tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11125157.post6495353694323498899..comments2023-09-16T02:32:27.765-06:00Comments on Passenger Rail: Answers to Commentsmistertrainshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06908806266880517883noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11125157.post-40868768490103768212007-04-19T15:20:00.000-06:002007-04-19T15:20:00.000-06:00Well, you are right that the band-aid approach has...Well, you are right that the band-aid approach has been used far too often at Amtrak.<BR/><BR/>Not quite sure what you are referring to, regarding problems in the northeast. Mixing freight and passenger? Despite what Graham Claytor believed, I don't see that as a problem. One newly constructed high speed network - in Germany - mixes freight and passenger.<BR/><BR/>It could be said that because Penn Central used their existing line we ended up with a slower route with more problems. However it came at a fraction of the cost of building new. There is a lot more investment that I think is called for which would include a new line northeast of New Haven CT, a new bypass of Wilmington DE, a new tunnel route through Baltimore, a new tunnel into New York, and perhaps some alternate route through Philadelphia. That would address the major slow areas. However the fact that we never made that investment doesn't mean that the result of the investment we did make is a problem, it just isn't at the level it could be. Note that the French TGV model is to only build new lines in the countryside where land is cheap and revamp existing lines for urban access.Christopher Parkerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16947034888487890485noreply@blogger.com