Status of Ca HSR?
Steve Austin
segments of California High Speed Rail will begin construction AND begin
operation?
I understand the initial segment will be LA-SF. What about the rest?
Will the current state budget crisis have any impact on the schedule?
Hatunen
I suggest the horse's mouth: http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/
--
************* DAVE HATUNEN (hat...@cox.net) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
van...@vsta.org
>>Will the current state budget crisis have any impact on the schedule?
> I suggest the horse's mouth: http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/
We should start a pool of whether it'll actually be seen in the lifetime
of any current ba.transportation reader.
Andy Valencia
p.s. I notice that Caltrain has indeed decided to cut midday schedules.
Steve Austin
<van...@vsta.org> wrote in message
news:7b6nhgF...@mid.individual.net...
We should start a pool to see how long it takes for transit agencies to
recover from the lack of state funding.
I'm guessing at LEAST ten years.
David Nebenzahl
> In ba.transportation Hatunen <hat...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> [someone else wrote]
>>
>>> Will the current state budget crisis have any impact on the schedule?
>>
>> I suggest the horse's mouth: http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/
>
> We should start a pool of whether it'll actually be seen in the lifetime
> of any current ba.transportation reader.
My bet would be only if there are any teenage readers here.
--
Found--the gene that causes belief in genetic determinism
John David Galt
> Does anyone know if there is a web page with details on when the various
> segments of California High Speed Rail will begin construction AND begin
> operation?
>
> I understand the initial segment will be LA-SF. What about the rest?
It will probably never be completed. The project seems to have been drawn
up as a sneaky way to get funding for "upgrades" to Caltrain and a segment
in metro Los Angeles, and they may manage to build those.
But there is NO demand for a high speed train between SF-LA. Why would
anyone want one when it would cost more and take longer than flying?
> Will the current state budget crisis have any impact on the schedule?
If we're lucky, the state budget impasse will cause the whole thing to be
cancelled or at least "postponed indefinitely" before any more money is
wasted on "studying" it.
For further info I suggest you look at the group
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PreservingTheAmericanDream/
Patrick Scheible
> Steve Austin wrote:
> > Does anyone know if there is a web page with details on when the various
> > segments of California High Speed Rail will begin construction AND begin
> > operation?
> >
> > I understand the initial segment will be LA-SF. What about the rest?
>
> It will probably never be completed. The project seems to have been drawn
> up as a sneaky way to get funding for "upgrades" to Caltrain and a segment
> in metro Los Angeles, and they may manage to build those.
>
> But there is NO demand for a high speed train between SF-LA. Why would
> anyone want one when it would cost more and take longer than flying?
Because the airports are running out of capacity and HSR is cheaper to
build than new airports.
-- Patrick
David Nebenzahl
You didn't really answer the guy's question.
Let's say, just for the sake of argument, that the HSR line, if it is
ever completed, *does* take longer and cost more than flying: who's
gonna ride it then? And how could you justify building it under those
circumstances?
van...@vsta.org
> Let's say, just for the sake of argument, that the HSR line, if it is
> ever completed, *does* take longer and cost more than flying: who's
> gonna ride it then? And how could you justify building it under those
> circumstances?
This is like saying, "Just for the sake of argument, HSR has waste
nuclear emissions which kill its riders. Who's going to ride it?".
In a word, a loaded question.
The supporters can point to cases where HSR has done pretty well.
It remains to be argued whether California's proposed line would
be enough like previous successes to be worth building.
Personally, whatever its merits, I have this bad feeling that neither
me nor my children will ever see it.
Andy Valencia
Hatunen
How do we know that airfares will still be cheap at that point in
the future? I wouldn't base any such projections on today's low
airfares.
Eurostar has cut deeply into air passenger numbers Paris-London
despite attemtps to compete with very low airfares. The sheer
convenience of taking a train from central London to central
Paris without ground transport to the airports is a very strong
incentive. "Regular" fare is about $150 return, but that's not
bad when you add the cost of ground transport to the airports to
the air fare.
Unfortunately for CalHSR transit in LA isn't up to the standards
of the London Underground or the Paris Metro/RER, which are what
make city center to city center so attractive London-Paris. SF is
a bit better, though.
Keith Keller
Well, he did answer, if pretty indirectly.
If airports are running out of capacity, that means that demand is
increasing or supply is decreasing, and it's very difficult and
expensive to add air travel supply. So, in this scenario, rail might
currently be more expensive, but could become cheaper than air if the
demand became great enough.
This isn't my own position, just following Patrick's premises through.
I'm not really sure what to believe at this point.
