Hyperloop: Texas Triangle

Tnexster
Posts: 3222
Joined: 22 Oct 2016 16:33
Location: Dallas

Hyperloop: Texas Triangle

Postby Tnexster » 15 Sep 2017 14:39

DFW, Texas Triangle tapped as finalist for Hyperloop tube travel

https://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/news ... rloop.html

The Texas Triangle route is a 640-mile system that will, if it becomes a reality, connect Dallas, Houston, Austin and San Antonio, with a leg down to Houston. The route was chosen as one of the top 10 proposals worldwide by Los Angeles-based Hyperloop One. There were more than 1,000 initial submissions representing six continents worldwide.


The cost of taking the Hyperloop would be roughly $330 one-way from DFW to San Antonio, but that could be reduced through project subsidies, according to the company. Hyperloop One aims to transport freight by 2020 and passengers by 2021 along whatever initial route is selected.

User avatar
electricron
Posts: 366
Joined: 29 Oct 2016 11:07

Re: Hyperloop: Texas Triangle

Postby electricron » 17 Sep 2017 21:42

Hyperloop fares subsidized, by whim? It certainly will not be TXDOT subsidizing the Hyperloop fares.
And one way fares of $330 is much, much greater than the fares airlines, Amtrak, and Greyhound charges.

User avatar
tamtagon
Site Admin
Posts: 2123
Joined: 16 Oct 2016 12:04

Re: Hyperloop: Texas Triangle

Postby tamtagon » 18 Sep 2017 06:26

19 minutes to Austin, sold.

User avatar
electricron
Posts: 366
Joined: 29 Oct 2016 11:07

Re: Hyperloop: Texas Triangle

Postby electricron » 18 Sep 2017 20:45

tamtagon wrote:19 minutes to Austin, sold.

Where in Austin would you place the Hyperloop Station?
Keep in mind the airlines wouldn't allow it on airport property!
Where in Austin will there be a cheap to obtain right-of-way and acreage for this station? Imagine the worse possible location, as far away from other transportation access as possible, that's probably where it will go. :D

cowboyeagle05
Posts: 3048
Joined: 21 Oct 2016 08:45
Location: Dallas

Re: Hyperloop: Texas Triangle

Postby cowboyeagle05 » 19 Sep 2017 08:38

If Uber still goes there they will be fine...
“Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell”


User avatar
art_suckz
Posts: 115
Joined: 19 Oct 2016 10:02
Location: Design District
Contact:

Re: Hyperloop: Texas Triangle

Postby art_suckz » 13 Mar 2019 16:10

19-minute hyperloop from Dallas to Austin on fast track after government push

By John Egan
Mar 13, 2019, 4:05 pm

http://dallas.culturemap.com/news/trave ... chao-sxsw/

During an appearance at SXSW in Austin, U.S. Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao said she has established a transportation technology council that will aim to clear regulatory and legal roadblocks for the traffic-busting Virgin Hyperloop One concept and similar transit innovations.
To the man who only has a hammer, everything he encounters begins to look like a nail.

DPatel304
Posts: 2048
Joined: 19 Oct 2016 18:49
Location: Turtle Creek

Re: Hyperloop: Texas Triangle

Postby DPatel304 » 13 Mar 2019 16:41

I thought Virgin just wanted to do their own high speed rail?

I appreciate the ambition this person has, but I'm EXTREMELY skeptical whenever I see anything involving the Hyperloop. But if they are trying to get rid of all the legal hurdles involved, perhaps this could also benefit a potential future HSR line as well? I'm not really sure if that makes any sense.

Either way, I just want to say how awesome it is that both Houston and Austin are trying to connect with Dallas first. I know eventually they'll likely connect with each other, and we'll also get San Antonio connected too, but, whatever happens with this Texas Triangle, I'm extremely happy with the fact that Dallas seems to be the center of it all for now.

User avatar
Tucy
Posts: 1258
Joined: 19 Oct 2016 12:50

Re: Hyperloop: Texas Triangle

Postby Tucy » 14 Mar 2019 14:05

DPatel304 wrote:I thought Virgin just wanted to do their own high speed rail?

I appreciate the ambition this person has, but I'm EXTREMELY skeptical whenever I see anything involving the Hyperloop. But if they are trying to get rid of all the legal hurdles involved, perhaps this could also benefit a potential future HSR line as well? I'm not really sure if that makes any sense.

