Orlando High Speed Rail IS DEFINITE

[lazyboy97o]

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.

Amtrak takes about 2 hours. Is that a resonable time to you? Would you take Amtrak if it went to more places?

A burst of speed would still costs millions extra to engineer. There are some more convention heavy rail units capable to reaching speeds near 100 mph that would probably be of better use on this route.

 

[devoy1701]

I figured I should stop quoting and just reply now...

The Orlando-Tampa area will continue to grow and will probably even have a population explosion as baby boomers retire. WDW is likely to be a continually growing enterprise too. You have to project out 10 or 15 years to really understand the need for HSR.

They predicted that Tampa and Brooksville would be connected into one large metropolitan area by 2025 a couple years back but alas, we got nowhere close to that... not to mention this horrible economy has set back growth plans by atleast 5-6 years.

And all it will take is one of I-4's major traffic jams and people seeing the train pass them at 150 MPH to drive people to the ticket counter.

I-4 doesn't get jam packed like it used to 5-10 years ago. It still gets bad by the I-75 interchange and over by Orlando during rush hour, but the main stretch is actually very tolerable ever since they've widen the entire system to 3 lanes in each direction.

I'll just throw in one more scenario. Imagine a major hurricane that suddenly strengthens in a short ammount of time and turns towards the greater Tampa area. This happened in Ft Myers not that long ago. It happened in Houston too when everyone tried to leave at once and all the interstates were gridlocked. An HSR shuttling between Tampa and Lakeland could evacuate a lot of folks and save lives.

Need I remind you that during the 2004 hurricane season, Polk County and inland Central FL saw damage much worse than Tampa did, and many of those storms were forecasted to (or did) travel right over Tampa. If anyone is going to evacuate from impending hurricanes (farther than just from the barrier islands) most people will head due north to Georgia and not to central Florida.

Another point. People are saying it should not happen because Tampa voters voted down a tax increase for local connectors. But I have no doubt that if the HSR is definitely happening that the taxpayers would change their minds. Many people would travel to the area just to experience HSR travel. And Tampa would want to capture those tourist dollars. Tampa is already spending a lot of money to become more tourist friendly and a local transport network would enhance the experience greatly.

Very VERY incorrect...I do not want my taxes increased period, regardless of HSR. I have no need for HSR or a commuter rail. I travel 10 miles to my office and it is on a corridor that would most likely not receive a commuter rail line. In addition, the tax increase was divided in a way where only about half went towards commuter rail while the other half went to payroll, road projects, walkways, bike lanes, etc... again, no thanks. the DOT needs to cut their operating budgets...not find new ways to come up with ways of making up deficits...they've already more than doubled the cost of things such as renewing licenses and registration tags!


It is 'win' everywhere you look.

Sorry...I don't see it.

Tampa and Orlando airports are overcrowded? Seriously?? And there IS NO regular air travel between the two... so why is that even an argument you're putting forward?

Never much of a crowd issue with TIA...even during the holidays we are hardly overcrowded.

I notice you fail to comment on the role the HSR could play in a hurricane emergency.



^So was your comment. Plenty of other threads you can troll if you don't like this one. Bye. :wave:

EDIT: Here is an excellent article. It predicts the HSR would "break even" in the 1st year!

http://www2.tbo.com/content/2010/dec/09/wisconsin-ohio-rail-money-going-to-other-states/

And create 10,000 jobs to build it. No brainer.

.

I'd also like to point out that in an evacuation, residents are much less likely to take mass transit since when most people evacuate, they take their pets and belongings with them.
True.

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!

again, i don't commute on I-4 every day, but I travel on it 2-3 times a week, every week, and that accident back in 08 was a rarity due to very very VERY thick fog. There was also a bad fog accident on the Skyway Bridge back in 1996 that caused me to have to spend 12 hours on that bridge...but again, that isn't a normal occurance and it isn't a very valid argument for HSR.

I just don't see how this project makes any economic sense. It takes about 60 minutes to travel from Tampa to Orlando, along with about about 3.5 gallons of gas in my V-6 Nissan Maxima, or about $10 in Gas. Why would I ever consider spending more than 3 times as much on a train? And for tourists, again, why would someone spend more than $50 roundtrip per person when they can just take a shuttle bus or rent a car for SIGNIFICANTLY less per person?

