Slick Vik Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 I wouldn't trust Slick's numbers. He'll swear up and down about the ridership numbers of current and proposed lines, but I haven't forgotten the line about "Houston has no tourists", which hasn't been recanted.Number one houston is not a tourist city. On another notehttp://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2014/12/28/amtrak-san-joaquin-corridor-nears-ridership-revenue-record/http://abc7news.com/traffic/bay-area-amtrak-ridership-up-despite-low-gas-prices/453327/http://patch.com/california/healdsburg/local-amtrak-corridor-nearly-sets-revenue-ridership-records-0http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/paffairs/news/pressrel/14pr127.htmhttp://www.fresnobee.com/2014/12/24/4301345/more-valley-riders-took-amtrak.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TowerSpotter Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 Elon musk has announced Texas will mostly likely have the hyperloop on twitter as well as saying he might even build tesla manufactoring site.http://www.wired.com/2015/01/hyperloop-test-track-elon-musk-takes-critical-heavy-lifting/ 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronTiger Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 Wow the arrogance of that title.... It's not arrogance, it's just the way cities are built and operate. Apparently, some of you think it's the jingoistic "We don't want that European stuff in MURICA" talk that has (supposedly) blocked rail progress in the States. What they're trying to say is that it's uneconomical to build to the airports just in the way people would travel on HSR. Rail is a highly complex system which has an effectiveness based on density and not so much total population, which is why there's not a straight ratio for rails to road lanes. The same two rails across a few lanes could hamstring one corridor's capacity (like, say, in Texas) while doing the reverse (rails to roads) in the Northeast could also be disastrous. The reason rail works wonders in places like in Japan, India, Europe, the American Northeast, and others is because the density is very high. Texas? Not quite as much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luminare Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 (edited) The reason why rail works in other places is because of ease of use and its inter-connectivity to other systems. Everyone freakin gets caught up with this density crap! That's not what necessarily makes rail successful and its a big reason why people don't think we need it. Its how a particular system gets you from point A to point B. If you only build your system to get from point A to point Aa then it won't be very desirable and would be used less. The future of transportation is multiplicity and not exclusivity which is the biggest hindrance upon American transportation systems. I think people assume that these systems are suppose to have legs on their own and when one fails we are all the sudden surprised that it fails or one doesn't get the amount of ridership it should. When highways pile up because its the only way to get around we all are baffled as to why. This is why I think it's foolish to imagine a world without the automobile because it plays a key part in a transportation ecosystem. Each services different needs, but when you only have ONE style of transport trying to service ALL needs efficiently then it collapses under its own weight and I don't understand why this is so hard to understand. Screw density because it's merely a component to a greater argument where the foundations of our current transportation network are built on a failed logic of exclusivity of use. Edited January 19, 2015 by Luminare 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slick Vik Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 Point a to point b seems to work for megabus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronTiger Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 (edited) The reason why rail works in other places is because of ease of use and its inter-connectivity to other systems. Everyone freakin gets caught up with this density crap! That's not what necessarily makes rail successful and its a big reason why people don't think we need it. Its how a particular system gets you from point A to point B. If you only build your system to get from point A to point Aa then it won't be very desirable and would be used less. The future of transportation is multiplicity and not exclusivity which is the biggest hindrance upon American transportation systems. I think people assume that these systems are suppose to have legs on their own and when one fails we are all the sudden surprised that it fails or one doesn't get the amount of ridership it should. When highways pile up because its the only way to get around we all are baffled as to why. This is why I think it's foolish to imagine a world without the automobile because it plays a key part in a transportation ecosystem. Each services different needs, but when you only have ONE style of transport trying to service ALL needs efficiently then it collapses under its own weight and I don't understand why this is so hard to understand. Screw density because it's merely a component to a greater argument where the foundations of our current transportation network are built on a failed logic of exclusivity of use.I