 |
Re: Max, let me set you straight on CA
Author: BOB2
Date: 02-13-2019 - 20:39
Zurich is a city of approximately 1.5 million. Basel is a city of approximately 170,000 approximately 100 km. away. It is connected to Zurich (IIRC) with a four track electrified mainline offering express service at least every half an hour. In contrast, Fresno is over 3 time larger than Basel.
Los Angeles is a city of approximately, 4 million, and San Diego is a city of approximately 1.4 million. about 200 km apart, with a still single track line for almost half of the route, with 12 intercity trains a day. Within 20 miles of the LOSSAN/I-5 corridor there is a population of over 12 million persons, with the one of the busiest and most congested interstate highway corridors in the US. Current intercity rail travel times are in many cases over 3 hours (which, ironically, is actually very competitive with the 5 to 6 hour weekend and rush hour travel times on I-5).
In France, when the TGV was first built to Lyon, there were approximately 650,000,000 annual intercity trips. The original 4 track mainline went via Dijon to Lyon, and was at capacity. So the French built a "cut-off" running directly to Lyon, and built it as a 180 mph. HSR line, which cut both distance and time from the existing trip.
In Germany when the HSR program began, they had approximately 950,000,000 intercity trips annually, with dozens and dozens of mid sized and large city pairs of an hour or two apart, with a large well developed feeder system.
This year Amtrak will likely set another ridership "record" with close to 37,000,000 annual intercity trips.
In Spain they did indeed make big inroads into Barcelona Madrid air travel, as well as into the highway trip market, with high speed service that allowed trains to make the trip in about half the time of the previous rail services. Spain also took on massive debt to finance this line, and other infrastructure projects, that ultimately caused a fiscal crisis, that has resulted in 10 years of severe austerity, unemployment, and a lowered standard of living.
So should CA really look to Spain as the model to spend 100 billion dollars on a "cost is no object" "super high speed" system, which will be so costly to operate, that in order to compete with our robust air services from multiple airports in the greater LAX to SFO air market, subsidized to make it competitive with air fares?
So I am obviously an ignorant luddite, for thinking that before we bankrupt the state, building the "cost is no object" "runaway money train", to replace our perfectly good air service, with a highly subsidized and very high fare train trip 450 miles from LAX to SFO in 2 and 1/2 hours, when I can't even get fast, frequent, and reliable train service to San Diego a mere 126 miles away, in less than 3 hours, on the 2nd busiest intercity rail corridor in the US?
Maybe it's me, I'm such a dumbass, for thinking that maybe we should put more priority on taking care of a few of our more obvious and basic rail passenger transportation "needs", before spending what would be about 80% of our available funding on the "runaway money train" for the next 25 years....
Los Angeles is a city of approximately, 4 million, and San Diego is a city of approximately 1.4 million. about 200 km apart, with a still single track line for almost half of the route, with 12 intercity trains a day. Within 20 miles of the LOSSAN/I-5 corridor there is a population of over 12 million persons, with the one of the busiest and most congested interstate highway corridors in the US. Current intercity rail travel times are in many cases over 3 hours (which, ironically, is actually very competitive with the 5 to 6 hour weekend and rush hour travel times on I-5).
In France, when the TGV was first built to Lyon, there were approximately 650,000,000 annual intercity trips. The original 4 track mainline went via Dijon to Lyon, and was at capacity. So the French built a "cut-off" running directly to Lyon, and built it as a 180 mph. HSR line, which cut both distance and time from the existing trip.
In Germany when the HSR program began, they had approximately 950,000,000 intercity trips annually, with dozens and dozens of mid sized and large city pairs of an hour or two apart, with a large well developed feeder system.
This year Amtrak will likely set another ridership "record" with close to 37,000,000 annual intercity trips.
In Spain they did indeed make big inroads into Barcelona Madrid air travel, as well as into the highway trip market, with high speed service that allowed trains to make the trip in about half the time of the previous rail services. Spain also took on massive debt to finance this line, and other infrastructure projects, that ultimately caused a fiscal crisis, that has resulted in 10 years of severe austerity, unemployment, and a lowered standard of living.
So should CA really look to Spain as the model to spend 100 billion dollars on a "cost is no object" "super high speed" system, which will be so costly to operate, that in order to compete with our robust air services from multiple airports in the greater LAX to SFO air market, subsidized to make it competitive with air fares?
So I am obviously an ignorant luddite, for thinking that before we bankrupt the state, building the "cost is no object" "runaway money train", to replace our perfectly good air service, with a highly subsidized and very high fare train trip 450 miles from LAX to SFO in 2 and 1/2 hours, when I can't even get fast, frequent, and reliable train service to San Diego a mere 126 miles away, in less than 3 hours, on the 2nd busiest intercity rail corridor in the US?
Maybe it's me, I'm such a dumbass, for thinking that maybe we should put more priority on taking care of a few of our more obvious and basic rail passenger transportation "needs", before spending what would be about 80% of our available funding on the "runaway money train" for the next 25 years....
