[HN Gopher] National Rail Network Map
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       National Rail Network Map
        
       Author : jonbaer
       Score  : 88 points
       Date   : 2022-09-14 08:12 UTC (14 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.arcgis.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.arcgis.com)
        
       | b800h wrote:
       | So from looking at this, I wonder if it's possible to do a (very)
       | rough circumnavigation of the USA by train?
        
         | zikduruqe wrote:
         | Head over to Reddit and go to the vagabond subreddit. There is
         | a lot of train riding info there.
        
       | bregma wrote:
       | A quick check shows plenty of rail lines that haven't existed in
       | several decades: the tracks lifted and the lands sold off long
       | ago. Not very useful if you're looking for information.
        
         | drmpeg wrote:
         | Same with some of the Union Pacific industrial spurs I'm
         | familiar with here in Silicon Valley.
        
           | Hogarth01 wrote:
           | I was going to mention a similar thing. There are some UP
           | tracks in Southern California that haven't existed in over 30
           | years now, if not more.
        
       | dankle wrote:
       | "National" meaning US, yet again.
        
       | afterburner wrote:
       | Behold the rail link to Churchill, which no road leads to.
        
         | conorcleary wrote:
         | Moosonee is the one I'd like to see connected by road.
        
       | kingsloi wrote:
       | Does anyone know of any current or past projects (AI or not) that
       | measures how many miles of train carriages pass through a
       | particular intersection or particular line?
       | 
       | I know there's an API for AMTrak, but anything similar for
       | commercial trains/lines?
       | 
       | I'm often stopped by trains, (what feel like) over 10 miles long,
       | doing 30-50mph. Some carriages carry uncovered coal, and are left
       | parked near my neighbourhood for days.
       | 
       | I'd love to track how many miles of carriages, and what type of
       | carriages, pass through my neck of the woods, either with
       | something like a Vizycam, and train it to count the carriages, or
       | even by sound or vibration, and get a basic count, at what times,
       | what dB, etc.
        
         | Mountain_Skies wrote:
         | Not what you asked for but I've seen recent articles and videos
         | stating that trains are getting longer, which means more time
         | consumed by those waiting at crossings.
        
         | bombcar wrote:
         | The railfan forums often have very knowledgeable people, and
         | many trains are run on schedules (our local track has a train
         | one direction in morning and the other in evening). If you find
         | someone who railfans in your area they probably know most of
         | what you want.
         | 
         | It shouldn't be hard to count cars if you wanted to, either by
         | sound or laser or something similar. People have even done it
         | by earth vibration.
        
       | exabrial wrote:
       | Just a footnote: this includes a lot of lines that don't exist,
       | have been abandoned, or repurposed.
       | 
       | As an example in Kansas, the steel rail lines from Osawatomie to
       | Osage City have long been ripped up and scrapped. They are now
       | rails-to-trails projects. Several other of the railroads marked
       | are the same way (I know because well I visit these places quite
       | often). Great use of the land btw, and makes for some beautiful
       | passage across the state.
        
       | kitd wrote:
       | Having a map of the whole world seems a bit superfluous ;)
        
         | wongarsu wrote:
         | Only because both North and South America lack rail links to
         | other continents. Afro-Eurasia is interconnected by rail
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | undantag wrote:
         | Or aspirational :)
        
       | foreigner wrote:
       | With those colours it looks like a game of Ticket To Ride
        
       | Etheryte wrote:
       | The title reminds me of an oft-cited anecdote of how someone
       | running an online shop of this or that sort can tell that an
       | order is from the US -- it will be the only one where the
       | provided address doesn't include the country.
        
         | ectopod wrote:
         | My American sister in law does this when she's posting stuff
         | from America to her non-American relatives. Her parcels tend to
         | bounce around America until some postal worker figures out she
         | meant the _original_ Worcester, or wherever.
         | 
         | I'm surprised they get delivered. Impressed too.
        
           | lqet wrote:
           | For fun I once send a postcard to my parents from Spain to
           | Germany without a ZIP code, without the country, misspelling
           | the town and street, and writing "the last house on the
           | right" (in German) as a house number.
           | 
           | It arrived without problems.
        
             | thesuitonym wrote:
             | I worked a summer as a postal carrier in the US, and I was
             | surprised at how far off from the official address standard
             | you can get and still get delivered.
             | 
             | For reference, our address standard is ## Street Name,<cr>
             | City, State, ZIP.
             | 
             | There was one neighborhood in particular that had a name
             | like "Edgeview Cottages", and instead of getting letters
             | addressed to 20 Apple St, you'd see Edgeview #20. It's
             | crazy how people expect the post office to be able to
             | figure this out.
        
