Discussion on:
Top
Rated
Rated
I love the idea of a modern rail system.
Posted by Hates Idiots
11th Jul
Just
In
In
Public Money IS needed upfront - but it can be made cheaper
Posted by JohnJefkins
14th Jul
Show:
+1
Vote
I love the idea of a modern rail system.
But Californias flawed design is not the way to go about it.
Posted by Hates Idiots
11th Jul
0
Votes
30 years ago...
...I though it was a great idea. The idea of quickly popping up from LA to SF was very appealing, and I love travelling by HSR in Europe. But the math on this project is horrendous. If CA taxpayers and bond buyers want to go for this, good luck. But not a dime of Federal money should be spent on this boondoggle.
Posted by JohnMcGrew@...
12th Jul
+1
Vote
Im for it
It must be a all american job. All material and trains must be made hear.All money spent on it will stay here. in our country. We dont to help outher countrys with jobs.
Posted by davewsr2
11th Jul
0
Votes
Public Money IS needed upfront - but it can be made cheaper
High Speed Rail does typically pay back construction costs over 30 yr periods - but public money is almost always needed upfront. The private sector is almost always unwilling to step in until the public sector has sorted out planning problems and probably got the thing open. The line can then be sold or rented out to the private sector to earn back all or more than the construction cost.
Over 12,000 miles of these new lines have now been built around the world in the past 30 years and about 12,000 more miles are due to open by 2030. There is plenty of experience for California to copy and perfect this current design.
For starters, why on earth are 24 expensive stations planned. A similar line in France or Spain or Italy would only have city centre stations (normally extended existing stations) in L.A. and S.F. plus a couple of park & ride/out of town stations that might double as airport stations. I agree that some of these trains could go onto existing lines to serve existing stations in San Jose etc, but any enhancement of that route should be separated from the high speed rail costs.
In order to win the air market (your 200mph line's main market) it has to do SF to LA in under 3hrs - and that means NOT stopping everywhere en-route.
Over 12,000 miles of these new lines have now been built around the world in the past 30 years and about 12,000 more miles are due to open by 2030. There is plenty of experience for California to copy and perfect this current design.
For starters, why on earth are 24 expensive stations planned. A similar line in France or Spain or Italy would only have city centre stations (normally extended existing stations) in L.A. and S.F. plus a couple of park & ride/out of town stations that might double as airport stations. I agree that some of these trains could go onto existing lines to serve existing stations in San Jose etc, but any enhancement of that route should be separated from the high speed rail costs.
In order to win the air market (your 200mph line's main market) it has to do SF to LA in under 3hrs - and that means NOT stopping everywhere en-route.
Posted by JohnJefkins
14th Jul