Orlando High Speed Rail IS DEFINITE

[Burning Metal]

Also, don't forget about this accident that happened on I - 4 in 2008...
4 Killed, 38 Injured In 70-Car Pileup

Officer: 'I Watched Man Burn To Death, Heard Others Screaming' In Fog

POSTED: Wednesday, January 9, 2008
http://www.clickorlando.com/news/15009814/detail.html
http://www.wftv.com/news/15009810/detail.html
I live on the West coast of Florida and have driven I - 4 many times. Traffic is usually horrible and I would gladly drive to Tampa, park my car at a train station, and take the train to Orlando...it would be so nice to relax and not have to drive and fight traffic.
If we get High Speed rail, I see it as a kind of "test" of how successful it will be. I think Florida needs something like this...hell, I think the US needs this option. It's getting harder and harder to fly, more and more stressful, it's taking longer and longer to get through airport security. I have taken Amtrak quite a few times from the Northeast U.S. to Florida and I love it! It is relaxing, nice to see the view out the windows, you can have a nice breakfast in the dining car, a drink in the lounge car...I MUCH prefer the train over flying!

 

[JungleTrekFan]

Im just going to say that even though i am a supporter of HSR i am not affilaiating myself with jt and his reasons that really dont make sense at all.

And jt extending HSR to miami will make perfect sense especially since its proven that people travel between the two cities. Im sure even locals would be on board with the expansion since the drive to Miami is quite long and most people do not enjoy long car rides. It would be much more enjoyable to take a high speed train from Miami to the Convention center or WDW or vice versa.

The other problem is what happens when you get to the station, what then. Yes local transport will need to be added, but right now it may not make sense to add a commuter rail, light rail, or other form of local transportation. I think once the HSR gets the green light and everything is signed off then the commuter rail or light rail will be approved.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Not exactly. Switches can be added so the trains can "shuttle" between Lakeland and a contingecy area built in the eastern part of Tampa in anticipation of such a disaster. There will be at least 4 trains by my estimate that can be used in such a way. The idea that one train would shuttle between Tampa Airport and MCO in such a scenario is somewhat silly. Think outside the box.

The presence of a switch will lower the speed at which a train can operate. I never said there would only be one train. However many trains sets there are would be the most on the system and the trains could not be made bigger. You just make yourself look like a troll when you present condensing comments like "Think outside the box" to ill conceived propositions that were never made.

Mass transits systems have been added in many places but they are usually 'failures'. The reason is they rarely coneect to a larger system.

That could not be further from the truth. Moving between regional centers on transit alone involves a lot of coordinating and transfers. Local systems get people around locally. They move commuters and locals who take the same trip every day. Commuters are the backbones of every successful transit system, including the most used and greatest revenue generating high speed lines.

You propose that Tampa-Orlando will be built on tourists. Even if this premise were undeniably true, it would hardly make the area the brilliant proving ground you claim. It would make it the worst proving ground for the nation as its unique, tourist-backed nature is not going to be found anywhere else or translate to places where the intention is commuters.

And jt extending HSR to miami will make perfect sense especially since its proven that people travel between the two cities. Im sure even locals would be on board with the expansion since the drive to Miami is quite long and most people do not enjoy long car rides. It would be much more enjoyable to take a high speed train from Miami to the Convention center or WDW or vice versa.

Miami might make more sense, I have not looked into that possible route.

The other problem is what happens when you get to the station, what then. Yes local transport will need to be added, but right now it may not make sense to add a commuter rail, light rail, or other form of local transportation. I think once the HSR gets the green light and everything is signed off then the commuter rail or light rail will be approved.

Again, that is backwards. You will spend years creating negative feelings and experiences as people deal with dead ends. You will then send years convincing people that the system is better.

 

[magicMLV]

In Europe, we use high speed trains for distances above 150 miles: paris-london, paris-brussels, brussels-london, paris-lyon,... and without any stop during the first 150 miles most of the time. when reaching our destination, we use local or regional train networks. It is a great alternative to flying. But I can't see any good reason to use a high speed train between mco and wdw. Even mco-Tampa is borderline considering all the stops in the Orlando area. Don't get me wrong, I love high speed trains but the Tampa-mco leg is simply to short to proove anything.

