 |
Re: From the 118 to Lang under Saugus Mountain Clem
Author: LES
Date: 07-30-2021 - 11:57
"3 minutes of running time..."
Curious to see if this matters or not so I did a little math. (Assuming slow thinking "Southern Californians" --LMAO-- are not spending billions on something with no expected longevity)
Paris-Lyon:
The approaching 50 year old (1981 start) does 148 million passengers/year.
If I did my math correct it will be doing 740 million extra hours of transport with the 3 extra minutes of travel over the next century (assuming it doesn't add any more riders).
Notes: Paris-Lyon is 288 miles.
In 1984, the first full year of operation in which the Paris to Lyon high speed line was in service, the volume rose to 14 million. 2007 the annual volume reached 100 million. Currently 148 million per year.
Wuhan-Chongqing line is 541 miles.
12 year old line does 10 million passengers (excluding additional riders entering endpoints from other stations) will save 50 million hours.
What LAs numbers would be in 12 or 50 years from now is hard to say but I'm sure it will be higher than stated. Hell I haven't even considered Brightline's use of the tunnels.
3 billion? For another day.
BOB2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I looked at a "toll tunnel" to bypass the 5/14,
> from the end of the 118-to the 14 with the folks
> from ACS Dragodos back in 2006-2007. A double
> bore dual leveltroll tunnel was both feasible and
> potentially very profitable.
>
> One option would have truck lanes on the bottom
> level, and after "boring" a full clearance
> "trench" for clearances and electrification on one
> side of the bottom level would be dug toclearance
> for the "HSR" line to use....
>
> The highway tolls paid for it with like an 8% ROI
> range on a fifty year franchise agreement, and
> basically the cost of the rail component is the
> incremental cost of excavating the deeper rail
> cut, and the connections on each end....
>
> It was assumed back then, by a firm that had built
> HSR around the world, that the HSR would go up San
> Fernando Road, turn east northeast into and share
> the ROW of the 118 (like "slow thinking"
> "southern" Brightline is doing in Florida)and
> continue under the mountain to Lang. This is also
> approximately the same route the CAHSRA is looking
> at, but without the profitable toll road component
> to offset the cost for boring a dual use
> tunnel....
>
> At that time, we had no idea that the "runaway
> money train" would choose to spend an additonal 3
> billion to save approximately 3 minutes of running
> time for around 30-36 round trips, hauling 10,000
> passengers daily, by tunneling under the Tujunga
> water table and through residential neighborhoods,
> with this ludicrously expensive Burbank Palmdale
> "contractor wet dream" of an alternative.
>
> For comparison of "cost benefit" of that enourmous
> proposed Burbank "alternative" expenditure, the
> approximately 1 billion dollar US Link (LAUS
> run-through) saves approximately 10 minutes for
> the nearly 300 daily train movements, and 50,000
> daily riders going into, out of, and through Union
> Station.
>
> I applogize to all of you on AP once again, for
> what LES calls my "slow thinking" "southern" ways,
> that looks for cost effective and affordable ways
> to meet our travel needs and provide value to the
> taxpayers who a paying for it...
Curious to see if this matters or not so I did a little math. (Assuming slow thinking "Southern Californians" --LMAO-- are not spending billions on something with no expected longevity)
Paris-Lyon:
The approaching 50 year old (1981 start) does 148 million passengers/year.
If I did my math correct it will be doing 740 million extra hours of transport with the 3 extra minutes of travel over the next century (assuming it doesn't add any more riders).
Notes: Paris-Lyon is 288 miles.
In 1984, the first full year of operation in which the Paris to Lyon high speed line was in service, the volume rose to 14 million. 2007 the annual volume reached 100 million. Currently 148 million per year.
Wuhan-Chongqing line is 541 miles.
12 year old line does 10 million passengers (excluding additional riders entering endpoints from other stations) will save 50 million hours.
What LAs numbers would be in 12 or 50 years from now is hard to say but I'm sure it will be higher than stated. Hell I haven't even considered Brightline's use of the tunnels.
3 billion? For another day.
BOB2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I looked at a "toll tunnel" to bypass the 5/14,
> from the end of the 118-to the 14 with the folks
> from ACS Dragodos back in 2006-2007. A double
> bore dual leveltroll tunnel was both feasible and
> potentially very profitable.
>
> One option would have truck lanes on the bottom
> level, and after "boring" a full clearance
> "trench" for clearances and electrification on one
> side of the bottom level would be dug toclearance
> for the "HSR" line to use....
>
> The highway tolls paid for it with like an 8% ROI
> range on a fifty year franchise agreement, and
> basically the cost of the rail component is the
> incremental cost of excavating the deeper rail
> cut, and the connections on each end....
>
> It was assumed back then, by a firm that had built
> HSR around the world, that the HSR would go up San
> Fernando Road, turn east northeast into and share
> the ROW of the 118 (like "slow thinking"
> "southern" Brightline is doing in Florida)and
> continue under the mountain to Lang. This is also
> approximately the same route the CAHSRA is looking
> at, but without the profitable toll road component
> to offset the cost for boring a dual use
> tunnel....
>
> At that time, we had no idea that the "runaway
> money train" would choose to spend an additonal 3
> billion to save approximately 3 minutes of running
> time for around 30-36 round trips, hauling 10,000
> passengers daily, by tunneling under the Tujunga
> water table and through residential neighborhoods,
> with this ludicrously expensive Burbank Palmdale
> "contractor wet dream" of an alternative.
>
> For comparison of "cost benefit" of that enourmous
> proposed Burbank "alternative" expenditure, the
> approximately 1 billion dollar US Link (LAUS
> run-through) saves approximately 10 minutes for
> the nearly 300 daily train movements, and 50,000
> daily riders going into, out of, and through Union
> Station.
>
> I applogize to all of you on AP once again, for
> what LES calls my "slow thinking" "southern" ways,
> that looks for cost effective and affordable ways
> to meet our travel needs and provide value to the
> taxpayers who a paying for it...
