California High Speed Rail Thread

[homebucket]

Originally Posted by moorhosj1

The highway system crossed dozens of states, providing benefits across the country. This is located in a single state. That makes it a harder sell from funding perspective. It’s why military contractors spread out facilities in all states, makes it hard to cut funding.

Right but considering California is the most prosperous state and therefore the one that contributes the most to the economy of the US, there should be proportional federal funding in return for such an important infrastructure project. When you consider so many other countries less advanced than the US have multiple high speed rail lines, you’d think they would want to make this project a priority and a catalyst for more HSR lines around the country in the future.

[TWAK]

Originally Posted by homebucket

Right but considering California is the most prosperous state and therefore the one that contributes the most to the economy of the US, there should be proportional federal funding in return for such an important infrastructure project. When you consider so many other countries less advanced than the US have multiple high speed rail lines, you’d think they would want to make this project a priority and a catalyst for more HSR lines around the country in the future.

I think some of it really just boils down to it being a thing California is doing...everybody seems to go bonkers for us lol. Most posters seemed generally excited or happy for Texas getting some HSR chatter...CA? Furious.
Full disclosure: I also think it's cool Texas might get HSR and funding from Amtrak, but I will tell them "it's never going to get built!" if this CA bashing continues. The CA system is also a proof of concept for the rest of the country, although it would be a bit cheaper to build in the flattest parts of the country (like it is for the CV). The article from Busy Bee does a good job in explaining WHY things aren't getting built at a China's pace, but I don't know if that will placate the out-of-state posters.

[homebucket]

Originally Posted by TWAK

I think some of it really just boils down to it being a thing California is doing...everybody seems to go bonkers for us lol. Most posters seemed generally excited or happy for Texas getting some HSR chatter...CA? Furious.
Full disclosure: I also think it's cool Texas might get HSR and funding from Amtrak, but I will tell them "it's never going to get built!" if this CA bashing continues. The CA system is also a proof of concept for the rest of the country, although it would be a bit cheaper to build in the flattest parts of the country (like it is for the CV). The article from Busy Bee does a good job in explaining WHY things aren't getting built at a China's pace, but I don't know if that will placate the out-of-state posters.

Yeah, I'm not sure what the mindset is. Haters gonna hate I guess.

My guess is perhaps they are salty their region is not getting HSR first, or that if CAHSR "fails", then the funding for their next in line project will go away. The reality is we should be building multiple HSR lines simultaneously across the country. The Northeast Corridor, the Midwest, the PNW, Texas, and maybe the Southeast. And if you really wanted to prioritize lines, it'd probably be the NEC and then CA/LV as far as highest projected ridership as well as existing urban rail connections in the main connecting metros (aside from Vegas). Why NEC HSR is not as far along, especially given its already an existing line and the lowest hanging HSR fruit, I have no clue, but not our problem.

[moorhosj1]

Originally Posted by homebucket

Yeah, I'm not sure what the mindset is. Haters gonna hate I guess.

My guess is perhaps they are salty their region is not getting HSR first, or that if CAHSR "fails", then the funding for their next in line project will go away. The reality is we should be building multiple HSR lines simultaneously across the country. The Northeast Corridor, the Midwest, the PNW, Texas, and maybe the Southeast. And if you really wanted to prioritize lines, it'd probably be the NEC and then CA/LV as far as highest projected ridership as well as existing urban rail connections in the main connecting metros (aside from Vegas). Why NEC HSR is not as far along, especially given its already an existing line and the lowest hanging HSR fruit, I have no clue, but not our problem.

Certainly, the fact that it is in California impacts national perception. That is obvious to anyone following how it is reported.

However, if you look at a project like Chicago-St. Louis HSR (only up to 110mph), it cost the federal government $1.6 billion to create the 300 mile trip. It also crosses two different states, which matters. Illinois kicked in $200m, so this project was around the 80/20 ratio people are referencing.

Meanwhile, Merced to Bakersfield is expect to cost $35 billion for a 170 mile trip. 80% of that would be $28 billion from the feds.

You could build 17 different Chicago-St. Louis corridors (twice the distance) for the cost of one Merced-Bakersfield. If you think that building multiple lines simultaneously around the country is the right move, than I don't see how you could justify giving $28 billion to a single project in California. Minneapolis-Milwaukee-Chicago could probably be built for far less and would connect three states and span 400+ miles.

