Live data from Hacker News

Fast Train to Failure: California’s Mismanaged High-Speed Rail Project

city-journal.org

191–200 of 201 posts

Re: Fast Train to Failure: California’s Mismanaged High-Speed Rail Project

#191
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A network of self-driving cars is a train, or could be considered one if engineered properly. Of course, self-driving cars don't run on fixed rails, which costs them a lot of popularity around here. People don't seem to understand that fixed rail is only good for transporting lots and lots of people, very efficiently and safely, from one place where they don't want to be to another place where they don't want to be.

Well, that depends on how you build your railways. The way I see it done in the US this is indeed the case, as the stations (especially in California) seem to be in bizarre places and there is rarely a way to get to say an airport by train. But you can also build railways that make sense. See Japan for an excellent example, as well as most of Europe. These get you from where you are to where you want to be quickly an…

I fully support public transit, including trains, but the geography of the US is not conducive to dense trains due to the urban sprawl.

Ideally the sprawl is minimized for maximum efficiency (in both enhanced inter-personal cooperation, living cost) but it's hard to sell that when gas is cheap, and land is plenty.

There's another issue unique to the US, is that there is a diverse spectrum of races, income levels, and cultural groups that make it hard for these different groups to live together in a dense area peacefully (as compared to a homogenous place like Japan). Much of the inane urban planning in The US is actually a result of people just trying to prevent black people or poor people from moving into their neighborhoods.

Re: Fast Train to Failure: California’s Mismanaged High-Speed Rail Project

#192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A Sepulveda Pass-LAX subway is supposedly coming eventually!

Wouldn't it be better for it to start at the orange line busway stop around the Sepulveda station, or is that it's start point? Is there a page about this 405 highway train plan somewhere?

Metro has some pages about it: [0][1]

It's still very much in planning stages though, thus the "eventually" in my comment. Might be the same "eventually" as the Purple line making it to UCLA, or it might be the same "eventually" as high-speed rail between LA and SF. I'm hoping for the former...

0: https://thesource.metro.net/2018/06/07/rail-concepts-release...

1: https://www.metro.net/projects/sepulvedacorridor/

Re: Fast Train to Failure: California’s Mismanaged High-Speed Rail Project

#193
post #37
post #17

While this article finds an issue with the way the Tejon Pass route was eliminated in favor of the Tehachapi Pass route, Tejon Pass route would skip a station in Lancaster/Palmdale, which would be a mistake. As the article acknowledges, these are rapidly growing exurbs that are refuge from the exorbitant land prices in the LA Basin. There is existing commuter rail service between there and Downtown LA, but a HSR is a…

What the heck is the train line doing near Fresno? Why is it not following I-5 and making zero stops in between the South Bay and LA?

> What the heck is the train line doing near Fresno?

A major purpose of the train is to reduce future expected freeway traffic that is largely driven by demand between the San Joaquin Valley and the two (well, four in the longest view) termini.

Avoiding the populated parts of the San Joaquin Valley would have missed much of the point of the project.

Re: Fast Train to Failure: California’s Mismanaged High-Speed Rail Project

#194
post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fresno is the third largest city in the state and the agricultural capital of the state. Going through Fresno will link the three largest industries: technology, entertainment, and agriculture.

I know Fresno is relatively large but the entire purpose of this route was/is/I guess isn't to get people from SF to LA as a rival to air travel.

No, the purpose cited and the comparison made in cost justifications was to North/South freeway traffic it would displace, not competition with air travel.

Re: Fast Train to Failure: California’s Mismanaged High-Speed Rail Project

#195
post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What the heck is the train line doing near Fresno? Why is it not following I-5 and making zero stops in between the South Bay and LA?

Fresno is the third largest city in the state and the agricultural capital of the state. Going through Fresno will link the three largest industries: technology, entertainment, and agriculture.

> Fresno is the third largest city in the state

Fifth, behind LA, San Diego, San José, and San Francisco.

