tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post1375465371853759532..comments2023-10-30T09:03:07.163-07:00Comments on California High Speed Rail Blog: How Will the FRA Decide?Robert Cruickshankhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06906581839066570472noreply@blogger.comBlogger58125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-34166244744545608852009-11-24T10:34:31.119-08:002009-11-24T10:34:31.119-08:00Caltrain 2025 Plan will have it operating at 110 m...Caltrain 2025 Plan will have it operating at 110 mph. That's a 15 mph difference in speed, which counts only when they've both reached top speed. They can both make the trip in about 30 minutes. It cannot be stated any clearer. When the business plan comes out we can see how much that non-stop service will cost the state.Arthur Denthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16780821836930957657noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-61126653908264060012009-11-24T10:07:33.893-08:002009-11-24T10:07:33.893-08:00But the plan never was to have Caltrain running an...But the plan never was to have Caltrain running any faster than 90 mph. HSR is planning to run the Peninsula at 125 mph.Peterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00326948451529910432noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-70064184592418776742009-11-24T10:01:37.788-08:002009-11-24T10:01:37.788-08:00I don’t understand why you keep insisting that Cal...<i>I don’t understand why you keep insisting that Caltrain won’t run at speed, or that it’ll be required to use the exact same schedule as today.</i><br /><br />Because Rafael either doesn't have a clue about transit operations or is dishonest.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-86878404116345134162009-11-24T09:35:52.522-08:002009-11-24T09:35:52.522-08:00@Rafael, “if you force passengers to take a relati...@Rafael, <i>“if you force passengers to take a relatively slow Caltrain from SF to SJ and a transfer to HSR there, you're increasing travel time to LA by 15-25 minutes.”</i><br /><br />You’ve got a point – if your plan is to force Caltrain to run at a slow speed. Caltrain will have the capability to do the trip in about 30 minutes, which is about the same amount of time as HSR. The only increase in SF-LA travel time is the cross-platform transfer. I don’t understand why you keep insisting that Caltrain won’t run at speed, or that it’ll be required to use the exact same schedule as today.Arthur Denthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16780821836930957657noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-10998657542486343942009-11-23T19:50:03.866-08:002009-11-23T19:50:03.866-08:00@ Anon 7:21
You're very weird.@ Anon 7:21<br /><br />You're very weird.Peterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00326948451529910432noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-5646546381719836872009-11-23T19:21:56.560-08:002009-11-23T19:21:56.560-08:00Perhaps the reason they haven't asked for mone...Perhaps the reason they haven't asked for money for the Tehachapis is they secretly hope that a reason will be found to dump the detour. Like maybe undocumented fault lines. Maybe the UP knows something the CHSRA "ëxperts" don't.<br /><br />Does anybody know if the Moffat Tunnel has an escape hatch? How come jetliners get to fly without escape tunnels? Guess what happens to airline passengers when an "ëarthquake" intervenes?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-49874738160563532652009-11-23T09:41:25.699-08:002009-11-23T09:41:25.699-08:00@ anon @ 12:55am -
if you force passengers to tak...@ anon @ 12:55am -<br /><br />if you force passengers to take a relatively slow Caltrain from SF to SJ and a transfer to HSR there, you're increasing travel time to LA by 15-25 minutes. Medium-distance passengers are far more likely to travel with baggage than commuters, so transfers are more of a hassle.<br /><br />Granted, there are millions of people in the East Bay that will have to drive or use BART, Amtrak CC or ACE to even reach the nearest HSR station. If there is sufficient demand, there may one day be an HSR spur from San Jose to Oakland, replacing the Amtrak CC service.<br /><br />However, that's not a good reason for cutting ridership even further by not running HSR tracks up to SF at all in phase I. If you're going to invest in HSR, as California voters have decided they want to, then do it properly. Terminating HSR in San Jose placate burys of Babbitts in the SF peninsula would be a recipe for throwing vast sums of money straight out of the window.Rafaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05471957286484454765noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-66150407086012867512009-11-23T00:55:42.394-08:002009-11-23T00:55:42.394-08:00HSR works best when passengers are offered a singl...<i>HSR works best when passengers are offered a single seat ride. Transfers reduce ridership, quite dramatically in some cases: HSR has a 95% modal share against flying for London-Paris but just 5% for London-Cologne. The latter route is longer, but crucially it also involves a transfer.<br /><br />Just imagine how many people would choose HSR over flying for SF-Anaheim if they had to transfer in both San Jose and in Los Angeles. In a word, fuggedaboudit.