understand the allure of rail, and I think there are places in America that could use more rail, but pretending that "density doesn't matter" is, in a word, wrong. This abstract by UC Berkeley (a train-friendly, liberal institution, might I add), and I quote" “mass transit” needs “mass” ". Highways filling up doesn't mean a mass transit plan is necessarily needed, it's usually because of a generally ineffective surface street grid (the lack of a major north-south road near the Uptown area is why 610 is worst around the spot...and why placing it over Post Oak Road was a disaster) or badly-timed stoplights. (FWIW, even though they're intercompatible, highways and surface streets are distinct transportation components that fit into this "ecosystem" you refer to)Getting back onto topic, if you actually read the article, it mentioned that the banks, not TxDOT, the NIMBYs, or the government, was the main cause for not going to the airport by not loaning them the EXTRA BILLION OR SO that they wanted. Edited January 19, 2015 by IronTiger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slick Vik Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 I understand the allure of rail, and I think there are places in America that could use more rail, but pretending that "density doesn't matter" is, in a word, wrong. This abstract by UC Berkeley (a train-friendly, liberal institution, might I add), and I quote" “mass transit” needs “mass” ". Highways filling up doesn't mean a mass transit plan is necessarily needed, it's usually because of a generally ineffective surface street grid (the lack of a major north-south road near the Uptown area is why 610 is worst around the spot...and why placing it over Post Oak Road was a disaster) or badly-timed stoplights. (FWIW, even though they're intercompatible, highways and surface streets are distinct transportation components that fit into this "ecosystem" you refer to)Getting back onto topic, if you actually read the article, it mentioned that the banks, not TxDOT, the NIMBYs, or the government, was the main cause for not going to the airport by not loaning them the EXTRA BILLION OR SO that they wanted.Density has nothing to do with intercity rail. Mass transit within a city or commuter transit is a different story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronTiger Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 Changing the topic away from a debate that will never get anywhere, I'm really confused about where the corridor is that they want to put it. I had heard it was along the rail corridor that goes through Oak Forest, but if the terminus is at Northwest Mall, how are they going to get there, put an elevated structure down the middle of Watonga/Mangum? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luminare Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 The one we have been discussing was the path along Hempstead Hwy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronTiger Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 (edited) Ah, I see. Well, if that's the case, I seem to remember that in the master 290 plan, the Hempstead Tollway would be built between the railroad and the original Hempstead Road with a high capacity transit corridor nearby taking up more ROW (and requiring demolition). In the 290/610 rebuild, TxDOT had to settle because some more ROW was taken than necessary...for the HCTC. Edited January 20, 2015 by IronTiger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luminare Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 Ah, I see. Well, if that's the case, I seem to remember that in the master 290 plan, the Hempstead Tollway would be built between the railroad and the original Hempstead Road with a high capacity transit corridor nearby taking up more ROW (and requiring demolition). In the 290/610 rebuild, TxDOT had to settle because some more ROW was taken than necessary...for the HCTC. They have since ditched the separate tollway and it will now run with the rest of 290. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronTiger Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 They have since ditched the separate tollway and it will now run with the rest of 290.Ok, if the HSR will run along the rail there, then why isn't it going to College Station? Where would they even split it if they were going in that direction? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slick Vik Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 Ok, if the HSR will run along the rail there, then why isn't it going to College Station? Where would they even split it if they were going in that direction?Eckels said it costs too much to go to college station Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DNAguy Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 (edited) Eckels said it costs too much to go to college station They're looking into building one station that would serve Hunstville and CS. “We plan to stop on Highway 30 and Shiro," Eckels says. "We’d look at that as a potential station location to link along Highway 30 probably 15 to 20 miles over to Bryan/College Station or from there. We could also get to Huntsville, serving both those universities in those communities.” http://keranews.org/post/dallas-houston-bullet-train-still-track Edited January 20, 2015 by DNAguy 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DNAguy Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 (edited) More HSR articles fwiw: Will it even work? http://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/print-edition/2015/01/16/cover-story-will-high-speed-rail-fly-in-texas.html No airport connections for TCR: http://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/news/2015/01/16/high-speed-rail-to-the-airport-nope-this-is-texas.html?page=all What's the next step after TCR: http://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/news/2015/01/16/beyond-dallas-to-houston-where-does-high-speed.html Edited January 20, 2015 by DNAguy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luminare Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 Oh wow! That's pretty recent. Now If he is even thinking about making a mid-way stop I think we can get a little more comfortable about it going from Downtown to Downtown. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slick Vik Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 They're looking into building one station that would serve Hunstville and CS.http://keranews.org/post/dallas-houston-bullet-train-still-trackYea with a shuttle but not exactly in the city Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronTiger Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 If the train stops at Northwest Mall and goes up 290, then there's no way to get to Shiro without cutting across the countryside, because between Navasota and Houston, there's no other splits along the track, and the split at Navasota goes east/west. If there's to be a Shiro stop, then it goes on the BNSF route, and there's no need to talk about the Northwest Mall at all. Either way, I could see why College Station would be too expensive to go through: barring any problems from NIMBYs, there's points where pedestrian underpasses go under the railroad but vehicular traffic doesn't, requiring there to be construction/demolition, and secondly, UP wants to use the corridor more, even going so far as to requiring two crossings closed to build a siding. Any ROW that the HSR might need (however small) might be wanted by UP instead to double-track it (and the infrastructure exists on those underpasses, might I add) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ADCS Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 If the train stops at Northwest Mall and goes up 290, then there's no way to get to Shiro without cutting across the countryside, because between Navasota and Houston, there's no other splits along the track, and the split at Navasota goes east/west. If there's to be a Shiro stop, then it goes on the BNSF route, and there's no need to talk about the Northwest Mall at all. Either way, I could see why College Station would be too expensive to go through: barring any problems from NIMBYs, there's points where pedestrian underpasses go under the railroad but vehicular traffic doesn't, requiring there to be construction/demolition, and secondly, UP wants to use the corridor more, even going so far as to requiring two crossings closed to build a siding. Any ROW that the HSR might need (however small) might be wanted by UP instead to double-track it (and the infrastructure exists on those underpasses, might I add) On the dallashoustonhsr.com site, you see that it's following a high-voltage line after turning north from 290 around Hockley. Both routes intersect near Shiro (this was brought up at the scoping meeting), which is why that location is getting a lot of attention for a station that would serve B/CS. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luminare Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 Serve both B/CS and Huntsville. It would be a smart move politically and save the headache of going through Huntsville or Bryan/College Station. Those areas would be better served by passenger rail anyway. It's also not exactly a new idea placing HSR stations in rural areas. If you want to reach smaller cities while still compromising between them then put it in the country and have either bus systems or maybe in the future passenger rail can connect both small cities/towns and it connects with HSR. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronTiger Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 Serve both B/CS and Huntsville. It would be a smart move politically and save the headache of going through Huntsville or Bryan/College Station. Those areas would be better served by passenger rail anyway. It's also not exactly a new idea placing HSR stations in rural areas. If you want to reach smaller cities while still compromising between them then put it in the country and have either bus systems or maybe in the future passenger rail can connect both small cities/towns and it connects with HSR.Yeah, finally saw the map. Apparently if it did go through Brazos Co., it would skirt the city anyway to the west. