Page 4 of 5

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2019 12:12 am
by af773atmsp
Interesting. So parts of the media and some people have spun this to make AOC look like she's a looney that wants HSR everywhere across this country including Hawaii and Alaska.

Nice to see people still love to blow things out of proportion.

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2019 12:42 am
by DL717
af773atmsp wrote:
Interesting. So parts of the media and some people have spun this to make AOC look like she's a looney that wants HSR everywhere across this country including Hawaii and Alaska.

Nice to see people still love to blow things out of proportion.



https://www.heartland.org/_template-ass ... 7-2019.pdf

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2019 1:19 am
by GalaxyFlyer
Ending air travel was a stated goal on the backgrounder released, then deleted from her website and reported on NPR.

Here’s the quote on transportation,

Totally overhaul transportation by massively expanding electric vehicle manufacturing, build charging stations everywhere, build out high- speed rail at a scale where air travel stops becoming necessary, create affordable public transit available to all, with goal to replace every combustion-engine vehicle


If one, like AOC, never, ever left the BoWash Corridor, perfectly reasonable. Still reasonable, if one flew from NYC to LAX, after all it’s only five hours away.

GF

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2019 2:25 am
by SheikhDjibouti
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
Ending air travel was a stated goal on the backgrounder released, then deleted from her website and reported on NPR.

Here’s the quote on transportation,

Totally overhaul transportation by massively expanding electric vehicle manufacturing, build charging stations everywhere, build out high- speed rail at a scale where air travel stops becoming necessary, create affordable public transit available to all, with goal to replace every combustion-engine vehicle

"Ending air travel was a stated goal" - not according to those words you have just quoted. :shakehead:
And that's ignoring the fact that AOC & her team have withdrawn this backgrounder as not totally correct.

But if you are going to continue to rely on a document that is no longer supported by AOC, at least emphasize the precise parts of it that you believe support your case.
Then we might be able to understand why you interpret it one way, whilst others read it differently.

Where does it state that air travel will end?

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2019 3:51 am
by GalaxyFlyer
“High speed rail at a scale where air travel stops becoming necessary” isn’t ending air travel WITHIN the continental US? Really, you interpret differently?

The document was roundly ridiculed, was fodder for laughter and political hay for Republicans which is why AOC disavowed it, especially after Pelosi derided it.

GF

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2019 5:12 am
by Thunderboltdrgn
af773atmsp wrote:

To answer your question about the baggage, I guess it depends on your definition of HSR but in Italy I rode a train that reached around 150 mph and it was packed
and people were leaving bags in the aisle, and I rode the X2000 from Stockholm and had the same issue. Easy fix is have more room for baggage and plenty of
seating capacity, because as you said standing on commuter trains is fine but when you have to stand on an intercity train and walk over people's bags something's wrong.


AFAIK for the X2000 standing is not allowed and seat reservation is mandatory. I can agree with the limited luggage storage though.

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2019 6:43 am
by DocLightning
Well, now this: https://sf.curbed.com/2019/2/13/1822351 ... california

We do have a market for high-speed rail (or something) between SF and LA. There are 62 flights just from LAX to SFO scheduled tomorrow (61 because AS canceled one). That doesn't even take into account the ones to SJC and OAK (17 to OAK and 31 to SJC). SFO is getting more and more clogged and the delays that pile up when there is rain (or clouds, or someone sneezing within five nautical miles of the airport) are a real problem. OAK and SJC can take some of the load off, but then there's the same problem on the other end at LAX. There needs to be a high-capacity, reliable form of transport that isn't airplanes.

The trouble is that we can't get a clean project that doesn't get sidetracked into the Valley and doesn't get mired down in efforts to save some salamander. It's nearly impossible to build any decent infrastructure in the USA anymore. And it can't cost more than maglev, seriously.

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2019 6:54 am
by Airstud
DocLightning wrote:
Well, now this: https://sf.curbed.com/2019/2/13/1822351 ... california

We do have a market for high-speed rail (or something) between SF and LA. There are 62 flights just from LAX to SFO scheduled tomorrow (61 because AS canceled one). That doesn't even take into account the ones to SJC and OAK (17 to OAK and 31 to SJC). SFO is getting more and more clogged and the delays that pile up when there is rain (or clouds, or someone sneezing within five nautical miles of the airport) are a real problem. OAK and SJC can take some of the load off, but then there's the same problem on the other end at LAX. There needs to be a high-capacity, reliable form of transport that isn't airplanes.

The trouble is that we can't get a clean project that doesn't get sidetracked into the Valley and doesn't get mired down in efforts to save some salamander. It's nearly impossible to build any decent infrastructure in the USA anymore. And it can't cost more than maglev, seriously.


I remember when they were extending BART down to Millbrae and the airport and the Sierra Club tried to get the entire project scrapped because a community of garter snakes would have to find new homes about a quarter mile away.

Actually I'm rather fond of garter snakes...