--keith
--
kkeller...@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us
(try just my userid to email me)
AOLSFAQ=http://www.therockgarden.ca/aolsfaq.txt
see X- headers for PGP signature information
Merritt Mullen
John David Galt <j...@diogenes.sacramento.ca.us> wrote:
> But there is NO demand for a high speed train between SF-LA. Why would
> anyone want one when it would cost more and take longer than flying?
Because it will cost less and, in many cases, depending on origin and
destination, will take less time. Have you tried flying from Fresno to
L.A. or SF, or Bakersfield to anywhere in California? How about Fresno
to Bakersfield? Even L.A. to S.F. at 2 hours and 40 minutes of
productive time on the train might be quicker than flying if you are a
business person going from the main economic hub of LA (downtown) to the
main economic hub of the Bay Area (downtown SF). That trip would take
almost 4 hours by air and the time en route would probably be
economically nonproductive.
It will also get built because the airlines will love it. They can
terminate money losing short distance flights and operate money making
trains instead.
It will also get built because the government owned and operated airline
infrastructure (not to mention the highway infrastructure) will not be
sufficient to handle the traffic required to support continued economic
growth in California.
Merritt
Merritt Mullen
David Nebenzahl <nob...@but.us.chickens> wrote:
You couldn't. But the premise is that it will be cheaper, often faster,
and economically more productive to take the train. And, for some city
pairs along the route, the only option other than the train is to drive.
The proof of the efficacy of HSR is when a decent HSR system is built,
the train option drives out the air option for distances of about 400
miles or less. For example, Paris-Lyon. And the train earns a profit,
whereas the air option is sometimes unprofitable.
Merritt
Patrick Scheible
> On 7/19/2009 2:07 PM Patrick Scheible spake thus:
>
> > John David Galt <j...@diogenes.sacramento.ca.us> writes:
> >
> >> Why would anyone want one when it would cost more and take longer
> >> than flying?
> >
> > Because the airports are running out of capacity and HSR is cheaper to
> > build than new airports.
>
> You didn't really answer the guy's question.
I gave as much of an answer as that ridiculous troll deserves.
> Let's say, just for the sake of argument, that the HSR line, if it is
> ever completed, *does* take longer and cost more than flying: who's
> gonna ride it then? And how could you justify building it under those
> circumstances?
The premises are incorrect. For significant numbers of people whose
trips are from city center to city center, HSR will be faster from the
time it opens. Another significant fraction of people put more of a
premium on comfort than on speed, provided they are reasonably
competitive.
Costs are highly variable depending on how they are counted: What's
the price of oil, and what direction is it headed long-term? When
governments build new airports, is the cost paid in airfares, or by
the general taxpayer? If they are passed on through airfares, will
the cost be a percentage of each fare, or a fixed cost per takeoff and
landing? When governments build HSR, how much of the operational and
capital cost will be subsidized?
Other worthwhile questions are what's the carbon footprint of HSR
powered mostly from hydroelectric in California vs. the carbon
footprint of aircraft.
-- Patrick
Jym Dyer
> Why would anyone want one when it would cost more and take
> longer than flying?
=v= Because it will use less fuel and pollute less, and because
the price of fuel will rise, so the "cost more" part will change
accordingly. Duh.
<_Jym_>
Zakhary
> In article <h3vq5v$sj...@blue.rahul.net>,
Merritt, here, hits most of my points on the spot. The only thing I
would add to the matters already discussed in this string about
capacity is that this isn't only a matter of airports running out of
capacity. More specifically, as intra-state travel increases,
airports' ability to cater to the interstate and international markets
that they are most intended for will be impacted. As it is, some
airports are far-reaching in naming themselves "international
airports." In time, without a more competitive option for intra-state
travel and as intra-state long-haul travel increases, several airports
just won't be able to serve interstate and international patrons. HSR
is intended to address this.
As others have said, the time to get from Point A to Point B will be
decreased by rail as opposed to air in most instances since rail will
take you directly to/from the economic centers. Additionally, though,
there is the matter of check-in and wait time: both of which will be
less for rail than air (at least in the beginning if/when this
happens).
Hatunen
They are international airports so long as they provide customs
and immmigration services. The Nogales AZ airport is quite small,
but it is still Nogales international Airport. Forty years ago
when I was flying here once you landed at Nogales from Mexico you
had to wait for the airport operator to call customs and
immigration at the large automobile and foot crossing downtown
and for them to drive out to inspect you.
>In time, without a more competitive option for intra-state
>travel and as intra-state long-haul travel increases, several airports
>just won't be able to serve interstate and international patrons. HSR
>is intended to address this.
>
>As others have said, the time to get from Point A to Point B will be
>decreased by rail as opposed to air in most instances since rail will
>take you directly to/from the economic centers. Additionally, though,
>there is the matter of check-in and wait time: both of which will be
>less for rail than air (at least in the beginning if/when this
>happens).