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F4shionablecha0s Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 (edited) The only way the HSR is going to work is if there are zero stops. Stops are a dealbreaker. Downtown Dallas to Downtown Houston, no stops. Anything else is not going to be able to effectively compete with Southwest. If we start pandering to politicians by making the train stop in the middle of nowhere than this whole thing is dead on arrival. Edited January 22, 2015 by F4shionablecha0s 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luminare Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 The only way the HSR is going to work is if there are zero stops. Stops are a dealbreaker. Downtown Dallas to Downtown Houston, no stops. Anything else is not going to be able to effectively compete with Southwest. If we start pandering to politicians by making the train stop in the middle of nowhere than this whole thing is dead on arrival. On what base in fact do you have this on? I've been on plenty of HSR and their are at least a couple of stops in between. Yes you don't want HSR going to small towns, but to cities yes. That's why HSR is more commonly called Intercity Rail. Plus the more access to passengers means more money and at the end of the day thats whats going to matter most. Finally whenever I was on HSR that reached this intermediate stops they were only there for at most 5mins. So that 90min trip is now 95mins. Big deal. The overall trip will be faster than if you flew. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F4shionablecha0s Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 On what base in fact do you have this on? I've been on plenty of HSR and their are at least a couple of stops in between. Yes you don't want HSR going to small towns, but to cities yes. That's why HSR is more commonly called Intercity Rail. Plus the more access to passengers means more money and at the end of the day thats whats going to matter most. Finally whenever I was on HSR that reached this intermediate stops they were only there for at most 5mins. So that 90min trip is now 95mins. Big deal. The overall trip will be faster than if you flew. It'll take longer than five minutes. Business travelers are going to be this route's meat and potatoes - particularly those business passengers flying between Hobby and Love right now. For every one passenger you pick up in Huntsville you're going to lose five DAL-HOU passengers. Why are we even bothering to make the thing high speed if we're going to cripple it with stops in podunk towns? Let's say someone DOES want to take the train to one of those towns. How are they going to get around once they get there? There's no transit. Rent a car? Why wouldn't they just drive from Houston or Dallas then? It doesn't make any sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ADCS Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 The only way the HSR is going to work is if there are zero stops. Stops are a dealbreaker. Downtown Dallas to Downtown Houston, no stops. Anything else is not going to be able to effectively compete with Southwest. If we start pandering to politicians by making the train stop in the middle of nowhere than this whole thing is dead on arrival. There's no reason that you couldn't have solely express train service during the peak hours, say at 6:30-9am and 4:30-7pm, then have intermediate stop service during non-peak hours. With B/CS being a college town, schedules are likely to be more flexible than those of the business travelers between Houston and Dallas. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luminare Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 (edited) There's no reason that you couldn't have solely express train service during the peak hours, say at 6:30-9am and 4:30-7pm, then have intermediate stop service during non-peak hours. With B/CS being a college town, schedules are likely to be more flexible than those of the business travelers between Houston and Dallas. This. For some reason people can't wrap their brains around the fact that you can schedule different times for different destinations. It's very common with trains. For instance when I was studying abroad in Italy I was living in a very small town that had access to Commuter rail. To help speed things up the trains that accessed the station only departed at certain hours of the day and most of the time it was only a couple trains in the morning, mid-day, and afternoon. Same thing can apply to this...and has been done in other places. For instance I could get a EuroStar ticket from Florence to Milan straight shot or get a cheaper ticket with the same train but with additional stops. It makes the routes a lot more flexible which is what makes trains such a great option. People forget this all the time especially if they have never been on these kinds of trains. Edited January 22, 2015 by Luminare 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronTiger Posted January 25, 2015 Share Posted January 25, 2015 TxDOT took extra ROW in the 290/610 project for an HSR corridor, why couldn't they put the terminus at NW Transit Center? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luminare Posted January 25, 2015 Share Posted January 25, 2015 (edited) This is no longer a debate when we keep circling back to the same questions of why NW Transit Center or why Downtown. I'm not going to continue to repeat what has already been said a dozen times on here IronTiger. Edited January 25, 2015 by Luminare Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slick Vik Posted January 25, 2015 Share Posted January 25, 2015 Get off at the NE Ttansit Center and then what? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DNAguy Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 Get off at the NE Ttansit Center and then what?Grab a beer and an Uber?http://www.karbachbrewing.com/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.