 |
Re: Diesels on orphaned HSR? 220 MPH. Really?
Author: BOB2
Date: 01-22-2018 - 19:54
Why do you "assume" that there would be a need is there for 220 mph service through Altamont?
That makes an assumption that this entire project is really all about international political penis envy (based on "my train is faster than your train"), without any regard to the vastly greater capital and operating costs (resulting in much higher fares, and consequently lower ridership).
This is the same kind of assumption that refuses to die, which is responsible for why we are where we are at with this fiasco today.
You're assuming that Kopp's visions were somehow based on any real analysis or definition of a real market to be served. The LA-SFO was based on the "looming" intrastate aviation capacity crisis "predicted" by a circle jerk called "Project California", which was known to be complete bull$hit back when it was first used as a justification for this project in 1995. It's was bull$hit then, it is still bull$hit now.
Is that really the most cost effective competitive seat mile that can be offered to the vast majority of likely riders, now stuck in the horrific freeway congestion, coming into and out of the Bay Area> The real highway demand diverted to rail from the Valley would likely be making an average trip of less than 100 miles, between most of the City pairs we are serving, with a high frequency, intermediate high speed, affordable (to construct and to ride) rail passenger service between the Valley and the Bay Area.
That makes an assumption that this entire project is really all about international political penis envy (based on "my train is faster than your train"), without any regard to the vastly greater capital and operating costs (resulting in much higher fares, and consequently lower ridership).
This is the same kind of assumption that refuses to die, which is responsible for why we are where we are at with this fiasco today.
You're assuming that Kopp's visions were somehow based on any real analysis or definition of a real market to be served. The LA-SFO was based on the "looming" intrastate aviation capacity crisis "predicted" by a circle jerk called "Project California", which was known to be complete bull$hit back when it was first used as a justification for this project in 1995. It's was bull$hit then, it is still bull$hit now.
Is that really the most cost effective competitive seat mile that can be offered to the vast majority of likely riders, now stuck in the horrific freeway congestion, coming into and out of the Bay Area> The real highway demand diverted to rail from the Valley would likely be making an average trip of less than 100 miles, between most of the City pairs we are serving, with a high frequency, intermediate high speed, affordable (to construct and to ride) rail passenger service between the Valley and the Bay Area.
