First off, I don't agree with the train to nowhere reference as the master plans have this train connecting the 2nd largest metro in the US to another major metro that is also recognized across the world. I respect that and I don't really take that comment seriously.

I don't think more people would be willing to take the train and as I mentioned, more people are ditching trains and mass transit entirely. Getting fat and older aren't exclusive to sitting in traffic but I know what you mean by that comment. I'm in great shape and I drive all over the place, lots of times sitting in traffic. That is because the freeways aren't designed to handle the traffic and need to upgraded/expanded.

From what I see, cars are most certainly superior to transit with few exceptions as I pointed out.

You last paragraph echoes my concerns for OKC street car. I believe it will fail because of how slow it will move and how it designed. I think that will set a bad precedent for a city that already severely undervalues mass transit and will likely hamper any progress to build real transit in the future that serves the entire city.

Likewise, I am concerned with CA's HSR project because it is technically the first real HSR project in the country. If it flops and isn't build, that could cause other areas to not build one of their own.

I would much rather have supported taking notes from how Japan has constructed and operated their system which I think is the best in the world and built ours accordingly. It's also important to note that geometric standards don't seem to be of much importance as it is clarified there will be several spots in this system where the train will slow way down from its average speed and it will share tracks with conventional commuter rail. Those are deal breakers, imo.

Both of those things are not unusual and work fine for many systems, including France, Germany, Spain, Italy and yes, even Japan.

And yet among those countries, the US is unique in that most or all of the shared segments would be controlled by private freight corporations with no incentive to ensure timely passenger service. In those other countries, both the HSR and legacy lines are operated by the same entity, usually a direct branch of the government. Japan does have a quasi-privatized system, but the rule still applies.

Is it possible to use a "phased approach" to build HSR? Of course. But the US has a bunch of unique and very difficult roadblocks to using that approach, including the urban sprawl that makes those "shared segments" drag on for tens or (over the length of CHSR) hundreds of miles.

Wait, I thought we were just talking about the Peninsula...

I was thinking of pretty much all HSR routing in Southern California. I think it's pretty much a given that HSR will have to use a blended plan south of Santa Clarita, no?

Also it's my impression that HSR will have to share tracks with freight from Gilroy to SJ, on a segment that is not controlled by Caltrain.

ROW blended yes with Metrolink, I'm not sure what the dedicated track situation will be or if they will in fact be shared track, I'll have to pour into the engineering docs again.



I have never heard such a thing and I highly highly doubt this. Isn't that the section that's calling for a long aerial segment?

yikes

rail construction in this country is pathetic

http://www.latimes.com/local/califor...309-story.html

^A good read from a couple years ago: Why We Can't Think Straight About Public Spending: California High-Speed Rail, and the Latest USAF Bomber

yeah whatevs we obv should not be wasting a trillion on the new fighter plane generation. still don't excuse this kinda shit we have the worst efficacy per dollar spent for rail in the world. not even close https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/28/n...ion-costs.html

Only way this is going to work....2 segments
 

The huge costs of tunneling through the transverse ranges (Tehachapis or San Gabriels) could be prohibitive, as would the seismic problems. If the thing is built at all build it in 2 segments. North--from Fresno or Bakersfield to S.F. and Sacramento. South--From L.A. to San Diego. The way they are postponing the southern construction leaves out 2/3rds of CA population. The south needs to wet its beak. A fast L.A.-Orange County-San Diego train would be welcome. Deferring the transverse range tunnel would save billions. At some future date, the 2 segments could be connected. But if not, the 2 segment idea could work as stand alones. Otherwise, ditch the whole thing and use the money for local transit in the cities and cheap housing.

It's not like the tunnels are the only issue, they can't even get the easy part done anywhere close to schedule and budget.

There's plenty of blame to go around INCLUDING property owners who have made this as hard and expensive as possible for the authority to acquire the needed ROW.

No, you can't really blame them. You have to blame the Government for allowing their absurd lawsuits to continue.

So no blame to the lawsuit-makers, just the lawsuit-allowers? Ok...

The Farmer and the Viper.

Central Valley construction update
 

This investment in clean, efficient, modern mobility is creating good jobs in the Central Valley.

Bullet train construction underway throughout Central Valley

By Nora Heston Tarte
March 22, 2018
Central Valley Business Journal

https://s3.amazonaws.com/cvbj.biz/wp..._Update_02.jpg
A stretch of the railroad tracks for the bullet train is under construction alongside Highway 99 through Fresno in the Central Valley. (Image courtesy of the Central Valley Business Journal)

"FRESNO—The much-anticipated bullet train project is inching its way to the finish line. Over 119 miles of the Central Valley leg is under construction from Madera to Wasco, with 1,700 workers dispatched to 21 active construction sites.

Approximately 1,200 workers are Central Valley residents.
“We’ve made a lot of really good progress in the Valley,” said Annie Parker, a spokesperson for the California High-Speed Rail Authority..."

https://cvbj.biz/2018/03/22/bullet-t...entral-valley/

I just booked a trip this summer to southwest France.

Paris to Bordeaux is 365 miles, which from LA would put you between San Jose and San Francisco.

The train costs €58 round trip, and takes 2 hours each way. It’s about a 7 hour drive.

How is that not superior to driving?

France isn't California. HSR makes a ton of sense in France; it makes little sense in California.

Also, those fares sound absurdly low, even for France. I've taken Mannheim-Paris a bunch of times, it's half the distance, and it has never been less than twice the price.

And second class seating (I assume that's the only way you're getting that price) is pretty awful. I've had too many bad experiences.

No that’s a 1st class fare. I am of course buying it quite early, not a week away like most business travel, which of course is more expensive (but can be expensed, so who cares). I would take 2nd class on a train over economy on a flight, by the way, and it’s not even close.

But what exactly is the difference between France and California in this regard? That is a TGV service that runs direct, so it’s not as if density between the origin and destination are important. In fact, an LA to SF train could make a few stops on the way (at the very least San Jose), and be even more economically viable. Bordeaux is no San Francisco either.