HSR Coming to FLA, AKA "See I told you so"

[fillerup]

The bit about population density averaged for the whole country seems misleading to me. We're not talking about servicing North Dakota and Montana with HSR. These projects are connecting high population areas, just like the op-ed says needs to be done for the project to make sense.

I think your comments about the density comparisons are a fair observation.

But numbers guy that I am (and you made me curious), I looked into it a little more on less of a macro basis and the numbers actually wound up surprising me. It seems our low density as a nation carry over into our urban areas as well.

A few numbers for comparison - population per square mile:

Paris 63,300
Tokyo 34.800
London 12,300
Glasgow 8,600
Madrid 2,010

San Fran 17,000
Los Angeles 7,800
DC 9,700
Baltimore 8,100

And here's the kicker as far as this discussion is concerned:

Miami 1,160
Orlando 990
Tampa 950

Rail ridership as a share of total transportation is falling in both Europe and Japan, and is subsidized.

I know much more than population density goes into these decisions, but how in the world can central Florida support a $3 Bil project. California maybe - but Florida?

 

[LordHelmut]

I'm *way* too lazy to read 11 pages but here is an economic reality check

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/o...exceed-Obamas-125-billion-grant-83069182.html

So.... anyone want to fact-check rail costs ?

 

[jt04]

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/o...exceed-Obamas-125-billion-grant-83069182.html

So.... anyone want to fact-check rail costs ?

This is why I think they should use the federal funds to build the MCO to Convention Center to WDW segments. It's less than 20 miles and will immediately generate revenue. If it can't generate a profit than high speed rail will be a boondoggle anywhere it is built in the states. If it does generate a profit then it can fund the next segment from that cash flow.

 

[Phonedave]

A good gauge to use would be the number of riders on any of the various "shuttles" that run back and forth between the two cities. There are a number of them that run up here between Atlanta and Chattanooga, as well as ones that run between D.C and a stop in West Virginia (not sure of the exact city). But those are regular commuters who may be more tempted to use the HSR service betwen Tampa and Orlando....

HEY. that gives me an idea!!

WDW should get rid of all it's busses. You know what it needs?

SLUG LINES !!!!!!!!!!

-dave

 

[unkadug]

HEY. that gives me an idea!!

WDW should get rid of all it's busses. You know what it needs?

SLUG LINES !!!!!!!!!!

-dave

a little shake of salt will cure that

 

[CDavid]

If it can't generate a profit than high speed rail will be a boondoggle anywhere it is built in the states.

It won't. No passenger railway in the world operates at a profit - that's not the point (and highways and airlines have hidden subsidies). Passenger railroads exist to provide a (public) transportation service, not to make money for shareholders.

A 20-mile or so segment, such as the airport to International Drive or WDW, isn't a proper location for high-speed rail anyway. As part of the larger Orlando-Tampa-Miami route its great, but for passengers traveling from their planes to a WDW resort, that's more appropriately the domain of light rail or maybe commuter rail (Sun Rail). Consider that a conventional 79 mph railroad will cover those 20 miles in about 20 minutes with a 60 mph average. A dedicated "high-speed" system costs a lot more in construction and annual operating costs, to save at most 4-5 minutes per trip (and less than that if you make any intermediate stops, such as the convention center).

 

[hoke2007]

I know I'm late to the party, but I have to say that this is one of the dumbest projects authorized by the federal government. I've driven from Tampa to Orlando and I don't really understand why that is the route that gets a HSR (other than for political reasons that are painfully clear).

There are 3 places that would all be better areas for a HSR that would actually make sense: California, the Midwest (Detroit to Chicago), and/or the Northeast (Boston-New York, Philly).

I really don't see this route from Tampa to Orlando doing well at all. Just another massive waste of government money.

 

[Mick G.]

Also, HST trainsets are more expensive than light rail or standard rail trainsets, so there would most likely be fewer of them, and longer waits between trains. Imagine landing at MCO and heading to the train station, only to discover that the next train doesn't leave for 2-3 hours.

