by Yoav Hagler, Associate Planner, America 2050
The best view of the Northeast Corridor is on board the Amtrak corporate rail car, looking through the back window at the scenery as it recedes from view. The car is hitched to a train, so that Amtrak engineers can periodically survey the corridor's infrastructure. They invited me to join one day this fall to get a good view of catenary, the overhead wires used to power the trains, and signaling systems. Both are nearly invisible to passengers enjoying the scenery from the train's side windows, but from the back, the signals pop up at pleasantly regular intervals, and the overhead wires dominate the view.
Significant upgrades to the Northeast Corridor's catenary and signalization are necessary to achieve the time savings outlined by the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act - three hours from New York to Boston, and two hours and fifteen minutes from New York to Washington DC. And so, even though this infrastructure is about as unglamorous as infrastructure comes, Amtrak is planning to invest hundreds of millions of dollars in it.
First, catenaries. Thanks to an electrification program earlier this decade, the section of the Northeast Corridor between New Haven and Boston is equipped with constant tension catenary. Necessary for speeds of over 135 mph, this catenary enables Acela trains to reach 150 mph on stretches in Rhode Island and Massachusetts. Although the entire length of the Northeast Corridor is now electrified, the southern half is still outfitted with the older fixed tension catenary, which dates backs in parts nearly a century. If trains between Washington DC and Boston will ever approach speeds of their European and Asian rivals, the upgrade of these catenary systems are a prerequisite. The price tag for this replacement is just over half a billion dollars.
Signaling systems are another piece of underappreciated, but absolutely necessary, infrastructure. Following a fatal train crash in California last year, the Federal government passed legislation requiring Positive Train Control (PTC) on all main line rail corridors in the country by 2015. PTC does four things: it prevents train to train collisions, it enforces civil speed restrictions (for example, even if the signal is all clear but there is a sharp curve that is not safe to operate at over 60 MPH then the PTC can set that as a maximum speed), it can stop trains at interlockings, and it can prevent trains from going through a switch left in the wrong position. PTC is not a signal system in itself, however, but an overlay to an existing system to enforce safety measures. With wayside signaling, the PTC system uses GPS to tell the on board computer where the train is. The computer then checks the next signal. If it's clear, the system leaves the operator in control. If it's not, the system can apply the brakes.
There is a common misconception that the installation of PTC will make the operations of the nation's rail system more efficient. While it is true that it will make the system safer, the efficiency gains that are being made on the Northeast Corridor are being done with the installation of an on-board signaling system that is being done concurrently with PTC installation. On-board signaling systems, unlike wayside signals, allow for different levels of service to run at maximum speed for longer distances. Here's an example: An Acela train needs 15,000 feet (nearly 3 miles) to stop from top speed. If transponders are spaced 4,000 feet apart, the on-board signals will receive an all clear if there are at least four consecutive clear signals ahead. If there are only three, its speed will be downgraded to 125 mph, bringing it within safe stopping distance of under 12,000 feet. Slower regional service and commuter service will maintain the all-clear until there are only two clear signals ahead. This differential system allows for more efficient use of the tracks allowing trains to maintain top speeds for longer, as opposed to the one size fits all system imposed by wayside signals.
If you've taken the train to Boston or DC, chances are you never noticed or thought of these systems; you even can't see them out your side window. But looking out from the back of a train going 125 mph, you get a good sense, both literally and figuratively, where high speed has been and where it has to go. Without significant investment in these unglamorous systems, there will be no high-speed rail ribbon-cutting ceremonies.
@RegionalPlan
Yoav,
Enjoyed your article, but I thought that the northeast corridor also needed rebuilding of track beds and enlarging tunnels.
Just another fact about train needs in America: We are soon going to Nashville, TN. We are flying, but I would love to go by train. Just out of curiosity I tried to get a schedule from Amtrak to go from Metropark to Nashville. Nashville does not have an Amtrak station. The closest Amtrak station is Newburn, TN which is a 3 hour 30 minute drive to Nashville. The Amtrak route I got on the Internet showed a trip from Metropark to Washington, DC to Chicago and to Newburn. It would take about 42 hours and cost just under $400 for 2 persons. I'm sure I could do a lot better in Germany for cities of comparable sizes.
Yoav, great piece!!
Nice meeting you at the U.S. HSR conference in D.C.
Before PTC & CTCat are installed, 100-year old drawbridges need to be replaced with high-level bridges. High-level bridges can be designed to straighten out some of the curves on the coastline.
Additionally existing plans to construct zero-speed rail terminals in underground caves need to be halted. These caves will cost passengers hundreds of thousands of hours of delays in unnecessary time spent walking & on escalators.
The alternative is to improve through-running terminals, such as Penn Station, or convert zero-speed rail terminals, such as GCT into through running terminals (at GCT that is possible on 8 tracks on the lower level - run 2 to 4 of those tracks to Wall Street and then to Brooklyn's LIRR Flatbush Avenue. That means a Wall Street commuter from Connecticut would not need to get out of the train at GCT and walk down & up crowded subway escalators, or stairs. A minimum of 2 tracks may be extended southeast to LIRR main track and a minimum of 2 may be extended southwest to Penn Station.
The third alternative is to avoid GCT & Penn Station altogether by providing borough-to-borough and suburban county to suburban county direct service. One example is using the 63rd Street tunnel for direct connection between Queens & the Bronx (including Harlem) & Nassau County & Suffolk Counties & Westchester & Putnam Counties. A second example is creating an interlocking at LIRR Main track & the Bay Ridge Line so that trains may run from Suffolk & Nassau Counties through Jamaica Station in Queens over the Bay Ridge Line to Astoria (time transfer bus shuttle to LGA) over Hellgate Bridge to the Borough of Bronx, Westchester, Fairfield & New Haven Counties.
These strategies will all reduce travel time. Obviously investments, such as PTC & CTCatenary (where applicable), that you advocate will need to be incorporated into these designs.