It would be nice if Amtrak would one day have a train called the Alaskan going from Juneau o Fairbanks. When the economy improves do you think Amtrak would have a train operating at least during the summer? I know Alaska has trains and it would be nice for Amtrak to enter the picture.
Also in Hawaii do you think there will ever be a commuter rail in which Amtrak could operate on?
Posted by ehbowen (Member # 4317) on :
The problem is that there is no rail line to Juneau (or anyplace between Seward [Anchorage] and Vancouver, save the narrow-gauge Skagway-Whitehorse line), and building one would be a construction project of epic proportions.
In Hawaii—well, there might be enough population density in Honolulu to support a subway system to the airport, immediate suburbs and as far out as Pearl Harbor, but there simply aren't enough people outside of Honolulu to make such a system worthwhile (IMHO).
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
Mr. Travelrobb, I fail to see any need for Amtrak service in Alaska. Alaska RR is already publicly owned and offers extensive passenger service. Since tourism represents a large segment of the State's economy, and a far greater %tge of its GNP with the collapse of oil prices, the travel industry's lobby will ensure such continues to be the case.
Many better a place in to expend "feddybucks".
Oh, if one wants to read about a Seattle to Anchorage rail line, rustle up a copy of "A Railroad for Tomorrow' written by impressario Edward Hungerford.
Finally, as Dr. Bowen notes, any future passenger rail in Hawaii would be mass transit.
Posted by rresor (Member # 128) on :
Periodically, somebody or other takes a look at building a railroad from the "Lower 48" to Alaska. Most likely route would start from somewhere in British Columbia (probably one of the northern branches of the former BC Railway) and run through the Yukon Territory (possibly through Whitehorse), across the border into Alaska and down the Nenana River to Fairbanks. A coastal route would be completely impractical -- have you SEEN the coast of Alaska? So no Juneau -- Anchorage service, ever.
I worked up some rough projections of freight traffic on a line to Fairbanks from Canada. You're probably looking at less than five million tons of freight a year, way too little to justify the cost of construction. Of course, to tap a larger market, you could continue west from Fairbanks, tunnel under the Bering Strait, and with only 1,500 or so more miles of construction, connect to the Trans-Siberian...of course, you'd have a break of gauge...
Posted by George Harris (Member # 2077) on :
Ahh, the Bering Strait Tunnel. This idea has been around a long time. It generates news every 10 years or so and then goes away again.
The most recent that I know about was a pitch for it or several pitches for it made at a Moscow, Russia conference on "Megaprojects in Russia's East" in April 2007. There was an article about it in the Anchorage newspaper about the same time.
One with a little more, but not much more detail on it appeared in the December 1994 Bulletin of the American Railway Engineering Association (Bulletin No. 748, Vol. 95 (1994), December 1994, pages 364-369.) (Pages were numbered through the four Technical Proceedings Bulletins that made up each volume, so this particular Bulletin begins with page 341.)
I made some notes and discussion on it after teh 2007 item came out which I copy here:
The article was titled, "Interhemispheric Bering Strait Tunnel & Railroad" by G. Khoumal. Use of quote boxes in the following indicates a quote from the article
Humility is not his strong point. The article uses an occasionally confusing mix of English and Metric units. I will show dimensions with or simply change to English units.
quote:The idea of the interhemispheric Bering Strait Tunnel was originally proposed as far back as 1849. This paper will serve as an update of accomplishments in the past 2 years.
This is a project which would, via a tunnel under the Bering Strait, potentially connect the railroad systems of all Continents with the exception of Australia. While the tunnel seems to draw most of the general public attention, the project is all about establishing a transportation/commerce artery and an access infrastructure to large regions of this planet with tremendous natural resources presently of little use to benefit mankind.
A sketch map was provided that showing distances: -->36.25 km (22.52 miles) Alaska coast to east shore Little Diomede Island -->10.91 km (6.78 miles) East coast Little Diomede Island to west coast Big Diomede Island -->36.4 km (22.62 miles) West coast Big Diomede Island to west coast of Siberia The width of the short piece of open water between the two Diomede Islands was not given.