Then you arrive at the WDW station [which is where, by the way?], and have to wait for the bus to take you to your hotel. Not quite the same service as the old Magical Express, and then we start getting nostalgic threads about the old bus service, and how great it was, when it didn't take 4 hours to get from the airport to your motel. And then people would start hiring taxis, or renting cars, again, and you end up with crowded highways AND a super-expensive train that few people ride.

Sorry if I sound bitter... I've traveled too many miles on Amtrak.

Mick

 

[DisneyJoe]

What happens if the train breaks down between MCO and WDW? Wouldn't that really make a mess of things?

 

[wm49rs]

I know I'm late to the party, but I have to say that this is one of the dumbest projects authorized by the federal government. I've driven from Tampa to Orlando and I don't really understand why that is the route that gets a HSR (other than for political reasons that are painfully clear).

There are 3 places that would all be better areas for a HSR that would actually make sense: California, the Midwest (Detroit to Chicago), and/or the Northeast (Boston-New York, Philly).

I really don't see this route from Tampa to Orlando doing well at all. Just another massive waste of government money.

Well, remember, the Tampa-Orlando segment is just part of a line being developed in Florida that will reach down to Miami. And California received funds as well for an 800-mile rail line. Thirty-one states received funding of some sort overall.....

 

[CDavid]

I know I'm late to the party, but I have to say that this is one of the dumbest projects authorized by the federal government. I've driven from Tampa to Orlando and I don't really understand why that is the route that gets a HSR (other than for political reasons that are painfully clear).

There are 3 places that would all be better areas for a HSR that would actually make sense: California, the Midwest (Detroit to Chicago), and/or the Northeast (Boston-New York, Philly).

I really don't see this route from Tampa to Orlando doing well at all. Just another massive waste of government money.

It's not a waste of money - it is indeed a wise investment for the future; The problem, perhaps, is that we are getting a bit ahead of ourselves sometimes. Right now there is one train a day between Orlando and Tampa (and it has to come all the way from New York), and the plan is to now build a completely new, dedicated right-of-way, high-speed service. That's skipping a couple dozen steps in the process. That doesn't make it a mistake or a waste of funds, but we're talking about quite a bit of money for something which won't carry its first passenger for several years.

For $200 million or less, a literal fraction of the high-speed proposals cost, you could add 1 or 2 additional trains per day on existing freight-shared tracks, make incremental improvements to the tracks to increase train speeds, and generally begin to build up the infrastructure to support future increases in train speed, frequency, and utility. You could have the first additional trains running (potentially) within six months to a year, rather than several years from now.

Again, that doesn't make the current Florida high-speed plan a mistake - and I fully support it - but its hardly the most efficient way to do things (being one of the more expensive ways of implementing high-speed rail).

What happens if the train breaks down between MCO and WDW? Wouldn't that really make a mess of things?

No - not any worse than a train becoming disabled anywhere else in the country, where its not a real problem. Remember than railroads have had over 150 years to solve these sorts of problems. The whole breakdown issue with rail is a red herring (and that includes WDW monorail expansion threads).

Imagine landing at MCO and heading to the train station, only to discover that the next train doesn't leave for 2-3 hours.

I can't imagine train frequencies being so sparse, but that goes back to what I mentioned earlier. High-sped rail, with maybe a train every hour or two (depending on demand) hours, is fine for Orlando to Tampa or other intercity applications. For the airport to WDW or I-Drive, where you need a train every 20 minutes, what you really want is a modern light rail system. You can certainly have a high-speed trainset shuttle back and forth on the "local' route, but remember that both operating and constriction costs are going to be much higher, all to save maybe 3-5 minutes per trip.

 

[Mick G.]