Either way, I just want to say how awesome it is that both Houston and Austin are trying to connect with Dallas first. I know eventually they'll likely connect with each other, and we'll also get San Antonio connected too, but, whatever happens with this Texas Triangle, I'm extremely happy with the fact that Dallas seems to be the center of it all for now.


You should probably read the article. ;-)

User avatar
tanzoak
Posts: 483
Joined: 18 Dec 2016 19:15

Re: Hyperloop: Texas Triangle

Postby tanzoak » 16 Mar 2019 11:07

The US is a backwater with respect to transportation infrastructure other than highway projects. We simply do not have the experience to engender any kind of confidence that this would be a successful project here. We can build 19th century technology (i.e. subway) only at a 5-10x cost premium to Western Europe and Japan, and we haven't demonstrated that we can even complete projects using 20th century technology (i.e. high-speed rail), much less emerging technology (i.e. high-speed maglev), much much less something truly at the technological frontier like Hyperloop.

I would want to see it demonstrated in countries that have a good track record building transportation projects (like France or Japan) before I trusted it to be built here.

User avatar
art_suckz
Posts: 115
Joined: 19 Oct 2016 10:02
Location: Design District
Contact:

Re: Hyperloop: Texas Triangle

Postby art_suckz » 18 Mar 2019 11:41

Honestly, *nobody* has experience with operations that involve flying jets on magnetic rails inside of a vacuum-sealed tube.

It's political willpower/obstruction and public perception that stalls our projects... not the ability to implement a technology.
To the man who only has a hammer, everything he encounters begins to look like a nail.

User avatar
tanzoak
Posts: 483
Joined: 18 Dec 2016 19:15

Re: Hyperloop: Texas Triangle

Postby tanzoak » 19 Mar 2019 10:24

art_suckz wrote:Honestly, *nobody* has experience with operations that involve flying jets on magnetic rails inside of a vacuum-sealed tube.

It's political willpower/obstruction and public perception that stalls our projects... not the ability to implement a technology.


It's not a political willpower thing. We spend vast sums on transportation projects (like literally 5-10x comparable projects in Western Europe) that take way longer to complete and are typically poorly designed (for example, mezzanines and super deep stations that add tons to travel times for no reason. Or just the ability to build functioning elevators and escalators. Or putting streetcars in *mixed-traffic* lol. Or just look at DART lol. Or the epic fail of CaHSR.).

Sure, nobody has the specific experience with hyperloop (though Japan with high-speed maglev is close). But when you consistently fail at related, globally standard technology, with clear, documented best practices, why do you think they'll succeed on the frontier?

More broadly, a transportation project is more than just the the core locomotive tech. Of course we could easily dig a hole in the desert and build a subway line, or lay a couple of miles of track and run a high-speed train on it. Likewise with hyperloop. But the delivery of the technology as part of a real transportation project seems to be out of our grasp.

User avatar
art_suckz
Posts: 115
Joined: 19 Oct 2016 10:02
Location: Design District
Contact:

Re: Hyperloop: Texas Triangle

Postby art_suckz » 19 Mar 2019 11:47

I still think the root of *all* of that is a political climate that stunts the environment needed to create healthy industries... it isnt a lack of imagination and ability. It's a pervasive conservative and crony-car-capitalist mindset that confuses and misdirects resources and funding.

America designs implement the most complex systems on the planet (mostly aerospace)... the maglev isnt really that advanced. They just put the resources behind it. I love Japan and the Shinkansen, Id rather see that than the hyperloop but I see their successes as nothing more than giving systems the political attention they need. Also, I'm sure youve seen how massive and convoluted Shinjuku and other big Japanese trains stations can be... they're a mess sometimes. Sometimes they have broken computers, ticket machines and escalators too. (they probably just fix it faster than a US civil entity would)

Maybe were are actually arguing from the same page and dont realize it... just my perspective.
To the man who only has a hammer, everything he encounters begins to look like a nail.

User avatar
muncien
Posts: 1062
Joined: 25 Oct 2016 08:46
Location: Cypress Waters

Re: Hyperloop: Texas Triangle

Postby muncien » 19 Mar 2019 12:31

art_suckz wrote:I still think the root of *all* of that is a political climate that stunts the environment needed to create healthy industries... it isnt a lack of imagination and ability. It's a pervasive conservative and crony-car-capitalist mindset that confuses and misdirects resources and funding...


