The U.S. Northern New England High Speed Rail Corridor At True High Speed?
Vložit
- čas přidán 9. 07. 2024
- Looking at the Federal Railroad Administration's high speed rail Northern New England Corridor and what it would be like to build a true HSR line from centered around Boston, Massachusetts extending to Portland, Maine, Hartford, Connecticut, Albany, New York, and Montreal, Quebec, Canada. The route runs through the Green Mountains and The Berkshires, Springfield, Massachusetts, Manchester, New Hampshire, and Burlington, Vermont. It would potentially service 24 million people in the New England and French Canada.
Leave a comment and also join the continuing discussion at the Discord Lucid Group: / discord
Chapters:
0:00 Hey, Its Your Old Pal Lucid Stew Again!
0:09 NNEHSR Corridor Description
0:38 The NNEHSR Region
2:20 The NNEHSR Metro Areas
4:09 The Premise
4:35 Challenges, Principles, and Methods
8:35 Cost Estimate
8:58 Route Overview
12:56 Estimated Travel Times
14:17 Alternative Choices
15:03 Possible Corridor Connections
15:25 Conclusion
15:55 Up Next
16:11 See You On That Big, Beautiful Freeway
Attribution:
"The MBTA ferry Glory, which joined the fleet in June 2018, in service that September"
by Eric Kilby
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
"Two Montreal Metro MPM-10 trains at Plamondon station."
by Dllu
creativecommons.org/licenses/... - Věda a technologie
Stew for FRA project coordinator 2024!!
Realistically the FRA could be promoting HSR like this for minimal investment. People love renders and future tech ideas and all that. FRA should dream a little.
Why just for 2024? For life!
If a person were looking for a Cabinet of ppl who could get things done....
*this ain't the Supreme Court* 😆🙊 @@rebeccawinter472
Having been brought up with the "American Dream" propaganda, there are some who are afraid to dream big, lest they realize they are asleep @@LucidStew
Portland to Boston in 50min would be insane for Southern Maine. The Downeaster currently takes longer than driving and often has to stop for freight trains
Fun Fact: Other than a short section of I495, Maine has the only top speed parts in this investigation. Both I95 and an abandoned rail right of way in the I-95 vicinity have 200mph potential.
Need to include Lewiston, Augusta, Waterville, and Bangor.
@@gemini-007 I agree.From the 1930s to the 1950s there was a train called the Flying Yankee that went from Bangor to Boston in 4 hours. It was a stainless steel dream. Now look at us: entombed in private cars in stop-and-go traffic. The age of building highways is over. If Europe, Asia, and the Middle East can do rail, then so can we. See: czcams.com/video/lJbZI1_G5VA/video.html
@@gemini-007 I chickened out on any extensions.
@@robertklose2140amazingly, the original Flying Yankee train-set (a near-identical copy of the Pioneer Zephyr train-set) also still exists, and may return to service one day.
I would go for the North-South Rail Link over the 495 ring rail because it should've been built 25 years ago and I'm still bitter about it
Why not both then? I really like ring rail for Boston. I495 has the median, connections to MBTA and pretty good speed potential.
I think a 495 and/or 128 ring would be best as a regional setup, and maybe that could free up the HSR to follow the existing MBTA ROW through Framingham, Wellesley, Newton, etc. I'm not sure what the average speed would be, since it's kinda curvy, but I think the shorter distance would help a lot
Plus I'm not sure how much more capacity there is in the NEC between Sharon and South Station, unless quad tracking is an option. The viaduct in Canton would make that expensive.
The NSRL tunnel through Boston would make the HSR routings and connections with commuter rail and Logan airport so much better that I think it’s worth the extra price. But it would take so long to actually get it built that I think it’s a good idea to not make any of this dependent on it. The 495 ring rail is a clever (hopefully temporary) solution that seems to work surprisingly well
The North South Rail Link's primary benefit is the poor suffering commuters on North Station trains which now must transfer to slow MBTA subway or Greenline to get the the Financial district or back bay. The NSRL would double patronage on north side commuter trains. The secondary benefit would be the North East Corridor to New York. Patronage on that route would increase 20%. Only last in line would be the benefits from linking these corridors to Albany/Hartford, Montreal/VT/NH and Portland.
My reading on the N-S assessment was that its really more about linking core Boston more than facilitating north-south through traffic. I think if that is linked you still want to steer as much traffic as possible away from it. You don't want every route to have to squeeze through those 2 tunnels. The thing about I-495 is that the median is there along 95% of the length and it's empty doing nothing right now. The geometry is also quite speed friendly. It only dips below 125mph for 15 miles around Lawrence, Methuen, and Haverhill. You would have some expense transitioning in and out of the ROW to the various spokes of the MBTA system, though.
So you're going to bring HSR to 2 Portlands in 2 videos! Only 34 more Springfields to go if you want to check those off the list next. I'm looking forward to your Brightline West video almost as much as the line itself.
Yep 2 Portlands in a row. I anticipate this next one being the bigger challenge
I would say the other benefit here is that a lot of these places are near or are old New England summer resort towns. Getting quick access to nearby or even exactly there with say TGV style mixed use of track types to get directly there as summer specials could revitalize that industry. In fact the old Northeastern railroads ran such specials during the summer for exactly that reason.
There are so many ppl who would travel more if the price and convenience were in-line with their lives
You missed the second largest city in New Hampshire, Nashua. Nashua is probably the most rail positive city in NH. Nashua is pushing for commuter rail to Boston. Nashua has already acquired the land and paved a parking lot for the station.