               | iudqnolq wrote:
               | Embarrassingly, I didn't believe it when I was told USPS
               | OCR rejects less than 5% of hand-written address. I
               | assumed that even if you could read the writing, the
               | format would be too irregular to parse a lot of the time.
               | 
               | Part of the reason I was wrong is that so much of the
               | address is redundant. I think they only use four letters
               | of the street name, for example, before they essentially
               | always can narrow it down to one possibility in their
               | database.
        
         | tialaramex wrote:
         | On the other hand, for example every country's stamps say which
         | country issued the stamps... except the UK. Our stamps just
         | have a silhouette of Liz on them (eventually they'll have a
         | picture of Charlie instead) because that's just how it's always
         | been.
        
           | p1mrx wrote:
           | There is at least one US stamp design without a country name:
           | https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:American_Flag_5c_196.
           | ..
        
             | tialaramex wrote:
             | Interesting, I looked at the collection that's from (at the
             | Smithsonian) and it didn't have any more in the pages I
             | scanned. I wonder what the story is.
        
         | Mordisquitos wrote:
         | On a similar note, it's also a common cliche in the context of
         | international group introductions:                   "Hi, I'm
         | Olaf and I'm from Lund, Sweden"              "I'm Francisca and
         | I come from Cordoba, Argentina"              "My name is
         | Jayalalithaa and I'm from Erode, India"              "Hey
         | everybody, my name's Peter but my friends call me Pete. I'm
         | from Columbus, Georgia, and I'm super excited to be here"
        
           | samatman wrote:
           | The population of the state of Georgia is about that of
           | Sweden, so that makes sense.
        
             | Mordisquitos wrote:
             | The population of other national subdivisions is greater
             | than that of Sweden and of most US states. That doesn't
             | make sensible to introduce oneself with _" I'm from Minas
             | Gerais"_, _" I come from North Rhine-Westphalia"_ or _" I'm
             | from Kaduna State"_ in an international context.
        
               | samatman wrote:
               | I've never heard someone from Berlin clarify that it's in
               | Germany either.
        
             | juki wrote:
             | It might make sense if Francisca had just said "from
             | Cordoba" and Jayalalithaa "from Erode, Tamil Nadu". Since
             | everyone was talking about countries rather than states,
             | one would reasonably expect Peter to do the same, and thus
             | assume he is from Georgia rather than the USA.
        
       | musicale wrote:
       | From the map, one could imagine an epic train trip from
       | Guadalajara to San Francisco to Hudson Bay.
        
       | londons_explore wrote:
       | What rail needs next is better co-ordination.
       | 
       | Connecting multiple carriages together to form a train was an
       | amazing innovation - those carriages are separated by inches,
       | whereas trains are separated by miles.
       | 
       | If everything could be separated by inches, we could have a
       | network with 1000x the throughput. 1000x the throughput means we
       | can use all the existing (expensive) rails, and be able to
       | transport everything the interstate road network does today.
       | 
       | And, with enough innovation, that's possible. Imagine an
       | infinitely long train. If more cargo needed to be added to the
       | train, while in motion at say 60 mph, one link in the train could
       | be broken, the gap widened to fit an extra carriage, and then an
       | extra carriage comes in from a side rail, just like merging on a
       | highway, and the whole lot is reattached again. All while still
       | moving.
       | 
       | Infinitely long trains already exist - for example an escalator
       | is a continuous 'train' of steps in a loop.
       | 
       | Disconnecting trains while in motion already exists - it was done
       | regularly on the british railway 50 years ago.
       | 
       | And the rest is just a coordination and timing problem - one that
       | computers are really good at.
        
         | ARandumGuy wrote:
         | Rail doesn't need technological pipe dreams. A well run rail
         | network is already really good at moving freight and
         | passengers.
         | 
         | The issue in the US is decades of cost cutting by the freight
         | operators. This includes a lack of infrastructure investment,
         | optimizing cost over speed, and overworking employees to an
         | extreme amount.
         | 
         | The technologies for better rail already exist. We just need to
         | actually use them in America.
        
         | its_bbq wrote:
         | And waiting for a train to pass through the road is already bad
         | enough
        
           | SECProto wrote:
           | level crossings are terrible for a number of reasons
        
         | themikesanto wrote:
         | If these ideas were viable, the class 1 carriers would have
         | already implemented them.
        
         | twobitshifter wrote:
         | Eh, not really that simple. The coupling forces with very long
         | trains can cause the trains to break apart. You need to
         | distribute locomotives throughout the train to provide power
         | not just insert new cars. The freight railroads are already
         | running very long trains based on computer modeling and they're
         | getting pushback from the govt.
         | https://www.trains.com/trn/news-reviews/news-wire/railroads-...
        