Be careful with this one... While it may be easier to lay the blame on 'conservatives', that really doesn't make it true. Part of the reason conservatives loath mass transportation projects is due to the ridiculous costs being mentioned in this vary thread.
Case in point... I have been following HSR plans for decades in California, with dreams of never taking that dreadful freeway to Vegas or Sacramento, etc...
But the bloated government bureaucracy that advocated so hard for HSR is the same one that inflated the costs and drew out timelines endlessly to the point that it was financially impossible to do.
We seriously need to fix our whole way of thinking when it comes to transportation.

But I'm with you on the 'crony car capitalist' mindset. We seriously need to think beyond the personal automobile when it comes to the majority of trips taken.
"He doesn't know how to use the three seashells..."

User avatar
art_suckz
Posts: 115
Joined: 19 Oct 2016 10:02
Location: Design District
Contact:

Re: Hyperloop: Texas Triangle

Postby art_suckz » 19 Mar 2019 13:25

muncien wrote:Part of the reason conservatives loath mass transportation projects is due to the ridiculous costs being mentioned in this very thread.
Case in point... I have been following HSR plans for decades in California, with dreams of never taking that dreadful freeway to Vegas or Sacramento, etc...
But the bloated government bureaucracy that advocated so hard for HSR is the same one that inflated the costs and drew out timelines endlessly to the point that it was financially impossible to do.
We seriously need to fix our whole way of thinking when it comes to transportation.


I agree, a liberal govt failed there. At the same time, those failings arent due to the industries as much as the state. But now conservatives will use that as an excuse to try and kill any private initiatives (in this case Texas Central or Hyperloop) based on the bad track record of California.
To the man who only has a hammer, everything he encounters begins to look like a nail.

User avatar
muncien
Posts: 1062
Joined: 25 Oct 2016 08:46
Location: Cypress Waters

Re: Hyperloop: Texas Triangle

Postby muncien » 19 Mar 2019 13:42

One last point... Developers, Contractors (particularly Defense contractors), etc., love nothing more than to hear that a given project has 'political will' behind it. They view that as $$$$, and will be more than nappy to charge accordingly.
It's a bit twisted, but that is the way it is.

What we need more of are the disruptors, such as Hyperloop and even Texas HSR to a degree, where they have no problem undercutting the established players if they see a way to make money on something without having the feds coming to them asking for it. When folks like this come along, the best thing we can do is partner with them and try to remove roadblocks, all while the Raytheon/Lockheed/Boeing people kick and scream the whole time.

*Sorry... you can tell I follow defense contracting as a personal hobby... lol
"He doesn't know how to use the three seashells..."

User avatar
art_suckz
Posts: 115
Joined: 19 Oct 2016 10:02
Location: Design District
Contact:

Re: Hyperloop: Texas Triangle

Postby art_suckz » 19 Mar 2019 14:31

I agree and another part of what I was trying clumsily to get at.
To the man who only has a hammer, everything he encounters begins to look like a nail.

lakewoodhobo
Posts: 1238
Joined: 20 Oct 2016 13:49
Location: Elmwood, Oak Cliff

Re: Hyperloop: Texas Triangle

Postby lakewoodhobo » 21 Jan 2020 09:38

North Texas Reaches Round 2 of Hyperloop One Competition
https://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/north ... n/2295422/

The city of Dallas has offered two options that both use Dallas Executive Airport on Hampton Road at U.S. Highway 67 as a destination.

The other end in one proposal is Hensley Field, the former Dallas Naval Air Station, where there is a large, available site for possible manufacturing or industrial uses.

The other Dallas suggestion for the certification test track is a Hyperloop connection between Dallas Executive Airport and the Inland Port area along Interstate 20 and Interstate 45, where there is a railroad hub for containers arriving from overseas and many warehouses.


DPatel304
Posts: 2048
Joined: 19 Oct 2016 18:49
Location: Turtle Creek

Re: Hyperloop: Texas Triangle

Postby DPatel304 » 21 Dec 2020 16:53

I'm still skeptical this will ever happen, but it looks like they plan to complement the HSR to Houston and focus on connecting the rest of Texas with Hyperloop?