[tech12]

Originally Posted by electricron

Take a close look at those recent photos, do you see any railriad tracks, track side signals, or new ballast in them? We're still years away before any trains run on these non-existent tracks. By the time they lay any tracks, all that pretty white concrete will be spoiled with graffiti.

Everyone already knows it's going to be years before trains are running. That's always been the plan, and the system is currently under construction, with a long way to go. How could anyone think otherwise? Who is saying otherwise?

In case you are confused, here is the definition of the word "construction":

construction (countable and uncountable, plural constructions)

The process of constructing.

Construction is underway on the new bridge.

Wow, it's almost like something that is under construction, is by definition, unfinished. The tracks come later, obviously.

[homebucket]

Originally Posted by moorhosj1

Certainly, the fact that it is in California impacts national perception. That is obvious to anyone following how it is reported.

However, if you look at a project like Chicago-St. Louis HSR (only up to 110mph), it cost the federal government $1.6 billion to create the 300 mile trip. It also crosses two different states, which matters. Illinois kicked in $200m, so this project was around the 80/20 ratio people are referencing.

Meanwhile, Merced to Bakersfield is expect to cost $35 billion for a 170 mile trip. 80% of that would be $28 billion from the feds.

You could build 17 different Chicago-St. Louis corridors (twice the distance) for the cost of one Merced-Bakersfield. If you think that building multiple lines simultaneously around the country is the right move, than I don't see how you could justify giving $28 billion to a single project in California. Minneapolis-Milwaukee-Chicago could probably be built for far less and would connect three states and span 400+ miles.

You're looking at this from the wrong perspective. I'm not saying that we should split up the pie more evenly. I'm saying there should be pies for everyone. The federal govt should be funding all of these projects, not just one, regardless of which one is cheaper. The country is long overdue in modernizing its long distance rail infrastructure in favor of pushing polluting freeways and highways. Why the CAHSR costs co much more than the Chicago-St Louis one, I don't know. It would be great if it could be built more cheaply but I'm sure there is a reason, if not multiple reasons.

[tech12]

Electricron, the brain genius:

Hundreds of miles of fields that are at risk of flooding? NO BUILD HUNDREDS OF MILES OF EMBANKMENT. ONLY BUILD TRACKS

River/road/highway/rail that needs to be crossed? NO BUILD BRIDGE NO BUILD PERGOLA NO BUILD TRENCH NO BUILD TUNNEL. BUILD TRACKS

Land that needs to be acquired? NO BUY! BUILD TRACKS

Lawsuits that need to be dealt with? NO LAWYER BUILD TRACKS

Not enough funding for everything yet? USE MAGIC CRYSTAL BALL BUILD TRACKS YESTERDAY


lol

[TWAK]

Originally Posted by moorhosj1

However, if you look at a project like Chicago-St. Louis HSR (only up to 110mph), it cost the federal government $1.6 billion to create the 300 mile trip. It also crosses two different states, which matters. Illinois kicked in $200m, so this project was around the 80/20 ratio people are referencing.

Never gonna get built! Too slow! Too expensive!
*sorry, had to do it and hmm...it felt kinda good to say that, maybe that's why people from out-of-state do it to California projects? For real though that's great for Missouri and Illinois.

Originally Posted by homebucket

You're looking at this from the wrong perspective. I'm not saying that we should split up the pie more evenly. I'm saying there should be pies for everyone. The federal govt should be funding all of these projects, not just one, regardless of which one is cheaper. The country is long overdue in modernizing its long distance rail infrastructure in favor of pushing polluting freeways and highways. Why the CAHSR costs co much more than the Chicago-St Louis one, I don't know. It would be great if it could be built more cheaply but I'm sure there is a reason, if not multiple reasons.

Things just cost more in higher-income states, from land acquisition to labor and ect. The CHI-STL HSR project is similar to the electrification of Caltrain and honestly all of our legacy rail should be electrified across the country.
It would be great to have true HSR across the country but it's way more expensive to build actual HSR.

[electricron]

Originally Posted by homebucket

Right but considering California is the most prosperous state and therefore the one that contributes the most to the economy of the US, there should be proportional federal funding in return for such an important infrastructure project. When you consider so many other countries less advanced than the US have multiple high speed rail lines, you’d think they would want to make this project a priority and a catalyst for more HSR lines around the country in the future.