 

[fillerup]

This may be getting a little wonkish, but here's a link to a December 2009 report on HSR from the Congressional Research Service. It examines HSR both here and in the rest of the world.

Keep in mind that this is a federal agency that works exclusively for the Congress. In other words, no particular axe to grind.

CSR Report

It's a pretty easy read, but for anyone who doesn't want to go through it, for fear it might fog your rose colored glasses, I'll post some salient parts.

High Speed Rail In Other Countries

"...even with the introduction of HSR, and with other factors that are more conducive to intercity passenger rail use than in the United States, in most of these countries intercity rail travel (including both conventional and high speed rail) represents less than 10% of all passenger miles traveled on land."

Alleviating Highway and Airport Congestion

"On the question of highway congestion relief, many studies estimate that HSR will have little positive effect because most highway traffic is local and the diversion of intercity trips from highway to rail will be small. In a study of HSR published in 1997, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) estimated that in most cases rail improvements would divert only 3%-6% of intercity automobile trips. FRA noted that corridors with short average trip lengths, those under 150 miles, showed the lowest diversion rates."

"Planners of a high speed rail link in Florida between Orlando and Tampa, a distance of about 84 miles, estimated that it would shift 11% of those driving between the two cities to the train, as well as 9% of those driving from Lakeland to either Orlando (54 miles) or Tampa (33 miles). However, because most of the traffic on the main highway linking the two cities, I-4, is not travelling between these cities, it was estimated that HSR would reduce traffic on the busiest sections of I-4 by less than 2%.

The final environmental impact statement for the project states that the reduction in the number of vehicles resulting from the HSR system “would not be sufficient to significantly improve the LOS [level of service] on I-4, as many segments of the roadway would still be over capacity.”

High Speed Rail Cost Issues

"Of the many high speed routes in the world, it is thought that only two have earned enough revenue to cover both their infrastructure and operating costs."

"In addition, at least one study suggests that transportation project cost estimates, especially those authored by project sponsors, should be rigorously scrutinized.65 This study examined 258 transportation infrastructure projects around the world and found that in almost 90% of the cases costs were underestimated, that actual costs on average were 28% higher than estimated, and that rail projects in particular were the most severely underestimated, costing on average 45% more than estimated."

So, who pays when the inevitable 28 to 45% cost overruns occur?

 

[Mammymouse]

Doesn't Amtrak already go to Miami through the center of the state? We now live in Sebring, which about 70 miles south of Disneyworld on Route 27, and the Amtrak goes right through our city on south. There was a lot of talk last year in the newspaper (Tampa Tribune) about a large train yard expansion outside of Lakeland or Winter Haven.

 

[jt04]

This may be getting a little wonkish, but here's a link to a December 2009 report on HSR from the Congressional Research Service. It examines HSR both here and in the rest of the world.

Keep in mind that this is a federal agency that works exclusively for the Congress. In other words, no particular axe to grind.

CSR Report

It's a pretty easy read, but for anyone who doesn't want to go through it, for fear it might fog your rose colored glasses, I'll post some salient parts.

High Speed Rail In Other Countries

"...even with the introduction of HSR, and with other factors that are more conducive to intercity passenger rail use than in the United States, in most of these countries intercity rail travel (including both conventional and high speed rail) represents less than 10% of all passenger miles traveled on land."

Alleviating Highway and Airport Congestion

"On the question of highway congestion relief, many studies estimate that HSR will have little positive effect because most highway traffic is local and the diversion of intercity trips from highway to rail will be small. In a study of HSR published in 1997, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) estimated that in most cases rail improvements would divert only 3%-6% of intercity automobile trips. FRA noted that corridors with short average trip lengths, those under 150 miles, showed the lowest diversion rates."