The wonderful thing with this is that Dallas will get the benefit of having both the HSR and Hyperloop! I'm honestly most excited about the connection between Fort Worth and Dallas, I really think the two cities have a lot of potential if we could just better connect the two and create more synergy within the metroplex.

User avatar
I45Tex
Posts: 491
Joined: 26 Jan 2017 05:52

Re: Hyperloop: Texas Triangle

Postby I45Tex » 24 Dec 2020 11:46

Yeah, just because of the legal history of the counties, the urban kernels of Denton and Dallas are both about 35 miles from their fellow seats in McKinney and Fort Worth.

User avatar
electricron
Posts: 366
Joined: 29 Oct 2016 11:07

Re: Hyperloop: Texas Triangle

Postby electricron » 24 Dec 2020 14:44

Virgin has finally tested a Hyperloop vehicle with humans aboard last month. The yet to be designed vehicle will have the capacity of 28 passengers. Let me repeat that once more, 28. That is less capacity than an intercity or school bus. The top speed attained by the test vehicle was slightly more than100 mph.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/202 ... 192824002/

Meanwhile, the 8 car Texas Central HSR train will have a capacity around 400 passengers. That’s over 14 times the capacity of a Hyperloop vehicle, and a 16 car version of that train with twice that capacity has been running in Japan for over a decade at speeds over 200 mph in commercial service.

Which is really THE mass transit alternative?

User avatar
utgf
Posts: 35
Joined: 22 Oct 2016 02:16
Location: San Francisco

Re: Hyperloop: Texas Triangle

Postby utgf » 24 Dec 2020 19:21

You basically have to build a meglev rail system and build it in a vacuum tube.

Tnexster
Posts: 3222
Joined: 22 Oct 2016 16:33
Location: Dallas

Re: Hyperloop: Texas Triangle

Postby Tnexster » 28 Dec 2020 15:01

DPatel304 wrote:I'm still skeptical this will ever happen, but it looks like they plan to complement the HSR to Houston and focus on connecting the rest of Texas with Hyperloop?

The wonderful thing with this is that Dallas will get the benefit of having both the HSR and Hyperloop! I'm honestly most excited about the connection between Fort Worth and Dallas, I really think the two cities have a lot of potential if we could just better connect the two and create more synergy within the metroplex.


I wonder if it will even happen, if the cost of the line between Dallas and Houston has doubled or more and will probably continue to increase one has to wonder about the cost of the Dallas to FW leg. Before all of the Texas Central staff were let go I was told repeatedly that the Dallas to Houston line has nothing to do with the Dallas to FW line and is a completely separate plan and one not even connected to the Houston line. So, the region will have to come up with their own funds to build it which was said to be 1B years ago before the costs suddenly went up. So, if the regional HSR line is 2-3B and we already have a train running between the two cities is it worth the expense when we have so many other infrastructure needs? The other question is can you even get a train up to 200mph between Dallas and Houston or would you even want to?

DPatel304
Posts: 2048
Joined: 19 Oct 2016 18:49
Location: Turtle Creek

Re: Hyperloop: Texas Triangle

Postby DPatel304 » 28 Dec 2020 15:24

Tnexster wrote:I wonder if it will even happen, if the cost of the line between Dallas and Houston has doubled or more and will probably continue to increase one has to wonder about the cost of the Dallas to FW leg. Before all of the Texas Central staff were let go I was told repeatedly that the Dallas to Houston line has nothing to do with the Dallas to FW line and is a completely separate plan and one not even connected to the Houston line. So, the region will have to come up with their own funds to build it which was said to be 1B years ago before the costs suddenly went up. So, if the regional HSR line is 2-3B and we already have a train running between the two cities is it worth the expense when we have so many other infrastructure needs? The other question is can you even get a train up to 200mph between Dallas and Houston or would you even want to?


Good points, it does seem insanely expensive and unnecessary to try and make a leg from Dallas to Fort Worth. Also, to your last point, I'm not sure you'd even be able to get up to 200mph for such a short distance.

Honestly, I think if we could get a non-stop TRE train that goes from end to end, that would be more than sufficient enough. I'm not sure how costly or feasible that would be, though.