Per Wiki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Califo...igh-Speed_Rail
The 2023 Project Update Report notes that permanent funding programs do not exist for high-speed rail, either nationally or in California. Current CAHSR funding for the project is estimated at $25 billion. Of this, California has contributed about 85% ($21.5 billion, assuming cap-and-trade stays at current levels through 2030), and the federal government has contributed about 15% (roughly $3.5 billion). The 2022 Business Plan indicated additional federal funds would be needed to complete the Merced-to-Bakersfield segment, and set a target of $8 billion to be awarded from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law for the project. If that target is achieved, about $33 billion would be directed to the project (about 65% state, 35% federal in total). Future state or federal funds of about $2 billion would address the full P65 cost estimate. However, there is no state funding assured after 2030, so ongoing funding will be a critical issue which will have to be addressed.

More than likely, the Californian Legislature will extend cap and trade taxation and therefore funding. So I would not worry about the extra $2 Billion.
To date, the Feds have contributed $3.5 Billion and by 2020 California will contribute $21.5 Billion. They want an additional $8 Billion from the Feds/ Some math - $33 Billion - $8 Billion = $25 Billion. $25 Billion - $21.5 Billion = $3.5 Billion. And California would still be $3 Billion short.

So, since last year, California wants $8 Billion more from the Feds while contributing up to 2030 and extra $1.5 Billion.

Of course that 15% Federal contribution looks short today, but at the time it was made and promised, before costs doubled, the was a health 30% contribution. Now Californai wants Federal taxpayers to pay for their mismanagement and cost over runs. That does not seem fair to rest of the country. Even Honolulu had to pay for its cost overruns itself. Why should California be treated any different?

[homebucket]

NEWS RELEASE: California High-Speed Rail Authority Moves Closer to Buying First Trainsets
August 24, 2023

SACRAMENTO, Calif. – Today, the California High-Speed Rail Authority’s Board of Directors took a major step toward bringing high-speed rail service to California by approving the release of a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) to industry for the nation’s first 220 mph electrified high-speed trainsets.

Today’s action is the first part of a two-step procurement process. The Authority anticipates getting Statements of Qualifications (SOQs) from prospective trainset manufacturers in November 2023.​ Once received, the Authority will evaluate the SOQs and create a shortlist of qualified teams capable of delivering high-speed trainsets​ and release a Request for Proposal in the first quarter of 2024 to qualified teams.

“Our action today allows us to deliver on our commitment to meet our federal grant timelines to start testing,” said Board Chair Tom Richards. “This is an important milestone for us to deliver high-speed rail service in the Central Valley and eventually into Northern and Southern California.”

This trainset procurement process will allow the Authority to:
- Procure six trainsets capable of operating at 220 mph and tested up to 242 mph;
- Receive two prototypes in 2028 to support static/dynamic testing and trial running;
- Receive an additional four trainsets by the end of 2030 to support revenue operations on the 171-mile Merced to Bakersfield section.

“These trainsets ensure that we are procuring the latest generation of high-speed trains for this first-in-the-nation project,” said Authority CEO Brian Kelly. “We look forward to working with members of the industry as we strive to develop a market for high-speed trains in the United States.”

https://hsr.ca.gov/2023/08/24/news-r...rst-trainsets/

[Busy Bee]

^ The biggest question for me is whether they will pursue a distributed traction platform like the Alstom AGV which has motors down the length of the high speed train like an EMU or instead go with a traditional locomotive driven consist.

I'm also quite a bit interested in whether CHSR gets a bespoke product with exterior styling just for the state system or whether a trainset model with a recognizable standard design used in other places will be pursued. Personally I think a custom designed locomotive and striking livery unique to the CHSR would be exciting to see.

Obviously were likely to see the list start with Alstom, Siemens and Hitachi. I profoundly hope CRRC is not considered even if they did submit qualifications. Also will be interesting if other Japanese makers show any interest in submitting proposals considering the agreement they have made in Texas.

[electricron]

Six trainsets for a 171 mile initial operating segment?
Let's assume they run all 6 at once, even though they will not, that it will take an hour to travel that 171 miles with all the station stops, that will support 20 minute headways on the route. If you take one train out for maintenance, that would support 30 minute headways.
I expect a very competitive bidding process, anyone HSR manufacturer could win the bid.

