Maglev is back in action...again. (Pittsburgh, Penn: buying, cost of, airport)

[Geeo]

There are about 180 daily flights at the airport, not 45. 45 is the number of USAir flights. There are 11 or 12 other airlines that make up the bulk of flights.

And although airport traffic is down, the number of Pittsburghers who use the airport is up. In the old days of the hub, fares were among the highest in the country and some Pittsburghers drove to other airports for cheaper flights. Now we have them. The bulk of the traffic when it was a hub were just people connecting to other flights. They never left the airport.

[Impala26]

Originally Posted by Copanut

I'd love to the know the stats of how many people that fly into the Airport go directly downtown. A lot of business headquarters these days are in the suburbs, what good would a direct shuttle do for them? It just seems like a waste of money.

I agree with Brian here in that a project like this is not a waste if the primary goal of the project is to test its feasibility based on natural terrain features, urban landscape, and variable weather conditions--all of which are why the Pittsburgh maglev project is pretty much the favored "test track" proposal amongst the other maglev projects. I totally agree with you that other maglev projects like Baltimore-D.C. line or the SoCal-Vegas line certainly would offer better "bang for your buck" efficiency in terms of populations and demand.

I do agree that there could be a negative backlash against implementing the project on a wider national scale if the project here turns out to be used infrequently. However, again this is not the goal of the project to be located here in Pittsburgh. Personally, I think that the Pittsburgh-Monroeville segment is the most important link of the project, as it would grant rapid access from many of the eastern suburbs to the city center and airport. Plus, I don't think you should underestimate of the possible "tourist attraction" type effect you could see from a project of this magnitude.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by Impala26

Plus, I don't think you should underestimate of the possible "tourist attraction" type effect you could see from a project of this magnitude.

While I would again agree that you could never justify this project just on this basis, I also think it could help promote tourism, as well as Pittsburgh's growing convention trade.

[Copanut]

Guys, I rode on sky-bus back in the 60's when they had the demo at South Park. Seemed like a good idea to me, but what did I know, I was in high school. For a multitude of reasons, it never went forward, no doubt that not enough politicians palms were being greased by Westinghouse and the unions did not like trains running without conductors.

If a private company wants to build a Mag-lev down the corridor from the airport to downtown for FREE, I'm all for it. Have it end at the north side so we can accommodate all the high rollers at the Casino.

No doubt it would be a draw for out of town mayors to visit here on the govt's dime, which is what politics is all about.

Sorry if I sound cynical, but after voting for almost 40 years, I've yet to see any politician do anything but feather his/her own nest.

[pman]

The Keystone East is $489 million and projects half a million extra riders assuming NO additional service. how many will the mag lev carry? I don't think it really matters what the INTENT of the line is, if it doesn't get implemented further, it will be considered a boondoggle, even if it's successful (as the shanghai project was). I've been thinking about possible routing between Philly and Pitt and I supppose a turnpike routing is feasible, and I know there's some space IN Philly that could probably be used (I'm thinking the current ROW which used to be ten tracks inside city limits) plus a freight bridge, and straight down the parkway to LOVE PArk. I'm having a hard time with Harrisburg-Pitt. I suppose a few tunnels, straightened curves, and cannibalizing the center tracks could work. Where would it go in Pitt? buy two tracks from NS and use Penn Station? does the US have the will power to build such a thing? Regarding the $8bn, there are 50 states, you do the math. PA should get the Keystone east because it's a good, solid plan that wil benefit riders before Obama's reelection. I think that's about as big an allocation as one can hope for PA. just one man's opinion. I also thiink that BaltDC is foolish because it's only 30 min on the Acela as it is. they just need more capacity down there and more fast trains. Vegas-LA is interesting, but it appears they are moving towards conventional HSR.

[Impala26]

Boondoggle or not, if those in the Department of Transportation want to test a maglev system here in the States, I'm not going to complain if it ends up in our city.

Pman, I agree with you that the apparent capital of cost for traditional HSR is far less than maglev. However, if what Brian says holds any water, and the Europeans have spend decades building up their HSR (much like us and our Interstate Highways), then maybe perhaps the long-term investment should be in a newer and possibly more efficient/reliable technology. Also like Brian said, we have an extremely outdated rail network, so the differences in costs may not be all that different. Of that I cannot be sure however.

If I were running things I would fund a maglev study and a few select corridors like the Keystone, California, and Midwest-Chicago.

[highway29south]

This is from yesterday's Tribune Review newspaper in Pittsburgh.

Maglev's ruse: Pull the plug - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review

[Impala26]

Originally Posted by highway29south

This is from yesterday's Tribune Review newspaper in Pittsburgh.

Maglev's ruse: Pull the plug - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review

Hah, like I find validity in the Trib's opinion section... the same section where I just read that Obama getting the Nobel Prize was purposely a smack in the face to Dubya and his constituents.

They make a statement about maglev's ineffectiveness without using any actual facts to back up their argument. Look, I don't view maglev as this God-send that will save America. I just think it's these pervasive conservative arguments over the years that have left the US in the dust behind other "inferior" nations in terms of transportation, education, health care, etc.

[highway29south]

Originally Posted by Impala26

Hah, like I find validity in the Trib's opinion section... the same section where I just read that Obama getting the Nobel Prize was purposely a smack in the face to Dubya and his constituents.

They make a statement about maglev's ineffectiveness without using any actual facts to back up their argument. Look, I don't view maglev as this God-send that will save America. I just think it's these pervasive conservative arguments over the years that have left the US in the dust behind other "inferior" nations in terms of transportation, education, health care, etc.

That is why they called it an opinion in the Trib.

There are some of us who consider the Trib a better source of information than the left leaning Post Gazette. We get enough of the left point of view from the television media and Hollywood as it is.

I still do not think Pittsburgh is the place for the maglev. The idea that a maglev will bring in tourists (which I still don't get how that will happen) is just not a good reason, and the population here does not support wasting billions on the train. The airport is no longer a major hub and the amount of people that would use the maglev would be a minimal. Pittsburgh is not that difficult of a town to get around in. From downtown you can get to the airport in a matter of 20 minutes. Even with traffic it's not that bad. Why would I spend money to hop on a fast speed train?

Maglev is a great idea but needs to be built where it will be used as it is intended. I think this has nothing to do with "pervasive conservative arguements" and more to do with what makes sense. And putting a maglev in Pittsburgh makes no sense whatsoever.

[BrianTH]

The reason to put a maglev test route in Pittsburgh is that to due to its topography and built environment it happens to be a good place to test the claimed technological advantages of maglev over conventional high speed rail, plus you could make use of the local manufacturing base. There is little doubt that if you were choosing the best possible maglev project to fund purely from an isolated usage standpoint, this probably wouldn't be it. But that is beside the point, because an isolated maglev project doesn't make sense anyway--if you are going to do maglev at all, you have to be thinking about a much bigger investment in a much larger scale system. Again, the purpose of this project would be to test out the concept before committing the capital necessary for that much larger system.