From these distances, the Alaska Coast to Siberian Coast distance is 88.56 km = 51.92 miles. Because of the location of the islands, the tunnel has one curve in the middle portion under then islands and is slightly over a mile longer than it would be if it were straight between mainlands.
quote:The sea is relatively shallow (maximum depth 174 feet) and that two islands in the middle make the work much easier, as does the fact that the sea bottom is formed by what appears to be a competent granite and equally competent limestone rock formations. Tunnel boring machine (TBM) technology would be applied to drive a 6 m (19.7 feet) and two 9 m (29.5 feet) diameter single line main railroad tunnels, with only the south branch to be completed in the initial phase of construction. The tunnel sections will accommodate double stack containers. Only the central portion of the northern branch would be completed in the first phase to ease train movement logistics. The northern branch will be finished later while the southern branch is full operational and revenue is being generated. Back in 1986 we calculated that the Tunnel could be constructed for about $18,100.00 per foot or a price of some $9 billion. . . . . The distance between Chicago and Bombay, India is much shorter via the Bering Strait than the current land/sea shipping lanes. . . . As a matter of fact, Japan can ultimately be connected to the Global Rail System by crossing the Tatarsky Strait (between Siberia and Shakalin Island) to the island of Shakalin (Stalin started work on this in 1952) and under the La Perouse Strait to the northern Japanese island of Hokkaido and then through the existing Seikan Tunnel to Tokyo.
In a few short sentences he covers the need to connect to the existing British Columbia Railroad at Fort Nelson, British Columbia, assuming using for a small part of the distance its graded but never tracked Dease Lake extension. He also makes the statement that, "The Alaskan Legislature recently approved the railroad right-of-way between Seward Peninsula and Fairbanks." No distances were mentioned for this side of the equation.
On the Siberian side he appears to be planning on hooking up with the BAM line near Culman, a distance of 2,400 miles.
quote:We have estimated the cost of railroad construction would be some $27 billion (between $5 million and $7 million per mile on an average) which would put the total cost of the project in 1986 dollars at a total of $37 billion.
Taking the mid range, this means the Alaska – British Columbia side would be about 2000 to 2300 miles.
Some comments:
Perhaps not clear in his explanation: His concept is to build a utility/services tunnel and one single track rail tunnel initially plus about 2 km of second tunnel at about the half way point for a passing track. This is probably a valid concept, except that the passing track should be a lot longer to, I would say, about 5 miles total length.
First, either this $37 billion number or the more recent $60 billion number are probably both way low. We are talking mainline railroad construction in some of the most remote and inhospitable country on the planet. Everything used in the way of equipment, materials, manpower, food, power, everything will have to be hauled for hundreds of miles just to reach the job site. While he talks about connecting Japan and Bombay as part of the rationale behind the project, the work to do that is not in these numbers. We are talking two more major under sea tunnels, this time in geologically highly active areas, to reach Japan and crossing the Himalayas to reach India.
This may be picking a nit, but it also appears that his 9 meter diameter for the TBM for the main tunnel is about 1 meter too small. The space above the track for electrification and below it for drainage both appear to need to be larger. But this may be personal, because I have spent a lot of my engineering life trying to figure out how to stuff things in tunnels along side trains that were not in the plan when the tunnel diameter was selected by the “shrink wrap” the train method. The extra space that you have on the sides by placing a circle around a rather tall rectangle is probably useful for air flow, so changing shape to reduce excavated material volume may be a bad idea.
The cost estimate of his railroad would be more appropriate to Kansas. For Alaska and Siberia, I would guess somewhere upwards of $20 million per mile. He is probably better on his tunnel costs, after all, that is the guy’s profession. But still, let’s say double the cost due to remoteness of site. Let’s take a ballpark estimate of $20 million x 4,600 miles + $18 billion gets us $110 billion. That is billion with a "B" If we want to amortize the cost at a rate of return of 10% a year and no more than one cent per ton-mile above operating cost, we then have to haul 1,100 million tons of freight a year. That is above the Powder River coal lines by an order of magnitude, and way beyond the capacity of a single track railroad.
Why did I pick a number so low? Actually, even that may be too high. Given ocean freight rates, a high freight charge would mean that these rails would never see a container. Even if the line could be build for half my guess, I think this is still true.
Recall that by the time the English Channel tunnel was built, there had been a tremendous volume of freight and passenger traffic across this barrier for years and that it is in the heart of an area that has been civilized for centuries. The same is generally true for the Seikan tunnel in Japan. It was the sinking of a ferry at a huge loss of life that put this tunnel on the to-do list, and it was built by a society willing and able to spend large money of transportation projects and to fulfill a real heavy demand for moving people and freight.
I see the Bering Strait tunnel and associated railroad work necessary to make it useful as a project that is probably a couple of centuries or more in the future, unless the worst of scaremongers on Global Warming prove correct so that Alaska, Siberia, and northern Canada become the new centers of population for our planet.
It appears to me the main thrust behind building this thing seems to be a sort of "because it is there" thing. There is no perceivable transportation demand for it. The tunnel is actually the cheap and easy part compared to what it would take to connect it to the world on either end.
Every other major underwater tunnel that I know about was built to serve a true transport demand. Examples: Seikan between Hokkaido and Honshu in Japan, English Channel Tunnel, currently under construction Bosporus rail tunnel in Turkey.
