 JoelTR
join:2000-12-05
Carmichael, CA
 ·AT&T U-Verse
| High Speed Rail Environmental Plan Approved Excerpts from KSEE 24 News:
Plans for the high speed rail project are moving forward. Thursday morning the Rail Authority passed a report that details the first phase of the project. The environmental report included a detailed route between Fresno and Merced.
Fresno County Supervisor Henry Perea calls Thursday's vote historic. He says, "It's going to being a lot of jobs. Diversify economic base and do what the people have wanted us to do. Bring more high paying jobs to the community. That's what this project will do."
What do you guys think about the California high speed rail? Would there be enough ridership as they claimed? Would this improve mobility across California?
Let's hear what you all have in mind. |
|
|
|
Host:
Wireless Networking
All Things Unix
Cox HSI
Efficient
Southwest Chat
| A horrible waste of money we don't have, to build an outmoded thing we don't need. The estimates are ballooning already and they haven't moved a single shovel of dirt. A colossal boondoggle that will play out eerily similarly to The Simpsons monorail episode.
We should scrap the worthless TSA and spend that money on airport improvements to move people and facilitate business. Better yet, give the money back to the people who earned it and let them drive the private economy.
Not all government is bad, but this is a classic case of big government run amok. |
|
 PostalFirst pull up, then pull down.Premium
join:2000-08-30
Simi Valley, CA | "But OCs streets are cracked and broken..."
"Sorry, No_Strings, the mob has spoken!"
MONORAIL!!!
--
Next time you wave at me, use ALL your fingers. |
|
 TwoFrogsPremium,MVM
join:2002-01-20
Downtown
·Verizon FiOS
| reply to No_Strings
said by No_Strings: A colossal boondoggle that will play out eerily similarly to The Simpsons monorail episode. Maybe they're going to use Professor Harold Hill's "Think Method" to build and operate the train.  |
|
| reply to JoelTR
said by JoelTR:Excerpts from KSEE 24 News:
The environmental report included a detailed route between Fresno and Merced.
Fresno to Merced. Now there's a heavily traveled route...
The taxpayers will get called upon to salvage this boondoggle but there won't be any money in the coffers. |
|
JoelTR
join:2000-12-05
Carmichael, CA Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
| reply to JoelTR
Supporters state that they first need to test it in rural areas prior to connecting to the big cities. Others state that Governor Brown is using this to leave a legacy. Florida, Wisconsin, and Ohio have turned down the Federal stimulus money for rail projects.
My concern is how California is going to fund the whole project. Funding is still unclear. Ridership estimate seems too be very, very optimistic or even unrealistic. I live in California, and I love it here. We all know that California needs to improve mobility across the state, but the high speed rail project might not be the answer right now, considering the many budget cuts every state agency has to face.
Here's a link to a video:
»www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4YEjTO6bdk |
|
JoelTR
join:2000-12-05
Carmichael, CA | reply to JoelTR
I would really like to hear from folks who support the California high speed rail project. |
|
| and then there was silence... |
|
 bobrkYou kids get offa my lawnPremium
join:2000-02-02
San Jose, CA
 ·SONIC.NET
| reply to JoelTR
said by JoelTR:I would really like to hear from folks who support the California high speed rail project.
Why? |
|
JoelTR
join:2000-12-05
Carmichael, CA Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
| said by bobrk:said by JoelTR:I would really like to hear from folks who support the California high speed rail project.
Why? I would really like to hear why they support it. I'm sure they have reasons, and it would be nice to hear their side. I'm sure others would like to hear also. |
|
| reply to JoelTR
I'm totally in favor of improving rail access in California. But I'm of the opinion that we should be concentrating on getting as much of the truck cargo off of I5 & I15 and onto trains as possible. |
|
JoelTR
join:2000-12-05
Carmichael, CA | I totally agree on getting as much of the truck cargo off the freeways and onto trains. However, do we really need the high speed rail to do that? Don't we already have the infrastructure to do that? |
|
 shortcktWatchen Das Blinken LightsPremium
join:2000-12-05
Tenant Hell | We (Californians) don't need the "High Speed" Rail to do that, or much of anything else. The proposed track routing for this "High Speed" Rail would not be useful for carrying cargo, most of which needs to travel to/from sea ports, places where distribution warehouses are located, and California's northern and southern borders.
