Obama plans high-speed money shredder, made in China.

[RPD]

So I was bored at work today, caught up on all 11 pages of this. The one take away? Peshakjang owned Red for about 3 solid pages while Red basically did the internet version of covering up his ears and saying "I CAN'T HEAR YOU LALALAL"

Good read.

Remember kiddies, -3 = +20

On topic HSR would only be a good idea if it went from SF to LA with maybe one to three stops in the valley AND used American made parts/trains etc.

 

[K1052]

commuter bus = 1% of the traffic on any given highway and therefore responsible for 1% of the road's cost
commuter train = 100% of the traffic because the rail is built specifically for this train

That would be fine if the road costs were actually in whole paid by users, but they aren't.

 

[K1052]

Doesn't matter. If it merely threatens to disrupt the Liberal Beatle, just the mere threat, then a multi-decade lawsuit must be hashed out. And I'm sure the ACLU will bring it against whoever is pushing HSR, because, the ACLU looks out for those who care about the Liberal Beatle, they are in no way at all biased.

And I strongly doubt existing rights of way will be utilized for 100% of the HSR rail projects. With unlimited money come unlimited HSR dreams.....

Chuck

Every proposed project follows existing rail or road ROWs it's beneficial from cost and integration standpoints.

 

[K1052]

It's a pretty shitty competition. 250,000 riders a day only. Compare this to a true subway anywhere you go in the world. I remember when Taipei Mayor Chen Shui Bian (the now incarcerated scandalous former president) visited the Bay in the late 90s to check out BART. And then look at what the Taipei MRT is today. Isn't it like 1.5 million riders a day? Holy crap. I used to have to learn the bus routes, and now I just go 100% MRT when I'm there. Try that in the Bay.

Hey, I'm not the one debating between airline subsidies and funding for BART since they don't even remotely serve the same user base. I was just pointing out it was a dumb argument.

Just as arguing about BART and it's farebox recovery has nothing to do with HSR.

 

[K1052]

EXACTLY, I am not sure why you are arguing with this guy about BART which isn't even HSR and has had to rely on gov't subsidies. But at least hundreds of thousands of people will take BART. Who is going to take HSR down from SF to LA if the plans are to stop in every cowtown in the Central Valley like Borden and Corcoran that they are proposing. The money can be better spent making BART or Amtrak/NE corridor better. This is a complete waste of money and Obama should be ashamed for charging more debt onto future generations.

For the umpteenth time the CA HSR does NOT have stops in Borden or Corcoran. Construction has started in the middle of the Central Valley because the federal funding that CA recently received REQUIRED it because of the economy there.

Between downtown LA and downtown SF an all stops run would stop at:

Burbank
Slymar
Palmdale (for future spur to Vegas)
Bakersfield
Fresno
Gilroy
San Jose
Redwood City
SFO

By no means does this mean that all trains will be required to make those stops. Express LA to SF trains will most certainly be a big part of the schedule.

 

[chowderhead]

Not true. They started there because it was the "easiest" politically and geographically and yet it will still cost 4.5 billion dollars and cover 85 miles with zero trains or stations.

The Ca High Speed Rail Website shows
Sacramento
Stockton
Modesto
Merced
Fresno
Bakersfeld
Burbank
Slymar
Palmdale
Burbank

and this somehow will connect to SF via SJ and up the peninsula when BART could not do it. boondoggle. With express and local trains ... (there will not be high demand - see Bart to SFO but whatever), the authorities will need to either build a separate tracks for the express to continue at a high speed to bypass these stations or these "express trains" will need to slow down somewhat but still bypass the stations. Complete waste of money. About 25k people take planes from SF to LA daily. Even if all of them decide to take the train, it still probably would not come close to breaking even. Bart has 330k daily riders and they cannot break even and needs gov't subsidies. Spend the money on BART or MUNI or NYC Metro. This is the lowest of low priorities.

 

[K1052]

Not true. They started there because it was the "easiest" politically and geographically and yet it will still cost 4.5 billion dollars and cover 85 miles with zero trains or stations.