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2019 6:57 am
by DocLightning
Airstud wrote:
I remember when they were extending BART down to Millbrae and the airport and the Sierra Club tried to get the entire project scrapped because a community of garter snakes would have to find new homes about a quarter mile away.

Actually I'm rather fond of garter snakes...


It's so idiotic because the alternative is...more cars?

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2019 8:07 am
by Jouhou
aviationaware wrote:
caliboy93 wrote:
aviationaware wrote:
How many billions have been wasted on this incredibly stupid vanity project by now?


I agree, it's almost as bad as Trump's wall. At least the high speed project is meant to connect people to each other faster, whereas the wall is to separate people based on ignorance and unfounded fears.


Calling hundreds of thousands of drug deaths, depressed wages and increased unemployment, drained public coffers and rampant crime "unfounded fears" is pretty cocky and a very know-nothing-millennial thing to do.


It's almost like boomers want us to put them in the absolute worst possible nursing homes possible by blaming the world's problems they've caused themselves on the rest of us. Watch what you say, a majority of gen-x, millenials, and gen-z already consider the boomers to be astoundingly narcissistic and destructive. We get to decide who wipes your ass in the nursing home for you. Keep that in mind the next time you cause a recession through your own greed and taunt your own children when they can't afford to survive. We aren't above hating you as much as you hate immigrants.

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2019 8:41 am
by aviationaware
Jouhou wrote:
aviationaware wrote:
caliboy93 wrote:

I agree, it's almost as bad as Trump's wall. At least the high speed project is meant to connect people to each other faster, whereas the wall is to separate people based on ignorance and unfounded fears.


Calling hundreds of thousands of drug deaths, depressed wages and increased unemployment, drained public coffers and rampant crime "unfounded fears" is pretty cocky and a very know-nothing-millennial thing to do.


It's almost like boomers want us to put them in the absolute worst possible nursing homes possible by blaming the world's problems they've caused themselves on the rest of us. Watch what you say, a majority of gen-x, millenials, and gen-z already consider the boomers to be astoundingly narcissistic and destructive. We get to decide who wipes your ass in the nursing home for you. Keep that in mind the next time you cause a recession through your own greed and taunt your own children when they can't afford to survive. We aren't above hating you as much as you hate immigrants.


Oh, the classic "we need illegals to do the menial jobs" leftist excuse. How surprising!

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2019 8:47 am
by Jouhou
aviationaware wrote:
Jouhou wrote:
aviationaware wrote:

Calling hundreds of thousands of drug deaths, depressed wages and increased unemployment, drained public coffers and rampant crime "unfounded fears" is pretty cocky and a very know-nothing-millennial thing to do.


It's almost like boomers want us to put them in the absolute worst possible nursing homes possible by blaming the world's problems they've caused themselves on the rest of us. Watch what you say, a majority of gen-x, millenials, and gen-z already consider the boomers to be astoundingly narcissistic and destructive. We get to decide who wipes your ass in the nursing home for you. Keep that in mind the next time you cause a recession through your own greed and taunt your own children when they can't afford to survive. We aren't above hating you as much as you hate immigrants.


Oh, the classic "we need illegals to do the menial jobs" leftist excuse. How surprising!


Read that again. Honestly I'm not sure how you took that away from I wrote, since it's 100% an angry take about boomers blaming their own failures on other generations with a jab at the end about how when you aren't busy hating your own children you're hating immigrants. That was literally all I said about immigration.

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2019 8:48 am
by Airstud
DocLightning wrote:
Airstud wrote:
I remember when they were extending BART down to Millbrae and the airport and the Sierra Club tried to get the entire project scrapped because a community of garter snakes would have to find new homes about a quarter mile away.

Actually I'm rather fond of garter snakes...


It's so idiotic because the alternative is...more cars?


How do you not understand that the alternative is to breed garter snakes of burden?

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2019 9:28 am
by aviationaware
Jouhou wrote:
aviationaware wrote:
Jouhou wrote:

It's almost like boomers want us to put them in the absolute worst possible nursing homes possible by blaming the world's problems they've caused themselves on the rest of us. Watch what you say, a majority of gen-x, millenials, and gen-z already consider the boomers to be astoundingly narcissistic and destructive. We get to decide who wipes your ass in the nursing home for you. Keep that in mind the next time you cause a recession through your own greed and taunt your own children when they can't afford to survive. We aren't above hating you as much as you hate immigrants.


Oh, the classic "we need illegals to do the menial jobs" leftist excuse. How surprising!


Read that again. Honestly I'm not sure how you took that away from I wrote, since it's 100% an angry take about boomers blaming their own failures on other generations with a jab at the end about how when you aren't busy hating your own children you're hating immigrants. That was literally all I said about immigration.


Sure sweetums.

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2019 11:57 am
by SheikhDjibouti
aviationaware wrote:
Jouhou wrote:
aviationaware wrote:

Oh, the classic "we need illegals to do the menial jobs" leftist excuse. How surprising!


Read that again. Honestly I'm not sure how you took that away from I wrote, since it's 100% an angry take about boomers blaming their own failures on other generations with a jab at the end about how when you aren't busy hating your own children you're hating immigrants. That was literally all I said about immigration.


