California High Speed Rail Thread

[JDRCRASH]

Originally Posted by twinpeaks

Why leave the country? you can't just give up unless you are not a citizen, then go. If you are, you need to fight and help make a difference for the better. We need more sane people likely you.

Sorry, you need money and power to make a difference on the scale of what's needed in this country... and money and power (especially on that scale) corrupts. And that's all assuming you don't get harrassed/intimidated by opposers and law enforcement and called insane by biased media.

Trying to "make a difference" by going into politics is a waste of time, sadly...

[drifting sun]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

It won't get out of the house, but people will blame the party that opposes it. These things are usually strategic... especially when followed up with how many jobs generated the bill will bring, etc.

You have it backwards. It won't get out of the House, and instead of railing against the Republican stone-walling of every single thing Obama proposes, people will blame Obama and complain how he "hasn't gotten anything done", or "his failed policies failed to make a dent in all the failure going around", or "Obama hasn't gotten me a new job", ad nauseum.

[jg6544]

Originally Posted by aquablue

Why is there no compromise on HSR??

Same reason there isn't any compromise with the Republicans on anything else. Their sole goal is to make the President a failure and damn what happens to the country.

[skyscraperfan23]

Originally Posted by jg6544

Same reason there isn't any compromise with the Republicans on anything else. Their sole goal is to make the President a failure and damn what happens to the country.

Both parties to me are fools and this globalist name nobama is not my president neither is the neocons.

[fflint]

People, please try to refocus on transportation and away from DC partisan politics--or just take it to the Current Events section, where partisan politics are supposed to be discussed on this forum.

[M II A II R II K]

Caltrain plan would fast-track electric rail


February 13, 2012

By Michael Cabanatuan

Read More: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...4G0.DTL&ao=all

The overhaul of California's high-speed rail project could bring the Bay Area $1 billion to electrify Caltrain and lay the path for bullet train service between San Francisco and San Jose sooner than anticipated.

The Chronicle has learned that officials with Bay Area transportation agencies are in negotiations with each other, and with the California High-Speed Rail Authority, to craft an agreement that would fund an advanced train-control system, electrify the rails on the Peninsula and eliminate some of the rail crossings - perhaps as soon as 2016, five to 10 years earlier than previous estimates.

"There's a lot of work that needs to happen, and a lot of moving parts, but this is the closest we've been to seeing some real tangible benefit to Caltrain from the high-speed rail project," said Seamus Murphy, a Caltrain spokesman.

.....

[pesto]

Originally Posted by M II A II R II K

Caltrain plan would fast-track electric rail


February 13, 2012

By Michael Cabanatuan

Read More: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...4G0.DTL&ao=all

Caltrain on the Peninsula is already pretty good. But if this improves it, so much the better. I would probably spend more on getting BART from Fremont to SJ, where it could link to Caltrain on the Peninsula. This would mesh with VTA for local SC County trips and form a serious transit hub in the SJ-Santa Clara corridor, which seems to have a dense future in store.

[202_Cyclist]

29M annual trips between LA - SF sounds reasonable. By 2040, California's population should grow by at least 15M more people (population growth as been 400,000 - 500,000 per year for the past decade). Ridership on Amtrak increased by more than five percent last year, setting a ridership record. As CA's metro regions continue to build their local transit and commuter rail networks, this will provide an important feeder system. High speed rail will travel between 2-3 times faster than the current Acela trains in the Northeast. And either the price of gas will be significantly more two decades from now or if there is a great expansion of plug-in hybrid vehicles, the highways will be far more congested as California continues to growth. Both will increase the relative attractiveness of high speed rail compared with automobiles.

The estimate provided in this article is only for 2040. Phase I of this investment is suppose to be completed around 2030. It will have a useful life of at least 50-60 years. It is entirely reasonable to expect that fast, efficient, high speed rail will be able to attract 30M annual passengers between the Bay Area - Los Angeles by 2070 - 2080.


Officials stand by high-speed rail estimate

By Tim Sheehan
Fresno Bee
Saturday, Feb. 18, 2012

"State rail officials are defending as reasonable their estimates that passengers will take at least 29 million trips a year on high-speed trains between San Francisco and Los Angeles by 2040.

In car-loving California, state High-Speed Rail Authority board members say, it will take only a small share of the millions of trips now being made by car and airplane to switch to trains to make the project profitable.