The Ca High Speed Rail Website shows
Sacramento
Stockton
Modesto
Merced
Fresno
Bakersfeld
Burbank
Slymar
Palmdale
Burbank

and this somehow will connect to SF via SJ and up the peninsula when BART could not do it. boondoggle. With express and local trains ... (there will not be high demand - see Bart to SFO but whatever), the authorities will need to either build a separate tracks for the express to continue at a high speed to bypass these stations or these "express trains" will need to slow down somewhat but still bypass the stations. Complete waste of money. About 25k people take planes from SF to LA daily. Even if all of them decide to take the train, it still probably would not come close to breaking even. Bart has 330k daily riders and they cannot break even and needs gov't subsidies. Spend the money on BART or MUNI or NYC Metro. This is the lowest of low priorities.

http://www.mv-voice.com/news/show_story.php?id=3575

"The decision to begin construction in Central Valley was driven by the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), which last week allocated $715 million for the rail project to the Central Valley section of the line, which would stretch from San Francisco to Los Angeles in its initial phase."

BART and HSR are not remotely the same thing and will serve vastly different user bases. Stations will be built on sidings to allow uninterrupted express operations and a lot of the denser sections will be 4 track. You actually need to read the map, since Sacramento isn't on the way to SF. This thing is going to be routed onto the peninsula regardless of what the NIMBYs say.

Though as a Chicagoan I have to admit that BART and MUNI are laughable compared to what we or NYC enjoy. My first time at a MUNI station I actually laughed when the "train" pulled up.

 

[SparkyJJO]

Sounds like a great use of federal money we don't have!

 

[alphatarget1]

About 25k people take planes from SF to LA daily. Even if all of them decide to take the train, it still probably would not come close to breaking even.

Good point. Do you have a source? I wonder how many people travel by car from SF to LA daily... Can someone dig up the AADT on I-5 lol...

 

[K1052]

Good point. Do you have a source? I wonder how many people travel by car from SF to LA daily... Can someone dig up the AADT on I-5 lol...

Looks like the lowest price one way ticket is about $75.

Assuming all the traffic jumped to HSR at that price point the revenue from that service alone would come to nearly $700M annually. Plus offsets for the time premium and multiclass service.

 

[Drako]

Anyone who actually thinks the CA HSR will be completed in the next 30 years is either naive, delusional, or just plain stupid

The Corcoran to Borden section is being built first for purely political reasons. Once they get it built they can say "look, we've already spent $10 billion on it, so we can't stop now."

 

[xj0hnx]

There have been several plans for highspeed rail in Texas that have never come to fruition, I think it would be a great idea for our area.

With the majority of the states population grouped in the five cities of Dallas, Ft. Worth, Houston, Austin, and San Antonio it makes it possible to link all five cities with less than 1000 miles of track. And in this area maybe more than any other regional city to city travel is already robust enough to support it.

For me this type of travel would be a no brainer if it were available. I occasionally have to travel from DFW to Houston on business and the two options I have are
drive an hour to DFW airport and deal with parking and airport security to take a 45min plane ride and rent a car or drive 3 1/2 hours, highspeed rail would be a better option.

And I would use the rail system extensively for vacation travel and visits to friends and relatives. For example from where I live it's about a 2 1/2 hour drive to Austin and I travel there a couple of times a year on long weekends and such, but if I could hop on a train and be there in 45min-1hr I would probably triple my visits to Austin, and to San Antonio and the gulf coast for that mater.

Bring on the bullet train!

If they build that Texas rail it better also go down to Corpus Christi/Padre Island.

 

[alphatarget1]

If they build that Texas rail it better also go down to Corpus Christi/Padre Island.

Then you solve the drunk driving problem during spring break! Oh wait, that's SOUTH Padre Island.

 

[chowderhead]

http://www.mv-voice.com/news/show_story.php?id=3575

"The decision to begin construction in Central Valley was driven by the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), which last week allocated $715 million for the rail project to the Central Valley section of the line, which would stretch from San Francisco to Los Angeles in its initial phase."

BART and HSR are not remotely the same thing and will serve vastly different user bases. Stations will be built on sidings to allow uninterrupted express operations and a lot of the denser sections will be 4 track. You actually need to read the map, since Sacramento isn't on the way to SF. This thing is going to be routed onto the peninsula regardless of what the NIMBYs say.

Though as a Chicagoan I have to admit that BART and MUNI are laughable compared to what we or NYC enjoy. My first time at a MUNI station I actually laughed when the "train" pulled up.