 

[AndyMagic]

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

Unfortunately the gas tax barely even covers the debt services on road capital improvements. It's become political suicide to raise the gas tax within states as well. Almost all highways (even those that are tolled) are subsidized by taxpayers (often at much higher rates than transit systems.) I do not own a car. I live in New York City and take the subway yet I pay income taxes and property taxes that go toward funding the widening of highways upstate. I don't pretend that roads should be "self sufficient" because they are part of our American infrastructure and I understand that roads are important for the country to prosper. The thing that upsets me are the majority of Americans are incredibly selfish when it comes to taxes or subsidies. If it doesn't DIRECLTY benefit them they consider it a "boondoggle" or some other nonsense word that gets thrown around regardless of its meaning. The point of a tax isn't to just benefit you as an individual, it's to help build a great nation. A nice mix of highways, bridges, and yes, RAIL is important for the country.

 

[devoy1701]

Unfortunately the gas tax barely even covers the debt services on road capital improvements. It's become political suicide to raise the gas tax within states as well. Almost all highways (even those that are tolled) are subsidized by taxpayers (often at much higher rates than transit systems.) I do not own a car. I live in New York City and take the subway yet I pay income taxes and property taxes that go toward funding the widening of highways upstate. I don't pretend that roads should be "self sufficient" because they are part of our American infrastructure and I understand that roads are important for the country to prosper. The thing that upsets me are the majority of Americans are incredibly selfish when it comes to taxes or subsidies. If it doesn't DIRECLTY benefit them they consider it a "boondoggle" or some other nonsense word that gets thrown around regardless of its meaning. The point of a tax isn't to just benefit you as an individual, it's to help build a great nation. A nice mix of highways, bridges, and yes, RAIL is important for the country.

Lets get the budgets and deficits under control first, then we can talk about how I feel about an additional tax. If the gov't (both local and federal) can't get their act together and spend OUR money in a reasonable and responsible manner...why the hell should I agree to give them more?

just saying....nothing against you personally at all. We shouldn't just blindly through money at the gov'ts with the idea that they will know best.

 

[freediverdude]

Amtrak takes about 2 hours. Is that a resonable time to you? Would you take Amtrak if it went to more places?

A burst of speed would still costs millions extra to engineer. There are some more convention heavy rail units capable to reaching speeds near 100 mph that would probably be of better use on this route.

If a conventional train went about that speed, and went directly to those places, I agree, that would be sufficient. I don't know how much difference in cost that would be, though. I'm not sure how much real difference we're talking about here, lol. They may need the "high speed" marketing part of it to help draw people in at first, so they don't think "OMG old clackety clack 20 mph train, no way" lol.

 

[JungleTrekFan]

We shouldn't just blindly through money at the gov'ts with the idea that they will know best.

:shrug: The whole idea of a democratic-republic is having the public vote in political figures who then represent the public in government decisions.

I agree that i dont like many politicians or how they vote on certain subjects but its how are country is run and has since the end of the American Revolutionary War.

 

[jt04]

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

It has everything to do with distance. There are certain applications of HSR that make sense IMO even if the train does not reach its top speed capability. Who is to say in the future that other segments will be added where the train will reach higher speeds? So that argument some are making seems baseless to me. Nobody seems to be able to think beyond the present.

Here is some examples where I think it makes sense because the segment is close enough to support rail travel but not so close that air travel would be significantly faster. By the way, when I speak of overcrowding at airports I am primarily refering to air traffic and the number of flights an airport can handle. That is a major issue HSR can address.

Here are those examples, all my opinion....

Tampa-Orlando
Charlotte-Greensborough
Houston-Austin-San Antonio
New Orleans-Baton Rouge
Colorado Springs-Denver
Sacramento-S.F.
Portland-Tacoma-Seattle

I just don't see the wisdom of spending the high costs of HSR between Miami and Orlando when air travel is so much faster and more efficient and cheaper to the consumer.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Sorry jt04, but that list just demonstrates a total misconception of high speed rail. There is no reason to spend millions or billions when cheaper rail alternatives can achieve the exact same goals and still have room for improvement.

 

[jt04]

Sorry jt04, but that list just demonstrates a total misconception of high speed rail. There is no reason to spend millions or billions when cheaper rail alternatives can achieve the exact same goals and still have room for improvement.

Again you are only seeing this through the lens of present conditions. I'm thinking 10, 20 or more years from now.

So, as things are currently I see your point. But with the massive spending and resources HSR would demand, the only way to properly plan and build such a system has to be with an eye on future conditions. Very future.

