Talk:Ohio Hub

High-speed?

Can we drop the high-speed from this? I'm sorry, but 79mph is nowhere near high speed. Not even close. —lensovet–talk – 04:08, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. Neither 79 nor 110 mph are high-speed... Wikipedia's definition (found at High-speed rail by country) is 125 mph. I'm also not sure why this would cost so much, or require the purchase of new trains... Amtrak already runs many (most?) of their routes around 80 mph... in some places where the tracks are upgraded, they can go as fast as 110 mph with regular diesel-electrics. --Shadowlink1014 05:33, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm going ahead and "de-high-speed-rail-ifying" this. --Shadowlink1014 15:35, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

According to High-speed rail by country, it is considered to be high-speed if it is over 125 mph in Europe. The link referenced in the article is at a French website and clearly says "Highspeed definition of the Europeen [sic] Union."[1] Standards in the United States are different because there are restrictions on how fast trains can travel (see High-speed rail in the United States). Systems like the Keystone Corridor and Midwest Regional Rail Initiative both have top speeds of 110 mph because trains are not allowed to travel faster than that in the United States. All the references listed on the page note the Ohio Hub as "high-speed rail" so I am reverting the edits to appear as such. –Crashintome4196 04:03, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, Tompw, for agreeing with me on this. Crashintome, here is the first paragraph from high-speed rail:

High-speed rail is public transport by rail at speeds in excess of 200 km/h (125 mph). According to UIC, a "high-speed train" in the European Union is a train that runs at over 250 km/h on dedicated tracks, or over 200 km/h on upgraded conventional tracks.

This is saying that the definition in Europe is higherbut that the definition of "high-speed" elsewhere is still at least 125 mph.

Please give us some sources as to where you are hearing that the definition of "high-speed" in the United States is different. Such a radical statement surely requires some credible sources. --Shadowlink1014 14:34, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

As I am a budding American transportation engineer, I have dug out my general Transportation textbook, Transportation Engineering & Planning, by C.S. Papacostas and P.D. Prevedouros. This, I would like to add, is a book for and by the American transportation industry. On page 253, it states, just as you will find anywhere else:

High-speed rail is defined as passenger rail transportation service with operating speeds of at least 200 km/h.

I will be adding this citation wherever relevant on Wikipedia, and if you like, I can dig out even more American transportation textbooks all saying the exact same thing. --Shadowlink1014 14:53, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I will also chime in to say that 110mph is not high speed rail. It makes me sad that they're not actually going for true high speed. Imagine something just like the TGV following I-71 between Cleveland and Cincinnati that travelled at 320 km/h (200 mph). You would be able to drive your car directly onto the train so you would have transportation once you got to your destination. Nobody is going to travel by train when you don't have that convenience and time saving factor. But I digress.--Analogue Kid 15:36, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

According to the Federal Railroad Administration of the United States Department of Transportation, "High Speed Rail, sometimes called High Speed Ground Transportation, refers to a series of technologies involving trains traveling at top speeds of 90 to 300mph." [2] The proposed New York high-speed rail, Midwest Regional Rail Initiative, and Southeast High Speed Rail Corridor are also high-speed rail systems operating at 110 mph (see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject_Trains#What IS high-speed rail?). Please stop reverting my edits. –Crashintome4196 01:42, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Please see High-speed rail. The working definition on Wikipedia, and among pretty much everybody else, is 200 kph. The source you have provided flys in the face of every other source I can find. I guess I'm just going to have to dig out more textbooks. I should also note that there are now at least four users that agree that this is not high-speed rail, against one. I am requesting administrator arbitration. --Shadowlink1014 10:29, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

There's a rather cheesy video about the project available, but I'm not sure if it would be appropriate for the wiki entry. It's originally from ODOT/The Ohio Rail Commission, but I can only currently find it from All Aboard Ohio. If people think it appropriate, maybe it could be added via a link. Ohio Hub Video --Dafunk 14:36, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Rename to 3C+D?

The Ohio Hub project is defunct, but it laid the groundwork for the new 3C+D initiative which is substantially the same. Would it make sense to rename this article to "3C+D", then move most or all of the "Ohio Hub" content under a "History" heading? 65.60.212.207 (talk) 19:26, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

That is what was done with Brightline West under the section heading, Early project development. 〜 Adflatuss • talk 22:25, 13 November 2024 (UTC)