That's ok. A main line doesn't have to go through every city. You could have something like MBTA extended from Lowell to Nashua and then hook up with the main line at Lowell. Ultimately you want a good main high speed line AND a good commuter rail network where it applies.
Nashua is part of the Manchester metro and has buses to Manch and Lowell
Hope they’re not just paving a parking lot but also adding weather resilient bike parking too.
Hey Lucid, you neglect to mention the important services provided by the regional rail provider in Montreal - Exo. They provide commuter rail and regional bus that has an annual rail ridership of roughly 20 Million over 5 lines - looking at pre-pandemic data.
It previously had a 6th line (Deux-Montagnes) but this has been converted to a high frequency express rail system opening in full this year - REM - also operated by the same provider, rather than by STM. Basically a new, above-ground subway.
You are correct. That was an oversight on my part.
In fact I'd get rid of Gare Centrale entirely and have it terminate in Brossard with cross-platform connections to the REM to avoid bulldozing neighborhoods.
Came here to say that. REM is on conventional track with overhead catenary too.
A few years ago, there was an announced plan to create an overnight sleeper train service between Boston & Montreal, using existing freight tracks in VT & NH.
I think that would likely be in the New England Central RR main line, that moves along the western border of NH. I did consider some of the abandoned RR lines between eastern and western NH. Some of them aren't bad. Not faster than the interstate, but probably not slower than typical Amtrak service.
@@LucidStew VIA Rail's former passenger train "Atlantic" ran until 1993 between Montreal & Halifax, via using a short-cut across central Maine. Included a stop at Lac Megantic, where a terrible freight car accident occurred in 2013.
@@RVail623 The inconvenience of Maine being pretty sparsely populated outside of the Portland area is that it has the best set of potential high speed routes in the region. If I could pick one part of this entire corridor to build it would be Boston-Portland, because it has significant 200mph stretches without much effort along I95 and a disused freight row in the same area that is almost as good.
The best damn US HSR channel strikes again. Gotta say that I havent heard of this before but I'm all for it. Ive been hoping for better connectivity to Albany (into Toronto) and Montreal for a while.
Lucid should cook the stew for the transport agencys and become the main route planer for the US.
I very much doubt that as I have no professional knowledge in the subject. This is fun with maps and it lets people imagine things in a realm somewhere between fantasy and reality.
@@LucidStew Hey I have a question on the Worcester bypass: How much time travel time would it roughly add between Albany/Hartford/Springfield and Boston South over the highway option?
Nice animations 🙂 Amtrak now has service on both sides of Lake Champlain, the 'Ethan Allen' has extended to Burlington VT (Union Station) from Rutland VT since COVID.
yeah, but it doesn't reach the border
Stew out here proving that we need a new Interstate Highway Act, except to put HSR in all the medians.
Some aren't bad. I-495 in particular is pretty good. A bill to set aside existing applicable medians might not be a bad idea. New freeways tend to be overbuilt in this manner.
@@LucidStew which is interesting, because cars aren't even allowed to take these 110mph curves at their design speed. You'd almost think highway engineers were intentionally laying the groundwork for HSR.
I love it and how this HSR line is constructed.
Considering the cost of a new Gerald R Ford aircraft carrier costs $13billion, i'd like to trade one of those for some Charlotte transit.
Even just postponing the start of construction of one would allow for alternative spending.
Did you consider making Portland’s station where Union Station once stood? It’s now conveniently called Union Station plaza but there is a growing movement to tear down this old strip mall and bring Union Station back. It’d also be slightly easier to create a PWM connector and any other local extensions to the greater Portland area
Yes, I looked at that, the airport, and the transportation center in addition to the site I chose. I was leaning toward the transportation center, but liked the idea of getting close to downtown and also the redevelopment opportunities in that area.
These videos are amazing! This is what we need to inform people of what we're missing. Great work.
Just the way you illustrated the potential and the people that would be served makes thus a good idea. It provides an easier alternative to help people explore other areas and opportunities.
A Boston North-South Stations connection is like electric power from nuclear Fusion. "Fusion is a good idea and we're working on it. We think it's about 30 years away" (and always will be)
I think this looks great, especially if we can get that COnnecticut Or Long Island train tunnel (aka the COOL tunnel as it should be branded), and connect the entire NE area into integrated train networks! Didn't you do a video recently about connecting existing LIRR lines to the NEC corridor to Hartford :-)
Yeah, no one liked the route I used. :) I agree that HSR tends to look more attractive the more HSR you have,
I rode the train from Montreal to New York City as a teenager. It was looong, so many stops, it felt like riding a city bus at times. A express anything sounds pretty good let alone 110 mph v-max. If that feeds directly into a hypothetical high speed NEC network I feel that would be quite handy and compete against future air travel for say a Montreal-Philadelphia trip.
The credible cost estimates you give are very interesting. This one seems quite reasonable for serving about 13 M at $110 M per mile. The average speeds are adequate for high speed rail.
Great video as always Stew, you're one of the very few channels I have clicked the bell icon for
Stew! Got a whoops, it's CDTA- Capital District Transportation Authority. I'm a region native, spent most of my life in the Capital Region and 6 years in Albany specifically.
Great stuff as always! The Boston ring rail was a good solution for the Boston access! I settled on giving the Framingham/Worcester line over to HSR/express trains and building a parallel train (elevated or underground probs Orange line branch) for the local stops inside the 95 ring.
Also, the Manchester to Burlington stretch is too far and too hilly for me. Boston->Albany-> Burlington(?)-> Montreal for the win.
Great video. I agree with access to Montreal via Albany. Still have interstate rights of way. Less push back from Vermont and none from New Hampshire. Plus easier connection to New York from Montreal. Didn’t hear how this tied into Logan Airport.
