SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   Transportation (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=25)
-   -   California High Speed Rail Thread (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=180558)

curt-pdx Jan 11, 2022 8:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmecklenborg (Post 9498664)
Whatever the plan is, critics always have another plan.

So true! If we all agreed, or better yet, realized that there is an extensive process in place used to plan the best possible project (with adequate time for public feedback to help shape the ultimate project), then what would the trolls do with their life?

This forum would just be interesting information, instead of a bunch of complainers.

jmecklenborg Jan 11, 2022 9:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by curt-pdx (Post 9499757)
So true! If we all agreed, or better yet, realized that there is an extensive process in place used to plan the best possible project (with adequate time for public feedback to help shape the ultimate project), then what would the trolls do with their life?

This forum would just be interesting information, instead of a bunch of complainers.

I didn't make up that "plan" comment - a guy I knew who led a failed transit initiative in my home town used to use it all of the time.

If you've ever answered the phones at a pizza place, people have 4-5 strategies for getting free food. You can hear the attempt at free food from the second the phone call begins. Same with people who criticize public works projects - it's one of the same 4-5 strategies every single time:

-the project is too big - we should start small to see if that works
-the project is too small - needs to be more ambitious to have any positive effect
-instead of spending $ on this, they could be better spent on that
-project needs to "pay for itself" even though suggested alternative does not

Busy Bee Jan 11, 2022 10:44 PM

Tell me more about this free pizza stuff...

202_Cyclist Jan 13, 2022 1:27 PM

More high-speed rail money in Gavin Newsom’s CA budget. Here’s what it would do


By Thaddeus Miller
Jan. 11, 2022
Fresno Bee

"California’s high-speed rail would get about $4.2 billion toward finishing the central San Joaquin Valley portion in Gov. Gavin Newsom’s proposed state spending plan, which he unveiled Monday.

The budget describes the money going to the rail from Merced to Bakersfield as advanced work, while dollars would also go to advanced planning for the entire project.

Originally planned from Los Angeles to San Francisco, the rail project has been pared down to connecting the Central Valley without the larger city destinations on either end. In his first state of the state in 2019, Newsom said the project didn’t have the pathway to the longer route..."

https://www.fresnobee.com/news/local...257203447.html

shivtim Jan 13, 2022 3:41 PM

With the infrastructure bill, and in general a big push on infrastructure from the Biden administration, wouldn't we expect CA will apply for additional funds and we could see the plan go back to SF-LA?

Busy Bee Jan 13, 2022 4:02 PM

The plan has always been SF-LA for phase 1 CHSR. That's never changed. The emphasis on fully constructing the IOS in the Central Valley is an intentional political strategy on the part of the Authority and the Governor to deliver a tangible that the public can see and/or use while simultaneously using that to hedge for funding commitments on both the state and federal level for the mountain crossings into SF and LA.

MAC123 Jan 13, 2022 6:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Busy Bee (Post 9501982)
The plan has always been SF-LA for phase 1 CHSR. That's never changed. The emphasis on fully constructing the IOS in the Central Valley is an intentional political strategy on the part of the Authority and the Governor to deliver a tangible that the public can see and/or use while simultaneously using that to hedge for funding commitments on both the state and federal level for the mountain crossings into SF and LA.

Exactly. Completing the central valley portion gives something for people to actually interact with and that promotes support for the overall project.

jmecklenborg Jan 13, 2022 8:00 PM

Also, the central valley IOS will run at top 200+ mph speed for its entire length. The speeds will be slower (roughly 110-150mph) through/over the mountains, between SF and San Jose, and between Burbank and Anaheim via LA Union Station.

All of the people insisting on starting at SF and Los Angeles would have complained that the trains would hot run super-fast in those areas.

TowerDude Jan 13, 2022 9:47 PM

California HSR should be absorbed into Amtrak and rebranded as "Acela West"

Busy Bee Jan 13, 2022 10:10 PM

I actually can't think of anything worse.

202_Cyclist Jan 13, 2022 10:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Busy Bee (Post 9502550)
I actually can't think of anything worse.

Have WMATA operate it?

Busy Bee Jan 13, 2022 10:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 202_Cyclist (Post 9502564)
Have WMATA operate it?

Have WMATA operate it with SEPTA's budget:haha:

tech12 Jan 14, 2022 12:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 202_Cyclist (Post 9501771)
More high-speed rail money in Gavin Newsom’s CA budget. Here’s what it would do


By Thaddeus Miller
Jan. 11, 2022
Fresno Bee

"California’s high-speed rail would get about $4.2 billion toward finishing the central San Joaquin Valley portion in Gov. Gavin Newsom’s proposed state spending plan, which he unveiled Monday.

