U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-09-2014, 11:57 AM
 
Location: roaming gnome
12,391 posts, read 24,570,477 times
Reputation: 5662

Advertisements

I think west coast is way too spread out, maybe between SD/LA and SF/Sac only.

NE while it would be cool, I'm not sure is populated, land limited and clustered as Japan.

Acela should have just set it's sight higher to a more TGV speed around 200mph ...doesn't need to go 300mph+
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-09-2014, 12:08 PM
 
Location: LBC
4,155 posts, read 4,485,422 times
Reputation: 3543
Quote:
Originally Posted by DinsdalePirahna View Post
The first leg of the California train is taking it through Bakersfield.
A more logical approach would be to connect it to the three large coastal population centers (San Diego, LA and San Francisco with limited stops every 50 -100 miles.

The second leg should be a Las Vegas Spur.
The deal with Fresno, Sacramento and Bakersfield
Bakersfield is not a "leg" on the first phase. Its just the first station to be built on the current alignment connecting LA and SF, and the stops are already limited to every 50 to 100+ miles.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2014, 12:41 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
15,470 posts, read 25,420,814 times
Reputation: 8936
The first phase of CA's HSR should have been built between LA and San Diego since that is where the most rail ridership in CA and I believe outside the Northeast is.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2014, 01:02 PM
 
Location: Zurich, Switzerland/ Piedmont, CA
32,376 posts, read 55,173,351 times
Reputation: 15454
Quote:
Originally Posted by sav858 View Post
The first phase of CA's HSR should have been built between LA and San Diego since that is where the most rail ridership in CA and I believe outside the Northeast is.
Yes, I have long felt that separate Intra-SoCal and Intra-NorCal HSRs would have been better and move more people. As growth warranted, they could be connected somewhere in the middle, eventually, if it ever came to that.

LA/OC-SD-IE-LV would be a killer system imo.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2014, 01:16 PM
 
Location: LBC
4,155 posts, read 4,485,422 times
Reputation: 3543
Quote:
Originally Posted by sav858 View Post
The first phase of CA's HSR should have been built between LA and San Diego since that is where the most rail ridership in CA and I believe outside the Northeast is.
I think that's a legitimate critique. But one of the problems with that approach is the risk of contentment with what essentially would be glorified commuter rail from LA to SD. There would be will less political pressure to fight the inevitable battles being fought right now, sadly necessary to start the connection from LA to SF. This is partly why the SF-Sacto leg will go last. Nobody wants the appearance of it being built to shuttle Sacramento politicians to their homes in the Bay Area, as we see in DC.

I've read and heard hundreds, literally hundreds, of different criticisms of this project, each with their respective proposed alternatives. The only way this thing ever gets built is when enough people understand their preference will not be met.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2014, 01:33 PM
 
Location: Huntington Beach, CA
5,847 posts, read 11,022,772 times
Reputation: 3829
Quote:
Originally Posted by nslander View Post
Bakersfield is not a "leg" on the first phase. Its just the first station to be built on the current alignment connecting LA and SF, and the stops are already limited to every 50 to 100+ miles.
Bad phrasing on my part. I think starting the line in Bakersfield is a big mistake.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2014, 04:05 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Long Island / NYC
45,990 posts, read 41,979,923 times
Reputation: 14810
Quote:
Originally Posted by grapico View Post
I think west coast is way too spread out, maybe between SD/LA and SF/Sac only.
Los Angeles to San Francisco is almost exactly the same distance as Madrid and Barcelona
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2014, 05:06 PM
 
Location: Aurora, Colorado
5,441 posts, read 8,153,163 times
Reputation: 4487
Both sound cool!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2014, 10:42 PM
 
Location: Seattle, WA
2,959 posts, read 3,820,755 times
Reputation: 3281
West Coast HSR is such a poor use of all that money. How about we use that money to help install public transportation in SoCal which is effing terrible? Everyone I know back in SoCal commutes at least an hour a day by car. No one uses public transit because good luck trying to take a freaking bus to work in SoCal; that fun venture will take you half a day. Sure, if you live in the city of LA proper, public transit is decent... but that doesn't help SoCal's sprawled-to-hell infrastructure. Public transit is a joke and this HSR is a pet project that is so blind to achieving something that would actually be a useful use of tax dollars.

Let's see which should have been given priority: a pet project chu-chu train connecting LA-SF for fun-sies, or attempting to fix one of the most sprawled out, auto-dependent metro areas in the US? Yeah, who cares about actual transportation within our metros; I want to take a train to Bakersfield!

All aboard the stupid train!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2014, 10:48 PM
 
12,696 posts, read 10,510,132 times
Reputation: 17588
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2e1m5a View Post
How does it currently take 1 hour to get from Baltimore to DC for a 30 Mile trip? A 15 Minute trip from DC to Baltimore in 2024 really does not sound impressive. Last I heard they were talking about making a 30 Minute trip from Center City to Manhattan.

I mean it currently takes only 1 Hour to get from Philadelphia to NYC or Baltimore/DC on the Acela.
How fast would the train have to be going through densely populated central and northern NJ for that to happen?

Also, this is with no stops? Direct Philly to Manhattan, probably Penn Station?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top