California High Speed Rail Thread

[202_Cyclist]

Originally Posted by LosAngelesSportsFan

That is a significant savings. Lets get this going asap!

Hopefully the CA HSR Authority can leverage this $300M - $800M through value-capture or some other innovative fiancing method to further extend this to Bakersfield and south towards the Southern California basin.

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

exactly my thoughts

[BrownTown]

What mechanisms are in place to ensure that the actual cost ends up being consistent with the bid? Having worked in construction I can tell you that we often had two cost evaluations. One was the "private" evaluation which was what we actually thought the project would cost and the second was the "public" evaluation which was what we thought it would take to win the bid. All too often the contracts are structured such that what you bid and what you eventually end up getting paid are two totally different numbers. I hope that California is wise enough to make these contracts have binding maximum payouts and not simply let these companies submit hundreds of millions of dollars in change orders and adders after making a bogus low bid to win the project.

[Xerx]

Anyone else find it amusing how the winning bid was $1,234,567,890?

[edluva]

Originally Posted by 202_Cyclist

Hopefully the CA HSR Authority can leverage this $300M - $800M through value-capture or some other innovative fiancing method to further extend this to Bakersfield and south towards the Southern California basin.

hopefully Dragados' underbidding of CAHSR's very own estimates will continue to make this increasingly palatable to the public as each additional segment is contracted out. may be a long shot considering the increasing complexity of future segments but who knows, maybe we'll vastly undershoot CAHSR's own ridiculous estimates

[202_Cyclist]

But CA high-speed rail is certain to fail because nobody rides trains in California....

San Joaquin Valley trains continue to attract more riders

By Garth Stapley
Modesto Bee
Jan. 1, 2015

http://www.modbee.com/news/local/art...#storylink=rss

[202_Cyclist]

Symbolic groundbreaking Tuesday in Fresno for high-speed rail

By Tim Sheehan
Fresno Bee
Jan. 1, 2015

http://www.fresnobee.com/2015/01/01/...sday.html?rh=1

[Illithid Dude]

I gotta say, I'm surprised this is actually, finally happening. I had my doubts, to say the least. Now, let's see if it will actually hit L.A. or San Fransisco...

[Eightball]

Both articles posted by 202 are great news! What an exciting time for California rail throughout the state. And it's only going to get better...

Took the train to Oakland a couple months ago and it was packed of course, both ways. I don't see why they don't immediately double or triple frequency on that line as a precursor to CAHSR. Or the long talked about overnight service.

[NorthernDancer]

http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2...nned-for-2015/

[edluva]

good news. now wake me up when we get funding commitments for the LA or SF tie-ins

[Onn]

Finally, about time this got underway!

[BrownTown]

Originally Posted by edluva

good news. now wake me up when we get funding commitments for the LA or SF tie-ins

Usually projects like this use a sort of "sunk cost" approach to justify completion. If they can get all of the cheap segments built then it will provide a strong case for completion of the much more difficult and expensive urban portions because all the money which has already been spent would be wasted without the connections to the states biggest cities. My bigger concern is that they end up going the cheapest routes possible into the big cities which means running at "normal" rail speeds instead of high speed which will really slow down the average commute time. In order to be "high speed" you have to look at the average speed and that can get killed if you end up with huge slowdowns at each end. In the end it might not matter all that much though since it's still not as bad as the slowdowns going though airport security.

[phoenixboi08]

Originally Posted by BrownTown

Usually projects like this use a sort of "sunk cost" approach to justify completion. If they can get all of the cheap segments built then it will provide a strong case for completion of the much more difficult and expensive urban portions because all the money which has already been spent would be wasted without the connections to the states biggest cities. My bigger concern is that they end up going the cheapest routes possible into the big cities which means running at "normal" rail speeds instead of high speed which will really slow down the average commute time. In order to be "high speed" you have to look at the average speed and that can get killed if you end up with huge slowdowns at each end. In the end it might not matter all that much though since it's still not as bad as the slowdowns going though airport security.

The IOS will integrate with the existing Amtrak services to allow revenue service in the interim. More importantly, this revenue will be borrowed against to help finance the ends. It's not as difficult as people insist on making it out to be...

