California High-Speed Rail: Later, Slower, and Way Over Budget

CNN video on California High-Speed Rail

Well, looks like that promised San Francisco-to-LA route isn't going to happen. Or if it does, it won't be quite so quick. After a report that said costs of the project had spiraled out of control, the California High-Speed Rail Commission has put forth a new plan that holds the costs of the system to $68 billion, only $20-odd billion over the original plan's cost.

Of course, the system won't go as far.

And the trains won't be "high-speed" anymore.

But, on the bright side, the first $6 billion will be spent plowing a rail line through central valley farmland so that anyone who really wants to will be able to take a train ride from L.A. to Fresno.

Predictable.

But the 99 between Fresno and Bakersfield is so crowded with commuters traveling between those two cities.

I was in Europe a few weeks ago and traveled only by train. All I can say is that America is pathetic in comparison to the systems they have there. I rode it all. Subways, commuters, 200mph TGVs, all networked together. Paris to London in 2 hours. Paris to Switzerland in 3.

WTF is wrong with us?

We took to the air and left the trains back in the 19th century.

Conservatives are threatened by high speed rail.

And by "conservates", I mean all conservatives whom ever lived, anytime anywhere, forever and ever, regardless of what position they really claim to have after this post.

Well I guess we're not threaten by this anymore since they been forced to remove the "high speed" from the High speed rail.

After an 11 hour flight, I can tell you that the trains were much, much more pleasant.

Our geographic layout is not conducive to rail, Europe's is.

Our domestic air travel is actually cheaper than rail is and would be.

We have an air infrastructure already built. We'd have to pay huge sums to build rail. Cali is at $70 billion and isn't even gonna get high speed or the distance. In this country rail is a albatross around fiscal responsibility.

This caveat. This is true as a general rule. There are certain limited areas where rail is viable. The NE seaboard is one of them.

Just long enough to pee your Osh Kosh B'Gosh's.

Your real problem is we're right about the clusterfuck the High Rail Speed project has become.

After eighteen hours on a train, I can tell you I wish I'd gone Delta.

The big problems have been:

1) The politicians keep changing the route, like five times, as each politician wants it to connect to their area. The problem is this isn't supposed to be a commuter train which stops at every stop and instead it's supposed to go from city center to city center. Ironically, the Republicans who oppose the HSR are the ones who keep voting to change the route over and over and over again. It's hard to say they aren't doing this on purpose to sabotage the project.

2) There has been a problem with NIMBYs in the bay area not wanting the tracks to be above ground and instead demanding it go underground like a subway through their area. This is the cause of 2/3rds of the claimed cost increase. Tell the NIMBYs no and you drop costs by 2/3rds right off the bat.

3) With the recovery from the recession land prices are going up again so that's part of the cost increases too.

In short, if the bay area stops demanding underground tunnels and the state Republicans stop being dishonest lying fraudsters then this thing would actually be pretty close to on budget minus the typical inflation adjustments. BTW the CNN report contains at least one factual error, they claim no tracks have been laid but over a year ago they began construction of one section in the central valley and the Republican fraudsters tried to claim it was "the train to no where" which was complete BS. No one cares that the first interstate freeway was built in a corn field in Missouri and instead they care that the entire freeway was eventually constructed.

Again, if you weren't a drooling idiot you'd know the reason is the Republicans keep changing the route from a straight line (where high speeds are possible) to make it zig zag all over (so high speeds are not possible). The zig zagging also increases the total length of track needed (as opposed to a straight line) thus further increasing costs. Yes, this is entirely a political maneuver but not surprisingly you aren't smart enough or informed enough to know what's going on behind the scenes.

It was too ambitious from the beginning. Would have been better off doing an Acela on a couple CalTrains routes and started to build demand that way.

Like Washington is doing with the Cascades route.

It you weren't such a drooling partisan hack you wouldn't blame all the issues on Republicans. But honesty was never your style.

No, no, not just Republicans, all conservatives, everywhere, everywhen, forever and ever.

We are too used to cars and airplanes.

Take a look a who is actually responciple for holding the bag when it comes to Airport debt (9/10 times while they are nominally independent 'Port Authorities' or something similar, the State is the Bonding Authority of last result, aka, iot, get the Billions needed for expansion at a rate that could reasonably be repaid, the State had to subtlety put their Full Faith and Credit on the line), and then take a look at how our highway infrastructure is maintained..... Then you will see why HSR isn't even considered. Yeah, it isn't economical transcontinental, but there are a fuckton of high demand, medium distance city pairs where it would work.

This does not make mathematical sense.

Say you have a project that's supposed to cost $100, and it ends up costing 30% more, and 2/3 of that cost increase is caused by ... I don't know, hedgehogs. Eliminating the hedgehogs would save you $20, which is 2/3 of the increase, but would not drop the cost of the project by 2/3, but rather by about 15%.

So what Confederate Son has not gone into is something called an EIS. Environmental Impact Statement. To really get into it is really way much more effort that half you Fuckers are worth, so here's a link to an article that explains how's its usefulness (if it ever existed) is long sense passed.

http://citytank.org/2012/05/17/get-stoked-to-surf-the-fourth-wave-of-planning/

Obviously never taken a ride on a modern train have you.

Trains and planes both have their advantages and disadvantages, and there are situations where one is better than the other.

Taking the train from London to Paris is one situation I have firsthand experience with which was a much better experience than flying.

I was staying at the Hilton in London and the train station was ten minutes walk away. Got there and went to the platform and got on the train. Got off the train in Paris, walked a few hundred meters to get another metro train and got off that one a few hundred meters from the hotel.

After eighteen hours on a modern ICE, you will have gone from New York to San Francisco one and a half times. And slept, in a bed.

I like a man with no unnecessarily sentimental attachment to his luggage.

I'm sorry the truth hurts but they didn't demand the entire route of the system be changed five times in a row yet on a system they opposed because they want it to be better. They're intentionally trying to drive up costs and lower the quality of service just for political gain. They ARE the reason large projects can't get done without going over budget and they're doing intentionally.

EISs are how the NIMBYs get most of their obstructionism done. They need to be reformed.

OH poor Baby...I know how this tears you up..you loved to keep bragging about it..making excuses for it and just lying about it...and now even you can't spin that this whole project isn't just a CLUSTERFUCK!!!!!!!

As usual, you fail to understand who made it a cluster fuck and why. This is why you are still a padawan instead of a Jedi.

Wrong thread.

Captain J beat me to it. Personally, I'd love to avoid traveling by plane as little as possible, but Europe is a tiny and far more compact than America. The next most populous city north of San Francisco, for example (other than Sacramento, which I think is more a tourist attraction for Californians than others in the country) is Portland, Oregon, which is a good twelve hours away and required driving through the Sierras and shit to get there.

You can rant and rave till the cows come home. It's not going to change the facts that rail is not a viable or economical means of long distance transportation in the US. Short distance routes like in the NE on the Ascela if done right can be viable.

No go rage and drool rabidly in your corner.