Forum talk:Federal States/Passenger Rail Network Proposal

From OpenGeofiction
Filing cabinet icon.svg This discussion has been closed and archived.

This portion of the forum entry is archived, including the initial discussion and the official vote.

Previously I sketched out some draft long-distance passenger rail corridors that the FSA could use, but after further refinement and discussions with numerous other stateowners, I wanted to formally submit a proposal.

Long-Distance Network

FSA Draft Passenger Rail Plan.png

Keeping in mind that our project is American-inspired and long-distance passenger travel is predominantly done via air or car, this is a basic, bare-bones long-distance framework that provides every state with at least one train per day to ensure a cohesive, but not necessarily convenient, long-distance network of passenger trains. Some busier corridors would have more than one train a day, but generally this system is inspired by Amtrak's current network of long-distance "overnight" trains. Speeds would generally be capped at about 80mph (130km/h), but select areas could see speeds of up to 110mph (175km/h).

The long-distance network would officially consist of ten "named" trains, or 32 individual trains numbered between 1 and 99. This does not include the ArchRail high-speed network in the Southeast, which wouldn't be affected by this proposal (although would be considered as-is as part of the network to ensure all states are connected to the national network).

These trains would be funded at the national level and operated by the national passenger railroad company.

Regional Networks

Not included on the map, but included in the proposal, is a framework to allow for regional hubs for shorter-distance passenger rail routes. These routes would generally not be overnight trains, and would be more like commuter-style intercity service within an individual region. These routes would be capped at about six hours in duration, at the same lower-speed (80-110mph) constraints. These trains would be numbered in the 100-999 band, based on their regional "hub". I've added some potential hubs in the train listing above, but these would be organized and determined by the individual regions rather than at a national level. Regions would also have the option of creating their own passenger railroad companies to operate those trains, or they could choose to have the national passenger rail company operate them on their behalf. (The latter option is similar to how Amtrak currently operates state-supported service on non-long distance trains in the United States outside of the Northeast Corridor.)

High-Speed Routes

There is no national high-speed network of trains in the Federal States; however, there are two existing regional high-speed routes: ArchRail in the Southeast, and LakeLynx in the West Lakes. This proposal does not include any changes to those existing regional initiatives.

Company Name

We'd also need to create a company name for the national passenger railroad company. Feel free to add options to this list:

  • FedeRail (Federal Railways)
  • Fedstar (Federal States Rail)

Discussion

To view the previous discussion, important clarifications, or how changes were made to the original proposal, click "expand" at right.

Interested in other thoughts and ideas on this topic. --TheMayor (talk) 18:12, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

I think the map looks good overall. The one thing I would prefer is a rerouting of the Ardentic and Asperic between St. Joseph and Jundah. I would prefer it goes from St. Joseph to Swansonville to Colurona to Wahanta to Jundah. The section I am proposing a rerouting of would be minimally affected as The Explorer is already providing service. Additionally, the proposed reroute would serve a larger population. - Glauber (talk) 18:55, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

That's a great suggestion. I've updated the sketch accordingly; let me know if that makes sense with what you were thinking of. --TheMayor (talk) 17:05, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
Yes, that is exactly what I was thinking. Thanks! Glauber (talk) 17:15, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Maybe there could be a line that branches off from the Explorer somewhere near Apricity? It could go southeast to serve Jericho, Caldwell City, and Massodeya City. It could possibly be extended to Silverdale for convenience's sake and how it's a pretty short distance, but it's not necessary. --IiEarth (talk) 21:59, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

I'm reluctant to add another branch of The Explorer, but I agree and think that there would be enough demand for a train that roughly parallels FS-1 through the Massodeyas. So instead I've updated the map with a new train that serves this route and eliminated the branch of The Explorer. There probably could be a regional Andreapolis-SVD train to close the gap. --TheMayor (talk) 23:40, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