If we solve the energy problem through some breakthrough technology such as fusion or solar and breakthrough storage capabilities then we will actually be flying our own planes everywhere in 25 years and people will look back on debates like this and :ROFLOL:

 

[lazyboy97o]

Future conditions will not solve the physical discomfort of rapid changes in speed.

 

[TimeTrip]

By the way, when I speak of overcrowding at airports I am primarily refering to air traffic and the number of flights an airport can handle. That is a major issue HSR can address.

I don't believe that MCO or TPA airports are really slot-constrained. Beyond that, the effect that HSR would have on that problem would really depend on how many people are (in this case) going to TPA to Orlando, or MCO to Tampa as a percentage of overall flyers into/out of that airport. I'm guessing that number would be extremely small. Also, since there are no flights from MCO to TPA or vice versa, you're probably just swapping capacity with a zero change in total capacity. To make a difference, it would need to be between two airports where there is a lot of O+D traffic (origin/destination ONLY, no layovers ).

Perhaps there are other places where it would work, but then you'd have to beat the speed/efficiency/price of flying, which in the case of Miami <-> Orlando keeps HSR from being a viable option.

But your point is certainly most applicable to the Northeast corridor. I think we need to be considering places that look like that for adding HSR. IMO Tampa/Orlando isn't one of them

 

[TimeTrip]

If we solve the energy problem through some breakthrough technology such as fusion or solar and breakthrough storage capabilities then we will actually be flying our own planes everywhere in 25 years and people will look back on debates like this and :ROFLOL:

I hope that you're really laughing, because that's not what it's going to take to have everyone flying where they need to go . The issue with everyone having flying planes isn't the technology, it's just one of many. The real problem is controlling traffic. Getting a flat tire on a road is quite different from an engine failure, or bird strike, or running low on fuel in an airplane. Then imagine thousands of these vehicles in the air at once. Unless they come up with a good automated system or something to solve the problem of thousands of flying vehicles in the air, and handle failure scenarios, we're very very far away from getting there

 

[jt04]

I don't believe that MCO or TPA airports are really slot-constrained. Beyond that, the effect that HSR would have on that problem would really depend on how many people are (in this case) going to TPA to Orlando, or MCO to Tampa as a percentage of overall flyers into/out of that airport. I'm guessing that number would be extremely small. Also, since there are no flights from MCO to TPA or vice versa, you're probably just swapping capacity with a zero change in total capacity. To make a difference, it would need to be between two airports where there is a lot of O+D traffic (origin/destination ONLY, no layovers ).

Perhaps there are other places where it would work, but then you'd have to beat the speed/efficiency/price of flying, which in the case of Miami <-> Orlando keeps HSR from being a viable option.

But your point is certainly most applicable to the Northeast corridor. I think we need to be considering places that look like that for adding HSR. IMO Tampa/Orlando isn't one of them

Again, I'm projecting out a decade or two when I think these issues will become severe. It wouldn't be my choice to invest heavily in new transportation technology in regions that continue to lose population. Rather I think it is best to invest that money in areas which will most need it most in the future. The northeast and taxpayers are best served by upgrading the current infrastructure.

I hope that you're really laughing, because that's not what it's going to take to have everyone flying where they need to go . The issue with everyone having flying planes isn't the technology, it's just one of many. The real problem is controlling traffic. Getting a flat tire on a road is quite different from an engine failure, or bird strike, or running low on fuel in an airplane. Then imagine thousands of these vehicles in the air at once. Unless they come up with a good automated system or something to solve the problem of thousands of flying vehicles in the air, and handle failure scenarios, we're very very far away from getting there

In 25 years technology and especially computing power will have resolved most of these issues. Besides, it works on Coruscant.


Oh, and another reason for not going forward with a national HSR network.....

http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/26895/?p1=A1

 

[fillerup]

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.

I agree with your premises here, but the hard realities are that the lowest one way fare currently proposed by FDOT is $27. And that fare would be reserved for off peak times and regular commuters. Read off peak to mean too late in the morning to properly do a theme park.

And you can take your $40 car cost and bring a family of 4 or 5. That same family by train would cost some multiple of the round trip fare.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Again, I'm projecting out a decade or two when I think these issues will become severe. It wouldn't be my choice to invest heavily in new transportation technology in regions that continue to lose population. Rather I think it is best to invest that money in areas which will most need it most in the future. The northeast and taxpayers are best served by upgrading the current infrastructure.

