The liberals $43 billion train to no where...

[zinfamous]

That's the biggest problem with most long haul passenger rail today, the costs aren't equal or cheaper than plane or bus travel for same travel time. The "sale" prices on Amtrak are typically higher than most other transport modes regular prices much less sale prices. For example Megabus RDU-WAS is $39 on Megabus and $57 on Amtrak. For the Northeast Corridor the differences are even more stark - you can get daily Bolt Bus fares for $12 O/W for the WAS-NYC route and at least $49 on Amtrak but more typically the "Saver" fares are sold out and you need to get the "Value" fare which puts you up to ~ $100 each way. It's not like Amtrak typically gets you there much quicker either.

I agree, the prices for the few long haul HSR options aren't competitive enough for comparable routes. There will be some customers that simply prefer traveling by rail over air--and at the same time, comparing airport travel to train station travel is way more chill--but customer preference isn't enough to make it viable.

I think for these specific routes, it's not the cost of the long haul routes: NY > DC, but the stops along the way for actual commuters--say Philly, Baltimore commuting into DC or the other direction, into NY. In those situations (also think San Jose to San Francisco and vice versa), there really is no other viable option, so any train that can get you from point A to point B in ~10-15 minutes or so (SF to SJ) will be an instant and consistent sell.

 

[glenn1]

I agree, the prices for the few long haul HSR options aren't competitive enough for comparable routes. There will be some customers that simply prefer traveling by rail over air--and at the same time, comparing airport travel to train station travel is way more chill--but customer preference isn't enough to make it viable.

I think for these specific routes, it's not the cost of the long haul routes: NY > DC, but the stops along the way for actual commuters--say Philly, Baltimore commuting into DC or the other direction, into NY. In those situations (also think San Jose to San Francisco and vice versa), there really is no other viable option, so any train that can get you from point A to point B in ~10-15 minutes or so (SF to SJ) will be an instant and consistent sell.

Caltrain already services that route and O/W ticket cost is like $11. Even if the HSR service is built the plan is the SF-SJ corridor will be a "hybrid system" with only 2 tracks and would only save about 15 minutes over current transit time, not be a TOTAL transit time of 15 minutes. Your side should really learn more about what you're planning to do before spending 10s of billions dollars on it.

http://www.caltrain.com/Assets/Calt...n-HSR+Blended+Service+Plan+Ops-Con-Report.pdf

Edit: can't make the screenshot work, so look on page 23 of the link above for the table that shows simulation results of current Caltran trip time vs. projected "HSR" times. 1h36s best versus 44m56s best.

 

[zinfamous]

Caltrain already services that route and O/W ticket cost is like $11. Even if the HSR service is built the plan is the SF-SJ corridor will be a "hybrid system" with only 2 tracks and would only save about 15 minutes over current transit time, not be a TOTAL transit time of 15 minutes. Your side should really learn more about what you're planning to do before spending 10s of billions dollars on it.

http://www.caltrain.com/Assets/Calt...n-HSR+Blended+Service+Plan+Ops-Con-Report.pdf

Edit: can't make the screenshot work, so look on page 23 of the link above for the table that shows simulation results of current Caltran trip time vs. projected "HSR" times. 1h36s best versus 44m56s best.

Yeah, I guess there's not much freely open area in that corridor that isn't water or ravine to make an uninterrupted HS track. Still, 1h36 or 44m both beat 2-4hours in non-moving traffic.

Sacramento to San Jose could be a more effective HS route, but would have to use an intolerable connector to dump people off towards SF while on-route.

 

[brandonbull]

again, it's not the entire transportation infrastructure. These are for specific metro commuter areas that are already desperately congested. One solution will be robot cars which, quite frankly, would easily eliminate such problems....but then we have the same type of luddites complaining that such a reality will be a disaster!

I actually take the crappy Amtrak every once in a while from NC up to DC and it isn't all that bad, despite the ridiculous time commitment (roughly 7 hours, where the typical drive is 5 hours, plane is about 1.5 hours--not counting airport travel-to-and-wait times). That route is actually rather crowded most of the time, so it isn't like people aren't using the train or somehow think it doesn't exist.

Show people that they can cover the same distance at roughly the same time as flying (when you factor in airport commute times), for comparable or a little cheaper cost, they will adapt. It works everywhere else. It's not like Americans are some monolithic species of human that think and act completely different from any other type of human. Far form it. Perhaps some communities want you to think this way for whatever reason, but after traveling from continent to continent and all over this country, I find such assumptions to be wholly without merit.

Let's talk about what is being said. So the idea is to build a parallel transportation infrastructure and then split the same number of people between that and the current transportation system? It's going to take a lot of $$$ and time to disincentivize people from wanting to use personal cars.

 

[glenn1]

Yeah, I guess there's not much freely open area in that corridor that isn't water or ravine to make an uninterrupted HS track. Still, 1h36 or 44m both beat 2-4hours in non-moving traffic.

Sacramento to San Jose could be a more effective HS route, but would have to use an intolerable connector to dump people off towards SF while on-route.