[eleven=11]

what about the new train station in Anaheim near the hockey arena
and Angels stadium?? is it done soon....

[phoenixboi08]

Originally Posted by eleven=11

what about the new train station in Anaheim near the hockey arena
and Angels stadium?? is it done soon....

ARTIC...?

[BrownTown]

Originally Posted by phoenixboi08

The IOS will integrate with the existing Amtrak services to allow revenue service in the interim. More importantly, this revenue will be borrowed against to help finance the ends. It's not as difficult as people insist on making it out to be...

Without the ends that segment will never carry enough passengers to justify the cost. You can only justify its construction as part of the overall system, not on its own merits. It will be losing money every day until the ends are complete. And that's all assuming that they can even acquire the land they need given how liberal California judges are and how much eminent domain will be required. It's unfortunate that California has probably the best distribution of cities and open land to build high speed rail but also probably the most difficult political environment in which to get it built.

[Obadno]

Does anyone know what the fare prices will eventually be?

Living in Phoenix I naturally go to California a lot for work, vacation, family & friends etc.

But if it isnt cheaper than flying and faster than driving why would anyone take a train?

Thats really the only requirement. Because if the price isnt drastically lower than a plane ticket from LA-SF I will just pay the extra 20-30$ and be on a 45 minute flight.

From eurpeans how long is the security check in etc ususally at trains? Americans dont really have a lot of expereince (not in the last 70 years anyway) does it take as long to check in as an airport?

As it is right now to drive from Phoenix or Tucson to LA or San Diego its about 5/6 hours. Conversly flights are only an hour but with all the time to go to the airport etc you really dont save a lot of time flying which is why many opt to drive.

Id imagine its similar for LA to sanfrancisco (about the same distance) The only way this train will have a point (other than a gian make work program) is if it can be faster than driving (it will) AND much cheaper than flying.

[spoonman]

Originally Posted by Obadno

Does anyone know what the fare prices will eventually be?

Living in Phoenix I naturally go to California a lot for work, vacation, family & friends etc.

But if it isnt cheaper than flying and faster than driving why would anyone take a train?

Thats really the only requirement. Because if the price isnt drastically lower than a plane ticket from LA-SF I will just pay the extra 20-30$ and be on a 45 minute flight.

From eurpeans how long is the security check in etc ususally at trains? Americans dont really have a lot of expereince (not in the last 70 years anyway) does it take as long to check in as an airport?

As it is right now to drive from Phoenix or Tucson to LA or San Diego its about 5/6 hours. Conversly flights are only an hour but with all the time to go to the airport etc you really dont save a lot of time flying which is why many opt to drive.

Id imagine its similar for LA to sanfrancisco (about the same distance) The only way this train will have a point (other than a gian make work program) is if it can be faster than driving (it will) AND much cheaper than flying.

Some good points that driving can often be comparable to flying when all factors are taken into account. Though I would say that as traffic continues to worsen in many places, flying or the train will seem like even better choices.

[jg6544]

Originally Posted by Obadno

Does anyone know what the fare prices will eventually be?

Living in Phoenix I naturally go to California a lot for work, vacation, family & friends etc.

But if it isnt cheaper than flying and faster than driving why would anyone take a train?

Thats really the only requirement. Because if the price isnt drastically lower than a plane ticket from LA-SF I will just pay the extra 20-30$ and be on a 45 minute flight.

From eurpeans how long is the security check in etc ususally at trains? Americans dont really have a lot of expereince (not in the last 70 years anyway) does it take as long to check in as an airport?

As it is right now to drive from Phoenix or Tucson to LA or San Diego its about 5/6 hours. Conversly flights are only an hour but with all the time to go to the airport etc you really dont save a lot of time flying which is why many opt to drive.

Id imagine its similar for LA to sanfrancisco (about the same distance) The only way this train will have a point (other than a gian make work program) is if it can be faster than driving (it will) AND much cheaper than flying.

One can work on a train. One can relax on a train. One does not often get stuck in traffic on a train. There are no security Nazis on trains.

Those just pop into my head. I'm sure if I gave it time, I could come up with more.