I agree completely, light rail, or some sort of heavy rail, would be more appropriate for the airport/WDW run. High-speed is a different animal altogether, and not as well suited to shuttling tourists and their luggage to and from the airport. My question is whether the airport/WDW connection is best handled as a subset of a larger high-speed network, or as a separate entity.

This does remind me of the connection between Charles DeGaulle airport, and the Disneyland Paris station. I've traveled that route, but can't recall whether the only trains between the two are TGV, or how frequently they run. Someone else might know. Seems like the TGVs run every 2-3 hours. By contrast, the light rail into Paris runs more frequently, and more slowly.

[We wouldn't be having this conversation if we had listened to Walt, and had built an airport on the southern section of WDW property, connected to the rest of the resort via monorail.]

 

[Wilt Dasney]

[We wouldn't be having this conversation if we had listened to Walt, and had built an airport on the southern section of WDW property, connected to the rest of the resort via monorail.]

But would it still be operating if it had been built? Disneyland stopped running its helicopter after a couple of fatal crashes. I think Disney is too squeamish to be in the air travel business.

 

[Mick G.]

OK, I had to find the info. In France, for the train from Charles De Gaulle airport to the MARNE-LA-VALLEE-CHESSY station, there are 12 TGV trains daily, and they are not evenly spaced. If you arrive at the station at 10:15 am, for example, you will be waiting until 1:11 pm for the next train. After 9:38 pm, you need to call a cab. And the trip is about 16 minutes long. And they do integrate a "shuttle" service into a larger operating high-speed system.

My point is, although this all sounds great, taking a "high-speed" train to WDW will probably take more of your valuable vacation time than the Magical Express bus, and certainly more time than hiring a cab, once you consider the time waiting for the next train and the time to travel from the WDW train station to your hotel. We can only guess at the cost of the tickets, but the cost to the taxpayers will be significant.

Also, I really like trains, and have traveled literally thousands of miles by train in the US, the UK, and France. I also hate buses, and dislike the US dependence on cars. But I've had some really bad experienced on Amtrak over the years, and distrust their ability to operate this kind of system effectively.


Mick

 

[wm49rs]

OK, I had to find the info. In France, for the train from Charles De Gaulle airport to the MARNE-LA-VALLEE-CHESSY station, there are 12 TGV trains daily, and they are not evenly spaced. If you arrive at the station at 10:15 am, for example, you will be waiting until 1:11 pm for the next train. After 9:38 pm, you need to call a cab. And the trip is about 16 minutes long. And they do integrate a "shuttle" service into a larger operating high-speed system.

My point is, although this all sounds great, taking a "high-speed" train to WDW will probably take more of your valuable vacation time than the Magical Express bus, and certainly more time than hiring a cab, once you consider the time waiting for the next train and the time to travel from the WDW train station to your hotel. We can only guess at the cost of the tickets, but the cost to the taxpayers will be significant.

Also, I really like trains, and have traveled literally thousands of miles by train in the US, the UK, and France. I also hate buses, and dislike the US dependence on cars. But I've had some really bad experienced on Amtrak over the years, and distrust their ability to operate this kind of system effectively.


Mick

I think like other people here have mentioned, the term "High-Speed Rail" may be misleading and inapplicable to all projects. I don't think there's going to be a "bullet" train between Tampa and Orlando, not with other stops incorporated in between. The HSR part may be for the longer leg down to Miami, as it may be for the 800-mile project out in California. Some of the smaller legs however may be "feeder" lines into the HSR ones, such as the extension up in New Englad that will now stretch from Boston to Brunswick, ME. People at the far end will now be able to take a non-HSR line down to Boston, where they can then take HSR to New York and Washington, D.C.

 

[fillerup]

It's not a waste of money - it is indeed a wise investment for the future; The problem, perhaps, is that we are getting a bit ahead of ourselves sometimes.

That is your opinion of course, and is every bit as valid as mine or anyone else's.

The federal money is at best about 1/3 of the buildout costs and I suggest you don't make that kind of investment until you know how you'll be making future payments.

