 |
Re: Coast Starlight revival? An interesting website... And, some interesting responses...
Author: BOB2
Date: 12-13-2019 - 04:42
At the risk of making a serious comment on a Railroad Discussion Board, the Daylight train has been proposed for over 40 years. And, some form of Coast "daylight" servive has been in the State Rail Plan for around 30 years.
Neal Peterson and Richard Katz tried to get the State to buy the Coastline back in the early 90's, when Anschutz offered to sell the Coastline to the people of California for only $400 million, and run tilt train 110 max speed service with a 6:30 run time, but Pete Wilson said no.
It is one of the most underserved high potential demand (based on 101 congestion levels) intercity rail passenger corridors in California, as this "brochure" rightly notes.
And, it's also true that there are a number of interesting private sector rail passenger operators making significant rail investments in a similarly congested high demand corridor in Florida. There are also private sector rail passenger efforts in Texas and the LA-LV proposals.
This "glitzy" web site makes some interesting points. Unfortunately this glitzy spread is also long on wishful (wistful?) hype, and short on real "business case" specifics.
The Coastline really needs at least hourly "all day" departures and arrivals from most major trip generators to achieve maximum ridership by offering a real time competitive travel alternative in the 101 corridor.
High service levels, with multiple daily departures from the multiple corridor city pairs, as they now operate and are planning in Florida on Virgin Trains/Brightline would be critical to any significant intercity rail passenger market penetration on the Coastline.
This "glitzy" web site seems somewhat unclear on how, or even if, this kind of level of service could be offered. It seems these folks are hyping this service as more as a "high end" tourist thing.
So, while Coast daylight services are warranted, this interesting proposal seems longer on hype and vision, with things like how the service would be "marketed". This proposal is weak on what kind of investment would be needed, a proposed operating scheme, or any other real "numbers" for costs, on things like equipment and line improvements, or travel times needed, so there is something to "market". What would the fares be for such a service? What ridership likely be? Would it be a "profitable" private sector investment? There is little contained here to make such critical assessments.
The Coastline is certainly a corridor with the potential intercity pairs to generate significant rail passenger numbers, with competitive travel times, and frequent reliable rail passenger service, based on the congestion and travel patterns observed on the 101.
Neal Peterson and Richard Katz tried to get the State to buy the Coastline back in the early 90's, when Anschutz offered to sell the Coastline to the people of California for only $400 million, and run tilt train 110 max speed service with a 6:30 run time, but Pete Wilson said no.
It is one of the most underserved high potential demand (based on 101 congestion levels) intercity rail passenger corridors in California, as this "brochure" rightly notes.
And, it's also true that there are a number of interesting private sector rail passenger operators making significant rail investments in a similarly congested high demand corridor in Florida. There are also private sector rail passenger efforts in Texas and the LA-LV proposals.
This "glitzy" web site makes some interesting points. Unfortunately this glitzy spread is also long on wishful (wistful?) hype, and short on real "business case" specifics.
The Coastline really needs at least hourly "all day" departures and arrivals from most major trip generators to achieve maximum ridership by offering a real time competitive travel alternative in the 101 corridor.
High service levels, with multiple daily departures from the multiple corridor city pairs, as they now operate and are planning in Florida on Virgin Trains/Brightline would be critical to any significant intercity rail passenger market penetration on the Coastline.
This "glitzy" web site seems somewhat unclear on how, or even if, this kind of level of service could be offered. It seems these folks are hyping this service as more as a "high end" tourist thing.
So, while Coast daylight services are warranted, this interesting proposal seems longer on hype and vision, with things like how the service would be "marketed". This proposal is weak on what kind of investment would be needed, a proposed operating scheme, or any other real "numbers" for costs, on things like equipment and line improvements, or travel times needed, so there is something to "market". What would the fares be for such a service? What ridership likely be? Would it be a "profitable" private sector investment? There is little contained here to make such critical assessments.
The Coastline is certainly a corridor with the potential intercity pairs to generate significant rail passenger numbers, with competitive travel times, and frequent reliable rail passenger service, based on the congestion and travel patterns observed on the 101.