Sure sweetums.

Sorry, bub, you left it too late; St Valentine's Day was yesterday.

And besides, I don't think she want what you're selling.... :lol:

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2019 12:26 pm
by SheikhDjibouti
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
“High speed rail at a scale where air travel stops becoming necessary” isn’t ending air travel WITHIN the continental US?

Really, you interpret differently?

Yes, always have done, ever since English first grade.

Currently air travel between LA and SF is necessary because the only alternative is a long, tiresome road trip.
Either that or a slow boat (probably via China)
I would very much prefer if a new alternative became available; namely HSR.
Then, it would no longer be necessary to fly; I could choose whether to fly, or alternatively take the train.

I agree that her wording is clumsy; the whole original document is a classic House of Representatives word salad.
A much better choice of plain english from AOC would have been
“High speed rail at a scale where air travel becomes optional

Choices. :checkmark: Generally speaking they are a good thing. :yes:

I believe the words you have in your head are something quite different;
Nobody actually wrote:
HSR at a scale where air travel is completely grounded

Come back to me when AOC makes that actual statement, and I will link arms with you as we storm the Capitol Building together, and kick her butt. :bigthumbsup:
Is that a deal?

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2019 1:26 pm
by slider
Ya'll are being fatuous about her vernacular. Her INTENT is quite clear...to eliminate air travel, of which she knows nothing about (lot of that going around these days with AOC).

Hers are the lamentations of an entirely insane person. Her FAQ was posted, then because of how utterly crackpot it was, it was removed. She tries to backtrack, to no avail, and then aspiring Marxist Democrat POTUS candidates all try to out-lefty one another glomming onto it. God this is glorious comedy.

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2019 2:32 pm
by af773atmsp
Thunderboltdrgn wrote:
af773atmsp wrote:

To answer your question about the baggage, I guess it depends on your definition of HSR but in Italy I rode a train that reached around 150 mph and it was packed
and people were leaving bags in the aisle, and I rode the X2000 from Stockholm and had the same issue. Easy fix is have more room for baggage and plenty of
seating capacity, because as you said standing on commuter trains is fine but when you have to stand on an intercity train and walk over people's bags something's wrong.


AFAIK for the X2000 standing is not allowed and seat reservation is mandatory. I can agree with the limited luggage storage though.


I was in Kristinehamn going to Oslo, booked on one train but got there early and asked if I could take the X2000 that just arrived. Conductor said yes, I got on, couldn't find a seat so I stood by the door with my suitcase. Conductor checked my ticket but didn't say I needed to find a seat. Half way through the trip I did manage to find a seat. Similar experience going between Copenhagen and Gothenburg, but at least they have trains to complain about.

Seeing where this thread is going makes me realize why we can't have nice things like HSR. It ends up in the toxic crap hole that is politics. The engineers and planners can make the best HSR plan, but once you show it to the politicians they either want to kill it or make it something completely different to fit their agenda. You can tell them why their ideas don't make sense, but they have the funding so you just have to nod in agreement and watch as the project falls apart, or if by some miracle it happens it's not the best it could be.

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2019 4:27 pm
by GalaxyFlyer
Deal, SD!

I like the IDEA of HSR on routes under 500 miles, but the reality usually creams the idea. If you look at LA-SF train, where you start in LA makes a large difference in the travel time, how much driving to get to Union station is needed. Same at the other end, if your destination was downtown SF, fine, but Cupertino, Walnut Creek, Mountain View, you’re likely back to getting in a car. Trains are great, if your travel begins and ends in the city. I’ve found anything under 500 miles, start the car, it’s quicker, more flexible and more enjoyable than waiting around for the plane/train; rubbing elbows with others, not eating anything when I want, etc

American path was determined by cars and planes, reversing back to the old system is difficult and should Be impossible

GF

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2019 7:51 pm
by SheikhDjibouti
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
Deal, SD!

I like the IDEA of HSR on routes under 500 miles, but the reality usually creams the idea. If you look at LA-SF train, where you start in LA makes a large difference in the travel time, how much driving to get to Union station is needed. Same at the other end, if your destination was downtown SF, fine, but Cupertino, Walnut Creek, Mountain View, you’re likely back to getting in a car. Trains are great, if your travel begins and ends in the city.
GF

You have a valid point, but it cuts both ways.
If I live close to LAX, and have to drive into central LA to catch a train, of course it's gonna seem like a bad idea
Ditto SFO
But, if I can get to the train stations more easily, either because they are geographically closer to me, or just better served, then I likewise would naturally favor the train.

If I was to suggest a 50:50 population split between being closer to the airport or closer to the rail terminus, would that be wrong?
For every suburb you can name that is closer to the airport, I'm sure I can find another that is closer to the rail terminus.

Actually, looking at Google Earth, it would seem that in the case of LA, more people would have to pass somewhere near Union Station on their way to LAX, than vice versa.
Breaking News... You will find it's the same in every large city across the world.
Rail stations are invariably situated near the center. Airports very much less so.