Of all the things this world needs in the way of things constructed for the benefit of the movement of people and goods, this thing has to be several pages beyond the end of the list of things that we can find the money to actually build.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
While rail is hands down the most economical mode of surface transport owing to the inherent efficiency of steel rolling atop steel, maritime transport is even more so. A vessel sailing at an optimal hull speed practically powers itself with inertia. Possibly not so anymore, but not all that long ago, maritime companies computed their operating costs in MILLS i.e. less than $.01 per ton-mile.
Finally, last time I checked, at least in this life, God does not assess any kind of fees for use of His rights of way. Regarding the next, I guess we all must wait to find out about that.
Posted by dmwnc1959 (Member # 2803) on :
quote:Originally posted by rresor: A coastal route would be completely impractical -- have you SEEN the coast of Alaska? So no Juneau -- Anchorage service, ever.
I have had the pleasure of visiting Juneau everytime on the five cruises I did to Alaska. Rail service to Juneau? As far as I know Juneau is the ONLY State Capital that is completely inaccessable by car or rail, only accessable by air or sea, this due to the surrounding geography. And in case your ever on Jeopardy, Juneau is the only State Capital with a glacier within its city limit and in area, the largest state capital in the US.
I have had the pleasure also on two of the Northbound cruises, ending in Seward, Alaska, to take the Alaska State RR up to Anchorage. It was a marvelous and relaxing way to end the cruise instead of crammed into a transfer bus. The railcars themselves were alot less opulant than the cars of Princess Cruises, Holland-America line, and Royal Caribbean that are used primarily in the interior up to Fairbanks, but provided an amazing scenic and stunning vista the entire route up.
In Skagway (accessable by highway) I did ride on two seperate cruises the fantastic White Horse and Yukon RR, a route that really wouldnt support regular passenger rail cars but still offered passengers another way to get to Carcross and Whitehorse, Canada for destinations and points beyond.
I dont believe Alaska could or would support regular rail passenger service even if funding was made available and routes were built. Anything past Fairbanks would be an enormous waste since the population density would never support it.
Map sources www.akrr.com and about.com
Posted by rresor (Member # 128) on :
Thanks to George Harris for his usual succinct engineering perspective. I was trying to show the same thing, in shorthand...rail to Alaska from the Lower 48 is a fool's errand, and the Bering Strait tunnel is an idea mostly promoted by people who have been smoking some very odd-smelling cigarettes.
Now, let's talk about the Spain to Morocco tunnel under the Strait of Gibralter, an idea possibly just a bit less crack-brained...
Posted by George Harris (Member # 2077) on :
And thanks to dmwnc1959 for the maps that illustrate how truly rugged and empty of people a lot of the territory is between Nome and any possible connection to the rest of the railroad world.
The Siberian side is if anything more rugged and even emptier of people. I have seen central Alaska the Bering Strait and the Siberian coast from the air about twice on Detroit to Tokyo flights on NWA. Rugged and empty beyond comprehension.
Posted by ehbowen (Member # 4317) on :
quote:Originally posted by Gilbert B Norman: Finally, as Dr. Bowen notes, any future passenger rail in Hawaii would be mass transit.
Any serious passenger rail in Hawaii would be mass transit; however I can also postulate rebuilding and reopening a couple of the narrow gauge lines which used to serve the pineapple and sugar cane plantations as steam-powered tourist railroads.
Posted by George Harris (Member # 2077) on :
Juneau may be the largest capital city in the USA, but that is only in area. The population is given as 31,300, which is about the same as Fairbanks, at 31,400. Both of these are estimates for about 2005. The state total, 2008 estimate is 643,800 people. The next door Yukon Territory in Canada? 31,000 people in total with 21,400 of those in Whitehorse. Then, for the nearest metropolis to the start point for the Bering Strait tunnel: Nome has 3,600 people.
Who was the guy that said, after he got there, he found that there was no "there" there? He must have been talking about the population density of these areas.
Posted by sojourner (Member # 3134) on :
Thank you so much for all the wonderful info, maps, etc, Mr Harris, DMWNC, etc. . . . I love the word Interhemispheric, btw.
I always thought Oklahoma City was the largest capital city in area. Maybe that is in the Lower 48?
I wish there were a train to Hawaii! or a regular ferry/boat service, or even the possibility of taking a cruise there, staying a few days, and taking a cruise back, without paying for the whole cruise twice. . . .
DMWNC, do you just go to Alaska on cruises or do you take lots of others? Which line to like best o Alaska? I have been on one cruise in my life, Holland American inside passage . . .
Posted by CG96 (Member # 1408) on :
A web site regarding the Alaska Canada rail connection. There continues to be discussion of routing the railroad through the Yukon River trench (I think that is what they are discussing).
