Budget Travel - Amtrak plans 37-minute train from NY to Philly

MSNBC: Amtrak plans 37-minute train from NY to Philly (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/48133556/ns/travel-news/)

Is Amtrak finally trying to catch up to the rest of the world with respect to high speed rail travel??

IME here in the UK, train travel can make life very easy - no security, relaxing, get up/move around, etc.

:)

Amtrak announced a $151 billion improvement plan on Monday that includes 37-minute trips from New York to Philadelphia at speeds approaching 220 miles per hour.

However, the U.S. passenger railroad will need substantial financial support from both state and federal governments to make its ambitious plan to transform rail travel in the Northeast a reality.

The railroad predicted that super-fast train trips along the East Coast could be a reality by 2040. Travel times from New York to either Washington or Boston - both about 200 miles in distance - would also be slashed, to 94 minutes, the report said.

Current travel times from New York to Philadelphia on Amtrak's sleek Acela trains are 1 hour, 15 minutes. Travel between New York and Washington currently takes 2 hours, 45 minutes and New York to Boston takes 3 hours, 41 minutes, according to Amtrak's website.

$151b? I don't think it's ever going to happen.

That's $500,000 for EACH PERSON in the United States.

edit: oops, $500/person. Still, that's quite a chunk of change, especially considering the vast majority of people in this country wouldn't use this line anywhere near frequently enough.

You are probably out by a factor of 1,000 - a billion is usually 1,000 million in the US.

Not going to happen. To get new tracks to Boston from New York, Phillly from New York, the White Plains airport from New York, etc will require them to take over some of the most expensive real estate in the country to put down new tracks (since there's no chance of running that speed on the current tracks).

It's just a dream.

The railroad predicted that super-fast train trips along the East Coast could be a reality by 2040.

2040? I get the politics involved, and that it would cost a ton of money, but is building 100 miles of rail using essentially existing technology really a three decade project?

Next-Gen High-Speed Rail systems require dedicated tracks with stringent design criteria to ensure safe and comfortable operations. While the track’s vertical grade can be somewhat steeper than traditional rail, its curvature limits are much more restrictive (minimum 3-mile radius curves vs. ½-mile radius for traditional commuter rail track), and even more gentle curves required to reach and maintain higher-end speeds. To further offset the force effects experienced on curved sections at very high speeds, high-speed rail tracks can be more “banked” (similar to race car tracks).

Next-Gen High-Speed Rail trains require roughly 5 minutes of acceleration over 16 miles of straight and flat track to achieve 200 mph. Next-Gen high-speed systems must provide alignment segments wherever possible that allow for these types of operating speeds if true high-speed travel time goals are to be met.

It then shows a map of the curves they will need to do this vs current requirements

http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/1096/curvea.jpg

Yeah, they shouldn't have any problems getting that in place in Manhattan.

At least they realized there was little chance of doing along the Connecticut coast, so they cut inland in New Rochelle (where the current Amtrak line merges with Metro North), zig into White Plains to the airport, then Danbury, Waterbury, Hartford, Woonsocket, RI, and then Boston. Besides Hartford and Boston, ignoring any major city in New England. Because people will want stops in Waterbury and Hartford.

37 minutes is way better than 1 week from Philly-NYC on foot (http://99milemarch.org)

Sounds like to me Amtrak is proactively trying to justify its future existence, financial support from the US Taxpayers. I would envision this happening about the same time LGA becomes delay free.