Why no "San Antonio/Austin light rail or bullet train yet? (Houston: neighborhood, construction)

[DarkWolf]

Originally Posted by hoffdano

It would be very easy for a suicide bomber to walk on any one of these trains. The threat of death means nothing to these people. A person in a business suit could board the Acela in Boston headed for NYC and easily cause a huge problem.

Well i doubt that would happen , infact they would have to get past rows of security which is trained to spot stuff. They also kinda scan you while boarding the trains..... The same can happen on a highway or crowded road... But i live up here , and that thought is far form my mind. I'm more worried about a lack of up keep type of collapse.....which would kill 1000s...

[hoffdano]

Originally Posted by Nexis4Jersey

Well i doubt that would happen , infact they would have to get past rows of security which is trained to spot stuff. They also kinda scan you while boarding the trains..... The same can happen on a highway or crowded road... But i live up here , and that thought is far form my mind. I'm more worried about a lack of up keep type of collapse.....which would kill 1000s...

When I rode the Acela a while ago - I boarded near Hopkington. Just stood on the tracks and waited for the train. I don't look like any stereotypical terrorist, so I don't think I would would have been stopped by any security. I don't see how a person carrying a briefcase or laptop bag, wearing a suit, would have any difficulty at all getting on a train.

At Tokyo Station, there are hoards of people milling about everywhere. Kids, business people, etc. carrying every kind of bag.

At Gare de Lausanne there was no obvious security to speak of.

I don't worry about this. But it is hardly secure.

[DarkWolf]

Originally Posted by hoffdano

When I rode the Acela a while ago - I boarded near Hopkington. Just stood on the tracks and waited for the train. I don't look like any stereotypical terrorist, so I don't think I would would have been stopped by any security. I don't see how a person carrying a briefcase or laptop bag, wearing a suit, would have any difficulty at all getting on a train.

At Tokyo Station, there are hoards of people milling about everywhere. Kids, business people, etc. carrying every kind of bag.

At Gare de Lausanne there was no obvious security to speak of.

I don't worry about this. But it is hardly secure.

The Acela doesn't come close Hopkington,MA....you mean the T system station in Southborough. Yea they use low and high level platforms , but i wouldn't worry about Terriosm out there. Also smaller stations don't have security...only larger ones do. They do bag checks and screen ppl ay larger stations. But i don't think we would have to worry about a Terriosm attack on the mass transit system. Its secure in the sense you can't take over the system or damage it in a bad way. There are sensors on most lines that can detect a missing piece of track. Like i said before , i don't think we should be so worried about a Terriost attack , when a collapse is more likely to happen.

[verybadgnome]

Originally Posted by Unclemeat

What about them? I don't think reasonable people visiting any of these cities would call those usable mass transit solutions.

Reasonable meaning not the most convenient maybe, but usable definitely so.

Originally Posted by Unclemeat

The situation would not be any different, which is why I don't see the logic behind a several-hundred-million dollar rail system to simply run in parallel to regional flights.

Security and having to show up an hour ahead of time are not ideal in plane travel. The TGV train I rode in Europe is quieter and more comfortable than anything available on a domestic airline in the U.S. and yes that does count 1st class accommodations. Freedom to walk around the train anytime you like plus dining cars. Less in the way of cab fares because train stations are not located away from urban areas b/c of noise like airports are. And finally I hate the way the some US airlines pressurize their cabins - I've gotten headaches from that constant change in pressure before. Plus there are people like John Madden who just do not want to fly.

Originally Posted by Unclemeat

In theory, yes. In practice, not so likely. The reason why the above-mentioned "commuter rail" systems in Texas are unusable? They don't penetrate enough of the areas that commuters need to travel. They largely use existing rail lines. There's far too much cost involved in expanding rail in an urban area. You can either dig under the city (ask Boston how they liked their Big Dig road project) or go on the surface side and have to reroute existing roadways, move buildings, etc. Sure it would be great to have trains taking you within a 20 minute walk of any part of San Antonio, but the logistics/financials of pulling that off are nearly impossible.

Problem is that no one in Texas in any city has a plan to build its way out of congestion using roadways as the primary medium of mobility. If land use is not addressed along with density the situation will only get worse. Building rail networks has helped places like Arlington, VA create density and enhance economic vitality b/c of the effects it has had on urban development. It is costly I agree with you on that, but long term increasing the number of modes available to commuters will increase the efficiency of the entire system.

Originally Posted by Unclemeat

All hypothetical arguments considering less than 15% of our energy sources in Texas are renewable.

