 |
Re: NY Times Front Page on CAHSR Boondoggle
Author: Wojak
Date: 10-09-2022 - 17:58
A comment underneath:
JD
San Francisco
10h ago
I was one of a small group of people with transportation, urban planning, and technology transfer education and experience that told most of the people involved in the early part of the High Speed Rail drama that what they were doing was wrong and would not work.
We were right and they were wrong. What we argued was that California needs to learn how to walk before it can learn to run.
An analysis of peoples behavioral patterns, with respect to workers flying between LAX and SFO showed that what they really needed was a way to get to a meeting at 9 AM and be back for work the next day at home at 8 AM.
We looked hard at what time people would have to get up to make a 2.5 hour train ride and be sitting in the office for their 9 AM meeting. We came up with 3 to 4 AM depending on where they live. Not attractive.
Our analysis was that a Rapid Rail not a High Speed Rail on the existing tracks down the coast from San Francisco to LA was the answer.
A business man could board a train after work after going home about 7 PM. Have a drink in the bar car and or dinner in the dining car. Then prepare for his/her meeting and go to bed. They would get into LA or SF and have time to get to their meeting without having to scramble and would be rested. A return tip would put them back home with ample time to change at home and get to work by 8AM.
In time, if traffic grew then one could discuss High Speed Rail. We were dismissed by many of those you quoted in the article.
JD
San Francisco
10h ago
I was one of a small group of people with transportation, urban planning, and technology transfer education and experience that told most of the people involved in the early part of the High Speed Rail drama that what they were doing was wrong and would not work.
We were right and they were wrong. What we argued was that California needs to learn how to walk before it can learn to run.
An analysis of peoples behavioral patterns, with respect to workers flying between LAX and SFO showed that what they really needed was a way to get to a meeting at 9 AM and be back for work the next day at home at 8 AM.
We looked hard at what time people would have to get up to make a 2.5 hour train ride and be sitting in the office for their 9 AM meeting. We came up with 3 to 4 AM depending on where they live. Not attractive.
Our analysis was that a Rapid Rail not a High Speed Rail on the existing tracks down the coast from San Francisco to LA was the answer.
A business man could board a train after work after going home about 7 PM. Have a drink in the bar car and or dinner in the dining car. Then prepare for his/her meeting and go to bed. They would get into LA or SF and have time to get to their meeting without having to scramble and would be rested. A return tip would put them back home with ample time to change at home and get to work by 8AM.
In time, if traffic grew then one could discuss High Speed Rail. We were dismissed by many of those you quoted in the article.