The budget describes the money going to the rail from Merced to Bakersfield as advanced work, while dollars would also go to advanced planning for the entire project.

Originally planned from Los Angeles to San Francisco, the rail project has been pared down to connecting the Central Valley without the larger city destinations on either end. In his first state of the state in 2019, Newsom said the project didn’t have the pathway to the longer route..."

https://www.fresnobee.com/news/local...257203447.html

lol

Funding not yet being secured for all segments of the system is not the same as the project being "pared down". The entire thing is still planned, as it always has been. It's annoying to constantly see inaccurate reporting on this project.

jmecklenborg Jan 14, 2022 4:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tech12 (Post 9502724)
lol

Funding not yet being secured for all segments of the system is not the same as the project being "pared down". The entire thing is still planned, as it always has been. It's annoying to constantly see inaccurate reporting on this project.

Very few reporters seem to understand infrastructure projects of any sort.

plutonicpanda Jan 15, 2022 10:39 PM

Do we have any new estimates on when the Palmdale to LAUS section could begin construction?

jmecklenborg Jan 16, 2022 6:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by plutonicpanda (Post 9504476)
Do we have any new estimates on when the Palmdale to LAUS section could begin construction?

No, no update for anything between Bakersfield and LA. Remember that in order for LA Union Station to be used in any appreciable volume by HSR, the terminus at Anaheim needs to be built because there is no space for cleaning/restocking the trains at LA Union. So the tunneling between Palmdale and Burbank needs to be built along with everything else simultaneously.

Busy Bee Jan 21, 2022 2:44 PM

Burbank to LAUS EIS in the news
 
If officials from Burbank and Glendale are so concerned about the addition of hsr tracks to the Metrolink corridor "further dividing their communities" they should have been advocating for the corridor to be trenched in conjunction with the hsr construction. This would have future-proofed the corridor, significantly alleviated noise, invested in brand new modern below grade Metrolink stations which would attract ridership, facilitate the removal of several pedestrian-hostile arterial underpasses which are the actual psychological barrier offenders allowing flanking communities to be stitched back together, preventing the closure of several current at-gtade crossings and creating numerous opportunities for air rights developments to be built above the trackway which would be a large revenue generator. This could be done from downtown Burbank all the way to Taylor Yard.

jmecklenborg Jan 21, 2022 2:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Busy Bee (Post 9509952)
are so concerned about the addition of hsr tracks to the Metrolink corridor "further dividing their communities" they should have been advocating for the corridor to be trenched in conjunction with the hsr construction.

There is such an overuse of the term "community" by "concerned" people. I grew up in a real multi-generational ethnic neighborhood where we and many others had lived for over 100 years, intermarried, etc. There were all sorts of problems (family feuds, fist fights, malicious property damage, waved guns), despite the absence of a highway or railroad track running directly through the place.

202_Cyclist Jan 21, 2022 3:50 PM

I read the LA Times article by high-speed rail hater, Ralph Vartabedian. I don't know what the concern is about with water. It isn't like California will have any water by 2030 anyways...

mattropolis Feb 11, 2022 12:05 AM

Downtown Fresno
 
Some recent images showing a shoofly track that is complete and operational now. Allows the Union Pacific trains to continue to operate while underpasses are built on their old alignment.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQDD...annel=JMACivil" target="_blank">Video Link

jmecklenborg Feb 11, 2022 3:36 PM

The Wall St. Journal's editorial board ran a CAHSR hit piece today:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/califor...nion_lead_pos2

As many of us here know, opponents refuse to engage the facts, but I suspect that the East Coast media is somewhat jealous that California is building something much flashier than what exists in the Northeast Corridor.

Obadno Feb 11, 2022 3:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmecklenborg (Post 9533251)
The Wall St. Journal's editorial board ran a CAHSR hit piece today:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/califor...nion_lead_pos2

As many of us here know, opponents refuse to engage the facts, but I suspect that the East Coast media is somewhat jealous that California is building something much flashier than what exists in the Northeast Corridor.

Here is a fact, its faster and cheaper to drive, it goes between two decidedly unnecessary small cities in the central valley, the easiest and cheapest place to build it and its still outrageously expensive.

I like high speed rail but as a concept but the CHSR is not a good project.

the cities connected by it need to have their own local transit buildout before city-city high speed rail is used to a large degree.

