Discussion on:
Top
Rated
Rated
Why is it that most advocates of HSR continue to confuse it...
Edited by JohnMcGrew@...
Updated - 6th Nov
Just
In
In
You are thinking in the right direction.
Edited by Hates Idiots
Updated - 13th Nov
Show:
0
Votes
High Speed Rail
I still remember taking the Bullet Train from Tokyo to Kyoto in 1966. It was thrilling just being on such a train. Train travel long ago surpassed air or car travel fro intermediate distances, but of course, we are too stupid to invest in such stuff. We'd much rather sit in traffic, inhalling CO. Living in LA in the mid-1950's, I learned that the automobile was definitively not the way to move large numbers of people. But the monied folks who represent cars, and the extractive industries are not about to let alternatives happen.
Posted by artful@...
6th Nov
+3
Votes
Why is it that most advocates of HSR continue to confuse it...
...with local commuter rail?
"We'd much rather sit in traffic, inhalling CO.
California's new HSR line, or practically any HSR line will do absolutely nothing to alleviate LA traffic. It's main purpose is to compete with the airlines, not the freeways. You're still going to have to suck in CO to get to the station, to work, to wherever.
"We'd much rather sit in traffic, inhalling CO.
California's new HSR line, or practically any HSR line will do absolutely nothing to alleviate LA traffic. It's main purpose is to compete with the airlines, not the freeways. You're still going to have to suck in CO to get to the station, to work, to wherever.
Posted by JohnMcGrew@...
Updated - 6th Nov
+1
Vote
Economic Development, California Style.
HSR through the Bay Area will likely cost considerably more than the current funding projections indicate, leaving us with a sizable shortfall when the system is ready to ply the Sacramento Valley. With litigation from Peninsula cities a massive roadblock between San Jose and San Francisco, the simpler and easier route obviously is to bring HSR to a Grand Central Station in Union City or even the Oakland Coliseum and let BART be the last mile solution. With that, the system can be up and running sooner, improvements to BART begun immediately and the local economy improved this minute, as opposed to years from now when all the litigation is finally done and all those Silicon Valley lawyers ready to retire on what will have pretty much been their lifework.
A cynic might think that because one company is better at lobbying for a HSR contract than another, our beloved pols have made up their minds and will stick to their guns, and that's why the Bay Area economy gets to suffer (and other systems get to remain stuck on hold) awaiting the glorious moment when the big train finally pulls into the station: maybe it'll still be called High Speed, but when the eventual completion date is factored in, it'll probably be known by everyone as Dead Stop Rail.
A cynic might think that because one company is better at lobbying for a HSR contract than another, our beloved pols have made up their minds and will stick to their guns, and that's why the Bay Area economy gets to suffer (and other systems get to remain stuck on hold) awaiting the glorious moment when the big train finally pulls into the station: maybe it'll still be called High Speed, but when the eventual completion date is factored in, it'll probably be known by everyone as Dead Stop Rail.
Posted by Steve Lowe Oakland
6th Nov
0
Votes
You are thinking in the right direction.
HSRs niche in transportation is on medium to long distance transportation between cities. Cost effectiveness seems to start in the 200 miles or more distance between stations, but in high traffic corridors it can be as short as 100 miles.
HSR should not be a commuter rail that stops every 10 to 30 miles like the as designed in the California HSR project. HSRs big advantage is speed. You negate that speed advantage with numerous stops.
In the case of land expensive California it is much better to let existing regional rail systems like BART fill the gap for the last stretch into most cities than to spend the money needed to bring HSR into the heart of a city. The discussion of moving the LA station of a once proposed LA to Las Vegas HSR to a point nearly 100 miles outside of LA was stupid because they were planning on car traffic to bring the people to the train. There was no regional rail link.
Linked into regional rail the HSR terminals become your regional rail hubs. The idea is to give the customer options for their long distance travel. Right now many people drive 20 / 30 miles to a regional airport for a 200 mile+ flight. Driving to the regional rail hub would be no different, but properly a implemented HSR/Regional rail system could have some big advantages over regional airports.
First, properly implemented HSR should be competitively priced against regional air without government subsidies for either. At that point value added services provided, food or WiFi for example, and customer service are your competitive points with regional air.
Second, the regional HSR train hubs should be designed from the start to be linked into existing regional rail systems, like BART, and bus systems. This gives the average person additional options on how to get to the rail hub other than driving a car.
One other side note. The state of Californias decision to contain state costs on the HSR project by pushing the local infrastructure costs, new HSR train stations, access roads and parking garages in particular, onto the local cities and towns would be illegal in some states. The NH State Constitution specifically bans such legislative mandates from being imposed on local governments by the state government.
