California high speed in trouble

[cteno4]

Not been paying close attention to the project lately.

 

http://nyti.ms/19XZNDv

 

Jeff

[kvp]

The biggest problem the project faces is the lack of any need. For low passanger volumes, using high speed rail is not the best solution. To get higher volumes, there must be a need, so either tourists or commuters. The highest accepted commuting time is around 1 hours, so the maximal distance is the average speed of the train multiplied by 1 hour.

 

On the other hand building something like a mini shinkansen route would be cheaper and almost as effective, so getting a faster train (either loco hauled or dmu) and double, triple or quadruple tracking the current tracks (depending on freight and passanger volumes) would be much faster and it would also open the possibility to add local commuter trains to the network. Adding double stack compatible electrification would benefit the freight industry too.

[disturbman]

Or not. Maybe it will force California to find and identify reasonable sources for fundings. The judge ruling definitely made sense. Apparently Gov. Brown already started to talk about using funds from California's Cap and Trade scheme. For me that is a step further.

http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2014/01/jerry-brown-eyes-cap-and-trade-money-for-high-speed-rail.html

[Guest ___]

Personally, I hate this topic. As a member of NARP who works pretty close with the main office in DC, I have to whole-heartedly support the HSR project. From a personal political standpoint, I hate the project due to fact that both the need, and funding is questionable at best. Add in the lack of goverment oversight and cost over runs, and well.... you get the idea.

[disturbman]

Personally, I hate this topic. As a member of NARP who works pretty close with the main office in DC, I have to whole-heartedly support the HSR project. From a personal political standpoint, I hate the project due to fact that both the need, and funding is questionable at best. 

 

I am curious, why makes you think this infrastructure is not needed? I am sure that if it ever gets build, it will be successful.

[cteno4]

there is a huge daily transport between the bay area and san jose. shuttle flights taking off from sfo, oak and sjc probably every half hour. i use to do this now and then for clients in la area and southwest shuttle was like bus service with whole 727s full all the time. going down or up for the day was a once or more a week event for many of the folks on these shuttles. so its similar to the ne corridor traffic in that regard, but longer trip than nyc/dc so making it fast is important if its going to compete with air.

 

i use to talk with folks on the plane about what they were doing for their day and was amazed a huge proportion could easily have been done via teleconferencing. At the time i was working for Kaiser and they had a huge teleconf system (they were one of the first out there doing their own very early systems) and we did 90% of our work via this (this was the mid 90s). we had full mobile cameras, copy cameras, computer feed, so it was super simple. local office in oakland was 5 minute drive from the house and the office the multimedia staff was in had a full rig. I only went down usually at the kickoff of a new project for two days so we could do longer design sessions, then the rest was tele.

 

i think business has gotten too plug and play with their employees that they feel they have to be face to face so much. if you get a good team that works well together you can supplant much of the travel with good tele links and slash travel which really costs the budgets. last big exhibit project i did we slashed out about 5 major meetings from the plan and the travel and labor cost savings were huge and we even bought the director his own mac so he could do the teleconf from home. we had way more check in meetings (once or twice a week) on the teleconf and it was the smoothest project with logistics ive ever worked on. 

 

couple of clients were in the fray at the beginning fighting for hsr in ca but ended up getting out of it mainly due to the backdoor graft happening. decisions were being forced from deep pockets wanting to cash in, not what would make the best and most cost effective system. Then CA economy slammed (its always a bit behind the nation as its got so much momentum) so that those that were trying to do any oversight got very distracted...

 

jeff

[3railgreg]

Never going to happen, not in the lifetime of most on this forum.....

[Mudkip Orange]

This is a ridiculous ruling. It took 60 years to build the interstates. Even isolated, unelectrified segments of HSR track can be used by FRA-compliant push-pull sets at 110mph until such time as they're connected into the network. And other half-assed measures are possible (e.g. terminating in SJ for a few years with a forced transfer to Caltrain while the Peninsula NIMBYs are dealt with).

 

Requiring the funding for the entire system to release the bonds for the first segment is like telling the Penna. Turnpike Commission that they can't start construction on the Irwin-Carlisle segment until the funds for completing I-15 through Great Falls, MT are located.

[Guest keio6000]

Things that we should see before we die but probably won't ---

 

- humans on mars

- usa hsr

- peace in the middle east

- abandonment of fossil fuels for personal transport, and ideally for all but air transport

- the end of fundamentalist religion

- decreasing work week / earlier retirement for all due to technological improvements

- the end of the electoral college

- the end of petty nationalism

[Densha]

I just saw this article: http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/single-view/view/cap-and-trade-revenues-to-support-californian-high-speed-programme.html

Not even having read the article thoroughly, I found the train sim pic of a 700 series in the livery of the Dutch railways pretty funny.

[cteno4]

its become such a hideous political and financial mess in the last year. gov brown pushing full speed ahead, but its looking like its going to be an ever larger political football. routing in north was so evidently done by money interests in the background, not the proper for doing the best rail system... its been so sad to watch the, sorry for the pun, slow motion train wreck...

 

jeff

[Mudkip Orange]

I found the train sim pic of a 700 series in the livery of the Dutch railways pretty funny.