This is quite literally a giant waste of money. By the time (if ever) the rest of the line is done and successful this portion will be decades old and needing replacement.

The whole process is ass-backwards. You start with robust local/regional transit, then connect those regional transit networks together by long distance HSR lines.

jmecklenborg Feb 11, 2022 5:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Obadno (Post 9533290)
Here is a fact, its faster and cheaper to drive,

Right, there's not such thing as traffic in Los Angeles or the Bay.


Quote:

it goes between two decidedly unnecessary small cities in the central valley,
Temporarily.

Quote:

I like high speed rail but as a concept but the CHSR is not a good project.
Concern trolling.

Quote:

the cities connected by it need to have their own local transit buildout before city-city high speed rail is used to a large degree.
Right, because nobody flies unless there is a train leading to the airport.

Quote:

the rest of the line is done and successful this portion will be decades old and needing replacement.
You just said it's a waste of money, but then predict its success.

Quote:

The whole process is ass-backwards. You start with robust local/regional transit, then connect those regional transit networks together by long distance HSR lines.
China, Japan, France, Spain, etc. built them both at the same time. BART is expanding and will interface with CASHR in DTSF, at SFO, and in San Jose. LA's network will be much larger than it is today by the time HSR beings service to LA Union.

Busy Bee Feb 11, 2022 7:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Obadno (Post 9533290)
Here is a fact, its faster and cheaper to drive, it goes between two decidedly unnecessary small cities in the central valley, the easiest and cheapest place to build it and its still outrageously expensive.

I like high speed rail but as a concept but the CHSR is not a good project.

the cities connected by it need to have their own local transit buildout before city-city high speed rail is used to a large degree.

This is quite literally a giant waste of money. By the time (if ever) the rest of the line is done and successful this portion will be decades old and needing replacement.

The whole process is ass-backwards. You start with robust local/regional transit, then connect those regional transit networks together by long distance HSR lines.


ig·no·rant
/ˈiɡnərənt/

adjective

lacking knowledge, information, or awareness about a particular thing.

Obadno Feb 11, 2022 9:06 PM

de·lu·sion·al
/dəˈlo͞oZH(ə)nəl/
Learn to pronounce
adjective
characterized by or holding idiosyncratic beliefs or impressions that are contradicted by reality or rational argument, typically as a symptom of mental disorder.
"hospitalization for schizophrenia and delusional paranoia"
based on or having faulty judgment; mistaken.
"their delusional belief in the project's merits never wavers"

When people voice real concerns about the project and are responded to with "Your ignorant" or "You are a troll" it might make you realize that you are the one who is misinterpreting reality.

Obadno Feb 11, 2022 9:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmecklenborg (Post 9533524)
Right, there's not such thing as traffic in Los Angeles or the Bay.


(IF EVER)
<--- conveniently left out of your quote

You just said it's a waste of money, but then predict its success.



China, Japan, France, Spain, etc. built them both at the same time. BART is expanding and will interface with CASHR in DTSF, at SFO, and in San Jose. LA's network will be much larger than it is today by the time HSR beings service to LA Union.

You are responding with things I didnt bring up. I said nothing about connecting to an airport, traffic or any such things.

But obviously you cant address what I said because you are just wrong. Bad rhetorical game that you arent very good at.

mattropolis Feb 11, 2022 10:10 PM

The draft 2022 Business plan for CAHSR has been released.
https://hsr.ca.gov/about/high-speed-...business-plan/

PDF here:
https://hsr.ca.gov/wp-content/upload...iness_Plan.pdf


It may be a better use of your time if you want to learn more about this project, as opposed to this thread! :)

From the NOTABLE section:

The Draft 2022 Business Plan:
  • Provides updates on milestones and progress since April 2021, when the 2020 Business Plan was published;
  • Incudes limited updates to forecasts; and
  • Previews what will be covered in the 2023 Project Update Report.
With the opportunity for new, more stable funding, we will work to:
  • Deliver electrified double-track operation segment connecting Merced, Fresno and Bakersfield as soon as possible;
  • Environmentally clear the full 500-mile system from San Francisco to Los Angeles/Anaheim;
  • Advance design statewide as each project section is cleared, preparing the sections for future construction funding;
  • Leverage new federal and state funds for targeted statewide investments, particularly in shared corridors; and
  • Reevaluate funding scenarios to extend high-speed rail beyond the Central Valley to the Bay Area.

