High Speed Rail (Boston to... Texas?)

LA-San Diego is a very busy and popular rail corridor. It is far busier now than it was pre-Amtrak, and I believe it is the second most frequent Amtrak route in the US (only the NEC is busier).
 
A Tampa/Orlando line will get more traffic than you may realize. Disney is building it's own intermodal center linking the HSR up to it's own very extensive and widely used bus system, so the direct connection from the airport will cut out any need for tourists to rent a car.

If even a small percentage of Orlando's 48 million tourists a year use this train, in a city with the second busiest convention center in the country (where a stop will be), this train will be used extensively.

Also, Tampa's station placement is in it's most urban downtown neighborhood, Ybor City (historic Cuban distrcit). It will link into the streetcar, and is a stone's throw from the Channelside Port Authority. It would be much more convenient to travel along the HSR to Tampa to catch a cruise, than to drive a car there and pay for parking. Well maybe not, but it would be cheaper.

The point is, there is some beef to this project, it's not as idiotic as Bostonians may think, although unconventional. I wish them the best, and hope it turns a leaf in transit thinking in Florida. If nothing else, it will be impressive to see these trains jetting down the median of I-4.
 
Disney is building it's own intermodal center linking the HSR up to it's own very extensive and widely used bus system, so the direct connection from the airport will cut out any need for tourists to rent a car.

If even a small percentage of Orlando's 48 million tourists a year use this train, in a city with the second busiest convention center in the country (where a stop will be), this train will be used extensively.

While I don't know much about Orlando travel patterns, these do sound like good trips to serve with transit (although most people going to Disney are part of families/groups, for whom the on-demand $50 cab ride from the airport would be tough to beat for an infrequent train that would likely cost more if you have more than a couple in your group).

I do question whether these are the types of trips that merit federal investment in HSR--they are essentially intra-municipal journeys of less than 20 miles. If you were building the NEC from scratch today, you'd be doing it to serve intercity markets, not the South Station to Route 128 or Penn Sta to Newark markets. These Orlando trips should be served with a New Starts grant, not an HSR one.

Ybor City, while dense for Tampa, is less dense then the areas immediately adjacent to the Amtrak station in New London, CT. And relying on the Tampa trolley for transit feeder service to the station there would be like stripping away the entire MBTA system except for the Silver Line Direct Connect to South Station and saying there was decent feeder service to Boston's Amtrak station. And that's probably being unfair to Direct Connect.
 
A Tampa/Orlando line will get more traffic than you may realize. Disney is building it's own intermodal center linking the HSR up to it's own very extensive and widely used bus system, so the direct connection from the airport will cut out any need for tourists to rent a car.

It may have been nearly 20 years since I've been to Disney World, but I seem to remember there being a ridiculous abundance of free/cheap shuttle transportation from the airport to the hotels. If Disney is shutting this down, maybe people will shell out for the train. If not, well, it may be pointless.

Also, Tampa's station placement is in it's most urban downtown neighborhood, Ybor City (historic Cuban distrcit). It will link into the streetcar, and is a stone's throw from the Channelside Port Authority. It would be much more convenient to travel along the HSR to Tampa to catch a cruise, than to drive a car there and pay for parking. Well maybe not, but it would be cheaper.

Tampa apparently has a nice old station that was overlooked in order to build a new terminus. Sort of a shame.
 
Am I the only one who absolutely loves this idea? Orlando isnt the ideal vacation city, so who woudlnt want to be able to stay with your family on the gulf of mexico and then take a quick trip to disney on a hsr. Also where else is there a more perfect testing ground than the I4 median which is basically a straight shot, really wide, almost perfectly flat, and all grass. This means they can pretty much just lay rails down on the median and save a lot of time and money on the first one being built. Then once its done the disney traffic alone will make this thing a success, and it will open new doors for the more important but also more complex systems like the california network and boston to new york. Trust me I would have wanted them to do boston to ny off the bat but there are rolling hills out here, trees everywhere, and there definately isnt one straight highway from boston to new york so it would have been muchhhh more complicated, cost a lot more money, and taken much more time than tampa to orlando. Im very confident that this will be a success and will be a model for us to push for all the future developments that we all want.
 
Last edited:
So you'd fly to Tampa, stay on the Gulf and take a day-trip on the train to Disney, huh?

You can do something similar now in Italy. You can stay in Florence and take a day trip to Bologna for one of their famous meals. Actually, the train is so fast that it only takes 37 minutes, and most of it is in tunnels. The world's fastest subway?

wiki said:
The Bologna-Florence high-speed railway is a link in the Italian high-speed rail network. It is part of Corridor 1 of the European Union's Trans-European high-speed rail network, which connects Berlin and Palermo. Full commercial operations commenced on 13 December 2009. High-speed passenger trains take 37 minutes over the route compared to about 59 minutes previously.

The line's northern end is at Bologna Centrale railway station and it connects with the Milan?Bologna high-speed line and lines to Venice and Verona. Its southern end is at Firenze Santa Maria Novella railway station and it connects with the Florence?Rome high-speed line.

... goods trains will continue to use the old Bologna?Florence railway, completed in 1934 and known as the Direttissima.