But it is increasing........I would even prefer electricity from nuclear energy powering trains than jet fuel powering inefficient planes.

Originally Posted by Unclemeat

That said, I don't think these rail ideas are bad, just not practical. Only a small percentage of people regularly commute between cities. A huge percentage commute within the city. Usable public transit initiatives could have an enormous impact, especially considering Austin, Dallas, Houston are home to some of the worst traffic in the US.

I think the proposal for HSR between Texas cities is because of all the commerce between the major cities in the eastern part of the state and b/c of their relative proximity. It is not a one size fits all approach but rather a system that is tailored to various regions of our country as evidenced by this map :

Google Image Result for http://brokensidewalk.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/high_speed_rail_map_03.jpg

[Trainwreck20]

But why Austin to SA? Houston or Dallas, I might use - it is far enough to make driving inconvenient. SA is close enough to drive easily, so the savings in stress/gas do no offset the other factors.

Personally, I would think that Dallas the Houston would be the theoretically most viable.

[txstate]

Hays, Gualdulupe and Comal county commissioners must approve first along with the right of ways...It will be 10-15 years before you see that.

[jb9152]

Originally Posted by Creedmoor_Mom

Interesting read ...

Just checked out the map of the route at lonestarrail.com

It could work ... if they are able to make sure that the trains don't interfer with existing traffic. Am thinking Main St in Buda & on FM 1626 in Manchaca. I'd would be willing to change my mind about the viablity of such a project if overpasses would be manadatory. I mean, what's the use of rail service that has to slow down at every road the tracks intersect? Going over or under exisiting roadways so that you DON'T have to slow down significantly makes more sense. Also, you wouldn't get people moaning about how their local traffic was disrupted either!

There are already freight trains in the existing corridor that have at-grade crossings with highway traffic. Lone Star plans to close some of those crossings, and will make improvements to the others. Passenger trains will operate at higher speeds, and will clear crossings much faster than the mile-plus long UPRR freight trains that currently operate in the corridor.

Part of the Lone Star project is the relocation of 20 to 30 UPRR 'through' freight trains per day to a new alignment to the east of the current one. So, the only trains operating on the future LSTAR line will be the LSTAR trains, an Amtrak round trip, and a few local freights. Across the board, average crossing gate down time will decrease in just about all locations.

[jb9152]

Originally Posted by pbnj07

When I first heard of the LSR system, I thought it was a great idea. Then I read it will take 90 minutes from downtown Austin to downtown San Antonio, with stops in San Marcos and New Braunfels.

90 minutes? C'mon, man. Why in the heck would anyone take that train instead of driving?

Actually, the latest train performance calculations, based on a slightly better understanding of the makeup of the new line, and assuming a maximum operating speed of 90 mph, show a travel time of 75 minutes city center to city center, which competes pretty much one for one with auto travel times. The website needs to be updated with the new time.

[jb9152]

Originally Posted by G Grasshopper

I'm all for mass transit, but I do have a question about this train, in that you need a complete system for that one mode to work well. What happens once you get to SA? Do you call a taxi, or is the mass transit good enough that you can get wherever you want to go. If you need a car to get around once you get into the city, then you need to take a car to the city. So how many people would want to come to Austin on the bullet train if they couldn't get around without a car once they got here?

The question of the "last mile" is an important one. LSTAR stations in the downtowns will be served by the local services of the two major transit authorities and in the case of Austin, the new Urban Rail system. Service and fare policy will be coordinated so as to permit the most seamless, convenient transfer possible between services.

For information on the Austin Urban Rail program, you can visit the city's web site at City of Austin - Downtown Austin Plan - Urban Rail. Plans for San Antonio's new high capacity transit systems and changes to VIA's route structure can be found at their project web site, SmartWaySA.com.

At the non-downtown stations, service and fare policy will be coordinated with rural transit providers like CARTS and ART to the greatest extent possible to allow people to connect with those services in as seamless and convenient a manner as possible.

[jb9152]

Originally Posted by CptnRn

Everyone pretty much agrees that you can't get around Austin without having a car. I don't believe San Antonio is much better. So it wouldn't make much sense to take the rail to get to either place when you are still going to need a car once you get there. Businesses in Austin are located all over town, same is true for San Antonio. Riding the rail to a central location in either place not going to get most people to their final destination.

Unless there were, say, an Urban Rail circulator that served all the major destinations downtown *and* Austin-Bergstrom International.

City of Austin - Downtown Austin Plan - Urban Rail