TWAK Feb 11, 2022 10:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Obadno (Post 9533841)
When people voice real concerns about the project and are responded to with "Your ignorant" or "You are a troll" it might make you realize that you are the one who is misinterpreting reality.

They said it wouldn't be approved...
Then they said construction wouldn't start...
Now they are saying construction wont finish....
I don't believe these out of state voices.

tech12 Feb 12, 2022 4:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Obadno (Post 9533841)
de·lu·sion·al
/dəˈlo͞oZH(ə)nəl/
Learn to pronounce
adjective
characterized by or holding idiosyncratic beliefs or impressions that are contradicted by reality or rational argument, typically as a symptom of mental disorder.
"hospitalization for schizophrenia and delusional paranoia"
based on or having faulty judgment; mistaken.
"their delusional belief in the project's merits never wavers"

When people voice real concerns about the project and are responded to with "Your ignorant" or "You are a troll" it might make you realize that you are the one who is misinterpreting reality.

Yes, we know you're delusional.

jmecklenborg Feb 13, 2022 5:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Obadno (Post 9533844)
You are responding with things I didnt bring up. I said nothing about connecting to an airport, traffic or any such things.

But obviously you cant address what I said because you are just wrong. Bad rhetorical game that you arent very good at.

Anti-rail people always imagine flying and driving alternatives at their best and rail at its worst. That said, it's tough to imagine many scenarios in which driving or flying might actually beat CAHSR in those respects, if population/job density is weighted, especially considering the extensive local transit improvements that will come to exist in the Bay Area and Southern California before CAHSR Phase 1 is fully operational.

202_Cyclist Feb 17, 2022 2:04 PM

High speed rail agency looking at different approaches to extend work to Merced, Bakersfield

By Tim Sheehan
Fresno Bee
Feb. 16, 2022


"The state agency that’s engaged in construction of a high-speed rail route segment between Madera and Shafter is getting ready to figure out how to extend the 119-mile route north to Merced and south to Bakersfield.

The California High-Speed Rail Authority’s board, at its meeting Thursday, will vote on asking companies to submit their qualifications for the initial design work for two separate extensions of the line: a 34-mile stretch northward from the northern edge of Madera into downtown Merced, and a portion of about 19 miles from Shafter into east-central Bakersfield.

Part of that process will also include getting contractors that are ultimately hired to give information on how they will deliver their work on-time..."

https://www.fresnobee.com/news/local...258464148.html

Busy Bee Feb 17, 2022 3:00 PM

Also in the news is they finally gave up on that idiotic plan to only build and operate a single track on the IOS. They've come to their senses and will complete the IOS as a fully electrified double track railway, so at least we've avoided that int'l embarrassment.

jmecklenborg Feb 17, 2022 6:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Busy Bee (Post 9539848)
Also in the news is they finally gave up on that idiotic plan to only build and operate a single track on the IOS. They've come to their senses and will complete the IOS as a fully electrified double track railway, so at least we've avoided that int'l embarrassment.

North to South, the IOS station listing appears to be:

Merced
Fresno
Kings/Tulare
Bakersfield

But there are also dots on this map (https://hsrail.org/sites/default/fil...ng_Map_web.jpg) at:
Madera
Corcoran
Wasco

The Wasco Viaduct is definitely under construction, but will this station be built right away? What about Madera? And I had never heard of Corcoran until I saw this map.

202_Cyclist Feb 17, 2022 7:05 PM

There is a state prison in Corcoran.

ardecila Feb 17, 2022 11:00 PM

This is basically all the stations along the San Joaquins. I don't think the HSR line will ever have all of those same stops.

SoCalKid Feb 18, 2022 12:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Obadno (Post 9533844)
You are responding with things I didnt bring up. I said nothing about connecting to an airport, traffic or any such things.

But obviously you cant address what I said because you are just wrong. Bad rhetorical game that you arent very good at.

Ok I can address what you said.

"Here is a fact, its faster and cheaper to drive"

It takes over 6 hours to drive between San Francisco and Los Angeles IF you leave at a good time (could easily be 2-3 hours more at the wrong time). The fully built-out high speed rail line will take around 3 hours between those two cities. 6>3, so it is most definitely not faster. I'm not sure where you're getting your information from, but I encourage you to read the plan.

MAC123 Feb 18, 2022 12:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SoCalKid (Post 9540850)
Ok I can address what you said.

"Here is a fact, its faster and cheaper to drive"

It takes over 6 hours to drive between San Francisco and Los Angeles IF you leave at a good time (could easily be 2-3 hours more at the wrong time). The fully built-out high speed rail line will take around 3 hours between those two cities. 6>3, so it is most definitely not faster. I'm not sure where you're getting your information from, but I encourage you to read the plan.