In addition, the "High Speed" Rail is not high speed. As planned it would have too many stops along the route which affects the travel time, distance between stops may prevent a train from reaching optimum speed between them, and if I understand correctly speeds are limited for safety reasons in close proximity to populated areas.
Long distance commuter rail is so... 20th century. It has been eclipsed by air travel, which is why ridership has suffered so much. |
|
 dogmaXYZPremium
join:2002-08-15
Boulder City, NV
kudos:1 | said by shortckt:Long distance commuter rail is so... 20th century. It has been eclipsed by air travel, which is why ridership has suffered so much.
I don't completely agree with your assessment.
My personal experience in traveling on the French TGV from Paris to the South of France was exceptional. A 220MPH (slightly slower than No_Strings  Audi], smooth as silk ride with stand-up, walk-around creature comforts is completely stress free as compared to the utterly dehumanizing crap we call air travel.
But unlike Europe, our culture doesn't have the capacity to change our ways. So any passenger rail system geared towards local citizens is DOA.
I do agree that there is no reason for the public to underwrite anything other than the base construction - of a viable project. Moreover, while the Privately held DesertXpress is on the verge of landing a $4.9 billion loan from the Obama administration to build the 150 mph train; Originating on a dusty, rock-strewn expanse at the edge of the Mojave Desert in Victorville, the company wants to build a bullet train that would rocket tourists from the middle of nowhere to the gambling palaces of Las Vegas….
This vast park-and-ride project hinges on the untested idea that car-loving Californians will drive about 100 miles from the Los Angeles area, pull off busy Interstate 15 and board a train for the final leg to the famous Strip at a cost higher than airfare.
Even this approach is bone headed IMO. We don't need a government subsidized private operator that "hopes" the locals will use it...That mentality is like Disneyland writing a business plan that only expects local residents to visit the park.
...we need a government coordinated plan that makes it easy for non-local tourist to travel between the Destination points of SoCal, Las Vegas, Lake Tahoe, and the Bay area. This would actually bring in NEW dollars to all of these areas, vs. this stupid attempt to change some air dollars for some rail dollars. The issue is the tourism industry isn't acting as one. The governments role should be one of encouraging the industry to pool their resources to gain new revenue.
Financing wise, the tourist industry of these locations should be the one subsidizing the travel cost. There are about $50 Billion worth of Hotel/Casinos constructed in just the past 10 years here. It's not like the industry is broke. So a round trip bullet train fare from L.A. to Vegas would be less than $100. Or on any leg. Just like Europe, make it an absolute no-brainer for a visitor to travel anywhere. |
|
shortcktWatchen Das Blinken LightsPremium
join:2000-12-05
Tenant Hell | I should have been more clear that I was referring to passenger rail as it exists in the US, since I have no experience with other countries' rail setups.
You have a good point in that a tourist transport would be more beneficial to businesses than a commuter transport. And yes, the gov't should let private industry put something in and only act as coordinator, not as investor with taxpayer dollars. But academians and engineers in Sacramento don't get it; we are a car-centric culture (esp. in CA) and just short of prying the keys out of our cold, dead fingers we will insist on traveling in personal, individual transportation machines. |
|
shortcktWatchen Das Blinken LightsPremium
join:2000-12-05
Tenant Hell | The problem with mass transit The problem with mass transit-- rider appeal, and that it's Mass, not individualized. If we're going to leave our cars in the driveway they will need to offer a system that is as much like a taxi as possible; on-demand and practically door to door. This IMO is technically feasible. I call it a horizontal elevator.