The line is 78.5 km long and includes 73.8 km of tunnels.[!!]
 
All of the above.

Yes, I think that is the right approach. I have travelled on the overnight trains in Russia and can attest that it is a fantastic way to get from Moscow to St. Petersburg. I could easily see making a similar trip to Washington or Chicago. Both are perfect examples of viable slow rail applications. But we also need high speed to NYC, high speed from St. Louis to KC, etc. We need it all and I think you are right that a good deal of it can be done privately with an eye toward a profit. What we need is Virgin Rail or iRail as you've suggested. I won't hold my breath for CSX or the FedGov to make this happen.
 
Am I the only one who absolutely loves this idea? Orlando isnt the ideal vacation city, so who woudlnt want to be able to stay with your family on the gulf of mexico and then take a quick trip to disney on a hsr.

I like the interstate testing ground argument. But I think you're overestimating the number of families that would decide to travel in this way. If I'm staying with my family on the Gulf Coast (and by that, presumably you mean on the coast and not in downtown Tampa, which is not a great vacation destination), then I still have to drive 20 miles to get to the HSR station in Ybor. That 20 miles represents about 20-25% of the entire driving distance from the coast to Disney. Then I need to pay for, say, four round trip train tickets for my family. Presumably this will cost me $60 to $80. Then, I need to plan my trip around the train schedule, meaning I'll have options to depart every hour (at best) and likely every two.

Now my family actually would probably travel this way. But why would your normal, non-transit obsessed family choose the option that is more complicated, more expensive, and takes longer?
 
I like the interstate testing ground argument. But I think you [stick n move] are overestimating the number of families that would decide to travel in this way.
Well, that's what I thought when various folks rhapsodized over the potential of this line. Glad you think that; my Florida observations suggested the same, but I thought things might have changed due to something I didn?t know about.

If I'm staying with my family on the Gulf Coast (and by that, presumably you mean on the coast and not in downtown Tampa, which is not a great vacation destination)
My in-laws lived in Tampa, and whenever I visited them I wondered why anyone would want to; why anyone would think it had tourist draw or elements of a resort, seaside or otherwise; or why Ybor City was perceived as anything but a terminally boring mishmash of kitsch, inauthenticity and suburban values (and my in-laws were Cuban!). One Ybor City visit was quite a bit more than enough; it?s the kind of place Cz would rail against if he visited.

? then I still have to drive 20 miles to get to the HSR station in Ybor. That 20 miles represents about 20-25% of the entire driving distance from the coast to Disney.
Right, and once you're in your car and the kids plugged in, why get out, and ...?

Then [after herding everone through a blazing parking lot or gloomy deck] I need to pay for, say, four round trip train tickets for my family. Presumably this will cost me $60 to $80.
Dream on. You have a family of four, right? Try $200.

Then, I need to plan my trip around the train schedule, meaning I'll have options to depart every hour (at best) and likely every two.
And better not miss the last train.

Now my family actually would probably travel this way. But why would your normal, non-transit obsessed family choose the option that is more complicated, more expensive, and takes longer?
Ain't it grand to be a railfan? I'm one too. Most of us can be found on a dozen internet forums. I'm saving up for the Cathedrals Express. Had my eye on the Duchess of Sutherland last year, but she's currently withdrawn from service.

belmont square, earlier you might have somewhat contradicted your spot-on observations:

While I don't know much about Orlando travel patterns, these do sound like good trips to serve with transit?
And then you get right back on course:

?(although most people going to Disney are part of families/groups, for whom the on-demand $50 cab ride from the airport would be tough to beat for an infrequent train that would likely cost more if you have more than a couple in your group)... I do question whether these are the types of trips that merit federal investment in HSR?

Ybor City, while dense for Tampa, is less dense then the areas immediately adjacent to the Amtrak station in New London, CT.
LOL; it?s also dense for Antarctica.

And relying on the Tampa trolley for transit feeder service to the station there would be like stripping away the entire MBTA system except for the Silver Line Direct Connect to South Station and saying there was decent feeder service to Boston's Amtrak station. And that's probably being unfair to Direct Connect.
LMAO

Am I the only one who absolutely loves this idea? Orlando isnt the ideal vacation city, so who woudlnt want to be able to stay with your family on the gulf of mexico and then take a quick trip to disney on a hsr.
Well, you can see from this thread that there isn?t universal enthusiasm for this proposal.

Then once its done the disney traffic alone will make this thing a success, and it will open new doors for the more important but also more complex systems like the california network and boston to new york. Trust me I would have wanted them to do boston to ny off the bat but there are rolling hills out here, trees everywhere, and there definately isnt one straight highway from boston to new york so it would have been muchhhh more complicated, cost a lot more money, and taken much more time than tampa to orlando. Im very confident that this will be a success and will be a model for us to push for all the future developments that we all want.
Truth is, it?s somewhat true that ?if you build it, they will come.? They built a very expensive light rail line in Charlotte, partially with Federal funds. The line has riders, and is declared a success by those who authorized it, because its ridership exceeded projections. Since you can control the numbers in a projection, you can issue them to guarantee ?success? when the real numbers come in ? but the Feds? money would have been better spent in Boston.

