Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
Great map, great diary, great work! Some notes and questions.

effective trip speed of 200mph

Do you mean maximum or average speed? If the latter, then that is pretty bold for one-hour relations (today, the fastest trip is a 66-minute trip between two out-of-town TGV stations at 263.3 km/h = 163.6 mph), though later on you say that the picture is not that different with 150 mph.

If it is easy to implement, I'd suggest you refine your model with these next simplest assumptions:

  1. give 40 km/25 miles and 10 minutes each for the acceleration and deceleration phases (the latter is in reality much shorter, but let's have buffer for city entrances),
  2. calculate the rest at maximum speed, if you're a bit bolder, 220 mph (which is a bit under the 360 km/h max for the next generation of Shinkansens),
  3. accept half-hour distances as minimum.

Final point: what about Houston-NOLA, St. Louis-NOLA, Jacksonville-NOLA? All seem to be within the scope of your rules (and all would be great to serve some major sub-million cities along the way, too).

"dives" for High Speed Rail can be more energy efficient than with slower rail, because the train clears the dive so rapidly that it does not have time to lose very much momentum

Hm. The factors to consider here are: steepeness of the passages, the ratio of inclination x mass x g to train resistance (which is chiefly wind resistance) and the sum of both to available tractive effort (chiefly a function of how many wheels are driven). Depending on the parameters, a HST passing a highway exit underpass can be much more and much less efficient than a conventional train. But if the parameters are such that HSTs can pass without velocity change and without having to brake on the descent, there should be insignificant overall energy difference relative to travel on level track (e.g., the descent spares exactly as much energy as the extra the ascent demands).

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Sat Mar 24th, 2007 at 02:20:41 PM EST
If it is easy to implement, I'd suggest you refine your model with these next simplest assumptions:
  1. give 40 km/25 miles and 10 minutes each for the acceleration and deceleration phases (the latter is in reality much shorter, but let's have buffer for city entrances),
  2. calculate the rest at maximum speed, if you're a bit bolder, 220 mph (which is a bit under the 360 km/h max for the next generation of Shinkansens),
  3. accept half-hour distances as minimum.
That simply boils down to replacing the old 200mi-600mi range with a 90mi-640mi range.

"It's the statue, man, The Statue."
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sat Mar 24th, 2007 at 05:24:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Or 90-580, if calculating with a more conservative top speed.

Note BTW: the acceleration rule-of-thumb numbers I gave are assuming distributed traction. TGV-style trains with tractor heads should be slower, see the current top speed example. (That train is allowed a top speed of 320 km/h = 200 mph on 40 km, 300 km/h = 183 mph on the rest of the 289.6 km relation, except for the Avignon bifurcation.)

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Sat Mar 24th, 2007 at 06:57:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I'd be happy to go with 120-580, I don't want to get in the way of higher priority tasks like Express passenger/freight rail projects ... so there aren't many short connections at all in there, ... except for a few special cases.

Because of the Bay, there is little downside and plenty of upside running as Express rail from San Jose to Oakland at the end of a HSR corridor to San Jose, especially if the final station is an interchange with the local rail over the Golden Gate.

Separate lines to Orlando and to Tampa down the length of the state is probably not a starter, so if I redrew the second map right now, I would draw the map assuming Tampa/Orlando/Jacksonville and Miami/Orlando/Jacksonville are two distinct services sharing the same Orlando/Jacksonville corridor.

But this map is not drawn on the assumption that you can buy a HSR ticket between, say, LA and Riverside. Short segments are included based on the additional trips they offer in the bracket.

And it is most definitely not a network planning map, since the broader idea that it is addressing is setting up an accounts-based system to support interurban trips of 1:30 to 3:00, with a range of types of projects eligible. HSR would be only one of those types of projects ... both Express rail and regular passenger rail would also be eligible.


I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.

by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Sat Mar 24th, 2007 at 07:15:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]
But this map is not drawn on the assumption that you can buy a HSR ticket between, say, LA and Riverside. Short segments are included based on the additional trips they offer in the bracket.

Ah, that would have been sweet, 30 minutes into Union Station.

"It's the statue, man, The Statue."

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sat Mar 24th, 2007 at 07:21:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]
One the first, its just a back of the envelope calculation, but the second map works with 150mph, effective trip speed. I expect the research triangle will be 1m+ if its not by now.