I was looking at the I-90 route again, like in the NEC video. It has its throughput issues, but I also really liked the idea of hooking up with the NEC near I-95. Basically adds Rhode Island to entire concept. I also find the NH-VT idea a bit of a stretch. I think they're probably thinking existing rail, which is TECHNICALLY in NH I guess. I went with the spirit of the sentiment.
There's rail that runs from Boston-ish up to just south of Franconia Notch, but I don't know if it gets used for anything besides excursions and dinner trains currently. AFAIK it doesn't connect to anything west of 93.
@@counterfit5 Yeah, I looked at one disused right of way between Concord and Lebanon that is a rail trail now, and seriously considered that, but it had some issues. There are a few options across the state there. None of them are all that great.
Boston North-South Rail Link is a standalone project with regional benefits that should be thought of in isolation from HSR. However, HSR would greatly benefit from the link being built first.
The North-South Rail Link should definitely be built - heck it should have been built with the big dig! - since it would make it feasible to turn the two commuter rail networks into one seamless regional rail system as well as providing Acela and other NE Corridor services into Northern New England.
But the 495 outer belt railway is also nice because it could also support regional rail services from Newburyport to Fall River and New Bedford without going through the city.
Being from Burlington I see 2 options for the station - follow the I-189 corridor to existing tracks and the historic Union Station on the waterfront before going around the edge of the Intervale and crossing the Winooski River back to the I-89 corridor, or stop right in the middle of I-89 by the University Mall and have the station facilities in the mall itself accessed by overpass or tunnel. Both are reasonably well-connected already and local transit being all buses is easy to reconfigure.
I love it!!! Also very much looking forward to the next video :)
One of the biggest handicaps for a speedy trip to Montreal is the stop at the border of the US and Canada. It can take a long time to look at each passenger and clear them. An Amtrak trip to Toronto has a long, long stop at the border where all the passengers have to exit the train, go through customs and re-board. This can make what should be a short trip into a long, long stop. Makes you mad that you have to go through this, but I've seen several passengers lead away and not allowed to continue, for some reason. Why they can't fix this, who knows.
I think the federal plan is a little strange. It would seriously lengthen NYC-Montreal HSR to slightly shorten Boston-Montreal...but the NYC market is much bigger.
I would just do the Boston-Worcester-Albany line to link up with the Empire Corridor and another HSR line through Burlington to Montreal. Less track, I think the terrain is easier, etc.
I agree. I don't really find the through NH and VT idea tenable, but maybe they're thinking more along current lines, which is barely in NH. The centerpieces here really are better connections between Albany, Hartford, and Boston. Most of the rest seems pretty far off, although Maine has the most potential. I liked the Portland-Boston connection the most out of all of these.
This would be great but Boston needs to have a the North South Rail Link which would benefit the MBTA
I'm all in.
Man, I wish they'd bring back regular passenger rail past Portland to Bangor, and hell, why not keep it going up 95 to Saint John or Moncton (or both) in Canada. Could be a very, very needed economic driver for a pretty depressed region.
The "Gull" passenger (& freight) train once ran between Boston & Halifax, until it was discontinued in 1960. Probably due to deteriorated rails, so that it's speed was not competitive with road vehicles.
Yeah, I grew up in Bangor. My dad used to take that train to visit his grandparents in Portland when he was a kid in the 40s & 50s. Well, I'm not sure if it was specifically the Gull, but it was some passenger train. It was another victim of the defunding and general dismantling of passenger service in the US in the post-War years, sadly. Heck, Bangor used to have a street car, too. Now, it barely has a functioning bus.
They tore down the gorgeous train station in Bangor and put up an ugly strip mall that's still there today. They gutted much of the historic downtown for "urban renewal," which just turned the downtown into a lot of mostly empty buildings and vast seas of parking. You see pictures of Bangor pre-1960 and it's thriving. Now, it's a wasteland. I'd love to see a passenger train brought back, and the potential for jobs & new life it could bring. Not that I'm ever moving back.
That said, I still have family and friends there, and I'd like to visit more often, but my wife & I live car-free because we live in an area where we can. We have to rent a car if we want to go to Maine, and driving in the Northeast Corridor SUCKS. I'd much rather train, but it's not really an option, not only because there isn't service to Bangor, but because the service between DC and Portland takes for-danged-ever.
Maine does have some good options in terms of speed and its interstate, freight, and abandoned rail rights of way.
For access to Gare Centrale, you have the track jump from the CP right of way to the CN right of way. There is a cliff and a very dense neighborhood right there.
If arriving from the CPKC side, where the Delson commuter line passes you can either terminate at an upgraded Lucien L’Allier station or tunnel under downtown to reach under Gare Centrale.
You could also continue along CN trackage to Victoria Bridge to hook up directly at Gare Centrale. This would either cross over the current bridge (slow and busy) or a brand new bridge beside it. However any rail crossing as to contend with the St Lawrence Seaway right at the south shore. The CN bridge as a dual draw bridge that maintains rail traffic while ships pass under each section. The CP bridge is a single draw bridge that as rail stopped for every ship. Also the CP right of way sits in the Kahnawake Indian reservation and any construction there would be very contentious.
As far as connections are concerned you do have the main Via Rail corridor from Windsor ON to Quebec City going to Toronto and Ottawa at Gare Centrale and the new light metro that is set to go to the airport in 2027. There is a project currently at the proposal stage for Toronto to Quebec City along former CPKC right of way. The government arm in charge is calling for proposal at either 125mph and/or 180mph or more. See hfr-tgf.ca.