Then there is the issue that I might be in a suburb that is slightly closer to the airport, but has a local train station that is closer still. This enables me to take a local train into the center, in order to catch the HSR.
Think of it as a hub-and-spoke type of system; except the railway companies were using this model almost a hundred years before the airlines "invented" it. :lol:

But even a conservative 50% of the LA-SF market isn't a bad target to aim for.

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2019 2:18 pm
by DL717
DocLightning wrote:
Well, now this: https://sf.curbed.com/2019/2/13/1822351 ... california

We do have a market for high-speed rail (or something) between SF and LA. There are 62 flights just from LAX to SFO scheduled tomorrow (61 because AS canceled one). That doesn't even take into account the ones to SJC and OAK (17 to OAK and 31 to SJC). SFO is getting more and more clogged and the delays that pile up when there is rain (or clouds, or someone sneezing within five nautical miles of the airport) are a real problem. OAK and SJC can take some of the load off, but then there's the same problem on the other end at LAX. There needs to be a high-capacity, reliable form of transport that isn't airplanes.

The trouble is that we can't get a clean project that doesn't get sidetracked into the Valley and doesn't get mired down in efforts to save some salamander. It's nearly impossible to build any decent infrastructure in the USA anymore. And it can't cost more than maglev, seriously.


They should have used Maglev. Less of an environmental impact. The whole thing would have been elevated. Rail needs big beds of dirt cut through peoples yards. Maglev can run down a narrow highway median if it needs to.

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Sun Feb 17, 2019 6:14 pm
by janders
SheikhDjibouti wrote:

Actually, looking at Google Earth, it would seem that in the case of LA, more people would have to pass somewhere near Union Station on their way to LAX, than vice versa.


You realize LA basin has many airports besides LAX that connect to Northern California. - BUR, LGB, SNA, ONT plus more basin periphery airports in PSP, SBA etc.

Driving to a location like Union Station hardly ideal probably for the bulk of Angelenos. For example, from by brother-in-law place, I could be already nearly 1-hour into the drive to SF, or could be at an airport in 20min instead.

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Sun Feb 17, 2019 7:36 pm
by SheikhDjibouti
janders wrote:
SheikhDjibouti wrote:
Actually, looking at Google Earth, it would seem that in the case of LA, more people would have to pass somewhere near Union Station on their way to LAX, than vice versa.

You realize LA basin has many airports besides LAX that connect to Northern California. - BUR, LGB, SNA, ONT plus more basin periphery airports in PSP, SBA etc.

Driving to a location like Union Station hardly ideal probably for the bulk of Angelenos. For example, from by brother-in-law place, I could be already nearly 1-hour into the drive to SF, or could be at an airport in 20min instead.

The first half of your reply makes sense.
For convenience I was only comparing access to the biggest and most obvious reference points. LAX vs Union Station
In reality it wasn't even a fair fight, as the whole of Union Station would fit in one tiny corner of LAX. And so would it's annual turnover in pax (1.7m)

Nevertheless, there are indeed multiple airports to choose from.
Likewise there should be multiple train stations to choose from. And if they don't exist already, then that is an oversight that could also be rectified as part of the bigger picture.
This would ultimately benefit local traffic as well as HSR pax.

The second half of your reply is a just a single example that works better for you.
Or for your brother-in-law. Or for somebody you once met in a bar.
Whatever.
He is indeed fortunate if he can reach an airport in 20min. I know people who live right next to an airport boundary fence, but on the "wrong" side of the runway. It takes them 40 mins to reach the actual terminal buildings.... :lol:
Does my example beat yours and means I win the argument?
Nah, it's just another isolated example; not statistically relevant.

About as relevant as including PSP (107 miles) or SBA (89 miles). Those communities are obviously better off using their own local facilities, even if it the SBA option only amounts to six daily flights, every one a CRJ-200.
From the abuse regularly dished out regarding those allegedly horrible little planes, are you sure the locals wouldn't prefer the train? :rotfl:

If you can show me that the majority of Angelenos would be seriously inconvenienced by going to a (local) train station, because they have a suitable (local) airport much much closer, then you have a case... but only in regards to those people.
I have already stated that I would happily settle for a train service that "only" suited 50% of the population.

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Sun Feb 17, 2019 7:52 pm
by GalaxyFlyer
Santa Barabra wasn’t anywhere the designed HSR. Better drive, it’s 5 hours.

GF

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Sun Feb 17, 2019 8:23 pm
by mham001
SheikhDjibouti wrote:
janders wrote:
SheikhDjibouti wrote:
Actually, looking at Google Earth, it would seem that in the case of LA, more people would have to pass somewhere near Union Station on their way to LAX, than vice versa.

You realize LA basin has many airports besides LAX that connect to Northern California. - BUR, LGB, SNA, ONT plus more basin periphery airports in PSP, SBA etc.