HSR should not be a commuter rail that stops every 10 to 30 miles like the as designed in the California HSR project. HSRs big advantage is speed. You negate that speed advantage with numerous stops.
In the case of land expensive California it is much better to let existing regional rail systems like BART fill the gap for the last stretch into most cities than to spend the money needed to bring HSR into the heart of a city. The discussion of moving the LA station of a once proposed LA to Las Vegas HSR to a point nearly 100 miles outside of LA was stupid because they were planning on car traffic to bring the people to the train. There was no regional rail link.
Linked into regional rail the HSR terminals become your regional rail hubs. The idea is to give the customer options for their long distance travel. Right now many people drive 20 / 30 miles to a regional airport for a 200 mile+ flight. Driving to the regional rail hub would be no different, but properly a implemented HSR/Regional rail system could have some big advantages over regional airports.
First, properly implemented HSR should be competitively priced against regional air without government subsidies for either. At that point value added services provided, food or WiFi for example, and customer service are your competitive points with regional air.
Second, the regional HSR train hubs should be designed from the start to be linked into existing regional rail systems, like BART, and bus systems. This gives the average person additional options on how to get to the rail hub other than driving a car.
One other side note. The state of Californias decision to contain state costs on the HSR project by pushing the local infrastructure costs, new HSR train stations, access roads and parking garages in particular, onto the local cities and towns would be illegal in some states. The NH State Constitution specifically bans such legislative mandates from being imposed on local governments by the state government.
Posted by Hates Idiots
Updated - 13th Nov
0
Votes
Not so far away
"Taking a larger perspective, both trains are going to redraw the travelers mental map of Italy. Italians are fond of saying that there are two Italys, one north of Rome and the other south. Theyre now a lot closer; Naples is no longer way down there. The Italian government may have laid down more than track."
When Japan introduced the shinkansen, it had the effect of virtually shrinking Japan. Suddenly Yamaguchi and Aonon were "close". Where as before, it took 10 days to make such a journey, it suddenly took less than 10 hours. Now it can be done in less than 5. Europe is seeing the same thing happen. It's now possible for a Londoner to easily spend a weekend in the Alps without spending the weekend getting there.
But a big problem which JohnMcGrew identified is that too many people, especially politicians, confuse HSR with commuter trains. Every politician wants their little town, village, or cross roads as a station on the HSR, expecting big things if they can pull it off. But if they succeed short term, the line ceases to be HSR, thus meaning that they eventually fail long term. The only way to run an HSR is between major cities, the equivalent of LAX to SeaTac in under 2.5 hours without needing to go through airport security and at a fraction of the cost.
When Japan introduced the shinkansen, it had the effect of virtually shrinking Japan. Suddenly Yamaguchi and Aonon were "close". Where as before, it took 10 days to make such a journey, it suddenly took less than 10 hours. Now it can be done in less than 5. Europe is seeing the same thing happen. It's now possible for a Londoner to easily spend a weekend in the Alps without spending the weekend getting there.
But a big problem which JohnMcGrew identified is that too many people, especially politicians, confuse HSR with commuter trains. Every politician wants their little town, village, or cross roads as a station on the HSR, expecting big things if they can pull it off. But if they succeed short term, the line ceases to be HSR, thus meaning that they eventually fail long term. The only way to run an HSR is between major cities, the equivalent of LAX to SeaTac in under 2.5 hours without needing to go through airport security and at a fraction of the cost.
Posted by mheartwood
6th Nov
0
Votes
What makes you think that there will be no airport-like security...
...or that it will be at "a fraction of the cost"?
Last time I looked, analysis of what the California HSR project will cost to build and operate, a one-way ticket would have to be priced at over $400 just to break even. That same ticket on Southwest goes for about $100, and gets you there twice as fast, even with airport security.
And what makes you think that the TSA will not expand to make train travel just as miserable as plane travel? After all, notice that it's called the "Transportation Security Administration", not just the "Airport Security Administration". That was for a reason.
Last time I looked, analysis of what the California HSR project will cost to build and operate, a one-way ticket would have to be priced at over $400 just to break even. That same ticket on Southwest goes for about $100, and gets you there twice as fast, even with airport security.
And what makes you think that the TSA will not expand to make train travel just as miserable as plane travel? After all, notice that it's called the "Transportation Security Administration", not just the "Airport Security Administration". That was for a reason.
Posted by JohnMcGrew@...
6th Nov
-2
Votes
www.wholesalemkt.net
Wonderful.
Share a website with you ,
( http://www.wholesalemkt.net/ )
Believe you will love it.
We accept any form of payment.
Share a website with you ,
( http://www.wholesalemkt.net/ )
Believe you will love it.
We accept any form of payment.
Posted by wholemkt104
7th Nov