The nature of the maglv tracks is if we build a meglv from Pitsburg to Philli what would happen if we build the line from Washingtion DC to Baltmore and wanted to link the two of them but the maglv gauges were different by a few inches and the two maglv lines trains couldn’t run on one another with out changing the gauges of one another?

Not to mention good high speed metal rails go only with in 10 miles on hour of maglv trains.

Washingtion needs to spend the money on breaking open bottle necks on the rail system such as Richmond to Washingtion and the Washingtion and Baltmore Tunnels. The classic catenary masts have been doing well they could instead of tearing them all down replace the brackets themselves over the tracks that hold the wires on to the mast and not destory the masts themselves. They could also extend the catenary wires south to Richmond VA and West to Pittsburg with the classic Pennsyvinia catenary masts but give the classic mast a up grade with the same masts but up graded brackets to tenstion the catenary wires better. The masts have been working well for 80 years plus and they help make US railroads look different from railroads in Europe.
The French TGV set it’s world speed record based off of good catenary brackets and wire and the good catenary brackets could fit onto the sold steel H beams of the classic Pennsyivinia Railroad masts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TGV_world_speed_record#Catenary_modifications
Let’s break some bottle necks.

1.Keystone East Corridor Harrisburg to Philadelphia. – This would be improving the already existing electrified service between Philadelphia and Harrisburg.
2.Scranton to New York Rail Passenger Rail Service Program. – This would be a high-speed(?) rail service from Scranton to New York.
3.Pittsburgh High-Speed Magnetic Levitation Project. This would be a Maglev, or magnetic levitation line from Pittsburgh International Airport to Monroeville/Greensburg. – This is a waste of money but has been on the books for years.
4.Keystone West Harrisburg to Pittsburgh High-Speed Rail Feasibility and Business Plan Study. – This would just be a study to expand high speed electrified rail service from Harrisburg to Pittsburgh.

http://www.poconorecord.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090718/NEWS/907180355/-1/rss01

Last time I checked Manhattan is in New York City. From the Times Union article: “…and to help pay for the new Moynihan rail station in Manhattan”

The state’s rail plan is at

https://www.nysdot.gov/divisions/policy-and-strategy/planning-bureau/state-rail-plan

Moynihan Station, Hell’s Gate Bridge, Hudson line improvements, Arthur Kill Bridge, Oak Point Yard, all sorts of stuff for NYAR freight operations. Lots of stuff in New York City and it’s suburbs. . . in the plan at least.

They’re asking for $152.2M in track one funds and $1.797B in track two funds.

The Eau Claire routing, which according to Hennepin (Minneapolis) County Commissioner Peter McLaughlin is supported by Transportation Committee Chairman Jim Oberstar, though to my knowledge there are no official studies on using that route. Much of it, from west of Madison to St. Paul, was the route of the CNW 400. From a point parallel with Madison, it got to St. Paul in 4 hours.

Having driven that stretch of freeway many times, I can say that it has plenty of room in the median but a hell of a lot of bridges to replace. The MIlwaukee-Madison route helps as a commuter line, too, and I think that’s why they took it, even though it could never be upgraded to 220mph.

I can say with relative certainty that the Mississippi River route from La Crosse to Red Wing to St. Paul will be used. It was also a high-speed route on the MIlwaukee Road.

Just as a definition note, if we are restoring about rail system to slightly-better-than 1930’s standards, we should call it Thirties-Speed-Rail (TSR), and call TGV trains HSR.

…. it’s a very preliminary study, one that documents the need for new tunnels, suggests a route and estimates the cost of the tunnel, none of the good stuff like actually connecting it to something. I doubt the cost estimate includes things like signals and catenary either. . . all of that was outside of the scope of the study.