"Planners of a high speed rail link in Florida between Orlando and Tampa, a distance of about 84 miles, estimated that it would shift 11% of those driving between the two cities to the train, as well as 9% of those driving from Lakeland to either Orlando (54 miles) or Tampa (33 miles). However, because most of the traffic on the main highway linking the two cities, I-4, is not travelling between these cities, it was estimated that HSR would reduce traffic on the busiest sections of I-4 by less than 2%.

The final environmental impact statement for the project states that the reduction in the number of vehicles resulting from the HSR system “would not be sufficient to significantly improve the LOS [level of service] on I-4, as many segments of the roadway would still be over capacity.”

High Speed Rail Cost Issues

"Of the many high speed routes in the world, it is thought that only two have earned enough revenue to cover both their infrastructure and operating costs."

"In addition, at least one study suggests that transportation project cost estimates, especially those authored by project sponsors, should be rigorously scrutinized.65 This study examined 258 transportation infrastructure projects around the world and found that in almost 90% of the cases costs were underestimated, that actual costs on average were 28% higher than estimated, and that rail projects in particular were the most severely underestimated, costing on average 45% more than estimated."

So, who pays when the inevitable 28 to 45% cost overruns occur?

If all of this is even close to being true what is the Obama administration trying to accomplish by pushing a national HSR network?

 

[Krack]

Doesn't Amtrak already go to Miami through the center of the state? We now live in Sebring, which about 70 miles south of Disneyworld on Route 27, and the Amtrak goes right through our city on south. There was a lot of talk last year in the newspaper (Tampa Tribune) about a large train yard expansion outside of Lakeland or Winter Haven.

There's Amtrak all over the country. Nobody uses it because Americans don't like train travel and they do like using their cars. Only place it is even remotely practical for distance travel is Boston to Washington DC route (where price and time is comparable to air travel).

 

[TP2000]

There's Amtrak all over the country. Nobody uses it because Americans don't like train travel and they do like using their cars. Only place it is even remotely practical for distance travel is Boston to Washington DC route (where price and time is comparable to air travel).

Yup, the Northeast corridor is about the only place in the entire Amtrak system that operates at a decent profit. Although the Carolinian in North Carolina ekes out a profit of about $500,000 each year, but that "profit" figure doesn't reflect the few Million dollars per year the North Carolina Department of Transportation pays Amtrak to run the service. Every other route Amtrak runs, both regional and long-distance, operates at a loss and requires subsidies from local government or the Feds to keep running each year.

Florida, including Tampa-Orlando, is served by several long-distance Amtrak routes; the Silver Star and the Silver Meteor. The government subsidy required to run those trains is currently about $140 per passenger.

In Fiscal Year 2008 both of those Silver Service routes carried about 680,000 passengers, and they lost just over $80 Million for that year. The Silver Meteor, for example, uses aging equipment from the 1950's-80's long since paid for and offers minimal service and amenities. But they still lose money hand over fist, and require government subsidies for every person that steps onboard above and beyond their ticket price.

The Super-Glamorous Silver Meteor Arrives at Orlando Station

How much money each year will Florida taxpayers be on the hook for to subsidize the Tampa-Orlando high speed rail?

 

[lazyboy97o]

If all of this is even close to being true what is the Obama administration trying to accomplish by pushing a national HSR network?

It is about planning for the future, but as many have said, we just do not think Tampa-Orlando is a good place to really start this type of project. I also believe that, if we are going to have a national high speed rail network, it should be national. We do not need to be subsidizing a bunch of state run organizations, each with their own structures to maintain, when we already have an existing national passenger rail service. The reason Amtrak is not behind these projects is because its name has been soiled by the decades of massive subsidies. That is what will happen to this Tampa-Orlando route if it is not a smash success in its infant years, people will associate it with a poorly thought out system that only goes to Walt Disney World, but costs a lot more than buses and taxis, and they'll just ignore it when the day may eventually come that it could be very useful. There needs to be at least some demand, but right now that demand is close to nothing.