"If you look at the long-term projections for rides in this state," said Michael Rossi, an authority board member and former vice president of Bank of America, "we only need less than 3% total ride changes [to high-speed trains] from cars and aviation to break even, and more of that will come from cars than aviation..."

http://www.fresnobee.com/2012/02/18/...igh-speed.html

[ardecila]

Cool. It seems like the major issues are slowly being resolved after a moment of crisis. This is starting to have the air of inevitability around it, especially with Jerry Brown's unwavering support.

[ltsmotorsport]

It's great having Michael Rossi on the team as well as he was appointed the Governor's 'Jobs Czar' last year (for his business background) and can hopefully continue to show that this system will be economically viable.

[philvia]

There's so much emphasis on profitability with rail projects... I wonder how profitable the highways and airports between SF and LA are.

[aquablue]

Does anybody have any idea what trainsets will be ordered if this goes ahead? What's most likely, French, German, Japanese, or Chinese trains? Any rumours?

[fflint]

Just noticed this interesting and relevant snippet published last month in a Washington Post article on HSR:

"Few places would benefit more from the trains. California’s urban areas are notorious for hair-raising traffic jams. The skies between San Francisco and Los Angeles — the country’s busiest route — are so packed that 25 percent of the flights between the two cities are at least one hour late, according to state officials. And with the state’s population projected to soar by 50 percent over the next four decades, the congestion is expected only to grow more dire."

[aquablue]

Originally Posted by fflint

Just noticed this interesting and relevant snippet published last month in a Washington Post article on HSR:

"Few places would benefit more from the trains. California’s urban areas are notorious for hair-raising traffic jams. The skies between San Francisco and Los Angeles — the country’s busiest route — are so packed that 25 percent of the flights between the two cities are at least one hour late, according to state officials. And with the state’s population projected to soar by 50 percent over the next four decades, the congestion is expected only to grow more dire."

This should have been done decades ago and they are still squabbling over it like children? Why state the obvious.. Everyone knows how awful the traffic is in CA.

[JDRCRASH]

Originally Posted by fflint

The skies between San Francisco and Los Angeles — the country’s busiest route — are so packed that 25 percent of the flights between the two cities are at least one hour late, according to state officials. And with the state’s population projected to soar by 50 percent over the next four decades, the congestion is expected only to grow more dire."

"HSR doesn't make any sense in LA-SF"..... right.

[pesto]

An interesting succession of non sequiturs. This is why it is useful to talk to people with different views. Not that you will change your minds; but at least change to different arguments.

LA and the Bau are very crowded metros. So build a a connection between them? This is nonsense on its face. How does this help me get from Reseda or San Dimas to downtown or Century City? Or Pleasanton or SF to Palo Alto or SJ? What is needed is intra-city not inter-city transit improvements.

The skies being full is just plain false. Call right now and see if you can get a flight from Oakland, SF, SJ or Sacto to LA, Burbank, Long Beach, the OC or Ontario. I virtually guarantee you won't have a problem. Things are so slow that Oakland is advertising for people to come use their airport. Ontario shut down a terminal. I rarely see lines at Burbank. LAX and SFO are legitimately crowded but they are national and international hubs and the instrastate traffic is largely immaterial to their problems.

[fflint]

Whose claims to trust--California state officials as quoted in the Washington Post, or a forum anti-HSR extremist? Hmm.

Originally Posted by Washington Post

The skies between San Francisco and Los Angeles — the country’s busiest route — are so packed that 25 percent of the flights between the two cities are at least one hour late, according to state officials. And with the state’s population projected to soar by 50 percent over the next four decades, the congestion is expected only to grow more dire."

[jg6544]

Originally Posted by fflint

Whose claims to trust--California state officials as quoted in the Washington Post, or a forum anti-HSR extremist? Hmm.

Who apparently has never had to get from the Oakland airport to BART after dark!

[Jasonhouse]

Originally Posted by pesto

LA and the Bau are very crowded metros. So build a a connection between them? This is nonsense on its face. How does this help me get from Reseda or San Dimas to downtown or Century City? Or Pleasanton or SF to Palo Alto or SJ? What is needed is intra-city not inter-city transit improvements.

Seems to me that y'all need both.

[edluva]

Originally Posted by pesto

What is needed is intra-city not inter-city transit improvements.

why not both? isn't that the whole point of hsr? to link and feed off growth of population centers that are increasingly intra-connected?

i think you're incorrectly seeing hsr purely as a response rather than a choice.