>>With investments in true high speed rail requiring decades of construction, the Northeast must also invest in conventional rail service.
When proponents in America discuss high-speed rail, it is often not clear what "high-speed" actually means.
The Acela service on the Northeast Corridor, for example, was originally billed as America's first high-speed rail service. But, as we explained last week, the Acela has a maximum speed of 150 mph and an average speed closer to 70 mph. In general, true high-speed rail systems, like those in Europe and Asia, can operate at top speeds of around 200 mph or higher. As a result, Acela is best considered America's fastest example of conventional passenger rail.
While a true high-speed rail promises important benefits for the Northeast, such a system is extremely expensive. The Northeast is still many years -- and billions of dollars -- away from achieving those speeds. While smaller investments in conventional rail don't pack the same wallop, they are less expensive and still have great potential to improve service right away. In order to balance our short-term needs with our long-term goals, the NEC must pursue both improvements to existing, conventional service as well as true high-speed rail.
Federal Definitions
In the United States, the Federal Railroad Administration has created its own definitions for different tiers of intercity passenger rail service:
- Core Express: Trains operate at speeds of 125 - 250 miles per hour on tracks dedicated to high-speed trains, matching standards for high-speed rail around the world.
- Regional: Trains operate at speeds of 90-125 miles per hour on dedicated tracks or tracks that are shared b high speed, commuter, and freight trains.
- Emerging/Feeder Routes: Trains operate at speeds of up to 90 miles per hour.
Under these categories, the Acela Express service is best described as "Regional." The true high speed rail systems in Europe and Asia would be Core Express.
Currently, the Obama Administration has invested in rail service under the High Speed Intercity Passenger Rail Program (HSIPR) Program. The name of this program is somewhat misleading, since it is really pursuing two separate aims: true, high-speed rail AND conventional, intercity passenger rail. On the "high-speed" side, the California system is the only example of dedicated Core Express service currently supported by Federal grants. On the conventional, intercity side, the federal program is supporting a wide number of critical improvements, but at slower speeds or on tracks that aren't "dedicated," meaning they are shared with commuter or freight trains.
Progress in the Northeast
Even though the HSIPR program isn't building true, high-speed rail for the NEC (yet), the program is making major, necessary investments. In May 2011, the Northeast Megaregion received almost $1 billion in grants from the HSIPR Program to complete a series of projects along the Northeast Corridor and its branch lines.
On the NEC main line, Amtrak is undertaking $450 million in improvements to upgrade a 24-mile section of track in New Jersey, increasing the maximum speed from 135 mph to 160 mph. This project will also replace the electrical system, which is responsible for frequent delays for the 70,000 commuters who rely on the line every day. New York State received $295 million to complete the reconstruction of Harold Interlocking, a site of frequent delays on one of the busiest stretches of the NEC, in Queens, NY. This project will untangle the series of tracks serving Amtrak and the Long Island Rail Road, reducing travel time for the 150,000 commuters who pass through daily. In addition, the states of Maryland ($22 million) and Rhode Island ($28 million) are undertaking projects to ease bottlenecks with new capacity and upgraded infrastructure that will support Amtrak's intercity passenger service.
The NEC branch lines are also seeing huge improvements. In Connecticut and Massachusetts, the HSIPR program is funding the New Haven-Hartford-Springfield Rail project, which will ultimately quadruple rail service on the line and raise speeds to 110 mph. In New York, HSIPR grants will raise speeds on the Empire Corridor to 110 mph. Finally, in Pennsylvania, operations on the already-110 mph Keystone Corridor, are being upgraded to increase reliability and reduce travel times.
A Dual-Pronged Approach
The investments by the HSIPR program demonstrate that we need investments in both conventional rail service and true, world-class high speed rail. Proposals by Amtrak (PDF) and a studio project at the University of Pennsylvania suggest that true high speed rail in the northeast will face significant obstacles, including a cost of approximately $100 billion dollars and decades of construction. While these obstacles are worth overcoming, we cannot wait for such large-scale investments to see improvements in our service. By investing in our conventional rail system we can achieve faster, more frequent and more reliable service right now - which will continue to supplement a high speed rail system well into the future.
This strategy of investing first in upgrades to existing, conventional rail service to provide more frequent, reliable, and faster trains as a stepping stone to dedicated, high speed rail is not unique to the United States. Other countries, including Japan, France, and the United Kingdom, have made these investments before implementing true, high speed service. Better service on the existing NEC will provide the foundation for true high speed rail.
Improvements to the existing NEC also recognize that our rail system isn't just for intercity service. It must be a reliable operation for the eight commuter railroads and four freight operators who share the NEC with Amtrak. Such improvements also recognize that we have needs that must be met right now. With key sections already at capacity, we must expand capacity to meet growing travel demand that cannot wait for HSR.
The question for the Northeast then isn't whether we should pursue conventional rail or high-speed rail. The question is how can we do both.
Images
Spanish AVE Train: Flickr. Bonaventura Leris.
Cover of Vision of High-Speed Rail on the Northeast Corridor. Amtrak.
I definitely agree that their needs to be investment in the current corridor. I think these need to be priorities
1) Constant-tension catenary replacement, the catenary system is the lifeblood of the NEC, it goes down, the corridor goes down. Also on straight stretches, permits higher speeds.
2) Signalling needs to continue to increase in density, capacity is already being stripped, especially in New Jersey
3) Replace bridges, that is where many slow points are on the corridor are the bridges. Replacing the moveables with high-bridges will allow more trains to transit the corridor, elimintate the possibility of corridor shutdowns due to bridges stuck in place, and slash a few minutes of time off travel times. Also make sure they are designed for a quad track line for future capacity.
4) Correct some curves, more high speed stretches=reduced delay
These should all help with improving the reliability and slashing a few precious minutes off travel times.
There also should be some research into expanding capacity north of providence. The Providence/Stoughton line should be be electrified, and the Franklin line rerouted over the Fairmount line. Doing these things would open up many more time slots for Amtrak.
I thought that Amtrak's major capacity constraint north of New York were drawbridges in CT? Isn't Amtrak building new drawbridges in CT??