Unless the state restricts development, future population growth will also continue along I-4.

 

[TP2000]

It has everything to do with distance... Here is some examples where I think it makes sense because the segment is close enough to support rail travel but not so close that air travel would be significantly faster. By the way, when I speak of overcrowding at airports I am primarily refering to air traffic and the number of flights an airport can handle. That is a major issue HSR can address.

Here are those examples, all my opinion....

Tampa-Orlando
Charlotte-Greensborough
Houston-Austin-San Antonio
New Orleans-Baton Rouge
Colorado Springs-Denver
Sacramento-S.F.
Portland-Tacoma-Seattle

I just don't see the wisdom of spending the high costs of HSR between Miami and Orlando when air travel is so much faster and more efficient and cheaper to the consumer.

Some valid points there jt, and yet you are forgetting that it also has everything to do with real demand and the current market. Tampa-Orlando is currently served by one (1) single Amtrak train per day, the Silver Star. Amtrak currently charges $10 for an adult fare to travel Tampa-Orlando in 2 hours and 3 minutes. There's plenty of empty seats on that single train per day.

There is not a single scheduled airline flight between Tampa and Orlando. That service doesn't exists because the private airlines have not identified a marketplace to serve there.

There are seventeen (17) trains per day travelling each way between Sacramento and the Bay Area, for a total of 34 daily trains, mostly handled by the Capitols that are operated by Amtrak California, a subdivision of Amtrak that is heavily subsidized each year by CalTrans and the State of California.

Amtrak California trains calling on Emeryville, home of Pixar Studios (the trains go right by the studio gate a few blocks north of the station)

In addition to the trains, there are sixteen (16) scheduled non-stop flights per day between Sacramento and Bay Area airports.

Or the Seattle-Portland route, served by the excellent Cascades train service. Like Amtrak California, it uses special train equipment in the form of Spanish built tilting Talgo trains that are heavily subsidized by the states of Oregon and Washington.

Cascades Service along Puget Sound

There are one dozen trains per day traveling between Seattle and Portland on the Cascades service, which is a very stylish and comfortable way to travel between those two sparkling cities.

Cascades Bistro Car with Fiber-Optic Route Map on Ceiling

Cascades Business Class

And yet there are also 52 scheduled flights per day for the short hop between Seattle and Portland! Alaska Airlines alone offers a "Shuttle Service" that has 737's leaving every hour on the hour, and smaller Embraer jets leaving every half hour. Other airlines fill in with other Seattle-Portland jet flights at varying times per day. Even with all that rail and jet service, private enterprise has spotted an untapped market there and a new airline called SeaPort Air now offers seven flights per day on small business jets between Portland and Seattle's Boeing Field, which is closer to downtown Seattle than the main international airport.

The point to all this?!? There's still not a single scheduled flight per day offered between Tampa and Orlando. There's just no market there for that. Private enterprise, in all its profit-driven wisdom, can not find a reasonable market for people wanting to travel quickly between Tampa and Orlando. So why does big government, driven mainly by votes and lobbyists instead of profit, feel there's a market there where no one else has been able to find one?

.

 

[jt04]

Unless the state restricts development, future population growth will also continue along I-4.

Which is a major reason why I think HSR along I-4 makes sense.

Some valid points there jt, and yet you are forgetting that it also has everything to do with real demand and the current market. Tampa-Orlando is currently served by one (1) single Amtrak train per day, the Silver Star. Amtrak currently charges $10 for an adult fare to travel Tampa-Orlando in 2 hours and 3 minutes. There's plenty of empty seats on that single train per day.

There is not a single scheduled airline flight between Tampa and Orlando. That service doesn't exists because the private airlines have not identified a marketplace to serve there.

There are seventeen (17) trains per day travelling each way between Sacramento and the Bay Area, for a total of 34 daily trains, mostly handled by the Capitols that are operated by Amtrak California, a subdivision of Amtrak that is heavily subsidized each year by CalTrans and the State of California.

Amtrak California trains calling on Emeryville, home of Pixar Studios (the trains go right by the studio gate a few blocks north of the station)

In addition to the trains, there are sixteen (16) scheduled non-stop flights per day between Sacramento and Bay Area airports.

Or the Seattle-Portland route, served by the excellent Cascades train service. Like Amtrak California, it uses special train equipment in the form of Spanish built tilting Talgo trains that are heavily subsidized by the states of Oregon and Washington.

