Rich Brownn
Well-Known Member
They get priority as long as they are on schedule.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Rumor Higher Speed Rail from MCO to Disney World
- Thread starter UCF
- Start date
TrainsOfDisney
Well-Known Member
The average is about $5 per train mile.
They still get priority - but the priority may be quite different once the train is off schedule since they missed the available slots.
Rich Brownn
Well-Known Member
We got delayed by hours coming back from LA due to freight trains we had to wait on. It ended up putting us a whole day behind when we got to New Orleans. Thats when they decided to do the turnaround in New Orleans instead of Orlando and bussed us back
TrainsOfDisney
Well-Known Member
Oh it can definitely happen.. and if the delay had to do with a freight train issue (accident, etc.) that can back up freights as well meaning there is no priority to give.
I think that is my point, priority will still be given if possible, but if a train is that late, there are probably lots of issues and the dispatchers can only do so much.
networkpro
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- Yes
If you do a quick search for maps of abandoned rail lines in the US, it's quite eye-opening. It's not as if rail service to everywhere hasn't been attempted before but abandoned as economically ruinous.
JoeCamel
Well-Known Member
They make great bike/hike trails though.....
TrainsOfDisney
Well-Known Member
trains must have really hurt you somehow haha.
Vegas Disney Fan
Well-Known Member
We’ve never had the infrastructure to really take advantage of trains, a fast train between cities isn’t very useful if our final destination is still 30 miles away once we got off the train, at least at the airport there’s rental cars conveniently available.
We have a bit of a cart before the horse scenario, even if we build the best high speed trains in the world we’ll still lack metro systems to get us to our final destination in nearly every city in the country. Uber has helped a bit in this area but it’s still nowhere near as convenient as a system like London or Paris where you can just take mass transit all the way to your destination.
We take the trains whenever we can in Europe, they are fast, clean, comfortable, and a relaxing way to travel… I’d love that convenience in America but I’m afraid I’ll be long gone before we get a comprehensive system that will get us conveniently from point A to point B. We have to start somewhere though and I’m thrilled we have a company like Brightline that’s getting the process started.
October82
Well-Known Member
This is both right and wrong. It's correct that many railroads failed because of overbuilt networks, but it's wrong to say that rail service is 'economically ruinous'. Historically, it has actually been freight and not passenger rail that was problematic, and even then, only in certain parts of the country. The major issue for historic railroads that led to their failure was that they often had multiple competitors with redundant infrastructure on low margin routes. This was then compounded by inefficient operations driven by lacking the technology that drives modern logistics. Today's modern freight railroads are mostly the descendants of those companies that didn't have redundant networks on low margin corridors.
These issues mostly don't apply to intercity passenger rail today. The major barriers to cost-effective and frequent service are the lack of dedicated tracks for high frequency routes and overhead catenary on shared right of way with freight.
October82
Well-Known Member
In some places rails to trails makes a lot of sense but a lot of the lost right of way would be much better used for intercity or interurban lines.
October82
Well-Known Member
High(er) speed and intercity rail infrastructure that is publicly owned is typically open to private as well as public/state sponsored operators in most places. This will also be the case with a portion of Brightline West which will ultimately share tracks with CAHSR. Since the US doesn't currently have many such operators, or desirable infrastructure to use, it's hard to know how or if access would be different were that different on a national scale.
There are generally multiple kinds of intercity rail services offered - in much the same way not everywhere has an interstate highway or an international airport - with slower speed but frequent intercity service on shared rights of ways generally reaching more rural and lower population density areas. Providing direct, frequent, and reliable links between rural areas is viewed as essential in many countries and is actually the main reason the Amtrak network looks the way it does in the US. These trains don't use a 'hub model' and most of the serious plans for HSR in the US wouldn't either. That does not mean that every rural community would receive the same level of service. No one is proposing replacing cars with trains for all trips, just those that have proven economically viable in other developed countries.
The freight prioritization issue isn't the main barrier to reliable intercity rail, it's the quality of the freight infrastructure. US freight railroads are optimized for certain customers that don't generally require high speed or frequent service. That means the infrastructure is generally also lacking for Amtrak to run at high enough speeds to offer a time (and consequently) cost advantage over driving. This isn't a limitation of Amtrak's making and it doesn't require true HSR infrastructure or ROW. Relatively modest infrastructure investments can make intercity service competitive on both a time and cost basis with flying or driving for many routes.
Vegas Disney Fan
Well-Known Member
I think this is true of rail in general, in large cities, and between large cities in heavily populated areas (northeast, Texas, Florida, Ca, etc) passenger trains make a ton of sense, in much of the country flying or driving makes a lot more sense though.
I’d never take the train between Vegas and SLC because I can relax and drive it in 5-6 hours, I can’t wait for the train to LA though because that drive is non stop stressful traffic and can be anywhere from 3.5-9 hours.
To me trains only make sense where it’s a less stressful option than driving and/or flying.
In FL, with many large metro areas relatively close together it makes perfect sense, in CA with many large metro areas relatively close together it makes perfect sense, in the northeast, in Texas, along the coasts, it makes perfect sense. In most of the midwest, the west, the south, etc it makes no sense compared to flying or driving.
Aries1975
Well-Known Member
In many cases, the railroad maintains the right-of-way with a memorandum of understanding or similar agreement to allow the abandoned line to become a trail. The property is far too valuable, and the non-profits building the trail can seldom raise the funds to purchase land.
TrainsOfDisney
Well-Known Member
That’s nothing… I went from Disney World to Disneyland by train by way of Canada one year. Up to nyc, nyc to Toronto, Toronto to Vancouver, Vancouver to Anaheim.
Although the train he takes in that video is my absolute favorite long distance train - the California Zephyr!
Andrew C
You know what's funny?
He has a lot of good train videos.
Disone
Well-Known Member
I just did the Zephyr from Chicago to Sacramento in a bedroom. So amazing. Colorado put on a SNOW! The first night was a little flat and not too exciting but the next morning we were in Denver and from Denver on it varied from very pretty to absolutely stunning.
Was my 7th Amtrak Long Distance train and easily my favorite so far. Also ran on time. Would definitely do again.