[sopas ej]

I wasn't sure where to post this comment (I figured The Brightline Thread was for Florida... and who there wants to read about our California shit?), so I thought I'd post this here, even though it's not being funded by CAHSR.

I didn't realize that the proposed high speed train from SoCal to Vegas was gonna run mostly along the median of the 15 Freeway. Does that seem safe to you guys? I assume there'll be higher barriers to separate automobile traffic?



https://www.brightlinewest.com/

[Busy Bee]

^Everything will be safe or the feds wouldn't sign off on it. I don't know if the concrete barrier will be as low profile as what is depicted in that rendering. What is surprising to me is that the majority median running alignment Brightline is pursuing penciled out to be less expensive than the offset alignment featured in the DesertXpress EIS. When you figure in a hundreds mile long ribbon of required barrier like this it would seem that would represent a pretty substantial cost. I suppose the elimination of the tunnels made a significant dent in the capital cost, as well as the new alignment includes a good deal of single track (not a fan). I'm not entirely sure if the offset alignment would still be nearly all Caltrans land or if there was some private acquisitions involved with that, either way that's something that is avoided with the median running.

To get back to what your saying about safety though, yes it will be safe. It will be built so automobiles will not be able to enter the right-of-way and accidently or heaven forbid intentionally cause a catastrophe. I also expect, like all modern high speed corridors, there to be a lot of tech monitoring with cameras and sensors and also automated cab control to assure nothing causes a collision with objects or people. It will be visually and psychological impressive, or unnerving depending on your level of anxiety, to see these median running trains blow past cars doing 80 at such close proximity. Besides a handful of areas around the world where true-hsr runs briefly parallel to major highways, there really won't be anything like it.

[edale]

Originally Posted by sopas ej

I wasn't sure where to post this comment (I figured The Brightline Thread was for Florida... and who there wants to read about our California shit?), so I thought I'd post this here, even though it's not being funded by CAHSR.

I didn't realize that the proposed high speed train from SoCal to Vegas was gonna run mostly along the median of the 15 Freeway. Does that seem safe to you guys? I assume there'll be higher barriers to separate automobile traffic?



https://www.brightlinewest.com/

The Green Line runs along the median of the 105. And a fair amount of BART runs along freeway medians in the Bay Area, so there's a good amount of precedent in the state for this approach. Perhaps high speed rail has different considerations though.

[FromSD]

Originally Posted by moorhosj1

Certainly, the fact that it is in California impacts national perception. That is obvious to anyone following how it is reported.

However, if you look at a project like Chicago-St. Louis HSR (only up to 110mph), it cost the federal government $1.6 billion to create the 300 mile trip. It also crosses two different states, which matters. Illinois kicked in $200m, so this project was around the 80/20 ratio people are referencing.

Meanwhile, Merced to Bakersfield is expect to cost $35 billion for a 170 mile trip. 80% of that would be $28 billion from the feds.

You could build 17 different Chicago-St. Louis corridors (twice the distance) for the cost of one Merced-Bakersfield. If you think that building multiple lines simultaneously around the country is the right move, than I don't see how you could justify giving $28 billion to a single project in California. Minneapolis-Milwaukee-Chicago could probably be built for far less and would connect three states and span 400+ miles.

I'm surprised at your comparison of California HSR to the project to improve the rail corridor between Chicago and St. Louis. The federal government did not build a new high speed line between Chicago and St. Louis. It contributed to improvements to an existing rail line. I don't know what the extent of those improvements was--I assume mostly track and signaling improvements. It sounds like it was a great project with a great end benefit. But it wasn't building a high speed line from whole cloth. It seems like an apples to oranges comparison. I would argue that the federal government should be supporting both kinds of projects.

[hughfb3]

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

What is surprising to me is that the majority median running alignment Brightline is pursuing penciled out to be less expensive than the offset alignment featured in the DesertXpress EIS. When you figure in a hundreds mile long ribbon of required barrier like this it would seem that would represent a pretty substantial cost. I suppose the elimination of the tunnels made a significant dent in the capital cost, as well as the new alignment includes a good deal of single track (not a fan). I'm not entirely sure if the offset alignment would still be nearly all Caltrans land or if there was some private acquisitions involved with that, either way that's something that is avoided with the median running.