Just as US's Amtrak has several Canadian stations as termini for northbound routes (eg Vancouver, BC, Montreal, QC, etc), I always imagined the FS rail through Ohunkagan would actually terminate in Ste-Jeanne, OO. That would be the routes 9/10.--Luciano (talk) 04:50, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Amtrak's international routes are not actually long-distance trains, but regional "daytime" services. While there definitely would and should be regional trips from Ohunkagan across the border into Ooayatais, logistically speaking I don't think they'd be part of the long-distance overnight services and would require a transfer in Ohunkagan (similar to how service to Vancouver requires transferring from the Coast Starlight to a Cascades train, and service to Toronto requires transferring to the Maple Leaf in either Buffalo or New York City). --TheMayor (talk) 17:25, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

I like the routes as they relate to Alormen. How are these being implemented on the map? Some sort of relation or is it just for fun? Ruadh (talk) 17:11, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

On the map they'd only be mapped as relations, although figuring out the routes and getting into the logistics weeds a bit may also show up on the map as well (for instance, if the "Two Lakes" north-south route ends in Andreapolis, there will need to be some yard space available near the station to service the train overnight). Likewise understanding a rough approximation of the train volumes expected will help to guide how many platforms are needed at major stations, and will let us identify core interstate corridors that should remain contiguous across various states. --TheMayor (talk) 17:25, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Voting

Symbol important note.svg Important technical notes to users
If you are an FSA state-owner or state coordinator, please vote for both initiatives below. To vote, sign your name by placing four tildes (~~~~) on a new line under your preferred option.

Initiative 1: National Passenger Network

The map included above summarizes the principal national rail network that is funded on a federal level. The map does not preclude regional initiatives of additional lines or require any change to the two existing HSR rails (ArchRail and LakeLynx). The national network shown is codified like the national highway network, so changes will require approval of the coordinators but can also be done as needed to adjust to future needs.

Please choose one (1) option below.

Yes, I approve the adoption of the national passenger network

  1. Glauber (talk) 20:12, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
  2. TheMayor (talk) 23:54, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
  3. Arlo (talk) 00:39, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
  4. Alessa (talk) 13:49, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
  5. Ruadh (talk) 14:07, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
  6. Brunanter (talk) 21:40, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
  7. Icefur2 (talk) 07:21, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
  8. ItsTybear (talk) 02:18, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
  9. Geoc3ladus (talk) 03:51, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
  10. wangi (talk) 10:40, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
  11. Leowezy (talk) 12:20, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
  12. Infrarrojo (talk) 17:58, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
  13. ThePhrogianOverlord (talk) 03:31, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
  14. Infinatious (talk) 14:56, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
  15. ~ Canada LaVearn (talk) 19:54, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
  16. Fluffr Nuttr (talk) 05:01, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

No, I do not approve the national passenger network

  1. Davieerr (talk) 15:07, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
  2. Ifgus (talk) 19:44, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

Initiative 2: Naming the National Passenger Network

Two options were submitted as proposals for the name of the passenger network. Please choose one (1) option below.

FedeRail (Federal Railways)

  1. ItsTybear (talk) 02:18, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
  2. ThePhrogianOverlord (talk) 03:31, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
  3. Ifgus (talk) 19:44, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

Fedstar (Federal States Rail)

  1. Glauber (talk) 20:12, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
  2. TheMayor (talk) 23:54, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
  3. Arlo (talk) 00:39, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
  4. Alessa (talk) 13:49, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
  5. Ruadh (talk) 14:07, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
  6. Icefur2 (talk) 07:21, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
  7. Davieerr (talk) 15:07, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
  8. Geoc3ladus (talk) 03:52, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
  9. wangi (talk) 10:40, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
  10. Leowezy (talk) 12:20, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
  11. Infrarrojo (talk) 17:58, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
  12. Infinatious (talk) 14:56, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
  13. ~ Canada LaVearn (talk) 19:54, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
  14. Fluffr Nuttr (talk) 05:00, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.opengeofiction.net/index.php?title=Forum_talk:Federal_States/Passenger_Rail_Network_Proposal&oldid=18941"