And then let's not even get into how expensive it is to drive. Gas (especially in California), maintenance, insurance, if you don't have a place to park paying for that, etc.

TowerDude Feb 18, 2022 4:35 AM

Any chance they might include a car transporter train service on this line?

Maybe just have car transporter stops at San Diego, Los Angeles, Fresno, San Francisco and Sacramento?

craigs Feb 18, 2022 6:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TowerDude (Post 9541081)
Any chance they might include a car transporter train service on this line?

Maybe just have car transporter stops at San Diego, Los Angeles, Fresno, San Francisco and Sacramento?

No.

chaunceyjb Feb 18, 2022 8:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mattropolis (Post 9532652)
Some recent images showing a shoofly track that is complete and operational now. Allows the Union Pacific trains to continue to operate while underpasses are built on their old alignment.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQDD...annel=JMACivil" target="_blank">Video Link

I can't see the images, and this may be the same as what you posted, but here is a video of the shoo-fly:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQDDCr180rg

Surely this means that the downtown underpasses can now move ahead at a more deliberate pace.

John S.

mattropolis Feb 18, 2022 11:05 PM

Thanks, that is what I was trying to post.

jmecklenborg Feb 20, 2022 5:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 9540772)
This is basically all the stations along the San Joaquins. I don't think the HSR line will ever have all of those same stops.

You're right. That particular map was confusing.

The stations in the IOS will be Merced, Fresno, Kings/Tulare, and Bakersfield.

So over that distance of 170~ miles, the distances between stations will be:

Merced>Fresno: 53 miles
Fresno>Kings/Tulare: 32 miles
Kings/Tulare>Bakersfield: 77 miles


With two intermediate stops, the total run time between Merced and Bakersfield will be a little under an hour. I recall reading a few years ago that they plan to buy 8 trains...I don't see why they'd need more than 4 (two operating and two spares).

Busy Bee Feb 20, 2022 5:57 PM

I still think they should hold off on purchasing a brand new fleet to serve the IOS. It will be years until the ends of Phase 1 are complete and by that time the tech will have probably advanced even further and they may feel locked into a trainset platform or reluctant to mix trainsets in operation after Phase 1 completion. I mentioned this some time ago but i think it would be prudent, and honestly popular with a skeptical public and cost critics, to frugally refurbish/rebuild some ex- Eurostar Class 373, ex-Frecciarossa or some first generation ICE 1 trainsets picked up for a song with the DB operator connection and operate these over a"broken-in" IOS, build ridership and then pull the trigger on a "knock-your-socks-off" train when full Phase 1 ops are ready.

plutonicpanda Feb 20, 2022 11:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Busy Bee (Post 9509952)
If officials from Burbank and Glendale are so concerned about the addition of hsr tracks to the Metrolink corridor "further dividing their communities" they should have been advocating for the corridor to be trenched in conjunction with the hsr construction. This would have future-proofed the corridor, significantly alleviated noise, invested in brand new modern below grade Metrolink stations which would attract ridership, facilitate the removal of several pedestrian-hostile arterial underpasses which are the actual psychological barrier offenders allowing flanking communities to be stitched back together, preventing the closure of several current at-gtade crossings and creating numerous opportunities for air rights developments to be built above the trackway which would be a large revenue generator. This could be done from downtown Burbank all the way to Taylor Yard.

I thought this was the plan? Is that not even on the table? Caltrans should have done that too with I-5 through Burbank.

Busy Bee Feb 23, 2022 3:02 PM

Not much new for the well-versed, but a decent deeper dive from Railway Age:

https://www.railwayage.com/passenger...limited-clear/

jmecklenborg Feb 23, 2022 7:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmecklenborg (Post 9543396)
You're right. That particular map was confusing.

The stations in the IOS will be Merced, Fresno, Kings/Tulare, and Bakersfield.

So over that distance of 170~ miles, the distances between stations will be:

Merced>Fresno: 53 miles
Fresno>Kings/Tulare: 32 miles
Kings/Tulare>Bakersfield: 77 miles

Wrong, per the Railway Age article. That article asserts that there will be a station at Madera.