 

[DVCOwner]

In Europe, we use high speed trains for distances above 150 miles: paris-london, paris-brussels, brussels-london, paris-lyon,... and without any stop during the first 150 miles most of the time. when reaching our destination, we use local or regional train networks. It is a great alternative to flying. But I can't see any good reason to use a high speed train between mco and wdw. Even mco-Tampa is borderline considering all the stops in the Orlando area. Don't get me wrong, I love high speed trains but the Tampa-mco leg is simply to short to proove anything.

I have lived in Japan and Europe and trains work there with heavy government money coming in each year. It will not work in the US for the following reasons:

1. The US is to large to connect rail outside of one area or state. So air travel and travel by auto will be the method people use.

2, Cities outside a few, do not have methods to get poeple from the train stations to thier want to end up. In Japan it was only a few blocks walk from a local train station to almost any where in a major city. Americans might even be to lazy to walk those few blocks.

3. The US airline system is so large that need to travel from one city to another is all ready in place with large parking for leaving a car at one area and renting a car at the other end. Train stations would have to have large parking lots and cost additional money not alreay in this project.

4. Americans love cars!!!!

 

[jt04]

It is about planning for the future, but as many have said, we just do not think Tampa-Orlando is a good place to really start this type of project. I also believe that, if we are going to have a national high speed rail network, it should be national. We do not need to be subsidizing a bunch of state run organizations, each with their own structures to maintain, when we already have an existing national passenger rail service. The reason Amtrak is not behind these projects is because its name has been soiled by the decades of massive subsidies. That is what will happen to this Tampa-Orlando route if it is not a smash success in its infant years, people will associate it with a poorly thought out system that only goes to Walt Disney World, but costs a lot more than buses and taxis, and they'll just ignore it when the day may eventually come that it could be very useful. There needs to be at least some demand, but right now that demand is close to nothing.

OK, I see where you are coming from now. But a nationalized HSR network is a pipe dream. To start with we can't afford it. Secondly, do we really want a government run transportation network? Yikes! I'm assuming you are either anti-fossil fuels or you just believe the government should run everything. (Or you fear flying :lol

Air travel is continuing to evolve because of private sector competition between airlines. And it is the only real option for long range travel. At least until we can all buy flying cars. But HSR can be a benefit between closely placed cities. Tampa/Orlando is perfect if it can be done at the right price.

TP2000 obviously hopes Florida turns down the money so California gets it.

Personally I think California should build a couple "hub airports" that will increase air travel capacity. Then it is just a matter of connecting existing systems to the hub with shorter HSR connections from the closest city.

For instance a hub east of L.A in the desert with direct flights to west coast cities and Vegas could be much faster and done cheaper than a complete HSR system.

 

[TimeTrip]

I believe a major reason to build such a line is to see if it can alleviate over-crowding of airports and eliminate the need for regular air travel between such closely placed cities.

EDIT: I just found out that the Metrorail will soon connect with Miami Airport. Since flying from Miami to MCO makes practical sense, I believe this largely eliminates the need for HSR from Miami to Orlando.

From your POV, what makes the difference between Miami/Orlando and Tampa/Orlando? Perhaps its just the distance? Without that context, it seems like you're playing both sides of the argument

 

[AndyMagic]

Virtually every public railroad in this country is in the red, loosing money big time. But somehow, the government finds ways to justify nosensical projects which benefit only a handful of people.

Moronic comments like this one enrage me. Why do we pretend train lines have to make money to make sense for the country when we don't apply the same logic to roads? Highway widening projects cost billions and billions of dollars and most people drive on them for free (thus providing an enormous subsidy to car companies). Roads are subsidized far more than trains but people apparently just look the other way. Nearly every major subway or railroad across the world need subsidies to operate efficiently and this is no different than the highways and bridges that you drive over. It's called thinking about externalities. Trains provide a huge benefit for the public (even those that don't use it). It removes cars from the road and encourages density around stations making towns more walkable and desirable. :brick:

 

[lazyboy97o]

OK, I see where you are coming from now. But a nationalized HSR network is a pipe dream. To start with we can't afford it.

The federal government is already paying, a national system would just be direct control instead of indirect control that can be exerted in other fields.