The vast majority of travel is from people commuting less than 100 miles and for about 25 minutes to work in their car (2007 census). This does nothing for them.

yes, the Congressman (Jim Costa) in that area inserted language mandating they start there. No pork here.

I am wrong and probably overestimated the number of fliers. In 2007, 14k people flew daily from SF Bay Area to LA area. This number should include those connecting through LA area to other parts of the country.
http://www.newsweek.com/2010/10/29/why-high-speed-trains-don-t-make-sense.html
Once again 330k ride BART daily and BART cannot break even. 14k or even 20k a day is not going to break even from the capital costs, labor cost, etc. If there was any way they would break even or make a profit, private interests would jump at the chance to be involved in financing the projects and according to the GAO report (March 2009) THEY ARE NOT INTERESTED.

Here is a report from Berkeley civil engineers (those conservative bastards!) who analyzed the rose-colored predictions of ridership from the CA High-Speed Rail commissioned study.
They found that “the forecast of ridership is unlikely to be very close to the ridership that would actually materialize if the system were built. As such, it is not possible to predict whether the proposed high-speed rail system in California will experience healthy profits or severe revenue shortfalls.”

http://newscenter.berkeley.edu/2010/07/01/high_speed_rail/

They claimed the study used flaw methodology and assumptions to arrive at their ridership numbers. This is a boondoggle. It is a waste of money to serve very few people and the cost does not justify the number of people that will use the system. WASTE OF MONEY.

 

[K1052]

The vast majority of travel is from people commuting less than 100 miles and for about 25 minutes to work in their car (2007 census). This does nothing for them.

yes, the Congressman (Jim Costa) in that area inserted language mandating they start there. No pork here.

I am wrong and probably overestimated the number of fliers. In 2007, 14k people flew daily from SF Bay Area to LA area. This number should include those connecting through LA area to other parts of the country.
http://www.newsweek.com/2010/10/29/why-high-speed-trains-don-t-make-sense.html
Once again 330k ride BART daily and BART cannot break even. 14k or even 20k a day is not going to break even from the capital costs, labor cost, etc. If there was any way they would break even or make a profit, private interests would jump at the chance to be involved in financing the projects and according to the GAO report (March 2009) THEY ARE NOT INTERESTED.

Here is a report from Berkeley civil engineers (those conservative bastards!) who analyzed the rose-colored predictions of ridership from the CA High-Speed Rail commissioned study.
They found that “the forecast of ridership is unlikely to be very close to the ridership that would actually materialize if the system were built. As such, it is not possible to predict whether the proposed high-speed rail system in California will experience healthy profits or severe revenue shortfalls.”

http://newscenter.berkeley.edu/2010/07/01/high_speed_rail/

They claimed the study used flaw methodology and assumptions to arrive at their ridership numbers. This is a boondoggle. It is a waste of money to serve very few people and the cost does not justify the number of people that will use the system. WASTE OF MONEY.

HSR supplants regional air and car travel. Few people will use it for daily commutes.

The insistence that the various forms of rail transit HAVE to be entirely self supporting while air and road travel doesn't doesn't make the playing field level. I don't think there is more than a couple transit systems in the world that actually turn a profit. To support density there is no other choice than to use them since there are practical limitations as to how many cars you can direct into a given area and the repercussions of attempting to do so.

If people truly want to play that game specifically prohibit by law transfers from general funds to the bankrupt highway funds and the use of one off capital funding programs (with no long term funding source to support the built infrastructure).

Comparing BART to HSR for revenue purposes is totally useless. They are different services that will have different fare structures. I don't think anyone has a good handle on how exactly HSR will preform in the short term. What is important however is that this is an asset that will be around for the next century at least and will help accommodate the growth in population and needed transportation.

There is limited private interest in passenger rail because the US government demolished the ridership by financially supporting interstate and airport construction while simultaneously forcing rail operators to maintain money hemorrhaging passenger routes. This is why Amtrak was established in the first place because the rail companies were collectively approaching bankruptcy, the government stepped in to relive them of the obligation so they could continue to run freight.

 

[Drako]

I guess the Florida Governor is not in on the graft. Good for him and the people of Florida.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/02/16/2069844/florida-gov-rick-scott-rejects.html