Montreal would be a major challenge for sure. It would help to have a current right of way electrified across the river. Otherwise, getting a new bridge across from the south or the east... its not impossible, but I didn't see an easy way to do it. The island was the mostly difficult part I looked at. I considered a tunnel, but it would be fairly long. It's not part of this corridor, but what appeared to make more sense to me for a new HSR right of way was coming up from the southwest after crossing the border on the east side of Lake Ontario.
Using Boston as a centerpiece connection is quite a brilliant idea
I wonder if using the Lowell Line (Commuter Rail) to get to Manchester before heading up to Canada wouldn't be a better idea,
like [ Boston > Lowell > Nashua > Manchester ] I'm not saying that it must stop at every station on every trip, cause the [ Burlington-MA | Lowell-MA | Nashua-NH ] corridor is already booming, and with the right investments it can deliver something truly special.
Also, the Boston to Portland-Me line could include on and off a stop at the best city in the area Portsmouth-NH that place is just stunning.
I don't know to what extent this would make sense before becoming wishful thinking lol
Ohh the speeds are just not good enough, the Lowell line, for example, can already peak at 75Mph for a bit before arriving at the Woburn station, I recorded 82mph a few times before but I don't know if that was standard or someone just pressing on cause they could.
If we are gonna go through the troubles of connecting these areas and spending all this money let's do the right thing a build a proper and real HSR, what's a few billion more, and we need to stop thinking of HSR as a for-profit endeavor and more like a public good which it is.
Ohh and Great videos as always. 👍🏽
In these I'm generally trying to get away from the complications of existing rail asap. Both Boston and Montreal I only settled for MBTA and STM ROWs because I couldn't figure anything else out that would have been reasonable. I95 out on both ends was more function on the I495 ring rail decision. In my mind the Boston area has this unfathomably good future electrified rail set up with ring rail on I95 and I495, and all the MBTA spokes being able to get you just about anywhere, but I had to ground things somewhere. :)
Boston is called The Hub for a reason!
Since I was a kid they've talked about extending the Lowell Line north to Nashua-Manchester-Concord and even managed a short term experimental trial a long time ago. Back then north of Lowell it was double-tracked, but not any more (don't know when.... 80s or 90s?)
What I don't see happening is using the I-495 corridor to include a rail line - it's perhaps too hilly, or the urban stretches get too narrow to have rail in the median or even next to the outside of the highway. It's pretty much need to use existing rail lines that connect Worcester to Ayer to Lowell.
stew doing gods work out here
This is really three separate corridors: Albany/Hartford - Boston; Montreal - Manchester - Boston; Boston - Portland. I'd be interested in hearing a cost breakdown for each (and the 495 ring). Of these three Albany/Hartford to Boston is strongest for ridership (based on current travel and also population density) and the Montreal corridor weakest by far once past Manchester NH. Manchester and Portland are natural extensions of a Northeast corridor, especially if that was improved to deliver a potential 90 minute NY-BOS trip.
I have the following:
Albany/Hartford-Boston $30 billion
Montreal-Manchester $14 billion
Boston-Portland $10 billion
I495 I-95-to-I-95 $20 billion
Separation of freight and passenger service should be done nation wide. This would give a great improvement to Amtrak service at least cost.
Really solid video. A 3 to 3.5h Montreal to Boston trip would be packed for hockey games - that’s for sure. They’d have to run a few extra trains on those days. I could see lots of packages on that train. Would almost be like a - what do you Americans call it - a TailGate?
Bruins-Habs party train
Even if you’re going with diesel for your higher speed train, I can’t believe Amtrak is only targeting 110 MPH. The UK has had 125 MPH diesels since the late 70’s running on fairly restrictive loading gauges.
The federal government considers 110mph high speed and that is the mid-term target. See Illinois HSR and the VA-NC S-line as examples. The problem is that 110mph is class 6 rail. Class 7 is 125mph, but that and higher classes need to be sealed corridors. Class 6 does not need to be sealed. It's also easier to get freight to agree to class 6. These various factors are part of the reason that Brightline's class 7 right of way is newly built(also freeway ROW adjacent)
Interesting point for N.H. I looked into the original plan years ago and nh was the 1st to back out. A majority of the planned route was the abandoned northern mainline and the state didn't want to drop the money on restoration, last I'd heard, the plan was going to avoid the majority of nh and route through Portland and Lewiston to use sl&a trackage most the way. However nh seems to have something against new passenger rail, as the downeaster was mainly funded by the state of maine, and they seem to be killing progress on the over 20 year old plan to upgrade an existing row to serve nashua, manch, and concord. Pease while being labelled as international only has 2 terminals, both served by allegiant. I wish it would grow further, but mht is the main airport in nh and one of the better established along the corridor. also the eastern division has long been abandoned and in nh, most the track is more of an industrial branch, while in maine, I believe they've used most of the row to set up roads. There is also the possible legal issues of running hsr right across from a nuclear plant. I'd love to see something like this happen and bring rail back into the granite state, but this state just seems to hate funding passenger projects
The corridor puts them in an odd spot where it has to run through there basically just cuz(with the exception of the ~15 miles connecting Maine). I would assume this happens northward on the New England Central ROW that Amtrak uses now, but of course that doesn't do much good for most of New Hampshire.
Yo you forgot to include Montreals Commuter Rail EXO and REM 2:54
Stew, I'd obviously choose both a north-south Boston connecter and ring rail through 495 ROW. I'm not sure if they'd build the interstate ROWs but it would definitely be nice if my hometown did receive a rail station on 495 ROW (I live in a small city of about 60,000.)
We are doing so in California and Nevada. That will be the test. If it works out, I think you will see the idea expand. Not every place has good medians, but Massachusetts certainly does in the I495 ROW.
