Ron Newman
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 30, 2006
- Messages
- 8,395
- Reaction score
- 11
I don't understand why grade crossings would limit speed. Shouldn't a train go through them as fast as possible, to minimize the amount of time they are blocked?
I don't understand why grade crossings would limit speed. Shouldn't a train go through them as fast as possible, to minimize the amount of time they are blocked?
Special interest trumps public.The other thing that could be done is to lift the restriction on the number of trains AMTRAK is allowed to run between NYC and BOS. The restriction was insisted on by Connecticut yachtsman who wanted the bridges to remain open, except when a train was approaching. They diudn't want too many trains interfering with their freedom to navigate.
The TGV in France routinely travels at close to 200mph, and in 2007 it topped out at around 340mph. We're a good 25 years behind them. I'm sure Amtrak could come up with a litany of reasons why we can't have an equivalent train, but it boils down to this: the French are capable of building great trains, and we are not. The Acela is a stupid train.
About crossings. warning is time-sensitive; The gates must be activated for twenty seconds before the train crosses, so speed only affects the distance of the circuits for the gates. The problem with higher speeds is with the idiot who would mis- judge his chances to beat a train.
I am a Conductor on the Acela and the best time I have run to NY in revenue service is 3:14. It is not unreasonable to believe that 3 hours is attainable with relatively inexpensive, and minor improvements to critical areas.
I flew the other day to Newark (to make a connection) and the flight time was 41 minutes (although the ticket said 1:30 because Newark is a hellhole and thats how long it takes to get to a gate).
I think its reasonable to expect train service to take not more than 3 times airplane service. 41 minutes = 120 minutes. That's what Acela should be aiming for, a 2 hour trip between Boston and NYC. Or in other words, 3x a plane time or 1/2 a bus time.
Was your destination Manhattan? If so, how long (and how much) did it take you to then get from Newark to the city? And how long did you have to get to Logan before your flight left? It's not just the total time the train or plane is moving that counts.
If you can get from Back Bay / South End station to Penn Station in 2:59:59, I think you have a winner on your hands.
The alternative would be 15 minute ride to the airport (by cab), 30 minute wait for plane (longer in the morning, evening, alternate Thursdays), 45 minutes in air, 10 minute taxi to gate, 10 minute walk to curb, 45 minute ride into city (by cab) (longer in the morning, evening, alternate Tuesdays).
155 minutes by plane vs. 179 minutes by Amtrak. A 25-minute difference, during which I can use my laptop, walk around at will, talk on my cell phone, or use the luxuriously-large toilets (over and over again).
Living in the city, it's such a simple decision for me, personally. Even at 3:30 for Acela, I consider it so much easier than flying by plane.
Of course, I have the luxury of time on my hands.