Not arguing that rail might be preferable for some customers. What I'm questioning is whether the cost/benefit makes sense to spend a lot of money reducing a 60 minute trip to 45. Or where are all these theoretical poor people who will move to Bakersfield and take HSR to get to their job at Wendy's in Fullerton everyday. Or Gilroy and take HSR to San Jose or SF. I can see a reasonably stable market of the upper middle class or wealthy who use HSR recreationally for tourism (such as to see sporting events in another city or hit the SoCal beach for a weekend) but I don't think the core ridership will be there to come even within sniffing distance of covering the operational costs. Which is fine if California wants to self-fund it, but it shouldn't be for federal taxpayers to subsidize in perpetuity. We don't need another Amtrak style money pit.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

I could explain things to you but it wouldn't matter.

The people approved a San Francisco to Los Angeles high speed rail. Not a central valley rail to eventually be tied into a San Francisco > central valley > Los Angeles high speed rail system. The people were lied to by your Governor and it's the ONLY reason that boondoggle was passed by a vote of the people. Epic fraud on an epic scale, but you approve of it because it fits into your liberal Democrat narrative.

 

[bshole]

The people approved a San Francisco to Los Angeles high speed rail. Not a central valley rail to eventually be tied into a San Francisco > central valley > Los Angeles high speed rail system. The people were lied to by your Governor and it's the ONLY reason that boondoggle was passed by a vote of the people. Epic fraud on an epic scale, but you approve of it because it fits into your liberal Democrat narrative.

Why would you care? It's their state, not yours. Shit they are about the only truly self-sufficient state in the entire union. America needs California much more than it needs America. It could be argued convincingly that California would be substantially better off if they were not being continually drained by the rest of the country via federal taxation.

 

[Drako]

Shit they are about the only truly self-sufficient state in the entire union.

LMAO, if by self-sufficient you mean massively in debt, then you would be correct.

We'll be filing for bankruptcy because of the massive amount of unfunded pension debt that we have, and other debt issues that the Sac-town leaders seem to ignore. Wasting money on this "bullet train" is just another example of the massive waste that's going on here.

 

[Maxima1]

Not arguing that rail might be preferable for some customers. What I'm questioning is whether the cost/benefit makes sense to spend a lot of money reducing a 60 minute trip to 45. .

Well, there is A LOT of questionable spending when it comes to public expenditures. This is at least more tangible than other things such as paying for half-***** foreign language classes in high school or college, incarcerating non-violent people with the cop thug force, etc.There's a reason why resource rich countries have much higher per capita income.

 

[zinfamous]

Let's talk about what is being said. So the idea is to build a parallel transportation infrastructure and then split the same number of people between that and the current transportation system? It's going to take a lot of $$$ and time to disincentivize people from wanting to use personal cars.

The simple truth is that people hate driving to work and back. They absolutely hate it. There remains this myth that driving somehow equals freedom (if we were to believe the nonsense car commercials of fantasy locals in the winding country with a single vehicle, or an empty Bay Bridge, free and open, lol) that simply is not reflective of 98% of the average american's actual driving experience.

There really is not competition between sitting and yelling in traffic for an hour or more each way vs reading a newspaper on the train, or taking a nap. No competition. The only real competition here, for commuters, comes in the form of an automated commuter fleet that may just upend everything in unexpected ways, and certainly including HSR. Automated cars really are the best option, but they have their own hurdles of non-believing wusses to overcome.

 

[glenn1]

The simple truth is that people hate driving to work and back. They absolutely hate it. There remains this myth that driving somehow equals freedom (if we were to believe the nonsense car commercials of fantasy locals in the winding country with a single vehicle, or an empty Bay Bridge, free and open, lol) that simply is not reflective of 98% of the average american's actual driving experience.

There really is not competition between sitting and yelling in traffic for an hour or more each way vs reading a newspaper on the train, or taking a nap. No competition. The only real competition here, for commuters, comes in the form of an automated commuter fleet that may just upend everything in unexpected ways, and certainly including HSR. Automated cars really are the best option, but they have their own hurdles of non-believing wusses to overcome.

They don't hate it enough to use public transit for the most part though. Considering your declaration that it's "no competition" you're lucky to break into double digit use percentages in the U.S. It's actually far more honest to say that people vastly prefer driving unless the commute becomes completely intolerable or they move into the urban core and forgo use of a car altogether except for longer trips.

 

[bshole]

The simple truth is that people hate driving to work and back. They absolutely hate it. There remains this myth that driving somehow equals freedom (if we were to believe the nonsense car commercials of fantasy locals in the winding country with a single vehicle, or an empty Bay Bridge, free and open, lol) that simply is not reflective of 98% of the average american's actual driving experience.

That depends. I love driving to work every morning and evening. It is usually a 45-55 minute drive. I listen to books on tape. Pretty close to the highlight of my day actually.