Nice video! Something small but it would be awesome if you also included the average speed in km/h
Another great vid, Lucid.
The North-South link in Boston would probably be worth it anyway and mostly due to the improvements that through-running commuter rail brings, being able to through-run Amtrak (including HSR) is a side benefit.
As to what other connections could be built from the New England + NEC + Empire corridors? I'd say one missing link is the NYC - Montreal connection. Which should be possible to do while using plenty of the tracks already built for the other corridors? (oh, and there's the Canadian corridor as well, of course. Detroit/Windsor - Toronto - Ottawa - Montreal - Quebec)
Only problem is that Albany-Montreal is not currently in a corridor. High speed VIA to Detroit would theoretically be one, but I'm saving that conclusion for a video on the subject after the FRA HSR corridor videos are done, since it has the potential to connect 3 of those corridors.
@LucidStew if I might make a suggestion: after the VIA corridor one, how about a video summarising the whole network. I.e. looking at missing bits like Albany-Montreal, maybe also pointing out bits that don't seem to be based on any actual need. And comparing the total cost to the funding freeways and airports get every year.
@@GustavSvard When I made my first videos about CAHSR, someone suggested that I put together my own U.S. HSR map, but I really didn't know anything about HSR outside of CAHSR! Most of the videos since have been an education process in aid of that idea. since southeast Canada is now part of that, that will likely be included. It might be truncated somewhat, perhaps only Detroit to Montreal, since it will be solely what *I* think is a good idea without outside consideration.
I'm not ready to get into the nuts and bots of cost comparison, nor am I sure if I'd even be able to do that. I may end up comparing specific proposed projects at some point, like lets say a freeway expansion is proposed. What if you put in rails instead of more lanes, that type of thing.
Nice
I get the desire to avoid existing rail rights of way. But that isn't what France did when they built high-speed. The core high-speed lines were "greenfield" trunks starting in the suburbs through the countryside where construction was cheaper (and they used highway rights of way as well). But existing rail lines were upgraded to get to the urban core and also to go beyond the main trunk (for example I rode a "high-speed" train from Paris to Geneva, Switzerland that diverged from main line at Macron and went twisting through the Alps at less than 60 mph for the second half of its run. The total travel time was quite reasonable through because of the fast stretch.
Interested in the choice to go down 495 to connect from the west (Albany/Hartford) to the NEC to get into Boston. I think I'd suggest continuing east on I-90 and switching to the MBTA commuter line at Riverside (I-95) which is a pretty straight route and already in discussions to be electrified. MBTA up from North Station to Lowell is also pretty straight and could save a lot of costs. None of these corridors are heavy freight routes; it is not unreasonable to think that freight could share a sub- 160mph line (as in the NEC).
The general idea is recognizing how our system is different and the workarounds. Ideally we'd be able to electrify everything and the entire exercise becomes much easier. Greenfield not impossible. I did have some in Canada. Most other places its difficult. I looked at this after several comments from Europeans. European development is way more compact. The room to work in cutting new rights of way very often isn't there or would be very expensive in the U.S. Electrification in Europe is also far more extensive. Look at the trouble CAHSR and Texas Central have run into and that's almost all farm land in both cases. It might work better in places where land is cheaper, like the Atlanta-Charlotte Greenfield alternative. All of this is kind of the issue with trying to get HSR off the ground. Once some is established more will make more sense and it will probably be easier to accomplish.
“The MBTA operates..” followed by anything should always be followed with an asterisk (I live in Boston)
I was just watching a video about various issues the MBTA is having. 😄
Honestly once the local side of the N/S connector + MBTA electrification is included I don't think there's serious competition between the connect or and a ring route. Boston needs to be connected REGARDLESS of HSR, and it's the incremental cost of adding HSR to the tunnel that needs to be compared to the ring route.
If you want riders, I would suggest Boston to Cape Cod, with a spur to Martha'a Vineyard and perhaps out to Provincetown.
World considered high speed rail is 250 kph 155 mph. If the rail corridor also handles freight then high speed rail is considered 200 kph 124 mph. 110 mph track speed is fast train travel that SuperLiner II cars can easily handle. They were designed for 125 mph. 110 mph track speed has a lot of achievable attributes. Above 110 mph the rail corridor has to be sealed in the USA drastically changing the character of the rail corridor. Full quad gates can be used for public road crossing for fast trains up to 110 mph. 110 mph allows Amtrak to compete with highway driving times and is a nice fast pace for passengers to experience in the comfort of Amtrak's Superliner II cars. Many freight rail corridors currently used by Amtrak could be upgraded to 110 mph track speed without changing the basic rail corridor. Some places it might be a separate passenger train track might be a solution.
Great video, this would be an MBTA project but what would you think of running a CR service between Worcester and providence on the CSX right of way for the Worcester-providence railroad?
Its the best connection between the two. I think the entire region has a lot of potential in that respect.
montreal where i live also has the atm exo extremely badly named commuter rail system.
You stated that you'd be keeping freight and passenger rail separated. But I'm familiar with the Hartford Line/ Springfield Line and it currently has freight. So the only way you'd keep them separated would to build two new lines in addition to the two already there. How would that work? I don't think there's enough room on the ROW
The presumption is that the right of way would be electrified and that all traffic could share that. There is room for an additional track most places. The distance and the frequency could accommodate most HSR traffic on a single track with some passing loops. There may need to be some adjacent land acquisition, but there are a few places with reasonable distances of open land along the right of way.
You can also separate passenger and freight temporally. This is typically accomplished by running freight overnight.
Lastly, they are guiding principles, but they're not beyond reproach.