</i><br /><br />Pure sophistry from Rafael. Timed and seamless transfers are at the core of effective transit, and HSR is most definitely a form of transit. How does BART do it at MacArthur and 12th Street in Oakland? Does that kill service?? If BART can do it, anyone can. High capacity transit simply can't offer every rider one-seat rides to their destination. It's all about creating a network of interaction, not wasting billions of duplicative infrastructure for some false ideal of one-seat rides.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-53244414984064735822009-11-22T22:26:48.756-08:002009-11-22T22:26:48.756-08:00"However, that argument is analogous to the o..."However, that argument is analogous to the one being made in favor of terminating HSR in San Jose and upgrading Caltrain only."<br /><br />To add to the other argument, that Anaheim is not as important as SF, putting HSR between Anaheim and LA won't do anything for Metrolink or the Surfliner. HSR will help facilitate electrification and grade separation on CalTrain's route.Spokkerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03244298044953214810noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-29305979441105838482009-11-22T20:24:43.815-08:002009-11-22T20:24:43.815-08:00Rafael, Anaheim isn't as important a destinati...Rafael, Anaheim isn't as important a destination as San Francisco. Most HSR traffic would be LA-SF, not Anaheim-SF. Unlike on the Caltrain corridor, HSR would seriously mess up any attempt to create a modern commuter line, since the ROW has room for only two tracks.Alon Levyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12195377309045184452noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-54585779106069584662009-11-22T13:46:54.965-08:002009-11-22T13:46:54.965-08:00California has not asked for funds for either of t...California has not asked for funds for either of the two mountain crossings in the starter system. Guess they're saving them for last ... they HAVE, however, asked for funds to build the Central Valley segment (Merced-Fresno and Fresno-Bakersfield), which should serve as a testbed for high speed operations.Joeyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16406340564037825796noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-33952335224991946242009-11-22T13:36:33.701-08:002009-11-22T13:36:33.701-08:00"Case in point: A project in one Midwest stat..."Case in point: A project in one Midwest state, we’re told, does not meet all the FRA’s criteria....<br /><br /> "We’re told, however, that this state’s Republican governor ordered the agency to submit the application anyway."<br /><br /> OK, is this state Indiana? I can't think of any other Midwestern states with Republican governors and potential application problems.<br /><br /> Minnesota won't have a Republican governor for long and their project seems to be in good shape. North and South Dakota and Nebraska shouldn't get any HSR money due to lack of population, I'm not even sure they've asked for any, and their Republicans don't need any demagogic help winning elections.<br /><br /> The trouble with Indiana is simply that you need to go through it to get from Illinois to Ohio or Michigan. The FRA may well give money to Indiana for that reason alone.<br /><br />"Alon Levy said...<br /><br /> No, I'd guess it's Minnesota. Pawlenty is much more vicious and partisan than Daniels. Plus, I don't think Indiana even has an HSR application - the existing Midwest applications prioritize Chicago-St. Louis and Chicago-Kalamazoo-Detroit."<br /><br />Indiana does have two applications (early planning for Chicago-Cleveland via Ft. Wayne, and minor upgrades to the existing line in Gary), but both look dangerously sloppy and poorly managed -- just a bad job. That's why I suspected Indiana.<br /><br />Minnesota has at least two applications, IIRC: Minneapolis-Duluth (which I give low chances -- it's a well-planned application but has little value nationally) and St. Paul Union Depot (which is actually really close to construction, and crucial to the MWHSR project, and cheap, so I give it very high chances).<br /><br />---<br /><br />Here's a question: did California apply for funds to finish planning LA-Bakersfield?<br /><br />From a practical perspective, that segment is far more important than LA-Anaheim. Funding the Central Valley test track and LA-Bakersfield planning would make a lot of sense, and would point towards a useful result even if further funding was hard to come by.neroden@gmailhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07475686367097445497noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-51587002167350252632009-11-22T09:33:27.652-08:002009-11-22T09:33:27.652-08:00@ jim -
LA-Anaheim is a stretch that could also b...@ jim -<br /><br />LA-Anaheim is a stretch that could also be served by grade separating and otherwise upgrading the tracks used by Pacific Surfliner and Metrolink.<br /><br />However, that argument is analogous to the one being made in favor of terminating HSR in San Jose and upgrading Caltrain only.<br /><br />HSR works best when passengers are offered a single seat ride. Transfers reduce ridership, quite dramatically in some cases: HSR has a 95% modal share against flying for London-Paris but just 5% for London-Cologne. The latter route is longer, but crucially it also involves a transfer.<br /><br />Just imagine how many people would choose HSR over flying for SF-Anaheim if they had to transfer in both San Jose and in Los Angeles. In a word, fuggedaboudit.Rafaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05471957286484454765noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-76059428656116708972009-11-22T08:40:10.780-08:002009-11-22T08:40:10.780-08:00One question for the Californians.