User avatar
I45Tex
Posts: 491
Joined: 26 Jan 2017 05:52

Re: Hyperloop: Texas Triangle

Postby I45Tex » 29 Dec 2020 14:01

TREE, the non-stop Trinity Railway Express Express?


User avatar
Tivo_Kenevil
Posts: 1981
Joined: 20 Oct 2016 12:24

Re: Hyperloop: Texas Triangle

Postby Tivo_Kenevil » 18 Oct 2021 08:51

I don't see why we need HSR/HL between two cities that close to each other. Upgrading TRE to light rail , increasing speeds and run times seems sensible

User avatar
undefinedprocess
Site Admin
Posts: 477
Joined: 05 Jul 2020 05:45
Contact:

Re: Hyperloop: Texas Triangle

Postby undefinedprocess » 18 Oct 2021 09:36

Tivo_Kenevil wrote:I don't see why we need HSR/HL between two cities that close to each other. Upgrading TRE to light rail , increasing speeds and run times seems sensible

The only way I could see HSR/Hyperloop making sense between Dallas & Fort Worth is down the line, once populations boom even further & more relocations come along... And I mean a big boom... Once there's a lot more density (both in terms of residents and jobs) in the cores of both cities, then it may make sense. But as of right now, yeah, I agree, that seems a bit much (although it would be future-proofing that corridor).

Upgrading TRE to light rail would be awesome to see in the near-ish future. Hadn't even thought about this before.

User avatar
electricron
Posts: 366
Joined: 29 Oct 2016 11:07

Re: Hyperloop: Texas Triangle

Postby electricron » 18 Oct 2021 11:02

Tivo_Kenevil wrote:I don't see why we need HSR/HL between two cities that close to each other. Upgrading TRE to light rail , increasing speeds and run times seems sensible

Huh?
You do realize that DART’s light rail trains have a maximum speed of 60-65 mph vs the TRE locomotives maximum speed of 79 mph. How are you planning to increase speeds with a slower train?

Additionally, Amtrak runs the Texas Eagle over the TRE tracks, which will not be allowed if they convert the line to light rail. Where would Amtrak run its trains between Fort Worth and Dallas?

Additional BNSF runs trains into Irving from Oklahoma, how would you run their freight trains into either Fort Worth or Dallas from Irving? Freight trains and light rail trains can not run over the same tracks, ever!

So why switch the TRE trains to light rail of freight and Amtrak trains must be allowed to use the tracks? There are valid reasons why the TRE is a commuter rail train.

Now, there are no reasons why the TRE line can not be improved for faster speeds, up to maximum speeds of 125 mph. But that would require double tracking the entire corridor, and triple tracking or quad tracking one or two passing sidings so faster trains can pass slower trains. Since there will still be freight trains running on the line, there will still be slower trains the faster trains will need to pass.

How fast could a faster non-stop train travel the 34 miles between Central Station and Union Station?
At 125 mph = 34/125 = .272 hours or 17 miunutes
At 110 mph = 34/110 = .309 hours or 19 minutes
At 100 mph = 34/100 = .34 hours or 21 minutes
At 90 mph = 34/90 = .377 hours or 23 minutes
At 79 mph = 34/79 = .43 hours or 26 minutes
At 60 mph = 34/60 = .566 hours or 34 minutes
Note: I rounded all the times up to the next minute.

Of course, with the existing trains stopping at all 10 stations, the trains take around a whole hour to travel the 34 miles with average trains speeds in the low 30s mph.

But they have eliminated the TRE corridor from the study, so this argument is basically useless. The planners are stuck on the I-30 corridor because that route allows a station in Arlington. Remember, the NCTCOG staff home base is located in Arlington. The likelihood that Arlington will ever support public transit or join DART or Trinity Metro is very slim. So the only transit line possible for Arlington would be a federal or state financed HSR line.
But with a stop in Arlington, it certainly will never be a non-stop line.

How many intercity train stations are there in New York City for Amtrak? One.
How many intercity train stations are there in Chicago for Amtrak? One.
How many intercity train stations are there in Los Angeles for Amtrak? One.
Are you seeing a pattern yet?

What is needed is not a HSR line between Fort Worth and Dallas. What is needed for the future economic growth of the Metroplex is another public transit line along the I-30 corridor; light rail, commuter rail, or metro rail with 10 or more stations along the rail corridor servicing commercial, business, and residential properties.

