Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

city-journal.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 201 posts

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

#51

Post by tropo »

Aloha wrote: post #41
cco wrote: 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?

It's supposed to link the whole state, not just LA to the Bay

We can do both.

Put all the stations on sidings so that stopped trains do not block the main track. Trains operate point-to-point just like aircraft, with everybody getting on and off at the same time.

This means that there is little downside to adding more stops. The trip time for other stops is unaffected. There is no energy or time wasted on intermediate stops.

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

#52

Post by scythe »

niftich wrote: 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…

> these are rapidly growing exurbs that are refuge from the exorbitant land prices in the LA Basin.

What kind of country are we building where we send people to live in exurbs in a literal barren desert -- I'm not exaggerating, I was in Palmdale a few weeks ago, and it could have inspired Solzhenitsyn -- with a fast train into the city, lest the petit bourgeois of L.A. be forced to live in -ugh- townhomes? There are great reasons for infill stations, but "encouraging the growth of exurbs" are not among them. Especially not when the exurbs are to function as the servants' quarters so that we can facilitate the continued excesses of Angelenos.

If you want to help the people of California, build the train line to Ventura and then north to Bakersfield. Those places are habitable. And I believe the commoners deserve to go to the beach once in a while.

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

#53

Post by amunicio »

ummonk wrote: 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…

All big infrastructure projects are very expensive, always miss their deadlines and go way over budget; it is the nature of the beast. I'm not saying it is ok or that it could not be managed better: it could and it should.

The thing is that the cost of such projects is an investments and a legacy for future generations to enjoy. Imagine if we had to build the BART or the highway system in this they and age. How much would it cost? How many buildings in highly concentrated areas will need to be taken down to make way? Do you even believe that BART was on budget or on time?

Would it be any cheaper to build a high speed rail system in 10 years? In 20 years? Should we throw the towel and decide that future generations will only have the option to fly to LA or should they have to build it themselves at an even bigger price tag?

I know the HSR project is going to be over budget and the ROI won't be there for my generation. But in the same way that I can commute to SF on Bart, I want future generations to have the option to travel to LA in HSR.

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

#54

Post by masonic »

russellbeattie wrote: post #47

Why does it seem that the U.S. has become incapable of building large projects in a reasonable amount of time and budget? It seems every major bit of construction is always years late, and billions over budget. Whether it's the Bay Bridge (half of it), or a new Space Shuttle replacement, or just fixing our bridges and other infrastructure, I've never read of a large public project actually coming in on time and on bu…

  the U.S. has become incapable of building large projects in a reasonable amount of time and budget?
Private projects come in on time and on budget, or nearly so, all the time. It's the public sector projects that are layered in graft.

The last major public project that came in near the original budget that I can recall is the San Jose Area (now SAP).

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

#55

Post by yellowapple »

cco wrote: post #37
niftich wrote: 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?

Because California is more than just two coastal cities.

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

#56

Post by landryraccoon »

eloff wrote: post #50
ummonk wrote: 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…

Your plan has never been done before. It might completely fail for risks you and everyone else has never considered.

For all of rail's faults, we are certain it is possible. It's been done many times before. Maybe it can be done cheaper or more efficiently but there is no question that if we build it it will actually work.

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

#57

Post by landryraccoon »

ummonk wrote: 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…

I think all of your arguments could have been made against BART 30 years ago as well. I'd be willing to bet that future generations will be glad we made the investment in HSR despite inefficiencies in it's construction.

HSR is not only supposed to support LA and SF. Air travel is great for those cities but it doesn't do much for anything in between.

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

#58

Post by rukittenme »

marcell wrote: post #32
ummonk wrote: 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…

What’s interesting to me is that the federal tax cuts passed last year cost around $150B a year. I know you may not support this either, but that would pay for the construction of 1 and a 1/2 HSR’s a year, even with the cost overrun. Reminds me of PG’s essay about how it’s easy to loss lots of money on bad investments, even for people who are normally frugal on luxuries.

Tax rates were cut; tax revenue was not. The federal government is expecting $26 billion more in tax revenue than in 2017.

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

#59

Post by matchbok »

hirundo wrote: post #28
chrischen wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cars may become self driving, but that won't change the fundamental efficiency problem in that you can only fit so many people in a private car. What you're describing can already be done by calling a Lyft, albeit at slightly higher costs than a self driving car.

As Uber is a major investor in self-driving tech, self driving short term rentals are all but inevitable, and likely to become the normal way cars are used. You can rent the whole car or pay less by car pooling, managed by an app. Probably it still will never be as energy efficient as a train on rails, but it's a lot better than one car one rider. And unlike the train, it can easily drop one rider off anywhere along…

Uber is nowhere near a "leader" in the space. If by leader you mean stealing tech from Google, then yes.

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

#60

Post by capkutay »

AlexB138 wrote: post #8

So, this article has some valid criticisms, but why is this the case? Why does it seem like modern America can't manage any public works projects without them taking twice as long and costing twice as much as projected? Is it regulation? Lack of work ethic? Graft? It seems like a major problem.

Because you have actors/lawyers planning a vast complex project with input from voters who have no clue how to build anything at this scale. if it wasn't political, then it would be feasible. But thats not the world we live in.
Post reply on HN