Posted by dmwnc1959 (Member # 2803) on :
double post, sorry.
Posted by dmwnc1959 (Member # 2803) on :
quote:Originally posted by sojourner: DMWNC, do you just go to Alaska on cruises or do you take lots of others? Which line to like best o Alaska? I have been on one cruise in my life, Holland American inside passage . . .
5 cruises to Alaska (2 on Princess, 1 on Celebrity, 1 on Holland-America, 1 on Cruise West; the one on Celebrity was a 12-night from LA that was preceeded by a wonderful cross country trip on Amtrak Charlotte-Raleigh-Jax-LA), and another 26 cruises around the Caribbean, Med, Hawaii, and one cruise down the Columbia and Snake Rivers on Cruise West (preceeded by another wonderful Amtrak trip Charlotte-DC-Chicago-Portland).
I have taken cruise-rail connections to Miami and Ft Lauderdale and it works well. Try it. You'll like it.... :-)
Favorite cruise line? Celebrity, Princess, and Holland-America but that's just me. I'd rather Amtrak to a cruise than fly time and destination permitting. It seems the cruise lines used to offer Rail/Sea Packages but I believe that's no longer an option. Easier to book it yourself anyway.
Posted by gp35 (Member # 3971) on :
Looks doable to me. But would cost a few billions.
Here is another paper or series of papers on the US-Canada-Alaska-Russia-China-etc. railroad. I have not read it yet, but saw some interesting maps as I skimmed through.
DMW thank you for all the input. My one cruise was on Holland America, Alaska Inside Passage. I took Amtrak all the way to Seattle--Empire Svc, overnight NYC, Regional to DC, Cap Ltd, Empire Builder, overnight Seattle--then Victoria Clipper for 2 nights in Victoria (recommended by people here, Miss Vicki I believe, among others, very good tips from everyone here!!), then BC bus/ferry to Vancouver for 2 nights, where I met my friend who flew out to join me on the cruise. Then, after the cruise, train down from Vancouver, overnight in SEattle, then EB and LSL home. It was quite wonderful, and I got very good rates for my sleepers on that trip.
I'd love to take the train to San Diego and then a Hawaii cruise but so far it's not in the cards. Besides, my husband will never go with me and it's hard to find anyone who will do the Hawaii cruise, it's quite long with too many days "at sea." But one day, we'll see. . .
Posted by cubzo (Member # 4700) on :
The institute mentioned here seems to be a Lyndon LaRouche concern. Makes all this highly questionable.
Posted by George Harris (Member # 2077) on :
quote:Originally posted by cubzo: The institute mentioned here seems to be a Lyndon LaRouche concern. Makes all this highly questionable.
Which one? So far as I can tell, all these schemes are fantasies, regardless of source.
Posted by cubzo (Member # 4700) on :
The Schiller institute. And I agree it is a fantasy.
Posted by MightyAlweg (Member # 5407) on :
quote:Originally posted by dmwnc1959: As far as I know Juneau is the ONLY State Capital that is completely inaccessable by car or rail, only accessable by air or sea, this due to the surrounding geography.
Juneau is not the only one. You can add Honolulu to that list. Posted by George Harris (Member # 2077) on :
quote:Originally posted by cubzo: The Schiller institute. And I agree it is a fantasy.
I have often wondered who funds this stuff? Going through that site, someone spent a lot of time and effort along with quite a bit of research to develop a fairly professional looking presentation. This sort of talent was unlikely to have been donated and does not come cheap.
The same applies to some of the stuff put out by the "Reason" foundation. They have an over 300 page report out detailing all the wrongs in the California High Speed Rail. Ther is just enough real information mixed in with the self-serving and completly false to make the report sound plausible.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
Of interest, from Section 201 of RPSA '70:
In recommending the basic system.i the Secretary shall take into account the need for expeditious intercity rail passenger service within and between all regions of the continental United States. and the Secretary shall consider the need for such service within the States of Alaska and Hawaii and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. In formulating such recommendations the Secretary shall consider opportunities for provision of faster service,
Therefore, if there were to be an initiative to have Amtrak service in any of AK, HI, or PR, the Act provided the means to do so.
Pragmatics with regards to HI and PR.....?
Posted by espeefoamer (Member # 2815) on :
quote:Originally posted by MightyAlweg:
quote:Originally posted by dmwnc1959: As far as I know Juneau is the ONLY State Capital that is completely inaccessable by car or rail, only accessable by air or sea, this due to the surrounding geography.
Juneau is not the only one. You can add Honolulu to that list.
You can reach Honolulu by car from any other town on Oahu.You cannot reach Juneau from any other city in Alaska.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
