There own design map in their 2012 plan looks like a subway system with how close the stations are. Some of them are less than 30 miles apart. How fast does a 200 mph train go when it has only 30 miles to run? Not very fast.
http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/assets/0/152/431/72e92f77-014b-45a0-ad04-6cfd6d79c778.pdfExpress trains running at 80 to 120 mph are better suited for such short regional runs. HSR needs closer to 200 miles between stops to effectively use its greatest asset. Speed.
This type of station plan is part of why the Northeast Regional, a conventional train, runs the Boston to NYC run in just 18 minutes slower than the billion dollar Acela. The other issue is reusing local track.
There is another mistake California is making in their 2012 plan. They are giving up on the idea of hundreds of miles of dedicated track to lower the project costs.
They intend to run on the same rails as the slower Caltrain and other regional rail lines. As has been seen in the northeast corridor, schedule conflicts and limited track availability will greatly impact the Caltrain and its customers and the new HSR. In the end both will be hurt by that short sighted decision.
In a properly designed system, regional trains like Caltrain would be feeding riders into and drawing riders from the longer distance HSR system.
The list of mistakes goes on. But California HSR proponents do not want a good HSR system design. They just want the mythical HSR at all costs.
The fact it will end up being a failure like Acela does not matter to them.
Notice the Las Vegas route was dropped from the 2012 plan. Another cost cutter because they cannot get to Union station from the east without expensive land takings. That is how they were able to keep the Union station stop.