And the Tampa-Orlando funds would have been better sent to California.
 
^^ I disagree that the funds would have been better spent in california. For a first step it is extremely imporant to have a finished running train as quickly and low cost as possible, which will allow many people to try it and see how viable it would be to go through all the steps to get one in their city. Floridas terrain and the fact that they had high speed rail in mind when building the I4 in the first place will allow this to happen much cheaper and quicker than california would. As I was saying before the flat median of I4 is going to keep the costs down substantially and allow it to be finished pretty quickly. What is the point of creating all of the tunnels, bridges, and rerouting all of the roads that it will take to complete one in the mountainous california terrain if theres a chance that it wont be a success. Not to mention the amount of money it will cost to completely finish the entire thing in florida would only be a drop in the bucket in terms of how much it would cost in california to finish one. Where are all of those extra funds in the present economy going to come from? That would leave the possibility of being left with an unfinished system that doesnt allow the critical public review process to happen. Im 100% convinced that this is the perfect "testing ground" for this type of transit. Im not saying that if I had to choose anywhere in america to build a high speed rail system I would choose here for reasons you mentioned, but Im saying that its going to be a critical first step. Once this is a success it will lead the way for other states like california to make the much bigger investment.
 
^^ I disagree that the funds would have been better spent in california. For a first step it is extremely imporant to have a finished running train as quickly and low cost as possible, which will allow many people to try it and see how viable it would be to go through all the steps to get one in their city. Floridas terrain and the fact that they had high speed rail in mind when building the I4 in the first place will allow this to happen much cheaper and quicker than california would. As I was saying before the flat median of I4 is going to keep the costs down substantially and allow it to be finished pretty quickly. What is the point of creating all of the tunnels, bridges, and rerouting all of the roads that it will take to complete one in the mountainous california terrain if theres a chance that it wont be a success. Not to mention the amount of money it will cost to completely finish the entire thing in florida would only be a drop in the bucket in terms of how much it would cost in california to finish one. Where are all of those extra funds in the present economy going to come from? That would leave the possibility of being left with an unfinished system that doesnt allow the critical public review process to happen. Im 100% convinced that this is the perfect "testing ground" for this type of transit. Im not saying that if I had to choose anywhere in america to build a high speed rail system I would choose here for reasons you mentioned, but Im saying that its going to be a critical first step. Once this is a success it will lead the way for other states like california to make the much bigger investment.

What worries the majority of us is that it won't be a success, and in turn the opposite of your post will occur and the country will see no reason to continue investing in pork barrel railways.
 
I disagree that the funds would have been better spent in california. For a first step it is extremely imporant to have a finished running train as quickly and low cost as possible, which will allow many people to try it and see how viable it would be to go through all the steps to get one in their city.

The funds would have been better spent in CA if the government were more concerned with HSR's longterm viability than scoring cheap political points by, as you said, demonstrating that something is up and running quickly - not only to increase support for HSR, but for the president that implemented it - and in a swing state. Once it's operational, a FL line could be a gamble, since the whole thing could flop, but luckily for Obama it's not going to be complete til well after the 2012 election, so the administration only needs to worry about having very visible construction crews out along Florida's most heavily trafficked interstate.
 
alright well ill be wavin to u guys out the window of the train goin by at 150 while u guys r sittin in traffic like damnn
 
lol we are not against HSR at all and given the chance we would all be on it. The point we are trying to make is that we WANT it to succeed, but if it doesn't it will lose what little support it already has.

How much support will it have if no one finds it useful? What incentive is there for people to continue to want to use taxpayer money for it when all they have seen is the line fail.

This is a very viable (probable) outcome. In CA, they have cities that are dense enough, with public transit feeders, and enough people that already travel the corridor by both plane and car. They are also in the right mindset already approving $10b in state funds, whereas FL struggled to pass SunRail.

If/when this gets built i will most certainly take a trip on it. I just don't know what i'll do for transportation when i am done.
 
If/when this gets built i will most certainly take a trip on it. I just don't know what i'll do for transportation when i am done.

If local transportation were such a problem, airports would be empty.
 
Yeah but as pointed out above, there's a huge difference in the calculus of whether to drive/taxi to a train station, take the train, and then drive/taxi away from the next station when you could just drive the whole distance in a time period that may be more than the train does its trip, but doesn't exceed the transaction cost of getting to/from stations by car and overcoming the inertia working against abandoning one form of transport for another.

And on longer routes, one of HSR's supposed advantages over every other form of transportation is its ability to overcome the hassles you deal with at airports.

Overall, feeder transit helps answer the question: why take it over some other form of transport if it doesn't deliver some additional benefit? With feeder transit, the answer is - because it's quicker and more convenient.
 
Overall, feeder transit helps answer the question: why take it over some other form of transport if it doesn't deliver some additional benefit?
Not sure what 'feeder transit' is. Can you have a bar car on feeder transit?
 
I was under the impression that "feeder transit" equals "local mass transit" and works in conjunction with long distance HSR lines.
 

Back
Top