Secondly, do we really want a government run transportation network? Yikes! I'm assuming you are either anti-fossil fuels or you just believe the government should run everything. (Or you fear flying :lol

No surprise, you are wrong once again.

Air travel is continuing to evolve because of private sector competition between airlines. And it is the only real option for long range travel. At least until we can all buy flying cars. But HSR can be a benefit between closely placed cities. Tampa/Orlando is perfect if it can be done at the right price.

The high speed rail is not being done by private enterprise, so I fail to see why you are on this anti-government tangent. Tampa-Orlando is too close. According to Google maps Orlando International to Tampa International is just over 90 miles by car. It's about 20 between Orlando International and Wide World of Sports. Now toss in a stop at Lakeland and your longest open stretch of track is going to be about 30-40 miles long. Where is this train ever going to attain high speed?

 

[TimeTrip]

Moronic comments like this one enrage me. Why do we pretend train lines have to make money to make sense for the country when we don't apply the same logic to roads? Highway widening projects cost billions and billions of dollars and most people drive on them for free (thus providing an enormous subsidy to car companies). Roads are subsidized far more than trains but people apparently just look the other way. Nearly every major subway or railroad across the world need subsidies to operate efficiently and this is no different than the highways and bridges that you drive over. It's called thinking about externalities. Trains provide a huge benefit for the public (even those that don't use it). It removes cars from the road and encourages density around stations making towns more walkable and desirable. :brick:

While it may seem that way, I thought that funding for roads was in some part funded by a gas tax, which should (in theory) be paid by people who use those roads. When it comes to rail, chances are that it gets subsidized by a ton of people who don't use the rail, or can't use it. I'm sure I'm missing a ton of detail here though, so

 

[freediverdude]

Well I live in the Tampa area, and I know if this HSR were in place, ran hourly, and were $10-$15 a ticket, I would use it all the time. And I think a lot of families would too. But it would need to:

A. be priced right
B. stop at Disney World, Universal, MCO, and International Drive/Outlet stores on Orlando side
C. stop at Tampa Airport and Busch Gardens on the Tampa side (with maybe a connector to the beaches somehow)
D. run hourly and almost 24/7 so people wouldn't have to worry about being stranded

There are TONS of people here in Tampa who run over to Orlando for the theme parks and shopping/dining. Also with this they could drink and not worry about designated driver back to Tampa and all that. Driving over to a theme park nowadays, the parking fee is $15 if you don't have an annual pass, plus $25 in gas, so there's $40 right there. Plus teens could go to the theme parks in Orlando on their own without needing to drive.

Tons of reasons why this would work for people in Tampa, and for tourists who want to venture beyond Orlando for a day at Busch Gardens or the beaches. Renting a car for just one day would be a hassle for them. Busch Gardens could come up with a package that included a day pass to both the park and the HSR for tourists. There is a lot more reason to think that this would work much better than the monorail in Miami that doesn't go anywhere people want to go, lol. If this dropped you off at the doorstep to each of these places and were priced right for large volume of people, people would use it.

 

[lazyboy97o]

freediverdude, how come you don't take the $10 Amtrak? All of the desired stops you describe only serve to slow down the train, removing the "high speed" part of the project.

 

[DVCOwner]

I for one think that every transit system in the US should pay its own way.

Gas tax (and other taxes on tires, batteries, etc.) should pay for roads and would if Congress did not use the money elsewhere.

Cost of airlines should be paid by tickets purchased (to inlcude cargo) and airports should pay with a user fee to include TSA cost.

Trains should be paid for by tickets purchased and cargo (if possible) carried on these trains.

High speed rail will never pays its way.

 

[freediverdude]

freediverdude, how come you don't take the $10 Amtrak? All of the desired stops you describe only serve to slow down the train, removing the "high speed" part of the project.

The "high speed" part of it isn't nearly as important as it stopping at the doorstep to all these destinations people want to go, which the Amtrak doesn't do. It won't be able to do 170mph or whatever, or maybe just one burst of that fast to show people what it's like, between Lakeland and Orlando. As long as it goes fairly fast, that would be fine.