California High Speed Rail

[JoshuaSantos]

I don't think it will be more than $40-50 each way from LA <> SJ, and it will take less time overall than flying (when you factor in time waiting in airports and getting molested by TSA).

[DaGaucho]

Has anyone seen any polls that indicate whether prop 1a will be passed on Nov. 4? I haven't seen a single TV commercial so far and the press has been pretty quiet about this.

[arturo]

Originally Posted by DaGaucho

Has anyone seen any polls that indicate whether prop 1a will be passed on Nov. 4? I haven't seen a single TV commercial so far and the press has been pretty quiet about this.

56-30 percent in favor as of July according to the SJMN

http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_10738404

[kalle_sg]

Originally Posted by JoshuaSantos

I don't think it will be more than $40-50 each way from LA <> SJ

Quite optimistic. In France TGV ride from Paris to Lyon takes ca. 70-90 dollars. Take into account, that Lyon is closer to Paris, than San Jose to Los Angeles.

[JoshuaSantos]

Originally Posted by kalle_sg

Quite optimistic. In France TGV ride from Paris to Lyon takes ca. 70-90 dollars. Take into account, that Lyon is closer to Paris, than San Jose to Los Angeles.

A flight from LA <> SJ costs around $50 each way, so if it was more than $50 each way on rail far fewer people would use it.

[kalle_sg]

Well, it all depends on what you mean by "high-speed".
Rail achieving 160-200 km/h might be cheap. The real "high-speed rail" starts at the level of 200 - but the operating costs grow unproportionally to the velocity growth. Just check prices at any European high-speed rail system - they're rather high, even if there's much cheaper airlines alternative Another example - from Germany: ICE Frankfurt - Hanover is 77 EUR (over 100 USD, while the distance is only slightly bigger, than LA - SJ). Such a low price as mentioned by you might make this whole business unprofitable.

I don't mean you shouldn't have HSR. I was astonished when I discovered how poorly developed is American rail system - and it needs improvements for sure. What I mean is that rail (especially high-speed) is not always meant to compete with low-cost airlines.

Good luck with that project, I fully support it

[Iain1974]

The thinking in Europe is that for journey's up to 3-4 hrs the train has the advantage over air travel.

The joys of airline security and early check-in makes me think 4 hrs is better on the train than 2 hrs in the air and 2 hrs waiting in various lines in airports.

[arturo]

Discussing pricing and comparing it to current European routes is impossible at such an early stage...and the value difference between the Euro and the Dollar makes direct price conversions inaccurate.

The one thing which must be true is that the price of train tickets and airplane tickets will have to be similar for CAHSR to succeed.

[Tritons]

Originally Posted by arturo

56-30 percent in favor as of July according to the SJMN

http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_10738404

Well, the economy didn't blow up yet back in July, so those numbers could be vastly different. I'm personally not very confident that this will pass.

[arturo]

YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS. What a comeback!

[gladisimo]

It is a good thing that it passed, but I have a bit of a problem of it being placed on people (such as myself) who don't make regular nor frequent trips to and from LA.

I understand this will be beneficial to those people I've mentioned above, whether for work or for vacation. But to me, it's of limited use since I'd still have to rent a car when I get to LA (just try traveling around the whole area by public transport, I tried once, and quickly gave up).

It would be useful for those who have people they know down there (provided they're available), so for me, if I travel alone, I can ask my buddies to give me a ride, but if I was traveling with family (which I do more often) it'd be much more practical and economical driving

[Westsidelife]

^ Measure R in Los Angeles County passed. By the time the Los Angeles-San Francisco segment is completed, you'll be able to take the Expo Line to Santa Monica and the Purple/Red Lines to West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Century City, and Westwood/UCLA.

[-Corey-]

You're lucky , our transit system sucks

[rst22]

Originally Posted by Vrysxy

You're lucky , our transit system sucks

LA's sucks for its size. SD's is normal for its size. That all.

[ieBryan]

Isn't there a rail that goes to Las Vegas? We need one of those

[arturo]

Originally Posted by gladisimo

It is a good thing that it passed, but I have a bit of a problem of it being placed on people (such as myself) who don't make regular nor frequent trips to and from LA.

I understand this will be beneficial to those people I've mentioned above, whether for work or for vacation. But to me, it's of limited use since I'd still have to rent a car when I get to LA (just try traveling around the whole area by public transport, I tried once, and quickly gave up).

It would be useful for those who have people they know down there (provided they're available), so for me, if I travel alone, I can ask my buddies to give me a ride, but if I was traveling with family (which I do more often) it'd be much more practical and economical driving

You must also look at it in another way: with HSR there will be less cars on the roads and less people at airports, making your trips on either faster. Consequently, roads and airports won't need to be expanded which costs tons of $$– and guess how those are paid? Bonds!

The way I see it is we're not merely spending more money for HSR but partially deferring money we'd otherwise be spending on roads to rail; money that wont be needed because there should be less trips on those roads, especially I-5 and H-101.

[JoshuaSantos]

Thanks for posting that Arturo, so true. HSR effects even people that have no intention of ever using it. Congestion on all major freeways that run from SF to San Diego will be eased. I'm not expecting a miracle... there will still be tons of traffic, but slightly less than before.

[davsot]

They should've gotten a chunk of the bailout bill. Maybe if they had extended it to Oregon and Washington (which is planned all the way to Vancouver). Either way, you think the state bailout will be used for this since it's kinda a shovel ready project?

[dachacon]

i believe there was about $8 billion set aside for HSR, so between California and the North East, i think were gonna get at least half of it. other cities want HSR but dont have the projects shovel ready yet. so between the $10 billion in bonds were gonna sell and this construction can start with grade separation. but im concerned about where the other $25 billion is gonna come from.

[MetropolisMayorII]

Originally Posted by dachacon

i believe there was about $8 billion set aside for HSR, so between California and the North East, i think were gonna get at least half of it. other cities want HSR but dont have the projects shovel ready yet. so between the $10 billion in bonds were gonna sell and this construction can start with grade separation. but im concerned about where the other $25 billion is gonna come from.

Don't sweat it!! California's legislature has our financial house in order..and they have our best interests in mind!