User avatar
Tivo_Kenevil
Posts: 1981
Joined: 20 Oct 2016 12:24

Re: Hyperloop: Texas Triangle

Postby Tivo_Kenevil » 18 Oct 2021 13:06

electricron wrote:
Tivo_Kenevil wrote:I don't see why we need HSR/HL between two cities that close to each other. Upgrading TRE to light rail , increasing speeds and run times seems sensible

Huh?
You do realize that DART’s light rail trains have a maximum speed of 60-65 mph vs the TRE locomotives maximum speed of 79 mph. How are you planning to increase speeds with a slower train?

Additionally, Amtrak runs the Texas Eagle over the TRE tracks, which will not be allowed if they convert the line to light rail. Where would Amtrak run its trains between Fort Worth and Dallas?

Additional BNSF runs trains into Irving from Oklahoma, how would you run their freight trains into either Fort Worth or Dallas from Irving? Freight trains and light rail trains can not run over the same tracks, ever!

So why switch the TRE trains to light rail of freight and Amtrak trains must be allowed to use the tracks? There are valid reasons why the TRE is a commuter rail train.

Now, there are no reasons why the TRE line can not be improved for faster speeds, up to maximum speeds of 125 mph. But that would require double tracking the entire corridor, and triple tracking or quad tracking one or two passing sidings so faster trains can pass slower trains. Since there will still be freight trains running on the line, there will still be slower trains the faster trains will need to pass.

How fast could a faster non-stop train travel the 34 miles between Central Station and Union Station?
At 125 mph = 34/125 = .272 hours or 17 miunutes
At 110 mph = 34/110 = .309 hours or 19 minutes
At 100 mph = 34/100 = .34 hours or 21 minutes
At 90 mph = 34/90 = .377 hours or 23 minutes
At 79 mph = 34/79 = .43 hours or 26 minutes
At 60 mph = 34/60 = .566 hours or 34 minutes
Note: I rounded all the times up to the next minute.

Of course, with the existing trains stopping at all 10 stations, the trains take around a whole hour to travel the 34 miles with average trains speeds in the low 30s mph.

But they have eliminated the TRE corridor from the study, so this argument is basically useless. The planners are stuck on the I-30 corridor because that route allows a station in Arlington. Remember, the NCTCOG staff home base is located in Arlington. The likelihood that Arlington will ever support public transit or join DART or Trinity Metro is very slim. So the only transit line possible for Arlington would be a federal or state financed HSR line.
But with a stop in Arlington, it certainly will never be a non-stop line.

How many intercity train stations are there in New York City for Amtrak? One.
How many intercity train stations are there in Chicago for Amtrak? One.
How many intercity train stations are there in Los Angeles for Amtrak? One.
Are you seeing a pattern yet?

What is needed is not a HSR line between Fort Worth and Dallas. What is needed for the future economic growth of the Metroplex is another public transit line along the I-30 corridor; light rail, commuter rail, or metro rail with 10 or more stations along the rail corridor servicing commercial, business, and residential properties.


TLDR. Whatever the case make it run faster. No need for HSR.

User avatar
MC_ScattCat
Posts: 140
Joined: 26 Jun 2019 16:12

Re: Hyperloop: Texas Triangle

Postby MC_ScattCat » 18 Oct 2021 15:49

I don't know how feasible it is but I think switching the UP freight line from its current route to the TRE lines and the TRE to the UP tracks would be a good idea. It follows I-30 for the most part. It misses Irving/DFW but the airport is now served by better rail options. Also, it's closer to the stadiums. Maybe a people transport from downtown Arlington to the stadiums. Its easier said then done.

User avatar
electricron
Posts: 366
Joined: 29 Oct 2016 11:07

Re: Hyperloop: Texas Triangle

Postby electricron » 19 Oct 2021 00:03

MC_ScattCat wrote:I don't know how feasible it is but I think switching the UP freight line from its current route to the TRE lines and the TRE to the UP tracks would be a good idea. It follows I-30 for the most part. It misses Irving/DFW but the airport is now served by better rail options. Also, it's closer to the stadiums. Maybe a people transport from downtown Arlington to the stadiums. Its easier said then done.