Small cabs that only hold six passengers or so would be light enough to run on a light overhead track. This opens the possibility of installing track on existing utility and muni rights-of-way, much of which passes the same areas as sidewalks. This opens the possibility of putting endpoints at almost any intersection or in front of any building. Arterial runs could run parallel to a freeway. Track switches would let a cab go off the main run to descending track that reaches ground level at the endpoints without impeding traffic flow. Unused cabs leave traffic areas and seek nearby parking track until called into service. Ridership statistics control where cabs are parked to reduce wait times when summoned.
Cabs obtain power from the track and communicate with a central dispatch and each other for collision avoidance and scheduling. Riders buy a rechargable card that is swiped at any endpoint to summon a cab. For quick departure their account stores the most recent destinations and presents them upon entering the cab, or allows entering a new destination. The passenger is prompted upon entry if they're willing to share the cab (for lower cost) or head immediately to the destination without any stops.
The system would be more or less comparable to a multi-cab elevator (but horizontal) in that a cab is summoned when needed and the nearest empty (or shareable) cab responds. It may stop at selected points but bypasses stops where nobody is waiting. Since it's automated (except for central dispatch) it can be available on a moment's notice 24/7/365.
The system is scalable. Build the track a block at a time or miles at a time. Add or remove cars to satisfy demand. It doesn't burn gallons of fuel driving mostly empty around town like a bus or train that must complete it's circuit whether anyone is on board or not.
As far back as the 70's Alweg, builder of the Disney monorail, proposed something similar but found no interested buyers. Two or three experimental systems that are similar to my description have been built around the country but they only cover a very limited area, such as a University campus, and none have the individual personalized transportation concepts I described. As I recall only one was aerial, the others traveled on the ground, which defeats the purpose of bypassing the bumper-to-bumper gridlock.
As dogma pointed out, "...unlike Europe, our culture doesn't have the capacity to change our ways. So any passenger rail system geared towards local citizens is DOA." Large commuter systems that carry a hundred passengers and stop dozens of times along the route have not caught on in our car-centric culture. If it hasn't after this many decades it never will. Since we can't mold the people to the engineer's whim, we need to engineer a system to the people's whim. |
|
Host:
Wireless Networking
All Things Unix
Cox HSI
Efficient
Southwest Chat
| said by shortckt:Small cabs that only hold six passengers or so would be light enough to run on a light overhead track.
* * *
As far back as the 70's Alweg, builder of the Disney monorail, proposed something similar but found no interested buyers.
See? I knew it. We've come full circle.
 |
|
shortcktWatchen Das Blinken LightsPremium
join:2000-12-05
Tenant Hell | What's old is new again. Why not? It happens in the fashion world.
edit: but I'm thinking of a really light track, such as a hollow steel tube or two holding up the cabs and which could be held in the air by light steel frame vertical members not much larger than what holds up the large freeway signs and billboards. The Disney monorail runs on a concrete and steel track that looks streamlined, but is more substantial. |
|
| The plaid bell bottoms I was wearing in that yearbook picture are not coming back.
Not that I could fit into a 29 waist these days. |
|
dogmaXYZPremium
join:2002-08-15
Boulder City, NV
kudos:1 | reply to shortckt
I think what you are referring to is an updated version of Disneyland's people mover:
An elevated system of tracks and autonomous small vehicles. In your vision, each vehicle can be summoned on-demand, pick up the rider(s), travel through a completely computerized grid system that minimizes any potential traffic jams, and deliver the rider to an area near their end destination.
Um, yeah... Idea's like that died when this country stopped doing great things like building the Interstate highway system, the National Park system, the Internet and going to the moon. About 1970. About the same time the government allowed TeeeVeee networks to charge for their news cast programming...which in turn corrupted how Americans received their pertinent information.
...but for your viewing pleasure, we can reminisce about how great we could have been:
»www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZpeJSXdTCrY |
|