Re: Fast Train to Failure: California’s Mismanaged High-Speed Rail Project

#196
post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Fresno, Bakersfield, etc. weren't included as stops, then those rural legislators would be entirely rational in scuttling said deal, given that it'd be a massive expenditure with exactly zero benefit to their constituents.

That's clearly nonsense -- it has some benefit, in the sense that it grows the economy which pays the taxes which funds things like dams and bridges and fire departments -- but let's put a pin in that. Frankly, I wish we'd stop using my tax dollars for road subsidies in Flyover, Oklabraska and military assault vehicles for local police, but we live in a society, and we don't always get what we individually want. I'm…

> That's clearly nonsense -- it has some benefit, in the sense that it grows the economy

The estimates that justified it relied on displaced freeway traffic in the valley, without that and just traffic between the two initial termini (or maybe adding Sab Diego, but if you are avoiding the Valley you presumably drop the planned Sacramento terminus as well) there wouldn't be an economic case for the project at all.

Re: Fast Train to Failure: California’s Mismanaged High-Speed Rail Project

#197
post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"it has some benefit, in the sense that it grows the economy which pays the taxes which funds things like dams and bridges and fire departments" The inland cities won't get to see that benefit, since the train that's supposed to be providing that economic growth would only be doing so for two coastal areas. Unless you're claiming here that the prosperity of San Francisco and Los Angeles means that Fresno and Bakersfi…

"The subsidy arrow in America points solidly toward the middle because that's where it's needed most right now." No, that's revisionism. We've been fire-hosing money at rural areas for decades , if not longer. This isn't a recent thing, and it's mostly because our system of government has one branch that over-represents the voices of rural citizens. "San Francisco and Los Angeles want to build a train that only conne…

> If you expect people to pave roads and provide drinking water and put out forest fires out in Bakersfield

A central justification of building HSR is to not pave roads in the Valley; that is, it displaces freeway construction, expansion, and maintenance that would otherwise be required.

Re: Fast Train to Failure: California’s Mismanaged High-Speed Rail Project

#198
post #50
post #14

I used to support the HSR project on the grounds that connecting the state (both LA / Bay Area and the Central Valley towns) would yield long term economic benefits due the increased flow of people within the state. Decreasing the effective distance between people by making travel faster and cheaper has a lot of value in the information economy. Nothing beats face to face communication. I now no longer support the pr…

For $100B you could buy ~33,000 $3M-dollar electric commuter planes with 10 person capacity and 600mi range - not quite anything like that on the market yet mind you - but it seems close at hand. You could cover nearly the whole state, not just LA SF, and have 330,000 person capacity. By what measure would this train be better? Certainly not economic, noise, land-use, speed, convenience, coverage, or flexibility. Pro…

> For $100B you could buy ~33,000 $3M-dollar electric commuter planes with 10 person capacity and 600mi range

So, how much does all the new airport and hanger capacity and support infrastructure cost, and what are the maintenance, operations, and replacement costs like over time?

> And it took me 5 minutes to think of a (possibly) better plan than theirs.

Not even close.

Re: Fast Train to Failure: California’s Mismanaged High-Speed Rail Project

#199
post #149
post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What the heck is the train line doing near Fresno? Why is it not following I-5 and making zero stops in between the South Bay and LA?

Fresno is a very important area in Central California. It was politically necessary to include them.

Also, economically. You can't really displace a bunch of Valley freeway construction if your train bypasses all the populated parts of the Valley that generate the traffic driving freeway demand.

Re: Fast Train to Failure: California’s Mismanaged High-Speed Rail Project

#200
post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's easy to do when you can just forcibly move people and don't have to listen to what the locals think before you start laying track

Um, the US government can do that too? I'm not aware of any government that doesn't hold eminent domain powers.

The UK government has to go through lengthy rounds of consulting with local citizens, groups, other interested parties in order to build anything like this. Building a new runway at Heathrow took so long because of years and years of consultations and negotiations.

China doesn't have to do that.

Post reply on HN