We have been a...One question for the Californians.<br /><br />We have been assuming that LA-Anaheim is more likely than SF-SJ to be funded. I know I have. Robert in this post seems to assume it. The Governor's office, when making the last-minute tweaks to the application, seemed to assume it. But as I look at the metrics FRA says they're going to use, it seems that SF-SJ may come out scoring higher. I can't see Szabo overruling his tech panel on LA-Anaheim vs. SF-SJ.<br /><br />So my question is: What effect will it have internally in California if SF-SJ gets ARRA funding and LA-Anaheim doesn't?jimhttp://www.jimandellen.orgnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-73728354080846709942009-11-22T01:31:11.396-08:002009-11-22T01:31:11.396-08:00Chicago-Kalamazoo-Detroit goes through a corner of...Chicago-Kalamazoo-Detroit goes through a corner of Indiana, and as far as I've read, the proposed upgrades are all either in Michigan, with improvements on the Amtrak-owned segment, or in Illinois, with relief for the Chicago bottleneck.Alon Levyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12195377309045184452noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-46470473643977219312009-11-21T22:44:56.634-08:002009-11-21T22:44:56.634-08:00I think the water bond will pass. It has delta pr...I think the water bond will pass. It has delta protections so northern california will vote for it, and it protects and ensures a future water supply so southern california will vote for it. id say itll pass 60/40 to 54/46 or or so.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-36410259540588304702009-11-21T20:39:42.667-08:002009-11-21T20:39:42.667-08:00Chicago-Kalamazoo-Detroit would have to go through...Chicago-Kalamazoo-Detroit would have to go through Indiana.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-55731909513419529072009-11-21T20:12:53.892-08:002009-11-21T20:12:53.892-08:00No, I'd guess it's Minnesota. Pawlenty is ...No, I'd guess it's Minnesota. Pawlenty is much more vicious and partisan than Daniels. Plus, I don't think Indiana even has an HSR application - the existing Midwest applications prioritize Chicago-St. Louis and Chicago-Kalamazoo-Detroit.Alon Levyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12195377309045184452noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-24374397942093103632009-11-21T17:47:16.904-08:002009-11-21T17:47:16.904-08:00"Case in point: A project in one Midwest stat..."Case in point: A project in one Midwest state, we’re told, does not meet all the FRA’s criteria....<br /><br />"We’re told, however, that this state’s Republican governor ordered the agency to submit the application anyway."<br /><br />OK, is this state Indiana? I can't think of any other Midwestern states with Republican governors and potential application problems.<br /><br />Minnesota won't have a Republican governor for long and their project seems to be in good shape. North and South Dakota and Nebraska shouldn't get any HSR money due to lack of population, I'm not even sure they've asked for any, and their Republicans don't need any demagogic help winning elections.<br /><br />The trouble with Indiana is simply that you need to go through it to get from Illinois to Ohio or Michigan. The FRA may well give money to Indiana for that reason alone.neroden@gmailhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07475686367097445497noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-11769030029873603832009-11-21T17:17:55.262-08:002009-11-21T17:17:55.262-08:00This comment has been removed by the author.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-14459800870090862722009-11-21T15:06:20.871-08:002009-11-21T15:06:20.871-08:00@ anon @ 1:58pm -