So the new station list and distances between them are:

Merced>Madera 33 miles
Madera>Fresno 22 miles
Fresno>Kings/Tulare: 32 miles
Kings/Tulare>Bakersfield: 77 miles

I'd love to know the distance needed to fully accelerate/decelerate from zero to 200mph and vice-verse, since I'm curious as to how many miles of the 22 miles between Madera and Fresno will be transited at 200mph. My guess is just 10 or so, if it takes 5 miles to reach full speed and 5 miles to slow to a stop. And I'd guess that the IOS won't floor it or slam on the brakes in order to avoid stressing the equipment. Under full operations, I imagine that they will accelerate 30 seconds slower than possible on schedule so that they can make up 30 seconds when needed, and the same when braking for stations.

Also, it should be noted that some of the expense of the IOS is not just the 4-track stations but also the approaches to them...Phase 2 headed toward Sacramento could save money by not only not building express bypasses but also by slowing express trains through stations so that the approaches can be built on a sharper curve than permissible on the IOS.

Busy Bee Feb 23, 2022 7:21 PM

I'm not sure the construction of through running express tracks represents a substantial cost in the context of the entire project and when operational benefits are factored in. Not enough to make a "hard decision" about in Phase 2 IMO, especially considering a non-stop LA ---> State capital of state the size of many major countries could see high demand, and the faster it can make that run the better.

jmecklenborg Feb 23, 2022 8:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Busy Bee (Post 9546724)
I'm not sure the construction of through running express tracks represents a substantial cost in the context of the entire project and when operational benefits are factored in. Not enough to make a "hard decision" about in Phase 2 IMO, especially considering a non-stop LA ---> State capital of state the size of many major countries could see high demand, and the faster it can make that run the better.

Yes I think that people are discounting the importance of Sacramento in the overall network. Its MSA of 2+ million makes it a peer of Kansas City, Cleveland, Milwaukee, Columbus, Indianapolis, Nashville, etc. - cities that are often the hubs or termini of various passenger rail proposals. Along with Stockton and Modesto, the total population served by Phase 2 is roughly the size of Baltimore.

Awhile back I remember reading the Prop 1A language and seeing that it appears that CAHSR can't build this section until Phase 1 is operational. That's why I suggested that ACE/Capitol Corridor/Caltrans or some agency could build it with its own grants from the state and federal government. ACE could buy four HSR trains and operate them from Sacramento to Bakersfield to avoid violating Prop 1A, sort of like Las Vegas HSR.

electricron Feb 23, 2022 9:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Busy Bee (Post 9543424)
I still think they should hold off on purchasing a brand new fleet to serve the IOS. It will be years until the ends of Phase 1 are complete and by that time the tech will have probably advanced even further and they may feel locked into a trainset platform or reluctant to mix trainsets in operation after Phase 1 completion. I mentioned this some time ago but i think it would be prudent, and honestly popular with a skeptical public and cost critics, to frugally refurbish/rebuild some ex- Eurostar Class 373, ex-Frecciarossa or some first generation ICE 1 trainsets picked up for a song with the DB operator connection and operate these over a"broken-in" IOS, build ridership and then pull the trigger on a "knock-your-socks-off" train when full Phase 1 ops are ready.

I disagree. How can you demonstrate real 200 mph HSR when you do not run trains capable of 200 mph speeds?
Do you really believe Californians will be impressed iThere 125 mph speeds when they already have 90 mph speed trains?

I suggest just purchasing a minimum number of trainsets for demonstration purposes instead, and buy more later as the system is enlarged.

Busy Bee Feb 23, 2022 9:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmecklenborg (Post 9546859)
Yes I think that people are discounting the importance of Sacramento in the overall network. Its MSA of 2+ million makes it a peer of Kansas City, Cleveland, Milwaukee, Columbus, Indianapolis, Nashville, etc. - cities that are often the hubs or termini of various passenger rail proposals. Along with Stockton and Modesto, the total population served by Phase 2 is roughly the size of Baltimore.

Awhile back I remember reading the Prop 1A language and seeing that it appears that CAHSR can't build this section until Phase 1 is operational. That's why I suggested that ACE/Capitol Corridor/Caltrans or some agency could build it with its own grants from the state and federal government. ACE could buy four HSR trains and operate them from Sacramento to Bakersfield to avoid violating Prop 1A, sort of like Las Vegas HSR.


If it's really about not violating the letter of the law, it seems the referendum language could just be retroactively altered to allow such construction, though that would proabably require a proposition of its own to be on a future ballot. They probably shouldnt have put that restrictive language in there aboit phase 2 in the first place, most voters approved Prop 1A based on the general promise of Cal HSR not the nitty gritty technicalities of phasing.


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:44 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.