

 

Shippers complain that a load of freight can make its way from Los Angeles to Chicago in 48 hours, then take 30 hours to travel across the city. A recent trainload of sulfur took some 27 hours to pass through Chicago -- an average speed of 1.13 miles per hour, or about a quarter the pace of many electric wheelchairs.

 

With freight volume in the United States expected to grow by more than 80 percent in the next 20 years, delays are projected to only get worse.

 

The underlying reasons for this sprawling traffic jam are complex, involving history, economics and a nation's disinclination to improve its roads, bridges, and rails.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/news/us/freight-train-late-blame-chicago-634786/

http://www.fra.dot.gov/roa/press_releases/fp_FRA%2019-12.shtml

 

 

U.S.Department of Transportation

Office of Public Affairs

Washington, D.C.

www.dot.gov/affairs/briefing.htm

News

 

 

FRA 19-12

Monday, May 14, 2012

Contact: Kevin F. Thompson

Tel.: 202-366-1299

 

RA Administrator Szabo Celebrates Opening of Station Platforms for Extension of Downeaster in Freeport and Brunswick

Service to Brunswick and Portland to Begin this Fall

 

FREEPORT AND BRUNSWICK, Maine – Federal Railroad Administrator Joseph C. Szabo today joined in celebrating the completion of new train station platforms in Brunswick and Freeport in preparation for the expansion of Amtrak’s Downeaster line, which will begin serving both cities this fall.  Administrator Szabo was joined by Maine Department of Transportation Commissioner David Bernhardt and local business leaders.

 

“The Obama Administration is committed to rail investment because it benefits the economy and provides the community with greater transportation options,” said U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood.  “Brunswick and Freeport are great examples of how rail investment can provide jobs, greater economic development and greater mobility.”

 

The Downeaster line expansion was funded by a $38.3 million grant from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) through the Federal Railroad Administration’s High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail Program.  Brunswick and Freeport have not seen passenger rail service since 1959.

 

The ripple effect of rail not only touches jobs associated directly with the project, but also jobs indirectly linked, including those associated with the people and products rail moves.  According to the Northern New England Passenger Rail Authority, the work along the Downeaster corridor is creating business orders and sustaining and creating jobs at 53 companies in 20 states.

 

“The Downeaster expansion is creating jobs and spurring local economic development even before the trains arrive,” said Administrator Szabo.  “The Northern New England Passenger Rail Authority delivered this project on time and on budget, and when the line opens in the fall it will increase tourism and mobility choices for residents from Boston to Brunswick.”

 

The Recovery Act grant was augmented by additional funds from the State of Maine to cover the project costs, including the construction of the Americans with Disabilities Act-compliant passenger platforms in Freeport and Brunswick.  The Downeaster project will improve 36 highway-rail grade crossings, upgrade numerous wayside signals, install signals on the Brunswick Branch and result in many other right of way improvements.

 

To reduce congestion on the rail corridor and increase the reliability of the Downeaster service south of Maine, FRA has also provided the Northern New England Passenger Rail Authority with a $21 million grant to improve the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) owned rail line used by the Downeaster.  This project includes new mainline track and installation of a section of double track to eliminate an existing bottleneck, which will provide a safer, faster, and more reliable travel experience for riders.  Work is expected to begin in summer 2012.

 

 

####

That "State Up North" continues to kick Ohio's butt in rail development....

 

http://www.fra.dot.gov/roa/press_releases/fp_FRA%2018-12.shtml

 

U.S.Department of Transportation

Office of Public Affairs

Washington, D.C.

www.dot.gov/affairs/briefing.htm

News

 

 

FRA 18-12

Thursday, May 10, 2012

Contact: Michael England

Tel.: (202) 493-6000

 

U.S. Transportation Secretary LaHood Announces $15.8 Million Funding Agreement to Eliminate Detroit Rail Bottleneck

 

WASHINGTON – U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood today announced a final agreement of $15.8 million for the West Detroit Connection Track project that will eliminate congestion for Detroit-area Amtrak passengers by addressing a bottleneck that comes from serving both freight and passenger rail on the same tracks.

 

The U.S. Department of Transportation’s Federal Railroad Administration is providing a grant for $7.9 million, which is being matched with another $7.9 million from the State of Michigan.  The project is set to break ground in West Detroit later this year.