I think to make this work you need to go ahead and build the north south connecter through Boston even if it is more expensive. That way you can integrate this with the northeast regional much easier. Also if you don't build it as part of a project like this you are never going to build it.
All very nice but, IMHO, existing train service just needs to increase. As an example, somebody trying to travel from Springfield, MA to Boston by Rail has a single direct routing as part of the Long Distance Lake Shore Limited in the evening. Otherwise, they would need to take a Hartford Line train to New Haven, CT & transfer to a connecting NE Regional or Acela to Boston. A New service along this section and on to Albany was included on the 2035 ConnectUs map, so additional frequencies could be possible in the upcoming years
For sure, but why not push for high speed trunks where you can get them?
@@LucidStew Absolutely. I wasn't saying that it would be an either/or situation. Ideally, both would be done. In the short to medium term, services would be increased on the existing legacy network whilst, in the long term, dedicated high speed tracks are being built. However, If CAHSR is any indication, total construction time could be on the scale of a decade or more
@@TheWolfHowling From a logistical standpoint it seems like the sooner the better on the more capital intensive parts of various networks. Otherwise you get new development that makes things that much more complicated. I'm not sold on the chicken before the egg stance. I don't think there is a benefit to waiting for local transit. Look at NYC. Plenty of local transit there. Impossible to get through or around at high speed unless you want to spend about $100 billion.
I'm interested in how you go about designing the corridors in detail. Since most of your proposed alignments run along interstate routes to keep costs in check there are many areas where the curve radii do not allow for an alignment capable of supporting true HSR speeds. In those cases, do you build tunnels and viaducts to cross the interstate or have a slow zone there? You also mentioned tilting trains, is the tilting function needed to reach your projected ride times and avg speeds? And lastly, what is the minimum curve radius you worked with to come up with these alignments?
You end up with zones that are around the same speed in their length. What you're looking for mainly in upgrading a right of way is two fast parts with a slow part in the middle. Eliminate the slow part and you end up with a much longer fast part. What is less productive is eliminating a slow part in the middle of a slow part because then you just have to slow back down and save little time for the expensive. You also have to consider passenger comfort and the amount of time it takes a train to accelerate to high speed and back. For instance, you wouldn't take 5 miles accelerating to 186mph only to immediately start slowing for a stop. I don't have a minimum curve radius and one isn't really need because interstate curves generally are not less than 1/2 mile radius. There are exceptions. A mechanically or pneumatically tilting train can maintain speed through a curve with about 2/3 the radius that a conventional train would maintain the same speed through, at lower speeds. In the video I talk about ~90-95mph averages. This would tend to indicate a lot of 1/2 mile curves. Not surprising for an interstate running through narrow river valleys. Things can always be made faster, but I felt like the price and the average speed told the story that parts of this don't really work for the concept(like VT and NH), whereas I think it would go pretty well between Boston and Portland. 127mph average for that was not going out of my way to make it faster.
@@LucidStewjust for reference on radii that are needed for a HSR operation without relying on the availability of tilting rolling stock: In Germany the highest permitted lateral acceleration in curves is 0.2G for testing only. Combined with a maximum banking angle of the rails at ~6.8° this would require a radius of at least 2300m (assuming the mimimum speed for true HSR at 250kph), which is almost 3 times the 1/2 mile radii seen on the interstate ROW. Granted, this could be reduced by a factor of up to 50% with the use of tilting trains but more realistically the radii should be at least 1mile to have some margin (which could be used to later run trains at up to 270kph).
However I am not aware of any trains that currently operate with tilting technology that achieve true HSR speeds on conventional lines (the geometry of which dont allow for true HSR), or any trains with active tilting technology used for speed gains to or above 250kph other than the JR N700. Add to this that many tilting trains in the past have been plagued with unreliability (most notably the ICE T and more recently the Alstom Avelia Liberty), rendering a corridor specifically designed with the reliance on speed benefits of a tilting train as a somewhat reckless gamble.
I'd argue that most of the alignment for any newly built HSR corridor should have a minimum radius of 2 miles which would allow for over 180mph speeds on conventional trains today and well over 230mph on tilting trains in the future. Now the thing that would be interesting to me is how that would affect the cost estimate for this network and how much more infrastructure such as engineering structures would be needed to meet this requirement.
@@vzs01 I can answer that. It would be somewhere prohibitively expensive to impossible, which is why I stuck to slower speeds. I'm aware that higher speeds require larger radii, but those are not reasonably possible in most places in this corridor. Really only in Maine. You're dealing with a lot of topographical problems that would equate to astronomical amounts of tunnel and you'd also be looking at demolishing probably hundreds of route adjacent properties, which would realistically never get off the ground.
Hopefully you can touch on the border in the next video. Currently, in a dedicated wing of the terminals checks for US and Canada are done at the Canadian airport, but the train stops right at the border and checks everybody before proceeding. It also doesn't make any of the US bound trains a good option for any domestic travel within Canada.
I talked about it a little in the Empire Corridor video. Its crazy that trains are stopped at the border. You'd think the two governments could come up with something that makes a modicum of sense.
@@LucidStewThere is a plan to create a preclearance facility in Gare Centrale for US-bound trains, for the Adirondack and the hoped-for extension of the Vermonter to Montreal.
Can you use higher degree of superelevation if you are not sharing with freight? This might ease the need for train tilt.
the curve radii I'm using are somewhat generalized, but they are assuming new right of way specifically for HSR, so these speed limitations already assume separation with freight.
