Quote:
Originally Posted by hughfb3
Also. California High Speed Rail is viewed by the state as an investment that will offset airport expansions. There are already rumblings that If California uses the same model as France and double downs on its high speed rail investment by banning airports in state from serving other in-state airports near HSR stations, that alone will free up SAN for other routes not currently served, thereby still increasing the capacity of intercity travel to/from San Diego.
Looking at the statistics for SAN on Wikipedia from last year, 4 out of the top 10 destinations for SAN will be served by either CAHSR or Brightline west with Las Vegas being the #1 destination. That is 2,647,000 passengers out of its existing 24,000,000 passengers alone, just from those top 4 destinations.
|
I absolutely support high-speed rail and as has been noted many times, the alternative to investing in high-speed rail isn't to do nothing, it is to spend tens of billions of dollars on airport and highway expansions.
With that said, the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 prohibits the regulation of rates, routes, and service. Neither states nor the federal government can ban any routes.
Also, some passengers originating in SAN might continue flying to SFO to connect to various destinations in Asia or the Pacific Northwest.
Prev
Linear Mode