Cascades Service along Puget Sound

There are one dozen trains per day traveling between Seattle and Portland on the Cascades service, which is a very stylish and comfortable way to travel between those two sparkling cities.

Cascades Bistro Car with Fiber-Optic Route Map on Ceiling

Cascades Business Class

And yet there are also 52 scheduled flights per day for the short hop between Seattle and Portland! Alaska Airlines alone offers a "Shuttle Service" that has 737's leaving every hour on the hour, and smaller Embraer jets leaving every half hour. Other airlines fill in with other Seattle-Portland jet flights at varying times per day. Even with all that rail and jet service, private enterprise has spotted an untapped market there and a new airline called SeaPort Air now offers seven flights per day on small business jets between Portland and Seattle's Boeing Field, which is closer to downtown Seattle than the main international airport.

The point to all this?!? There's still not a single scheduled flight per day offered between Tampa and Orlando. There's just no market there for that. Private enterprise, in all its profit-driven wisdom, can not find a reasonable market for people wanting to travel quickly between Tampa and Orlando. So why does big government, driven mainly by votes and lobbyists instead of profit, feel there's a market there where no one else has been able to find one?

.

I think the powers that be know very well the population surge Florida is about to experience. Especially central Florida. Here is an analogy. People look back 20 years and wonder how we got along without internet in the home. Two things will be possible 20 years from now concerning this discussion. Either people will say, "I wish we had built the MCO-TPA HSR when we had the chance" or they will say, "How would we ever manage without HSR between MCO and TPA"?

Also, I think comparing Amtrak, even the newer more techy lines with the more futuristic bullet trains being proposed is not valid with all due respect.

Most just don't relate Amtrak with general positive experiences. But a state of the art bullet train traveling between two city centers or airports would be a different story.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Which is a major reason why I think HSR along I-4 makes sense.

Why does it make sense to have a train zip right past all of these possible future residents? So grandpa can take the grandkids to watch the trains speed past?

Also, what could is state of the art if none of the technology is utilized. It's like using a Ferrari for a golf cart.

 

[jt04]

Why does it make sense to have a train zip right past all of these possible future residents? So grandpa can take the grandkids to watch the trains speed past?

Also, what could is state of the art if none of the technology is utilized. It's like using a Ferrari for a golf cart.

Actually, I think grandpa and the grandkids would be on the speeding train and they would be watching the cars on I-4 look like they are just sitting there. And often times they will be sitting there. So I guess in those instances they will look like they are in reverse. :lookaroun

A study was done on the Tampa/Orlando HSR and it determined it would not lose money from the start so obviously it would be utilized.

I agree. High speed is not high speed if the train stops every 10 minutes. I'm still wondering how many people would exactly be able to use a train from Orlando to Tampa??? Of course you can't get off the train and then be riding around on a bus in ghetto land. I've seen that trick.

Don't know what to think of it all. The jobs angle is crap, if operation costs are huge you might as well save the time and effort and mail everyone a check. Let's say the train loses 50 million a year that's 1000 people at 50,000 a year. Think that train will employ a 1000 people????

Again, I posted an article earlier which stated the train will be able to cover operating expenses from day 1 so your point is not valid.

The train would only have 1 or 2 stops between Orlando and Tampa. Bullet trains can reach speed much quicker than standard legacy train technology. The idea that the new trains can not take advantage of their speed on short runs is also not a valid point.

Such a high tech option will have the effect of revitalizing local transportation networks (and communities) and potentially create local transit that does not have to be subsidized by the taxpayer. It would also reduce the need for road widenings and road maintenance. There will need to be an expansion of feeder networks to both airport stations and the Lakeland station due to demand. I believe it would also cause WDW to 'reimagine' its transportation network that will then connect to WDW's new station as will Celebration in all probability. Sea World, Universal, International Drive and the Convention Center would also move to add people mover systems that connect to the new station there in my opinion. Most of this is private sector investment and will add to the jobs created.

Since it will break even from day 1 and if the result of an HSR line is that I-4 does not need to be widened again, then the Florida taxpayer will have saved a substantial sum of money right there. Remember, all the economic activity during construction (at least 10,000 jobs) will generate huge tax revenues to the state just through sales taxes. As I have said, it really is a no brainer.

 

[stlbobby]

I find it amusing that everyone balks at the costs of HSR, metro's, and other mass transit systems, but thinks nothing of the cost of building and expanding highways.

The mindset in America is cars are good and mass transit is bad, when in so many ways the opposite is true.