There is a great line (or was) from Burlington across lake Champlain on a causeway called the causeway. The causeway's still there (in the lake) but the tiny intermediate towns in VT are encroaching on the right of way. I donno if they'd want an active passenger railroad through there, but I think even if you have to go through both Schenectady and Rutland ('cause the direct routes are disconnected) it would still be faster than going through Plattsburg - although going on the west shore of Lake Champlain is very scenic, it's kinda curvy. I had a pretty good do on my Boston & Albany re-do but it never got past Springfield. I seem to do better when I'm so absolutely appalled at their proposals: www.rail-nyc-access.com/boston-and-albany-railroad
Yeah, doesn't look bad. Might need to blow up a subdivision or two to make it work. :) This is an issue I see a lot where pretty decent rights of way are converted to rail trails(or are just sold and developed). Or, what looks like decent open space to connect ROWs turns out to be protected because overdevelopment has caused many areas to start setting outlying areas aside for preservation since they wrecked the urban and suburban spaces.
As usual, you were far more brave and bold. The entire proposal seemed expensive with such a basic treatment proposed in the video. I didn't feel like raising it to the next level would reasonable. As a result, I didn't even look into shortcuts beyond the cheap and obvious. It's possible my regional adjustment for MA is too high. If so, further improvement might be more tenable than I imagined. I like the tunnel concepts, particularly Fentonville-Brookfield and Spencer-Worcester. I entertained a tunnel out of Worcester to the east myself, but couldn't figure out a good way of getting into the ground.
@@LucidStew Yup, property's a big problem and getting worse. Of course, if like TC you don't have a legitimate reason... I did this proposal for a tunnel trans-Hudson that connected to a line running south as supplement for Penn Station. The whole thing would be underground except the waterfront transfer facility which is desperately needed in Manhattan. (shortest rail route is like 220 miles longer. But that's a Park called... I don't remember, no one goes there... Anyway, this is a SPECIAL park that a bunch of very rich from Manhattan pushed through. So using the waterfront for the purpose for which it was intended would be like a 10 year legal battle with miserable odds. But I think there is an advantage to all those legal fees. Issues with rail are more and more tied up with that, and all the principals just happen to be lawyers. Never any engineers. (Not that engineers would know any batter what to build.)
Did I read right that connecting Boston North and South would cost $13+ billion?
yep. If you want to compare it to a recently completed project, see $11 Billion for East Side Access in New York City. A new station, a couple miles of tunneling and reconfiguring a rail yard.
That's for the preferred alternative with improvements. Basic preferred alternative could be "as little as" $10B. I read quite a bit of the assessment. The preferred alternative seems like a reasonable choice relative to the other alternatives. The big benefit of that alignment would be a station at Haymarket that would connect to the orange, green, and blue lines.
@@LucidStew That would be my dream - I could rail to work in a single trip, one-stop connect to rail to the relatives in Maine, and one-stop connect to my favorite city, MTL.
Keeping the rail unconnected but building a massive motorway tunnel sure was smart.
/s
I may be a bit of an extremist on infrastructure, but they shoulda built the rail connection and just got rid of the motorway.
@@GustavSvard I might do a video about this one of these days because its an intriguing subject. Of course the Big Dig was an absolute disaster anyway, but why did they take a pass on including the N/S connection with such an obvious opportunity...
Montreal to NYC via Albany would be interesting
there is bus and rail service to both, but not high speed north of Albany
Hi Stew, are you using a google earth overlay to calculate your alignment speeds?
For my speed calculations I use Google maps and a spreadsheet.
@@LucidStew like a VBA application referencing the topographic data?
@@LucidStew My province, Alberta, put forward a mandate for the transport minister to begin creating a regional rail service, similar to Metrolinx in Ontario. However, I have some suggestions, from my experience living and travelling around Europe and I'm hoping to have this as part of my proposal.
@@Jay-jq6bl no, nothing that complicated. I check curve radii and figure out speed zones. The reason I use Google Maps specifically for that is the distance measure for that shows you distance ticks along a path. As a result, you can lay down the path, check some curves and say "ok, this 10 miles can support 125mph" enter 10 miles in the 125mph row of the spreadsheet.
@@Jay-jq6bl As far as topo goes, I will usually fly through an area in 3D with Google Earth Pro, Google Earth Studio, or UE5(just depends what's handy) to get a sense if grades might be questionable. Then I'll double check with Google Earth Pro using a path with "show elevation" to see if I need something like a tunnel, bridge or viaduct.
3:00
Montreal also has commuter rail, but that is operated by the reigonal tranport authority, ARTM (Autorité régionale de transport métropolitain). Though it is not expansive, i think it should include EXO trains running on this proposed corridor.
11:39
I understand a priority is intermodality with airports, but that cannot come at the cost of serving the city poorly. why is manchester station nowhere near manchester??
12:39
there is absolutely no chance of that happening, and there's a canadian pacific line literally right next to it! just use CP's infrastructure instead of demolishing a neighbourhood.
13:52
passport checks accounted for?
Please do the Southeast next🙏🙏🙏
I'm going in alphabetical order
@@LucidStew ohh i’m dumb
@@joeshulman3090 That also might be a two-parter. I made the mistake of trying to squeeze the NEC into 1 video and it backfired. SEHSR is just as big a concept even though it remains unbuilt.
Why not go along the Worcester line for access into south station? Worcester line directly accesses back bay and south station. How much more time from ALB-BOS does your routing around 495 to connect to the NEC then jnto south station add i wonder.
You'd probably need to add one or two more tracks to Worcester line.
I've done this in another video for an alternate NEC trunk. It just seemed like things would be crowded in the longer view. The thing about ring rail is that it would allow a lot of different ways into the core. If they're all electrified, Boston then has 7-8 options there, any 2 or 3 of which are perfectly fine.