           | mellavora wrote:
           | So, kind of like consistent hashing?
        
         | mschuster91 wrote:
         | > If everything could be separated by inches, we could have a
         | network with 1000x the throughput. 1000x the throughput means
         | we can use all the existing (expensive) rails, and be able to
         | transport everything the interstate road network does today.
         | 
         | The problem: most rail runs above ground, with level road
         | crossings. Running trains at the same spatial density as cars
         | would massively impact wildlife, and you'd need to rebuild all
         | the road crossings as well. Additionally, you'd need to
         | reconstruct a lot of bridges and other infrastructure as it was
         | never built to handle that amount of load and traffic.
         | 
         | Another limiting factor is that switches need time to operate,
         | you don't want to end up with the tip of the train going
         | straight and the rear part of the train going off. That
         | requires a further minimum distance between trains.
        
       | poszlem wrote:
       | .. of the US.
        
       | dan_pixelflow wrote:
       | I assumed this was the UK, because our rail network is the
       | 'National Rail' network. Could the fact it's the US be added to
       | the title?
       | 
       | Edit: It's not just the US (!) Maybe a 'North American rail
       | network map'?
        
         | OJFord wrote:
         | Me too. Clickbait Case's Fault Really. (But that's present in
         | the submission, it's not just HN's auto-clickbaitiser. (But
         | I'll take the opportunity to say I wish it wouldn't do that
         | anyway.))
        
         | dukoid wrote:
         | https://www.openrailwaymap.org/ has everything, including
         | colorization options by speed, electrification or gauge
        
           | noneeeed wrote:
           | This is great. Although looking at the UK map makes me sad,
           | all those abandoned lines.
           | 
           | It makes you wonder what the country would be like if we'd
           | leaned into the rail system instead of tearing up a chunck of
           | it following the Beaching Report. The most interesting ones
           | for me are the additional lines that crossed the Pennines,
           | linking the north together much better than it is today.
        
             | midasuni wrote:
             | Not much different. Service frequencies and speeds on those
             | lines we're not suitable for modern day, without large
             | capacity increase in cities they couldn't really be
             | increased.
        
             | mschuster91 wrote:
             | > Although looking at the UK map makes me sad, all those
             | abandoned lines.
             | 
             | Germany is just as bad. Between 1994 (the begin of the
             | privatization) and now we lost 6.200km of rail
             | infrastructure [1] - something like 15-ish percent.
             | 
             | My s/o and I went on a two week railroad trip through the
             | whole of Germany. Seeing rotting or half-ass dismantled
             | rails, former shift yards and smashed-in former other
             | infrastructure just hurted to watch. Everything has gone
             | downhill, there was barely any investment in upkeep of
             | tracks and buildings, only in new construction of expensive
             | billions-euros high speed rail... the reason is simple: DB
             | Netz, the privatized infrastructure operator, has to pay
             | for upkeep on their own (from usage fees) while the federal
             | and state governments (and in some cases like the Munich
             | S-Bahn also the counties and cities) pay for all the high-
             | profile projects.
             | 
             | We had so, _so many_ industrial areas served by rail as
             | well: in 1994, over 11.000 companies and industrial zones
             | had their own railway attachment - today, it 's barely
             | 2.300, a reduction of 80% [2]. No wonder our highways and
             | side roads are overcrowded with trucks. The reason for
             | _that_ is that unlike the US, Europe still has chain-link
             | and buffer couplers, which means shunting yards are
             | extremely staff-intensive to run, and shunting from and to
             | the industrial areas is expensive as well... which means
             | that, thanks to privatization, DB Cargo was more or less
             | forced to shut down the industrial zone supply because the
             | absurd losses this branch brought in could no longer be
             | cross-subsidized by passenger rail.
             | 
             | [1] https://www.allianz-pro-
             | schiene.de/themen/infrastruktur/schi...
             | 
             | [2] https://www.rnd.de/wirtschaft/gueterverkehr-auf-die-
             | schiene-...
        
               | bearmode wrote:
               | >something like 15-ish percent.
               | 
               | In the UK it was somewhere around 25% of rail lines and
               | 55% of stations. Complete short-sightedness.
        
             | timthorn wrote:
             | Though if abandoned lines weren't so common, we wouldn't
             | have nearly so many heritage lines still running steam
             | engines in their natural habitat.
        