Indeed, the original spreadsheet that this was based on had 50, 100, 200, and 300. This diary was the result of the observation that almost all the 1m+ cities tied together at the 200mph effective trip speed.

Politically, I think that's 66 Senators (68 if Denver CO could be included, but that's just at the edge of the limit on the Kansas City side, which is why it drops down to a dashed line in the second map) and a very large nuumber of House Seats represented. I think, consciously or unconcsciously, that's one of the reasons that the map attracted such attention on dKos. The standard is to think of fast rail for California and for Boston/DC, and the rest of the country gets nothing.

On whether the "1 hour" trips would really be one hour trips, if the vehicle was operating at a speed that allowed the "three hour trips" to be finished in three hours ... I don't think so, but I pulled out the sub-one hour legs anyway. For example, Cleveland/Columbus/Cincinatti if implemented with tilt trains can readily include Akron, Canton, Newark and Dayton enroute, plus a couple others (the main thing is to run through Columbus on an East/West alignment), and would plausibly be less than 4 hours end to end. So I pulled those out.

So its mapping the market, not mapping a particular technology.

On Houston / NOLA, I had it in, I'll probably put it back in. I took it out of the spreadsheet for the same reason as San Francisco / San Jose / LA ... but I'll put it back in next time I look at this. On NOLA / St. Louis, I think I just overlooked it (thanks).

On NOLA / Jacksonville, Jacksonville was not 1m+ in the 2000 urbanized areas data that I used, so it was not in the first map at all. I added it on a dashed line in the second map for the link that would be most attractive in Jacksonville itself.

In the added material on the end, which more reflected some of the concerns of the dKos commentary that I didn't want to write 50 identical replies to ... on the interstate alignment, I would not be surprised if it was preferable to run in a shallow trench in any event, to reduce cross-wind profile, so if a dive requires braking, I'd say stretch out the dive so that it doesn't. And I should stress more that this would be for the long stretches between urban areas, the Interstates are a lot more bendy when they get into areas that were already built up when they were constructed.

I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.

by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Sat Mar 24th, 2007 at 06:15:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Politically, I think that's 66 Senators ... The standard is to think of fast rail for California and for Boston/DC, and the rest of the country gets nothing.

Good point.

Regarding Interstate exits, if that troubles your Kossack readers so much, please point them to European examples of high-speed lines along highways in practice. Best the HSL Zuid line in the Netherlands and Belgium, to be opened at the end of this year, because that crosses flat terrain like Florida:


(You can find lots of other pictures of the Antwerp-Rotterdam section here.)

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Sat Mar 24th, 2007 at 07:12:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Thank you, thank you, thank you!

I was not aware of this ... while Oz is further advanced in rail than America, its still only just now getting out from under a "protect what we have" attitude into an attitude of modern systems being used to servce additional transport tasks.

I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.

by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Sat Mar 24th, 2007 at 07:17:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Further lines alongside highways: the line from Bruxelles to the German border (hilly terrain); almost all German lines, including Cologne-Frankfurt

(low mountains) have sections alongsaide highways, new Italian lines too, especially Milan-Bologna (opens soon) and Turin-Milan (half opened):

...some sections of all TGV lines:

...and the Channel Tunnel Rail Link.



*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Sat Mar 24th, 2007 at 08:51:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Man, you are writing my next dKos HSR diary for me! Thanks again!

I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.
by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Sat Mar 24th, 2007 at 08:57:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Pleased to help you :-) Our cause is common.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Sat Mar 24th, 2007 at 08:58:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Bruce -- You are aware of the railroad diaries and railroad passion here, no???

Blogging regularly at Get Energy Smart. NOW!!!
by a siegel (siegeadATgmailIGNORETHISdotPLEASEcom) on Sat Mar 24th, 2007 at 11:11:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Mate, I actually contributed to a double decker train diary, when the diarist did not realize that NSW relies almost exclusively on double deckers

I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.
by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Sun Mar 25th, 2007 at 12:58:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Mea culpa ... hard to keep track who is involved where ...

Blogging regularly at Get Energy Smart. NOW!!!
by a siegel (siegeadATgmailIGNORETHISdotPLEASEcom) on Sun Mar 25th, 2007 at 09:27:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]
No surprises there ... weeks can go by when I only read the EuroTrib without commenting.

I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.
by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Mon Mar 26th, 2007 at 11:27:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Top Diaries

Occasional Series