 

“President Obama’s bold vision of investing in rail projects like the West Detroit Connection Track will create jobs and grow our economy over the long-term by moving people and goods more quickly and efficiently than ever before,” said Secretary LaHood.  “In eliminating a longstanding bottleneck, we are creating capacity to handle future rail demand as our population grows, while strengthening the foundation for economic development across the region.”

 

Currently both freight and intercity passenger trains make a connection through Bay City Junction.  The West Detroit Connection Track project will provide new track to separate freight and passenger train movements. Amtrak’s “Wolverine” service, which provides three daily round trips between Chicago and Detroit/Pontiac, will use the new track. West Detroit Junction is a key link between the Dearborn Station and the Detroit New

Center Station.  In 2009, this track moved 444,127 passengers on the Wolverine service.

 

West Detroit Junction is a key part of the Chicago to Detroit line, which has seen nearly $400 million in federal investments in the state of Michigan under president Obama’s High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail Program. The line now reaches speeds of 110 mph between Porter, IN and Kalamazoo, MI and will reach 110 mph on 80 percent of the track by 2016.

 

The Chicago to Detroit line is part of the Midwest Regional Rail Network, which is located in one of five densely populated mega-regions, areas already overwhelmed by congestion and in need of better transportation options. Bringing safe, fast, convenient, affordable high-speed rail to these areas will create jobs, increase economic opportunities and relieve congestion.

 

“This is yet another example of how federal, state, and local governments, as well as the railroads, are working hard to eliminate rail bottlenecks and improve service for both freight and passenger rail customers,” said Federal Railroad Administrator Joseph C. Szabo.

 

More than 100 million people call the Midwest region home. Using the Gross Domestic Product as a measure, the Great Lakes-Midwest economic region would be the fifth largest economy if it were its own country.

 

The Federal Railroad Administration and its 32 state partners are making great progress on High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail Program-related projects across the country. With $10.1 billion in federal funding, they’re moving forward with 153 projects, laying the foundation for a 21st century passenger rail network.

 

####

I am impressed that the State of Michigan is chipping in that kind of money. 

 

This improvement will take place between the Detroit and Dearborn stations.  From what I understand, the lion's share of that money will be used to rebuild a bridge deck over Junction Avenue.  There have not been rails over the existing bridge in quite some time.  The track work should actually be a small amount of money compared to the bridge, I imagine. 

 

The junction at which this work will be taking place is an at grade crossing of two lines and will prevent the passenger trains from having to travel through the diamond and then making a sharp turn to the north. The new track work will be a long, sweeping curve that will come from the west and join the CN tracks as they angle to the Northeast.  This improvement should shave eight min. off the travel time between Detroit and Chicago.  That may not sound like much but incremental improvements like this across the entire route will go a long way toward making the train option much more competitive with the Downtown to Downtown times of both driving and taking the plane.

 

 

The bridge might be the most costly part of this, but my guess is that the biggest cost component may be the changing of the dispatching software and hardware. The last I'd heard, NS wants $1 million whenever a passenger project causes a change in the points of interaction with a remote-control interlocking. For others: A point of interaction refers to a motorized switch (called a powered turnout) or a signal or some other fixture that is controlled by the dispatcher (ie: remote control). An interlocking is also called a Control Point, a location on the railroad where the dispatcher can interact with devices in the track (ie: a powered turnout) or a trackside device (ie: a signal). There is usually a control box next to the track through which dispatcher can affect those changes.

 

And to go off on even more of a tangent, here is an example. The points of interaction are the powered turnout where the two tracks switch together to become one track, as well as the signals protecting that location. The dispatcher's control box at this control point is seen at the right....

http://articles.philly.com/2012-05-13/news/31680382_1_tunnel-project-northeast-corridor-acela-express

N.J. to contribute to proposed Amtrak tunnel

May 13, 2012|By Paul Nussbaum, INQUIRER STAFF WRITER

 

The Christie administration, which killed a trans-Hudson rail tunnel because of fears of cost overruns, will pay its “fair share” of a proposed Amtrak tunnel project linking New Jersey and New York City, Christie’s transportation chief said Friday.

 

The payment would probably be a user fee to share the tunnels that Amtrak proposes as part of its $14.5 billion Gateway project, state transportation commissioner James Simpson said.