They don't reckon Arab terrorists are likely to highjack an HSR
and fly into a skyscraper.
There is a cursory inspection boarding Eurostar, though; they
don't want anyone doing something stupid and dangerous in the
channel tunnel. For other European HS trains you can show up five
minutes before departure and board the train.
I'm not thrilled with the seating on Eurostar, which is a bit
cramped, but the other HS trains I have been on have been quite
comfortable, even in second class.
The big problem for CalHSR is the LA end. Once you've arrived
downtown on HSR, what then? LA is car-oriented and business
destinations are widely scattered from some downtown locations,
to the San Fernado Valley to El Segundo, etc. How to get to these
places from the downtown station? Given the current state of LA
transit it will probably mean renting a car. But take a look at
car retnaly facilites at airports aand imagine them being set up
in downtown LA; not a pretty picture.
European HSR stops at central stations that have easy access to
Underground/Metro services, and those serve almost every place in
the metro area speedily and efficiently. In fact, one would have
to be a fool to rent a car from the Eurostar London terminus;
surface traffic in central London is a bitch. Even a cab isn't
the best idea if you have to go very far, since the cabs also
have to sit in that traffic mess.
Keith Keller
On 2009-07-20, Hatunen <hat...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> The big problem for CalHSR is the LA end. Once you've arrived
> downtown on HSR, what then? LA is car-oriented and business
> destinations are widely scattered from some downtown locations,
> to the San Fernado Valley to El Segundo, etc. How to get to these
> places from the downtown station? Given the current state of LA
> transit it will probably mean renting a car. But take a look at
> car retnaly facilites at airports aand imagine them being set up
> in downtown LA; not a pretty picture.
I can imagine these facilities being set up at stations other than
downtown Los Angeles (is CaHSR supposed to go to Union Station?). For
example, the Burbank, Ontario, and Irvine stops might be able to
serve as hubs for rental car companies. (Apparently the Ontario stop is
actually at or near the local airport, so such a facility might already
exist.)
Merritt Mullen
Hatunen <hat...@cox.net> wrote:
Just a couple of comments for clarity.
> They don't reckon Arab terrorists are likely to highjack an HSR
> and fly into a skyscraper.
>
> There is a cursory inspection boarding Eurostar, though; they
> don't want anyone doing something stupid and dangerous in the
> channel tunnel. For other European HS trains you can show up five
> minutes before departure and board the train.
Unlike California HSR, Eurostar is an international train, so one would
expect some additional formalities. Also, the UK is not as fulling
integrated into the EU and are most continental countries.
> The big problem for CalHSR is the LA end. Once you've arrived
> downtown on HSR, what then? LA is car-oriented and business
> destinations are widely scattered from some downtown locations,
> to the San Fernado Valley to El Segundo, etc. How to get to these
> places from the downtown station?
It could be better, but the picture is not as bleak as you paint it.
There is Metrolink Commuter rail and Amtrak California regional rail to
many destinations around the greater L.A. area. There is subway service
to the San Fernando Valley, connecting to BRT to get to the west valley.
It will be awhile, but the subway will be extended to Santa Monica.
There is Light Rail to Pasadena, and this fall the extention to East
L.A. will open. There is Light Rail to Long Beach with a connection to
Light Rail to LAX and El Segundo. Expo light rail to Culver City and
eventually Santa Monica is under construction. All of these services
are centered on L.A. Union Station.
> Given the current state of LA
> transit it will probably mean renting a car. But take a look at
> car retnaly facilites at airports aand imagine them being set up
> in downtown LA; not a pretty picture.
There already is car rental in L.A. Union Station. With HSR that would
no doubt have to be expanded, but a parking structure would handle that.
The private owners of LA Union Station are in the real estate
development business and would probably be happy to develop a rental car
storage facility on the property. Airports would not be viable without
car rental services. It will be not different for HSR hubs (at least in
the foreseeable future).
Merritt
C.Tudor
> It could be better, but the picture is not as bleak as you paint it.
> There is Metrolink Commuter rail and Amtrak California regional rail to
> many destinations around the greater L.A. area. There is subway service
> to the San Fernando Valley, connecting to BRT to get to the west valley.
> It will be awhile, but the subway will be extended to Santa Monica.
> There is Light Rail to Pasadena, and this fall the extention to East
> L.A. will open. There is Light Rail to Long Beach with a connection to
> Light Rail to LAX and El Segundo. Expo light rail to Culver City and
> eventually Santa Monica is under construction. All of these services
> are centered on L.A. Union Station.
There's also the 704 bus line that leaves Union Station, the red
limited-stop Santa Monica Blvd bus that serves the commercial portions
of West Hollywood, Beverly Hills and Century City, as well as Santa
Monica of course.