Driving to a location like Union Station hardly ideal probably for the bulk of Angelenos. For example, from by brother-in-law place, I could be already nearly 1-hour into the drive to SF, or could be at an airport in 20min instead.

The first half of your reply makes sense.
For convenience I was only comparing access to the biggest and most obvious reference points. LAX vs Union Station
In reality it wasn't even a fair fight, as the whole of Union Station would fit in one tiny corner of LAX. And so would it's annual turnover in pax (1.7m)

Nevertheless, there are indeed multiple airports to choose from.
Likewise there should be multiple train stations to choose from. And if they don't exist already, then that is an oversight that could also be rectified as part of the bigger picture.
This would ultimately benefit local traffic as well as HSR pax.

The second half of your reply is a just a single example that works better for you.
Or for your brother-in-law. Or for somebody you once met in a bar.
Whatever.
He is indeed fortunate if he can reach an airport in 20min. I know people who live right next to an airport boundary fence, but on the "wrong" side of the runway. It takes them 40 mins to reach the actual terminal buildings.... :lol:
Does my example beat yours and means I win the argument?
Nah, it's just another isolated example; not statistically relevant.

About as relevant as including PSP (107 miles) or SBA (89 miles). Those communities are obviously better off using their own local facilities, even if it the SBA option only amounts to six daily flights, every one a CRJ-200.
From the abuse regularly dished out regarding those allegedly horrible little planes, are you sure the locals wouldn't prefer the train? :rotfl:

If you can show me that the majority of Angelenos would be seriously inconvenienced by going to a (local) train station, because they have a suitable (local) airport much much closer, then you have a case... but only in regards to those people.
I have already stated that I would happily settle for a train service that "only" suited 50% of the population.


and with that diatribe, you have just proven, beyond any shadow of a doubt that you do not know the LA area nor the trip between LA and SF. 1-2 hours could easily be spent in LA traffic. In that time, many can be a third the way to San Jose by car. Not just one person, but millions. And do so much cheaper, especially with passengers.

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Sun Feb 17, 2019 10:47 pm
by SheikhDjibouti
mham001 wrote:
and with that diatribe, you have just proven, beyond any shadow of a doubt that you do not know the LA area nor the trip between LA and SF. 1-2 hours could easily be spent in LA traffic. In that time, many can be a third the way to San Jose by car. Not just one person, but millions. And do so much cheaper, especially with passengers.

I'm not sure what you have proved either, beyond a shadow of a doubt, except if you can spend 1-2 hrs in LA traffic, you should take the train.
I may have mentioned it, several times over. :banghead:

It may well be cheaper (than what? Have you been allowed a sneak preview of the 2030 HSR network prices?).
And cheaper still for all those vehicles with passengers. Great point. Which reminds me....
Here's another image from Wikipedia; I'm sorry that it show a US Interstate - I didn't have much choice (again)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-occu ... hicle_lane
Image
Just look at all those "vehicles with passengers", jammed bumper-to bumper in the HOV lane.

If you really want a multi-occupancy vehicle, take the train ! :lol:

Notwithstanding that, I totally understand your argument that cheaper must be better, even if it means more pollution from all those individual gasoline engines, chugging away hour after hour.

But I guess my opinion isn't relevant, because I don't live in LA, and that means I know nothing about anything.
You win!
:wave:

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Sun Feb 17, 2019 10:50 pm
by GalaxyFlyer
HOV lanes are a PC hoax—they waste space, do not expedite traffic and cost money. As a open lane that HOV lane could speed travel up considerably.

GF

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2019 12:38 am
by mham001
SheikhDjibouti wrote:
mham001 wrote:
and with that diatribe, you have just proven, beyond any shadow of a doubt that you do not know the LA area nor the trip between LA and SF. 1-2 hours could easily be spent in LA traffic. In that time, many can be a third the way to San Jose by car. Not just one person, but millions. And do so much cheaper, especially with passengers.

I'm not sure what you have proved either, beyond a shadow of a doubt, except if you can spend 1-2 hrs in LA traffic, you should take the train.
I may have mentioned it, several times over. :banghead:

It may well be cheaper (than what? Have you been allowed a sneak preview of the 2030 HSR network prices?).
And cheaper still for all those vehicles with passengers. Great point. Which reminds me....
Here's another image from Wikipedia; I'm sorry that it show a US Interstate - I didn't have much choice (again)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-occu ... hicle_lane
Image
Just look at all those "vehicles with passengers", jammed bumper-to bumper in the HOV lane.

If you really want a multi-occupancy vehicle, take the train ! :lol:

Notwithstanding that, I totally understand your argument that cheaper must be better, even if it means more pollution from all those individual gasoline engines, chugging away hour after hour.

But I guess my opinion isn't relevant, because I don't live in LA, and that means I know nothing about anything.
You win!
:wave:


And you just continue to dig yourself a deeper hole. You apparently cannot discern the difference between commute traffic and travelling the Central Valley LA-SF, you know the subject of this thread? Drive I5, 99, 101 and 1 and....well, you've never done that, have you? Nope, you sit in another part of the world and "know all about it".