 

Simpson, in Voorhees to address the Chamber of Commerce of Southern New Jersey, declined to predict how much of the cost New Jersey would be willing to shoulder. He said he was meeting with Amtrak president Joseph Boardman and other officials to discuss cost-sharing.

A well done story from a Portland, Maine station on the dedication of station platforms for the expansion of  'Downeaster" service from Portland up to Brunswick.

 

Some of this expansion work was achieved using dollars originally directed for Ohio's 3-C Quick Start project.  The critics poo-poohed the economic benefits and claimed no one would ride a "slow train".

 

The "Downeaster" is evidence of just how wrong the naysayers can be.[/size]

 

Watch the story at: http://bathbrunswick.wcsh6.com/news/news/133729-new-train-platforms-cause-celebration-freeport-brunswick

 

The rest went to California, correct?

audit season!

 

 

 

Updated 05/21/2012 11:23 PM

 

Feds Audit East Side Access Project As MTA Stands By New Completion Date

 

By: Tina Redwine

 

 

...Asked why it was so, MTA Chairman and CEO Joseph Lhota said, "The complexity of the project as outlined in the presentation and combined with all the issues we’re finding on the Manhattan side, but most importantly on the Queens side."

 

On the Queens side, more than 700 trains roll across the Sunnyside rail yards through a switching area known as the Harold Interlocking. It is the busiest rail-switching intersection the country, and the construction has to be done at and below this interlocking.

 

The trains are from three different companies — LIRR, Amtrak and N.J. Transit — so there have also been coordination issues.

 

There have also been issues with contractors and problems removing debris from the site, but Lhota said New Yorkers can trust the revised start date and budget....

 

 

more+video:

http://www.ny1.com/content/news_beats/transit/161629/feds-audit-east-side-access-project-as-mta-stands-by-new-completion-date

Only four comments after 18 hours??

 

MTA's East Side Access project could now cost $8.2B

Completion for LIRR extension to Grand Central Terminal pushed back to 2019

BY PETE DONOHUE / NEW YORK DAILY NEWS

 

Monday, May 21, 2012, 9:46 PM

 

The LIRR extension to Grand Central Terminal may cost $920 million more than the MTA’s most recent estimate, officials said Monday.

 

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority also pushed back the East Side Access project’s expected completion date by three years to August 2019.

 

Officials cited the enormous complexity of a project that includes building new tunnels in Queens and Manhattan, and the reconfiguration of a massive juncture that’s being used by three different railroads.

 

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/mta-east-side-access-project-cost-8-2b-article-1.1082218#ixzz1vhgOqU3u

^^What is a "massive juncture?^^  Perhaps they mean massive junction.  Good ol' media!

ugh suburbanites! dont get me started...lol!

 

 

general info about all the 'big four' ny transit projects (east side access, 2nd ave subway, 7 train extension & fulton st transit center) here:

 

http://www.mta.info/capconstr/sas/

 

 

also -- weekly photos of the east side access project construction here:

 

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mtacc-esa

 

 

A well done story from a Portland, Maine station on the dedication of station platforms for the expansion of  'Downeaster" service from Portland up to Brunswick.

 

Some of this expansion work was achieved using dollars originally directed for Ohio's 3-C Quick Start project.  The critics poo-poohed the economic benefits and claimed no one would ride a "slow train".

 

The "Downeaster" is evidence of just how wrong the naysayers can be.[/size]

 

 

Brunswick is practically right next to Portland.  Speed isn't the same issue at that distance.  With regard to 3C, the naysayers had a valid point and were called every name in the book.  A "slow train" between Cleveland and Akron would be a completely different story, and would be cause for celebration just like in Maine.

^FYI, the Downeaster is a service between Portland and Boston (Massachusetts), a 100+ mile route; this is just a planned extension of the service, which despite "slow" average operating speed has been extremely successful by every railroad metric and widely supported by the state governents of MA and ME. It's not perfectly analogous to the 3Cs given the very different natures of the cities involved, but yes, it does in fact suggest that even for intercity travel, average speed is not the end all and be all.

I'm aware of the Downeaster.  But the comparison was a Portland-to-Brunswick extension vs 3C.  Throwing in Boston makes it an apples-to-oranges comparison, instead of apples-to-suitcases.  Don't mind us 3C naysayers... most of us actually like trains and we're trying to help.  It's not our fault we were born troglodytes.