Several problems with switching who runs on which corridor (TRE and UP).
Railroad corridor ownership is a huge problem. GM plant location, a huge money maker for the UP. Existing train station locations are on the TRE and not on the UP. Grand Prairie and Arlington are not members of either DART or Trinity Metro, why would they subsidize a rail line to non member cities? Just too many problems to solve which will cost a lot of money to fix.

And again, the present study NCTCOG has underway has eliminated both the TRE and UP rail corridors. It is I-30 or bust. At least the I-30 corridor is owned by TXDOT, owned by the State. It will cost far less to get easements for passenger trains than buying the UP corridor.

User avatar
MC_ScattCat
Posts: 140
Joined: 26 Jun 2019 16:12

Re: Hyperloop: Texas Triangle

Postby MC_ScattCat » 19 Oct 2021 09:17

I forgot about the GM plant. It would be great to use the UP line, but I agree money wise it doesn't make sense. I'm having a hard time even seeing where the line would go? All the interchanges, express lanes, etc. in the way. It won't happen so I won't spend time thinking on it.

cowboyeagle05
Posts: 3048
Joined: 21 Oct 2016 08:45
Location: Dallas

Re: Hyperloop: Texas Triangle

Postby cowboyeagle05 » 19 Oct 2021 10:18

Just look at other examples many transit agencies have floating rail around and over highways. I am not saying its a good idea but its been done.
“Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell”

User avatar
saxman
Posts: 9
Joined: 23 Dec 2016 14:34

Re: Hyperloop: Texas Triangle

Postby saxman » 24 Oct 2021 12:45

It took many years to get Amtrak off the UP line and onto the TRE line. Amtrak wanted to eliminate the daily backup move into Fort Worth saving considerable time. UP just wants passenger trains off it's lines. TRE didn't think it could work Amtrak into its timetables, and then it turned into who would carry the liabilities. UP accepting passenger trains back onto its sub is not happening, unless they get lots of taxpayer funds to make capacity improvements. They'd want it triple tracked if not quads.

How many intercity train stations are there in New York City for Amtrak? One.
How many intercity train stations are there in Chicago for Amtrak? One.
How many intercity train stations are there in Los Angeles for Amtrak? One.
Are you seeing a pattern yet?


True, but those are just city limits. Amtrak serves the suburban cities only a few miles away in all of those areas; Newark NJ, New Rochelle for NYC. Glenview, Naperville, Joliet for Chicago. Numerous cities in the LA area like Glendale, Fullerton, Anaheim, Santa Ana, Oxnard and many others. Suburban service for intercity rail is quite common.

User avatar
electricron
Posts: 366
Joined: 29 Oct 2016 11:07

Re: Hyperloop: Texas Triangle

Postby electricron » 26 Oct 2021 14:56

saxman wrote:True, but those are just city limits. Amtrak serves the suburban cities only a few miles away in all of those areas; Newark NJ, New Rochelle for NYC. Glenview, Naperville, Joliet for Chicago. Numerous cities in the LA area like Glendale, Fullerton, Anaheim, Santa Ana, Oxnard and many others. Suburban service for intercity rail is quite common.

True, for regular Amtrak intercity trains. Along the 457 rail miles along the Northeast Corridor Amtrak regional trains visit 29 stations not including the stations along its branch lines, but Amtrak's HSR Acela trains visit just 16 stations.
So, the average miles between stations are:
Amtrak Regional 457/29 = 15.75 miles
Amtrak Acela 457/16 = 28.5 miles
That's in a fairly dense population of the northeast corridor, with the Acela trains taking 6.75 hours averaging around 70 mph between Boston and DC.

Meanwhile, Texas Central is planning 3 stations along its 240 miles, averaging 80 miles between stations. Let's take the plunge and suggest they should add a 4th station, like in Corsicana, it would average 60 miles between stations. Is not Fort Worth more like half that distance (around 30 miles) away from Dallas?

FYI, Texas Central desires Dallas to Houston elapse time around 90 minutes, with trains averaging 160 mph. Do you want a HSR train service averaging 70 mph or one averaging 160 mph? At around an average speed of 70 mph, it would take Texas Central not so HSR trains 3.4 hours vs 90 minutes to travel between Dallas and Houston.

Maximum speeds of the trains does have an affect, but so do the number of stations the trains stop at along the route.