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2019 3:58 am
by SheikhDjibouti
mham001 wrote:
And you just continue to dig yourself a deeper hole. You apparently cannot discern the difference between commute traffic and travelling the Central Valley LA-SF, you know the subject of this thread? Drive I5, 99, 101 and 1 and....well, you've never done that, have you? Nope, you sit in another part of the world and "know all about it".

Oops, you got me there, I really didn't think about that until you mentioned it. /sarcasm off :roll:
Or perhaps it was covered when I explained my choice of photo. Or rather my lack of choice.
Didn't you see, I clearly wrote:
I'm sorry that it shows a US Interstate - I didn't have much choice (again)

What worries me more is that you missed a slam dunk; none of those routes you listed feature more than a small percentage of miles covered by HOV lanes, mostly clustered at the northern and southern ends for obvious reasons. I assumed you would know that.

But since you are so well informed, instead of quibbling over the choice of photo, what are the actual numbers for multi-occupancy vehicles for those people making the whole journey from LA to SF? Remember; this was a point you wanted to push.

And just for laughs, do you even know how many HOV facilities there are in California? (clue; it's more than 87, and less than 90).

BTW you are wrong about me never having driven I5,99,101 and even 1 (which isn't really a valid choice, unless you've got plenty of time to enjoy the scenery)

I recognise that I might get a few details wrong (allegedly) because I don't live in LA.
But what's your excuse? :rotfl:

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2019 8:47 pm
by N867DA
There's a market for high speed rail between San Francisco and Los Angeles but this became the poster child pork train (haha!)

An ideal service would have a stop at the urban core and one or two stops in suburban or peripheral cities:
LA
Stop 1
Stop 2
- hundreds of miles of travel -
Stop 3
Stop 4
San Francisco

Last-mile problems and connectivity issues abound but that's a problem for the future. Once the rail service begins development will focus on improving access to and from the rail corridor. This Central Valley Milk Train cannot complete on price or time with other modes of travel.

A viable concept got bludgeoned by politicking.

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2019 2:57 am
by Bradin
DL717 wrote:
DocLightning wrote:
Well, now this: https://sf.curbed.com/2019/2/13/1822351 ... california

We do have a market for high-speed rail (or something) between SF and LA. There are 62 flights just from LAX to SFO scheduled tomorrow (61 because AS canceled one). That doesn't even take into account the ones to SJC and OAK (17 to OAK and 31 to SJC). SFO is getting more and more clogged and the delays that pile up when there is rain (or clouds, or someone sneezing within five nautical miles of the airport) are a real problem. OAK and SJC can take some of the load off, but then there's the same problem on the other end at LAX. There needs to be a high-capacity, reliable form of transport that isn't airplanes.

The trouble is that we can't get a clean project that doesn't get sidetracked into the Valley and doesn't get mired down in efforts to save some salamander. It's nearly impossible to build any decent infrastructure in the USA anymore. And it can't cost more than maglev, seriously.


They should have used Maglev. Less of an environmental impact. The whole thing would have been elevated. Rail needs big beds of dirt cut through peoples yards. Maglev can run down a narrow highway median if it needs to.


The land below would still property of the Maglev - and restricted.

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2019 1:42 pm
by DL717
janders wrote:
SheikhDjibouti wrote:

Actually, looking at Google Earth, it would seem that in the case of LA, more people would have to pass somewhere near Union Station on their way to LAX, than vice versa.


You realize LA basin has many airports besides LAX that connect to Northern California. - BUR, LGB, SNA, ONT plus more basin periphery airports in PSP, SBA etc.

Driving to a location like Union Station hardly ideal probably for the bulk of Angelenos. For example, from by brother-in-law place, I could be already nearly 1-hour into the drive to SF, or could be at an airport in 20min instead.


I just did some spot checks on this with google maps on trip times to Union Station. Keep in mind, it’s 5:30 am in LA right now:

Orange County - 1:20, 46 miles.
Long Beach - 0:41, 27 miles.
Ontario - 1:14, 40 miles.
LAX - 0:31, 19 miles.
Burbank - 0:20, 16 miles.

Bradin wrote:
DL717 wrote:
DocLightning wrote:
Well, now this: https://sf.curbed.com/2019/2/13/1822351 ... california

We do have a market for high-speed rail (or something) between SF and LA. There are 62 flights just from LAX to SFO scheduled tomorrow (61 because AS canceled one). That doesn't even take into account the ones to SJC and OAK (17 to OAK and 31 to SJC). SFO is getting more and more clogged and the delays that pile up when there is rain (or clouds, or someone sneezing within five nautical miles of the airport) are a real problem. OAK and SJC can take some of the load off, but then there's the same problem on the other end at LAX. There needs to be a high-capacity, reliable form of transport that isn't airplanes.

The trouble is that we can't get a clean project that doesn't get sidetracked into the Valley and doesn't get mired down in efforts to save some salamander. It's nearly impossible to build any decent infrastructure in the USA anymore. And it can't cost more than maglev, seriously.