you have a preconceived notion ...@ anon @ 1:58pm -<br /><br />you have a preconceived notion in your head that CHSRA made the decision in favor of the Tehachapis purely in response to political pressure from LA county developers.<br /><br />This is patent <i>nonsense</i>. If it weren't for the Garlock and San Andreas faults, the additional cost of the longer tunnels needed in the I-5 corridor would have been worth it for the sake of shaving a whopping 12 minutes off the SF-LA express line haul time.<br /><br />However, please imagine just what it would take to evacuate 1000+ stranded passengers several miles from either tunnel portal after a major earthquake derails their train.<br /><br />Yes, there would be a service/escape tube, just like the one for the Channel Tunnel. However, who's to say that won't be destroyed in a major earthquake? There is no detailed knowledge of the meter-scale geology deep under Tejon Pass.<br /><br />It's much safer to cross these two faults at grade, something that can be achieved with the Tehachapis route. Note that CHSRA also studied but ultimately rejected a third option via a utility easement and Comanche Point.Rafaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05471957286484454765noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-90222429397462525212009-11-21T15:01:53.135-08:002009-11-21T15:01:53.135-08:00I'm sorry, but I can't really see any viab...I'm sorry, but I can't really see any viable political motivation for such a decision. I can't imagine the Antelope Valley itself having enough political will to do anything like that, and I would imagine developers have higher priorities than some backwater area like Palmdale. The technical reasons for choosing the route make sense, so I'm confused as to what the problem is.Joeyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16406340564037825796noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-47903845292172334592009-11-21T13:58:52.299-08:002009-11-21T13:58:52.299-08:00The CHSRA's tack toward the Grapevine has been...The CHSRA's tack toward the Grapevine has been skewed for political reasons. An independent analysis is needed. What a laff if decades from now when the Grapevine is finally built, without hysteria, it is recognized the Tehachapis detour was a consequence of simple influence peddling. .Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-84176943958828927912009-11-21T13:43:06.252-08:002009-11-21T13:43:06.252-08:00The Grapevine's problems are not operational. ...The Grapevine's problems are not operational. If the line could be built safely, it would actually be operationally easier than the Tehachapi route because it doesn't need to climb as high. The problems are with construction. UP may be selecting the more difficult corridor today, but that doesn't mean that if neither corridor had a rail line today, it would've picked the same corridor for construction.Alon Levyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12195377309045184452noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-82328797977461262542009-11-21T13:05:09.169-08:002009-11-21T13:05:09.169-08:00The water bond issue will be a litmus test of vote...The water bond issue will be a litmus test of voter support for vast public works projects that invariably benefit well-heeled special interests much more than the ordinary population. Read the CHSRA in general and Palmdale developers in particular.<br /><br />Shifting to the Grapevine vs. Tehachapis controversy, let me draw an analogy to the Cenral Pacific-Donner Pass route vs. the Western Pacific Feather River Canyon route. The UP owns both of these and evidently is in the process of engineering a major shift of traffic to Donner Pass. Why? - becasue it is more direct even tho more difficult operationally. The same superiority applies to the Grapevine. The Tehachapis detour is a mistake that will be regretted. I shouldn't be surprized if the Grapevine is tunnelled anyway in time and the Tehachapis becomes the backup, like the Feather River Canyon line.<br /><br />Lastly, it seems that some of the attachment to the Tehachapis alignment stems from a yearning for a rail connection to a moribund Las Vegas. Wake up foamers, even retrograde and holier-than-thou Ohio has just legalized casinos. Sin City's raison d'etre is screwed - it's hundreds of miles from nowhere, sitting in the middle of a hot and smoggy desert. Its only hope for the future is if Prop 13 is torpedoed and I doubt that even Nancy Pelosi could engineer such a stupid move. Half of California's population would be driven out.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com