Brightline is saving BIG on grade separations. The I-15 freeway already has every road that it comes in contact with on bridge crossings or as an overpass already built in. Brightline has to build none of these, it's basically using what would be allotted for a future carpool lane, same with the Green Line and every other N. AMERICA median running train trying to build train on the cheap. DesertXpress was thinking like Europe, but our right of way planning is not set up for that and they would have been on the hook to build all new overpasses and crossing. Brightline is building this in the least expensive way possible.

Europe thinks differently about high speed/high capacity right of ways than we do. Most other HSR projects have their tracks parallel outside of the highway median because their mentality doesn't have them build highways past 3-4 lanes in each direction... Rarely will you see a 10 lane freeway in Europe... after 8 total lanes of congested roadway, their method for increasing traffic through an area is via rail expansion..., so rather than a road being the center of a right of way, they offset it to one side and they leave the other side for rail or other multi-use purposes. All we seem to think about and plan for in USA is ever expanding roads which is why a new interstate through a rural area will have 2 lanes in each direction and a few acres between the opposite driving lanes... all for future road growth.

Let’s say The USA and Eurasia have the same 14 spaces in a right of way... how it will be planned (diagram below). 7/8 are the center of the entire right of way. In Europe, 7/8 is planned for the end of the road and the beginning of other uses… In the USA 7/8 is planned to be the center of the road which in final widening stages becomes a carpool lane or high occupancy toll lane… oh…but I guess we can just throw a train in there if they make us.

USA
1. -----Wall-------------
2. |
3. <<<<
4. <<<<
5. <<<<
6. |
7. | Future Carpool
8. | Road Widen
9. |
10. >>>>
11. >>>>
12. >>>>
13. |
14. -----Wall--------------



Europe/Asia
1. -----Wall--------------
2. <<<<
3. <<<<
4. <<<<
5. |
6. >>>>
7. >>>>
8. >>>>
9. \\\\\\\\\\\\ TBD Misc
10. //////////// Poss. Rail widen
11. <==== Rail way
12. <===>
13. ====>
14. -----Wall----Train Station----


California is building a high speed rail system from scratch as it doesn't have this prior allotment along the CA-99 corridor or anywhere. The USA will always have this problem until these priorities shift in how we plan for and use the available space we have. As rail advocates, one thing to advocate for if there is a freeway widening, would be that the entire road goes to one side of the right of way... you can keep it a secret that the other side could be used for rail and just say you are pro road way widening... but in the "right way." haha...

[edale]

Originally Posted by hughfb3

Brightline is saving BIG on grade separations. The I-15 freeway already has every road that it comes in contact with on bridge crossings or as an overpass already built in. Brightline has to build none of these, it's basically using what would be allotted for a future carpool lane, same with the Green Line and every other N. AMERICA median running train trying to build train on the cheap. DesertXpress was thinking like Europe, but our right of way planning is not set up for that and they would have been on the hook to build all new overpasses and crossing. Brightline is building this in the least expensive way possible.

This is the same exact argument I've made in the past for CAHSR using the 5 freeway's ROW. But apparently serving every podunk town in the Central Valley is more important than building a project in an economical and timely manner. The vast majority of work done on the CAHSR project so far has been building bridges and overpasses, rerouting and rebuilding roads, etc. Imagine if we only had to do a fraction of that work by using the 5's ROW? Not to mention much cheaper and easier land acquisition and probably fewer lawsuits, too. But no, we're building high speed rail stations literally in the middle of farms (this is the location of the planned Madera HSR station...kid you not...) in the name of *equity* for the central valley

[Crawford]

I really wish I'd never hear the term "equity" again, at least in context of transit planning, urban planning and public policy. It's just dumb. It's 99.9% pork-barrel, budget-busting crap.

[Busy Bee]

Originally Posted by edale

Imagine if we only had to do a fraction of that work by using the 5's ROW?

I can see it now. You'd have a line finished sooner and for less money, but ultimately one not as good as what they are actually constructing. This is a once in a lifetime undertaking. You don't build the best state system by bypassing the entire middle of the state. Connecting routes would a) likely never get built and b) never make up for not having direct through service.

Do everyone a favor and please don't restart this debate in this thread.