For $200 million or less, a literal fraction of the high-speed proposals cost, you could add 1 or 2 additional trains per day on existing freight-shared tracks, make incremental improvements to the tracks to increase train speeds, and generally begin to build up the infrastructure to support future increases in train speed, frequency, and utility.

I wouldn't quibble with your suggestion of slow and go incrementalism but the current ridership numbers aren't encouraging.

For fiscal year '09, Tampa's RR station had Inbound/Outbound ridership totaling 115,000, roughly 315 per day, i.e. about 160 peeps arrived in Tampa, and another 160 departed.

And of those departing, Orlando was only the 4th most popular destination. Hardly the thing to justify two more trains. IMO, in a sane world - based on these numbers - this service would be discontinued yesterday.

For the airport to WDW or I-Drive, where you need a train every 20 minutes, what you really want is a modern light rail system. You can certainly have a high-speed trainset shuttle back and forth on the "local' route, but remember that both operating and constriction costs are going to be much higher, all to save maybe 3-5 minutes per trip.

You're right about what's needed from MCO to WDW. But unfortunately, the die is cast already.

Our upcoming light rail system will go right down the middle between MCO and WDW - serving neither. In fact, it's just now being discussed if the new HSR to Tampa will even connect with Sunrail - pure genius.


A couple random thoughts:

I have a concern as to what the cost overruns over time will be. Government projectts don't get built on time or within budget - that's a fact. If you think otherwise, I have a 5th gate I'll sell you..

I don't care about the politics of this, although they're certainly in play. This HSR project could just as easily come from a Republican president as it did from a Democrat. But I view this particular route as total folly, and one that is destined to be an economic anvil around our necks for decades to come.

Oh, and yeah - I love trains.

 

[lazyboy97o]

OK, I had to find the info. In France, for the train from Charles De Gaulle airport to the MARNE-LA-VALLEE-CHESSY station, there are 12 TGV trains daily, and they are not evenly spaced. If you arrive at the station at 10:15 am, for example, you will be waiting until 1:11 pm for the next train. After 9:38 pm, you need to call a cab. And the trip is about 16 minutes long. And they do integrate a "shuttle" service into a larger operating high-speed system.

My point is, although this all sounds great, taking a "high-speed" train to WDW will probably take more of your valuable vacation time than the Magical Express bus, and certainly more time than hiring a cab, once you consider the time waiting for the next train and the time to travel from the WDW train station to your hotel. We can only guess at the cost of the tickets, but the cost to the taxpayers will be significant.

Also, I really like trains, and have traveled literally thousands of miles by train in the US, the UK, and France. I also hate buses, and dislike the US dependence on cars. But I've had some really bad experienced on Amtrak over the years, and distrust their ability to operate this kind of system effectively.


Mick

In the other thread I looked at the cost of riding the TGV as a means of getting to Disneyland Paris.

Just looking at some guesses, it appears that trip from airport to Disney is about the same in Florida as it is in France. A family of four (two adults and two children 4-11), going from Charles de Gaulle to Marne-la-Vallée will pay a minimum of $72.00 for economy class tickets. A taxi can be had for about the same price, if not a little cheaper. A taxi is not on a fixed schedule and will take the family straight to their hotel. The train operates on a fixed schedule and does not drop one off at the door. Even if Disney offers a baggage service, not every other hotel and park in the area is going to follow.

I am still convinced that the key to this working is going to be the destinations heavily subsidizing the travel of their customers. The train will have to be "cheaper" then rental car, bus or cab. Disney would have to continue Magical Express, but by replacing the Mears buses with the train and still operating a baggage service. Others such as Universal, Sea World, and even Busch Garden at the other end, would have to offer something similar. Americans are not used to riding trains and to complicate matters further by not being used to riding trains with luggage.

