President Pushing For High Speed Rail Through OKC & Tulsa!
April 17th, 2009
The proposal would put Oklahoma City on a high-speed passenger rail line that would connect: San Antonio – Austin – Dallas – OKC – Tulsa. Please discuss. This is huge! Hard to even get my head around how big of an impact this would have on life along the I-35 corridor and throughout the United States.
And by the way, I like how they call the line “South Central.” I have always struggled to say where Oklahoma is…”it is erhh Southwest, but kind-of near the Midwest.” Anyway, south central works for me…of course, you should say “South Central United States” because “South Central America” is reserved for another place with a canal a little bit bigger then what we got in Bricktown, but I doubt it has as cool of website.
Speaking of Panama, here is a palindrome to enjoy on this beautiful Friday morning:
A-MAN-A-PLAN-A-CANAL-PANAMA
April 17th, 2009 at 7:22 am
Count me slightly un-impressed. These are all corridors that were previously designated… I hope this means ODOT will move forward with helping BNSF pay for upgrades along the line and in Fort Worth. Future capacity is a huge problem if we are to promote a proper rail infrastructure (freight rail should get federal help so that we remove trucks from highways). Gary Ridley commented that we’re ready to move forward, but I didn’t actually see the plan. What’s in store for us?
I also don’t like the misnomer “High Speed Rail” in these cases… High Speed is the Northeast Corridor (above 120 mph). The lines shown with this proposal are all currently included in the 110 mph range – fast, but not nearly fast enough to remove people from short-distance flights and bring them to rail. Of course, I’ll definitely choose rail over air if I have the time, because it’s so much more comfortable.
Finally, it’s too bad an OKC or Tulsa connection to Kansas City or St. Louis isn’t on the corridor plans… That would make travel up to Chicago (Amtrak’s biggest hub), so much easier. Right now it’s a 2 train, overnight ordeal (3 trains to make it home to my native Michigan).
April 17th, 2009 at 9:28 am
I’m thrilled about the idea, but 8 billion dollars? That’s nothing! That’s barely enough to build a highspeed rail to an airport in some place with truly depressed real estate prices (a perfect project for detroit!)
remember this: http://www.infrastructurist.com/2009/04/06/chart-comparing-new-hs-projects-around-the-world/
Also, why so few connections? Is about a system, not distinct corridors. Why not connect Chicago with Windsor, Ca (through Detroit) or Chicago with Buffalo/Toronto. Not well thought through.
April 17th, 2009 at 11:54 am
Great comments!
“existing corridors”….yes it is simplistic, but they also seem to work. Though I would have liked to see OKC make a connection to Houston instead of San Antonio.
“Finally, it’s too bad an OKC or Tulsa connection to Kansas City or St. Louis isn’t on the corridor plans… That would make travel up to Chicago (Amtrak’s biggest hub), so much easier. Right now it’s a 2 train, overnight ordeal (3 trains to make it home to my native Michigan).”
Completely agree. My guess is the I-30 corridor with Texarkana? and Little Rock was politically motivated. The Tulsa – KC connection makes more sense to me, but I am bias.
“Also, why so few connections? Is about a system, not distinct corridors. Why not connect Chicago with Windsor, Ca (through Detroit) or Chicago with Buffalo/Toronto. Not well thought through.”
Deborah, I think the connections tend towards centering around regional air hubs with: Chicago, Atlanta, Dallas, LA, etc. As Paul points out, the travel speed is not really conducive to long trips, but I personally think this system could replace a significant amount of regional air travel.
And thank you for posting the article; I will take a look at it.
—
Last point, I am just glad OKC and Tulsa are included. Despite any issues we might have with the plan, it would be a very different discussion if we were left of the list. For instance, Denver, Phoenix, Nashville, etc must be feeling pretty left out at this point. So there are reasons to smile. Of course, there is a very big difference between being included in the plan and being included in the implementation; lets hope OKC stays in the picture.
April 17th, 2009 at 12:42 pm
Hey Deborah – I checked out the link, and encourage everyone else to do the same. The only thing I would point out is that the projects referenced are true high-speed rail projects. I haven’t seen the specs on the proposed system and am not sure how the costs compare. As this point, it could just all be a massive pipe-dream…or it could be a huge paradigm shift in U.S. transportation.
April 17th, 2009 at 2:29 pm
Thanks for posting this story – it’s the first place I’ve seen it.
I’m glad to see a federal push for high speed rail. We need an alternative to the 1.5 hour prep process for a 50 minute flight to Dallas. But I agree with previous comments that linking to the north to create a full loop is so needed. We want to be able to connect straight to Chicago – not be at the end of the rail.