             | quietbritishjim wrote:
             | I know there's a lot of (very justified) vilification of
             | Beeching, and Marples who was transport secretary at the
             | time.
             | 
             | But actually Britain _had_ leaned in hard to the railways,
             | by undertaking a large modernisation scheme [1]. The
             | problem is, they did it a bit too early, in the 1950s, when
             | electricity seemed like a risky bet so they stuck with
             | steam which was the UK 's core strength.
             | 
             | Of course, that turned out to be a mistake in retrospect.
             | In the 1960s, investing in the railways in any form at all
             | would've seemed like making the same sort of mistake as
             | just a few years ago.
             | 
             | One interesting analysis I saw about the Beeching cuts said
             | that the worse sin is that they did not preserve rights of
             | way i.e. when closing a line they should have built a road
             | and run a bus service (as Beeching's report recommended) or
             | at least preserved it for potential rail reopening, but in
             | many cases they sold the land off to developers so the
             | chance was lost.
             | 
             | [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=1955_Moder
             | nisat...
        
               | samizdis wrote:
               | Ian Hislop, the editor of _Private Eye_ magazine and
               | regular star of the satirical TV show _Have I Got News
               | for You_ , made a documentary 12 or so years ago - _Ian
               | Hislop Goes Off the Rails_ - which looked at the Beeching
               | cuts and, more broadly, the history of the UK rail
               | network. It 's nicely done, and never descends into an
               | anguished, hand-wringing rant. Sadly, it's no longer
               | available on BBC iPlayer, but it's on YouTube (split into
               | six episodes):
               | 
               | https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=ian+hislop+o
               | ff+...
        
             | martinald wrote:
             | Most of the closed lines were seriously seriously unviable
             | and had really poor service frequencies.
             | 
             | There was definitely mistakes (Pennines) but overall most
             | of the lines would have had to be closed at some point.
             | They often connected tiny towns/villages by circuitous
             | routes, often with stations ages from the actual place they
             | were meant to be serving.
        
             | nerdponx wrote:
             | The northeast US is also dense with abandoned lines that
             | can never be rebuilt. I assume they are not on the map
             | because they've been built on top of or otherwise
             | completely ripped up.
        
               | flyinghamster wrote:
               | Also, on OpenRailwayMap some abandoned lines only show up
               | at very close zoom levels. I see a lot of that in
               | Illinois.
        
           | SECProto wrote:
           | Not everything! While it has rail lines, and abandoned rail
           | lines, and surface light rail (streetcar/tram/trolley) lines,
           | it is missing abandoned streetcar/trolley lines. (They
           | existed in a lot of North American cities until the 40s-50s
           | ish)
           | 
           | Despite that minor absence, the map you linked is clearly
           | superior
        
             | lqet wrote:
             | The map is based on OpenStreetMap data, so it's quite easy
             | to add the abandoned streetcar and trolley lines if you
             | know their original course.
        
               | SECProto wrote:
               | While I appreciate the sentiment, the OSM wiki
               | specifically says[1] "In locations where the railway has
               | been replaced by new buildings and roads, the mapping of
               | such features becomes out of scope for OpenStreetMap.
               | Historical mapping can occur on Open Historical Map."
               | 
               | (Just checked - OHM doesn't seem to have any data
               | whatsoever - present or historical. Maybe I don't know
               | how to use the interface, but all I see is land/water
               | borders)
               | 
               | [1]
               | https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Demolished_Railway
        
               | habi wrote:
               | OSM builds on verifiability. If there is nothing there
               | 'on the ground' anymore it should not be mapped.
        
               | SECProto wrote:
               | Right. In the two cities I have personal experience with,
               | the tracks and/or sleepers are still there, just paved
               | over. They are evident (and briefly verifiable) when
               | potholes develop or roadwork excavations go into those
               | areas.
               | 
               | Regardless of whether it's more suited to OSM or OHM, I
               | just think it would be a neat feature to have on Open
               | Railway Map.
        
           | Steve44 wrote:
           | That's really interesting. In the UK you can cross reference
           | with the National Library of Scotland maps[1] which allows
           | you to overlay quite a few different maps of an area over
           | different time periods.
           | 
           | [1] London Kings Cross area with large rail yard to the
           | north. By changing the transparency you can see things like
           | ST Martins College and the new Coal Drops Yard development.
           | The new British Library is also built over Somers Town Goods
           | Depot.
           | 
           | https://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoom=16&lat=51.53529&lon=-0.
           | ..
        
           | dom96 wrote:
           | This is much better. Honestly maybe the submission link
           | should be changed to this?
        
           | iisan7 wrote:
           | would be even better if it had the ownership/trackage rights
           | that the other map had, though, that's quite interesting.
        
         | rjmunro wrote:
         | I was expecting something like one of these maps too:
         | https://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations_destinations/rail-ma...
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-09-14 23:02 UTC)