We need to get North Station and South Station connected in Boston.
North-South connection with at least 4 tracks and built so it can fit the full sized big american trains plus electrification above that. Build it right.
@@GustavSvard Given the state of MA NIMBYs, Regulations, and Cost-Cutting. They probably would only do two tracks. Def needs to be 4 tracks if they want to have any sort of future expansion in mind.
I lobe these videos but please make them a bit slower with more detail on the route like your oulder ones
The FRA HSR corridor videos are all high level like this and generally run about this long.
As long as it’s faster than driving, I’m cool with it. If the trains are averaging at anything lower than 120 mph, you could still use the Amtrak semen charger trains
It's not like they're 120 mph to the whole time. The reason the averages are above 110 in most instances is because a fair amount is at 150mph or above.
@@LucidStewOh yeah of course, what I’m saying is if the average speed of those routes are around 100 miles an hour, I feel like at that point you might as well just use the semen trains, because if you were to use the Alston alcea express trains, then you would be under utilizing them. Also, you forgot about the new REM transit system in Montreal
@@RailMan102_Productions It's definitely possible. 125mph trains on halfway decent HSR lines are slower, but not terrible in the range where HSR works best. Something like this would probably be fine at 125mph aside from Maine, which has some good potential for top speed.
The speed projected is not HSR. Take a look at Spain and Italy for true HSR.
It is certainly not fast in totality, but it is able to reach high speed in parts.
Other than boston and mtl, the other towns are much too small for all of this of investment
If they start considering planning it in 10 years and they start planning the Environmental Studies, then do the Studies than NIMBY Opposition blocking it for decades then land acquisitions then actually building the thing for 30 years wirh anything that can happen while building it then maybe we get Phase one by around 2100 or later 😂 ( there's at least 50 delays)
:) It is a very long process, but all the more reason to be talking about it now.
the n maine line should go north east from downtown portland to portland airport and the nearby medium sized vites of auburn not the one with the famous university and lewiston.
We need just standard rail to start, there is only one train for Alb to Bos. But this was a cool video.
Boston-Albany got a Corridor ID grant, so its in the works. I'm guessing the corridor would be along the CSX ROW, which isn't the fastest, and they'd probably be resistant to improvement.
Eastward, ho!
albany montreal makes more sense because it coonect better with the empire corridor a to upstare new york midium sized cities none of which have flight to montreal.
6:12 Germany be like: 👀
Sometimes you can't. It is to say that at-grade is preferable from a cost perspective.
@@LucidStewin Germany, the most tunnel-intesive variants for projects are frequently chosen to please NIMBYs (see Brenner Nordzulauf)
conspiracy theory alert: I believe that really the automobile industry might be behind it intentionally driving up the cost of the project in hopes of having it delayed or even canceled
@@entized5671 Germany is just a little more behind the concept than we are. We have a lot of conservatives that don't want to contribute to anything they themselves don't use. I'm sure lobbyists are also working overtime to protect their various interests since our system is awash in corporate money.
100mph average speed is pretty good for such a mountainous area
It's not terrible considering no tunnels
why no surburban stops in montreal southern suburbs with a thur bus to vallefield and corn wall ontario.
Maglevs don’t need to be as straight as conventional rail
Albany 3:22, "CPTA" CDTA
do I get a star?! ;)
Too many stops is part of the reason amtrack is too slow as it is, the fewer stops on the high speed line the better.
HSR stations are usually built quad-track to allow express services to pass through. If demand wills it, it’s just a matter of running another train service
Boston already has the big dig tunnel between south station and north station. remove the highway and replace with rail and boom s-bahn
I've been wondering if this is possible or if it makes sense. I think either way the Big Dig portion of I93 should eventually be removed.
When that was happening I was paying attention out of the corner of my eye and never dove into it, but it seems wild that the north-south connection wasn't part of that project.
@@LucidStewIt was originally planned to be, but that was cut for cost reasons. And the tunnel doesn't have enough vertical clearance for rail.
New Hampshire is an underrated state
I've heard it's alright for fighting
@@LucidStewonly on Saturday Nights
Except when you live in Boston and thousands of them flood the city with their pickup trucks every day
@@gumbyshrimp2606 I've heard its a nice place to fight in the summer and a nice place to fight in the winter.
2 HSR(maglevs) can do this Portland to Albany and Boston to Montreal with a transfer station along 495 and other links with regional rail at higher frequencies
When are Vermont New Hampshire Massachusetts Connecticut and Rhode Island becoming one State?
Probably around the time that California becomes 5. :)
We need to become our own country
New England: NE
Nebraska: NE
coincidence??
Northern Nebraska HSR? Kinda rules out Omaha-Lincoln
@@LucidStewbut it can still go through the Omaha Indian reservation
Respectfully, it's absolutely foolish to use Quebec's land area in any sort of calculation here (the VAST majority of Quebec has nearly no population density whatsoever). Not to mention that yhe US has no authority to do anything regarding Quebec other than renting track rights...
Pretty sure no one suggested that the U.S. was going to invade Canada to build HSR and the irrelevance of the land area to population density is made clear in the video.
Yeah, i was pretty dissapointed to see that. More service for northern quebec is great, but really not the scope of this project. Really should have just counted the montreal metro area, and everything south of there to the border.
Too slow. Too expensive.
Don't bypass worcester !!!! Historical rail city, 2nd biggest city in new england 😭😭😭😭😭😭😭
I promised several people I would after not bypassing it in the NEC video. :)
Revive branch lines and run frequent service
The North-South connector would probably be the better option, with a regular speed regional train along 495, since the commuter rail needs it anyways.