Rather than only concentrating on point-to-point fast train systems between major cities, the “phased network approach” spells out ways to integrate a variety of services to conveniently link many station pairs — big city, suburban, and rural — all at once.
The blueprint for systems that serve multiple markets and as many constituencies as possible already exists, the proposal outlines, in France, Germany, and Japan. Although noted for their speedy trainsets and dedicated routes, the real strength of these systems are the multiple connections provided to the main stems.
After describing in detail how those countries use coordinated multiple-speed services to boost usage, the paper then goes on to show how a combination of upgraded Metra Electric tracks from O’Hare International Airport through Chicago, a high-speed trunk connecting the Windy City with Indianapolis, and conventional feeders to other communities could reduce Chicago-Indianapolis rail travel times from the current five hours, ten minutes to 90 minutes.
With upgraded freight railroad tracks continuing on to Cincinnati (along the former route of New York Central’s James Whitcomb Riley) three-hour Chicago-Cincinnati overall travel times could be achieved compared with today’s lethargic eight hours, thirty minutes on the Cardinal.
“The core point is that rather than only trying to keep projects affordable, we should be figuring out how to put more people on trains,” Rick Harnish, Midwest High Speed Rail Association’s Executive Director, tells Trains News Wire. “We need a new ridership and revenue model that combines commuter, feeder, and intercity trips in a way suited to the geography and demographics to the Midwest.”
The proposal outlines a series of specific recommendations, including:
•Increasing compensation to host railroads, combined with publicly-funded infrastructure improvements, but limiting top train speeds to 90 mph on these routes
•Identifying and constructing big networks, but implementing fast, dedicated right-of-way segments with a high-impact first phase that serves many markets at once through feeders
“With such a model in place,” says Harnish. “we can define a funding and financing plan to convince elected officials that high speed rail incorporated into a phased network is not only feasible, but essential to the economic states and communities.”
The full report is available online.
As long as government employees continue to be involved in the process it will be slow, slower and slowest.
US cousins, please read this proposition carefully. Despite your current political disaster area you are a can-do nation. This proposal is looking at serving as many multiple markets as possible, using differing technologies as appropriate to specific locations, and importantly, bringing together multiple funding sources and rail operators as appropriate to the routes in question. If the Feds, States and Class 1s and Commuter lines see advantages they will go for it. This proposal is picking targets that may be feasible. It is not moaning about the overall situation. A view from Australia.
Our #1 problem re passenger rail is a totally disparate approach, as evidenced here, with no overview and national perspective to align our varied interests in rationale priorities.
We have enough needs just in the Northeast Corridor to consume every potential dollar available. But what about the CREATE program, South of the Lake program, and others to remedy rail gridlock and congestion?
As well, what federal legislative relief will be on the table to allow Amtrak’s excessively padded schedules to even be adhered to, let alone, sped up?
The concept of passenger rail is all over the board re frequencies, speed, and services.
Interesting.How do they plan to build track in Indiana for high speed?
If money is no object, then sure, a 3-hour Chicago-to-Cincinnati passenger rail operation is possible. BUT, it will require some serious $$$ investments to make this happen.
The other logical question to ask is whether there is a serious and large enough Chicago-to-Cincinnati passenger market to make this considerable investment pan out.
What the NYC “James Whitcomb Riley” did back in the 1950’s, we can’t do now until the Feds and state governments like Ohio and Indiana get serious about inter-city service. If they could follow the lead of Illinois and North Carolina and had passenger rail friendly Governors we might , at least, see more frequent, daily departures for inter-city Cincy-Chicago service , or even Indianapolis-Chicago service. I think Iowa Pacific’s operation of the “Hoosier State” opened the eyes of Indiana’s DOT on what is possible.
what i take out out of this article is the concept that frequency and reliability are almost
as good as “high speed”. some would argue the point, but i believe we have in the loosan corridor
a very good example of such a system in use every day. the highest speed operated between
santa barbara and san diego is 90 mph and over much of the route it is far less. but multiple
frequencies combined with equipment designed for the service make it a successful, busy operation
which is practical for business and leisure travelers alike. loosan was not cheap but it cost far
less than “high speed” and hauls thousands of people each day who would otherwise be in
cars, buses or planes. similar systems based around chicago and atlanta seem “natural” to me.
if you built it — to paraphrase the movie — they would come.
The largest cities need more service?
I have a question in regards to this article , who is going to supply the funding and equipment for this project ?
Cincy is an hour ahead of Chitown, so that would make for a “4” hour ride to Cincy and a “2” hour ride back. FWIW.
Don’t expect any help from the Ohio Govt. The governor vetoed a proposal for a train to run from Cleveland to Cincinnati by turning down funds from the Federal Govt. a few years back .
Should’ve left the Big Fours through route from Cincinnati to Kankakee intact…
Technically, a trip from Minneapolis-St. Paul to Chicago, via the old C&NW “400” route, could be completed in a little more than two hours…if the trains could run 200 mph. Personally I’d love it, but that doesn’t mean it will happen in my lifetime.
Somebody has been smoking something. It currently takes 5 hours to get the 196 miles from Indy to Chicago now (40mph avg. speed). And 35 years later – we still can’t get 3-C corridor Amtrak service in Ohio.
Metra Electric tracks from O’Hare International Airport through Chicago? Since the Electric District ends at Chicago’s lake front, I was confused, so I looked at the white paper. It states that the proposed route would use Metra’s North Central line from O’Hare to Union Station, then over to the St. Charles Air Line and connect with the Electric District at 16th Street.