They should have used Maglev. Less of an environmental impact. The whole thing would have been elevated. Rail needs big beds of dirt cut through peoples yards. Maglev can run down a narrow highway median if it needs to.


The land below would still property of the Maglev - and restricted.


Highway median, or over the top of existing rail. Tons of ways to avoid someone’s backyard.

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2019 4:20 pm
by flymia
If there is the potential for money to be made, then someone else will do it. That people thought the governments, whether state or federal, were the right people to take on such an endeavor, is shortsighted.

Look at Florida, they turned down federal dollars, but they are getting their high speed railway anyway.

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2019 5:28 pm
by Reinhardt
slider wrote:
Hers are the lamentations of an entirely insane person. Her FAQ was posted, then because of how utterly crackpot it was, it was removed. She tries to backtrack, to no avail, and then aspiring Marxist Democrat POTUS candidates all try to out-lefty one another glomming onto it. God this is glorious comedy.


So funny to hear this in America time and again. You really think the Democrats are that far left wing by any international / normal standards? Marxist, really? They're firmly middle ground or just right of centre in the rest of the Western world. If you think that about the Democrats then I say the GOP are so far right they are out of the ball park. Have some perspective.

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2019 5:34 pm
by Bradin
DL717 wrote:
janders wrote:
SheikhDjibouti wrote:

Actually, looking at Google Earth, it would seem that in the case of LA, more people would have to pass somewhere near Union Station on their way to LAX, than vice versa.


You realize LA basin has many airports besides LAX that connect to Northern California. - BUR, LGB, SNA, ONT plus more basin periphery airports in PSP, SBA etc.

Driving to a location like Union Station hardly ideal probably for the bulk of Angelenos. For example, from by brother-in-law place, I could be already nearly 1-hour into the drive to SF, or could be at an airport in 20min instead.


I just did some spot checks on this with google maps on trip times to Union Station. Keep in mind, it’s 5:30 am in LA right now:

Orange County - 1:20, 46 miles.
Long Beach - 0:41, 27 miles.
Ontario - 1:14, 40 miles.
LAX - 0:31, 19 miles.
Burbank - 0:20, 16 miles.

Bradin wrote:
DL717 wrote:

They should have used Maglev. Less of an environmental impact. The whole thing would have been elevated. Rail needs big beds of dirt cut through peoples yards. Maglev can run down a narrow highway median if it needs to.


The land below would still property of the Maglev - and restricted.


Highway median, or over the top of existing rail. Tons of ways to avoid someone’s backyard.


Probably would increase the cost of construction because now you have other engineering considerations - like if a train derails or a car hits one of the support columns, what happens? What happens if a diesel locomotive or some petrol catches on fire underneath it?

Also - disruptions to the operational aspects of the rail or road during construction.

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2019 11:40 pm
by LAXintl
So now the DOT announced its cancelling $929 million in federal transit funds, and "is actively exploring every legal option" to get back the $2.5 billion in federal funds previously granted to the project

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:48 am
by casinterest
LAXintl wrote:
So now the DOT announced its cancelling $929 million in federal transit funds, and "is actively exploring every legal option" to get back the $2.5 billion in federal funds previously granted to the project


Seems fair. There were other projects that didn't get funded due to this project. Just not sure if there were any federal strings attached to the money though.

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2019 3:40 am
by seb146
Governor Newsom announced the cancellation of HSR. Right on cue, the orange one throws out "I know you are, but what am I?" and cancels the plan that had already been cancelled.

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2019 3:48 am
by DL717
LAXintl wrote:
So now the DOT announced its cancelling $929 million in federal transit funds, and "is actively exploring every legal option" to get back the $2.5 billion in federal funds previously granted to the project


Good. All they did was flush money down the toilet on this.

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2019 3:50 am
by DL717
seb146 wrote:
Governor Newsom announced the cancellation of HSR. Right on cue, the orange one throws out "I know you are, but what am I?" and cancels the plan that had already been cancelled.


Actually it was “if you give us money for our shovel ready project, we’ll do this”. Wasn’t shovel ready and now it’s canceled. “Thanks, we’ll take our money back since you don’t need it anymore”.

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2019 3:55 am
by seb146
DL717 wrote:
seb146 wrote:
Governor Newsom announced the cancellation of HSR. Right on cue, the orange one throws out "I know you are, but what am I?" and cancels the plan that had already been cancelled.


Actually it was “if you give us money for our shovel ready project, we’ll do this”. Wasn’t shovel ready and now it’s canceled. “Thanks, we’ll take our money back since you don’t need it anymore”.


Well, actually

https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2019/ ... rail-plan/

during the "State Of The State" address FIVE DAYS AGO Newsom cancelled the plan that REPUBLICAN Schwartzenegger wanted too, but go ahead and rewrite history......

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2019 3:59 am
by DL717
seb146 wrote:
DL717 wrote:
seb146 wrote:
Governor Newsom announced the cancellation of HSR. Right on cue, the orange one throws out "I know you are, but what am I?" and cancels the plan that had already been cancelled.