I think like other people here have mentioned, the term "High-Speed Rail" may be misleading and inapplicable to all projects. I don't think there's going to be a "bullet" train between Tampa and Orlando, not with other stops incorporated in between. The HSR part may be for the longer leg down to Miami, as it may be for the 800-mile project out in California. Some of the smaller legs however may be "feeder" lines into the HSR ones, such as the extension up in New Englad that will now stretch from Boston to Brunswick, ME. People at the far end will now be able to take a non-HSR line down to Boston, where they can then take HSR to New York and Washington, D.C.

I think in Florida they really do mean high speed rail. Some relatively close stops is not unusual within cities, and I can see some wisdom in building those closer stops now as opposed to the complexities of building them later when the line is in operation. It does seem however that a lot of people are mesmerized by the high speed trains and want to see stops littering the state and even more-so in the ORlando area.

 

[TP2000]

This is why I think they should use the federal funds to build the MCO to Convention Center to WDW segments. It's less than 20 miles and will immediately generate revenue. If it can't generate a profit than high speed rail will be a boondoggle anywhere it is built in the states.

There's no way that short two-stop route could ever generate enough cash to pay the monthly payroll and the upkeep/maintenance costs on the HSR stations and trainsets. Even with a ticket price of $50, you'd never get your investment back, much less make a profit and prove a point. And your still dumping off WDW passengers miles from the Magic Kingdom and subjecting them to the latest rumors from the bus driver. It will always be cheaper and faster to take a cab from the Convention Center.

You are proposing buying and building a custom ordered 21st century high-speed rail system to go 20 miles and hope it pays off? That's about like building a Space Shuttle to drive a few housewives to the market twice a week and hoping their $1.50 Super Shopper fares pay for the shuttle and the launch pad so you can begin revenue service to the moon in the future. :lol:

If you want a little tourist train to go 15 miles from MCO to the Convention Center to Celebration, then build a cheap off-the-shelf light rail or trolley system. :wave:

Hip and funky Portland, Oregon and their excellent system of local neighborhood streetcars and citywide light rail trains. = $$$

But if you want a dedicated, custom-built high speed rail system to travel upwards of 150+ miles per hour over long distances, than that is something entirely different and requires far more expensive equipment, maintenance and yard facilities, custom built stations, dedicated right of way, expertly trained personnel, and a large payroll.


The proposed California High Speed Rail intermodal station at Anaheim, California = $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.

 

[wm49rs]

There's no way that short two-stop route could ever generate enough cash to pay the monthly payroll and the upkeep/maintenance costs on the HSR stations and trainsets. Even with a ticket price of $50, you'd never get your investment back, much less make a profit and prove a point.

You are proposing buying and building a custom ordered 21st century high-speed rail system to go 20 miles and hope it pays off? That's about like building a Space Shuttle to drive a few housewives to the market twice a week and hope their $1.50 Super Shopper fares pay for the shuttle and the launch pad so you can begin revenue service to the moon in the future. :lol:

If you want a little shuttle train to go 20 miles from MCO to the Convention Center to Celebration, then build a cheap off-the-shelf light rail or trolley system. :wave:


But if you want a dedicated, custom-built high speed rail system to travel upwards of 150 miles per hour over long distances, than that is something else and requires far more expensive equipment, maintenance and yard facilities, custom built stations, dedicated right of way, expertly trained personnel, and a large payroll.

I think you see the HSR more in the longer routes and in the 13 "corridors" mentioned in some of the news articles surrounding the original funding announcement. But it other areas, where the routes are shorter and the demand is less (and not just Tampa-Orlando, but Brunswick, ME-Boston would be another example), more conventional rail will be put to use....

 

[Gatorboy]

It is ridiculous to look at all the facts and money that will be a drain on Floridians forever and not say, WE DON'T NEED IT! By the way, just because money has been earmarked doesn't mean we have to build it. It still has a long way to go to find two thirds of the funding just to build it. I love trains too, but this is not a viable means of transportation for this corridor and I'd rather see something on the lines of PRT for moving tourists and locals than paying for a train between to areas.