 

[zinfamous]

Not arguing that rail might be preferable for some customers. What I'm questioning is whether the cost/benefit makes sense to spend a lot of money reducing a 60 minute trip to 45. Or where are all these theoretical poor people who will move to Bakersfield and take HSR to get to their job at Wendy's in Fullerton everyday. Or Gilroy and take HSR to San Jose or SF. I can see a reasonably stable market of the upper middle class or wealthy who use HSR recreationally for tourism (such as to see sporting events in another city or hit the SoCal beach for a weekend) but I don't think the core ridership will be there to come even within sniffing distance of covering the operational costs. Which is fine if California wants to self-fund it, but it shouldn't be for federal taxpayers to subsidize in perpetuity. We don't need another Amtrak style money pit.

dude. That is not a 60 minute commute on 101 or 280 during rush hour. It's 40-60 minutes in those fantasy auto ad scenarios. In real life when, say, i would drive from Berkely to SF (you know--20 minutes, MAX! as the car drives on empty roads) it was more like 1-2hrs on rush hour or throughout the weekends. The fricking weekends. It's endless.

 

[zinfamous]

They don't hate it enough to use public transit for the most part though. Considering your declaration that it's "no competition" you're lucky to break into double digit use percentages in the U.S. It's actually far more honest to say that people vastly prefer driving unless the commute becomes completely intolerable or they move into the urban core and forgo use of a car altogether except for longer trips.

well, let's look at some of those cities that actually don't have real PT: Atlanta...lol, are you serious? This shouldn't even be in the table. Miami? lol. LA has a train that has like, 4 stops. I don't know much about St Louis or Portland, but I've never heard anything about great PT there. Ditto Pittsburgh and certainly not Baltimore. Baltimore has a light rail and subway that runs along the same route, and is very bus dependent. Usually, when you offer good PT, you get ridership.

However, this doesn't excuse low use in places, according to your table, like SF, Boston, DC and even Chicago (Chicago is good, but is also very bus dependent in large parts of the city). Lower than 20% in those cities honestly doesn't make much sense to me, considering I commuted for 5 years straight in Chicago, and the EL is very heavily used--train and bus. Same with SF, which is a relatively small city, land area-wise. The Metra or whatever it is called is usually quite packed whenever I am using. BART is sort of a joke, but it doesn't really operate as light rail, IMO--it's more of a whole-Bay Area commuter system, and it serves that purpose fairly well.

 

[glenn1]

dude. That is not a 60 minute commute on 101 or 280 during rush hour. It's 40-60 minutes in those fantasy auto ad scenarios. In real life when, say, i would drive from Berkely to SF (you know--20 minutes, MAX! as the car drives on empty roads) it was more like 1-2hrs on rush hour or throughout the weekends. The fricking weekends. It's endless.

The current Caltran train trip is 60 minutes, again see the link in my post #952. The proposed HSR would reduce that to 45 minutes. It's not a comparison of car vs. HSR, it's a comparison of HSR (actually so-called planned "hybrid rail") to existing rail service for that route.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

Why would you care? It's their state, not yours. Shit they are about the only truly self-sufficient state in the entire union. America needs California much more than it needs America. It could be argued convincingly that California would be substantially better off if they were not being continually drained by the rest of the country via federal taxation.

I was born and raised in California and have family there. You don't seem to understand.
https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_1A,_High-Speed_Rail_Act_(2008)

 

[Thebobo]

That depends. I love driving to work every morning and evening. It is usually a 45-55 minute drive. I listen to books on tape. Pretty close to the highlight of my day actually.

I do to, well not on tape anymore but it makes the commute enjoyable as you say. I look forward to listening to the book. I get all my audio books through my local library which has contracts with two companies that you can download them from. Totally free.

 

[ElFenix]

you people who enjoy your hour long commutes must be from another planet or something

 

[bshole]

you people who enjoy your hour long commutes must be from another planet or something

Look dude, if you had the same thing waiting for you at the end of your commute that I have waiting for me, you would beg for 2 hour commutes!

 

[werepossum]

The current Caltran train trip is 60 minutes, again see the link in my post #952. The proposed HSR would reduce that to 45 minutes. It's not a comparison of car vs. HSR, it's a comparison of HSR (actually so-called planned "hybrid rail") to existing rail service for that route.

And that's in the simulation. One wonders how many delays figure into the Caltrain trip times that were not in that simulation.

 

[werepossum]

Look dude, if you had the same thing waiting for you at the end of your commute that I have waiting for me, you would beg for 2 hour commutes!

So change what's waiting for you. You presumably selected your own job, so select one you like better. Or if it's the other end, figure out why the woman you married is not the same woman you now sleep with and fix your relationship.

 

[umbrella39]

ProfJohn (the guy you quoted) was a conservative that was banned a long, long time ago...you might as well be talking to a wall.

well... not really. As if he just tucked his tail and accepted his ban. It wasn't his first banned account and shan't be his last. Will ProJo's latest alt please stand up and take a bow...

 

[bshole]

So change what's waiting for you. You presumably selected your own job, so select one you like better. Or if it's the other end, figure out why the woman you married is not the same woman you now sleep with and fix your relationship.

Gotta admit I was just going for the laughs. I am actually ok at both ends. Absolutely love my job and would die without my wife.