Actually it was “if you give us money for our shovel ready project, we’ll do this”. Wasn’t shovel ready and now it’s canceled. “Thanks, we’ll take our money back since you don’t need it anymore”.


Well, actually

https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2019/ ... rail-plan/

during the "State Of The State" address FIVE DAYS AGO Newsom cancelled the plan that REPUBLICAN Schwartzenegger wanted too, but go ahead and rewrite history......


Well actually, the grant money came from Obama under the stimulus package. So sure, go ahead and try a rewrite.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-cali ... SKCN1Q82TH

http://www.hsr.ca.gov/About/Funding_Finance/index.html

Schwarzenkennedy a Republican? LOL. Okay. This thing was a lib project through and through.

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2019 4:49 pm
by anrec80
casinterest wrote:
LAXintl wrote:
So now the DOT announced its cancelling $929 million in federal transit funds, and "is actively exploring every legal option" to get back the $2.5 billion in federal funds previously granted to the project


Seems fair. There were other projects that didn't get funded due to this project. Just not sure if there were any federal strings attached to the money though.


Who cares what strings were attached, if any? Those involved in “planning” already sliced this budget and received their share. They don’t care if taxpayers will ever pay anything back. As long as not them.

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2019 4:49 pm
by anrec80
casinterest wrote:
LAXintl wrote:
So now the DOT announced its cancelling $929 million in federal transit funds, and "is actively exploring every legal option" to get back the $2.5 billion in federal funds previously granted to the project


Seems fair. There were other projects that didn't get funded due to this project. Just not sure if there were any federal strings attached to the money though.


Who cares what strings were attached, if any? Those involved in “planning” already sliced this budget and received their share. They don’t care if taxpayers will ever pay anything back. As long as not them.

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2019 6:23 pm
by Bradin
anrec80 wrote:
casinterest wrote:
LAXintl wrote:
So now the DOT announced its cancelling $929 million in federal transit funds, and "is actively exploring every legal option" to get back the $2.5 billion in federal funds previously granted to the project


Seems fair. There were other projects that didn't get funded due to this project. Just not sure if there were any federal strings attached to the money though.


Who cares what strings were attached, if any? Those involved in “planning” already sliced this budget and received their share. They don’t care if taxpayers will ever pay anything back. As long as not them.


As someone who applied and supported grants for local colleges and universities in my area, it does matter.

If the terms and conditions, outlined as part of the grant or to obtain federal government subsidy is achieved, then the money should remain in California's hands rather than California taxpayers having to shoulder the bill.

If the terms and conditions have not been met or there's a failure to meet milestones or similar in the language, it sucks to be California.

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2019 7:09 pm
by af773atmsp
Give some money to Minnesota so we can build our higher speed rail line between the Twin Cities and Duluth. It's actually shovel ready unlike most of CAHSR.

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2019 7:32 pm
by seb146
DL717 wrote:
seb146 wrote:
DL717 wrote:

Actually it was “if you give us money for our shovel ready project, we’ll do this”. Wasn’t shovel ready and now it’s canceled. “Thanks, we’ll take our money back since you don’t need it anymore”.


Well, actually

https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2019/ ... rail-plan/

during the "State Of The State" address FIVE DAYS AGO Newsom cancelled the plan that REPUBLICAN Schwartzenegger wanted too, but go ahead and rewrite history......


Well actually, the grant money came from Obama under the stimulus package. So sure, go ahead and try a rewrite.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-cali ... SKCN1Q82TH

http://www.hsr.ca.gov/About/Funding_Finance/index.html

Schwarzenkennedy a Republican? LOL. Okay. This thing was a lib project through and through.


https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2009/1007 ... -usgn.html

The article is from 2009 when Schwarzenegger applied for HSR funding for California. Go ahead and change this timeline and narrative, too.

http://governors.library.ca.gov/list.html

Go ahead and deny that Schwarzenegger was a Republican.

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2019 8:43 pm
by GalaxyFlyer
RINO more like it.

GF

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2019 9:49 pm
by GalaxyFlyer
Here’s a Cali idea to get behind, an Autobahn

This bill would require the department to initiate a project to construct two additional traffic lanes on northbound and southbound Interstate Route 5 and State Route 99, and would prohibit the imposition of a maximum speed limit for those traffic lanes.


https://legiscan.com/CA/text/SB319/id/1914874

Re: California abandons plan for LA-SF HSR; air travel continues to rule the market

Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2019 10:47 pm
by philabos
California could have purchased the Coast Line. It would never be high speed but would provide regional services.
The Valley route could have been double or triple tracked north of Bakersfield again providing regional service.
All for a fraction of the cost of CAHSR.
They probably haven't thought through this yet, but there is no sense in electrifying the portion they will build, because they cannot electrify the private railroads to access SF.
Going to LA is out of the question without a brand new railroad through a tunnel, but that's one of the rocks against this proposal failed.
This was always a solution in search of a problem.