 

Three years ago the renderings were showing a Siemens Velaro in the same paint scheme, so I consider the 700 to be an improvement.

[Guest ___]

I am curious, why makes you think this infrastructure is not needed? I am sure that if it ever gets build, it will be successful.

 

Sorry, I hadn't seen your reply Vince as I forgotten about this thread. My reply is based upon both partisan and non-partisan polls from within the NTSC, as well as our own polls conducted by NARP on the topic. NARP polls have even shown that the majority of our CA chapter members believe the cost, limited benfits and likelihood of the project being built within 50 years versus the financial issues and overall usage feels the moeny would be better served to fund current Amtrak improvements.

 

Jeff's own reply goes to show what I felt was going to be reality, sicne day one of the proposal. Simply, put, this is a case of, "I told you so", from three or four years ago.

Edited June 19, 2014 by Shashinka

[cteno4]

I do see the need there and it could work, its just you have to go thru such high value properties and such huge political and money players that I think they are the impediment. I use to do the Bay Area to LA air shuttle a lot for work pre 911 and it was a pain in the ass then, now I could see a 4 hr train trip much nicer than the 1-2 hr airport struggle on both sides and the 1hr cattle car run...

 

Even pre 911 dc/NYC metro liner beat doing the shuttle, I know I use to always take the train at the same time the marketing director would take the shuttle, I always beat her office to office and enjoyed the trip!

 

Jeff

[Ochanomizu]

I often give the general topic of HS rail acquisition some thought.  Japan, of course, has the most comprehensive and advanced network, but Europe and China also offer excellent product.  However, for other Western nations I believe the introduction of comparable HS Rail is, and will remain, a dream that will never come true.  Labour rates in the West are too high.  Planning legislation too complicated. Political issues are too frustrated.  And countries such as USA, Canada, and Australia, simply can't afford the up-front costs.

 

On the other hand, I would not be surprised to see HS Rail in Malaysia and Thailand, linking through to China sometime in the next 10 years.  Everyone in USA, Canada and Australia has a car.  If you've got to load the luggage into a car to take it to the station, you may as well take it to the airport ... or drive the whole way to your destination.  This mindset, along with cheap fuel secured by decades of conflict in the Middle-East, has given those nations a mindset and infrastructure that simply makes it easier to use a car.

 

Many Japanese never owned a car.  I don't mean since they became of driving age, I mean since Japan started making cars.  I mean 3 or 4 generations of Japanese living in the same house that never owned a car.  Their reliance on public transport has, in turn, improved that public transport.  It is nothing for Japanese to take the Chuo main line 80km to Shinjuku, a subway to Tokyo station, and then a Shinkansen on to Osaka ... and their luggage arrives separately via a luggage service.

 

Likewise, in S E Asian countries many people cannot afford a car and cannot afford airfares.  Luggage doesn't sit well on the family motorcycle, although I've seen many try.  Planning law is in its infancy.  Labour rates are low.  You only need to consider the expansion of the BTS Skytrain in Bangkok over the last decade to see what I mean.  Such countries are more likely to acquire high speed rail as the benefit to the general population will be greater, and the cost of installation is lower.

[kvp]

I think in the US high speed rail has a chance in the commuter market. Where lots of people move daily to a packed city without much baggage. If the rail system with a park and ride structure is faster and doesn't cost more than going by car, then people will use it. This is the commuter kind of high speed rail, but as far as i can see, this is what makes the most profit in Japan.

 

The other area is business travel, where there is a vast amount of air traffic between cities and the train can be faster and cheaper. There is a distance limit on this and above that air travel becomes faster. The Tokaido shinkansen is a good example for this kind of train service. This is the second market where high speed rail could be good.

 

Two examples:

-in northen California, there is a need for high speed rail access to the silicon valley, so people who work there could live where it's cheaper, so the main lines should run from downtown San francisco, Sacramento and Fresno to San Jose. The service patterns should be designed as a gather/scatter limited express with local lines or p&r parking at major source stations and local lines (even to streetcar or electric bus level) around the destinations (Palo Alto, Mountain View, San Jose).

 

-in Texas, the Dallas - Houston hsr project is perfectly viable, mostly because the land is flat and relatively cheap, so air traffic replacing rail service can be cheap and fast

[bikkuri bahn]

California and Amtrak end plans for joint procurement of trainsets:
 

Amtrak and California have ended their effort to jointly buy high-speed trains for the West Coast and the Northeast Corridor.

A meeting with train manufacturers in Philadelphia this month convinced officials that the needs of the Northeast and California - including top speeds and route configurations - were just too different.

 

http://www.philly.com/philly/business/transportation/20140621_Amtrak_and_California_end_plans_for_buying_new_trains_jointly.html

[Mudkip Orange]

This is good news. Amtrak can procure whatever weird-ass Canadian/Euro hybrid that weighs 800 billion pounds and exceeds whatever the latest FRA requirements are for structural rigidity, must be able to withstand 550mph collision with a train loaded with lead ingots with .002% deformation or whatever.

 

California can by N700s off the rack.

 

Win-win situation.