Bullet Train - Portland to Seattle to Vancouver? (Tacoma, Everett: middle-class, real estate)

[Ruth4Truth]

Originally Posted by OneTimeSEALover

The Acel on the eastern seaboard is high speed if not maglev. But there are a whole bunch of cities along the way. All the Pacific Northwest has is Portland, Tacoma, Seattle, and Vancouver (and I doubt such a train would go north of Seattle). The total population there is probably less than one eastern state. East of the Mississippi is more likely for a bullet train.

I understand your point, but at least in the NW, because there are few big population centers, you wouldn't get the bickering over stops like you see outside the LA area with the CA HSR project. More stops just slow it down. They're not supposed to be a milk run service; they're supposed to zip non-step between major cities.

[pnwguy2]

Seattle and WA State can't seem to build much smaller projects without delay and cost-overuns (SR 520 bridge, Alaska Viaduct Tunnel), so to make a high speed train work would take cooperation from Oregon and British Columbia. I think it is a good thought, but not a good reality in todays climate. (Frankly, I'm not sure what a Vancouver-Seattle connection would really do for either country, other than for some high-end executives who probably have private planes anyway.) Yes, we could spend billions on a high speed train that would only serve a relatively few. Just doesn't seem sensible right now, IMO, but perhaps someday.

[Ruth4Truth]

Originally Posted by pnwguy2

Seattle and WA State can't seem to build much smaller projects without delay and cost-overuns (SR 520 bridge, Alaska Viaduct Tunnel), so to make a high speed train work would take cooperation from Oregon and British Columbia. I think it is a good thought, but not a good reality in todays climate. (Frankly, I'm not sure what a Vancouver-Seattle connection would really do for either country, other than for some high-end executives who probably have private planes anyway.) Yes, we could spend billions on a high speed train that would only serve a relatively few. Just doesn't seem sensible right now, IMO, but perhaps someday.

Tourists and weekenders from Seattle would use it to go to Van, and likewise BC residents, probably. It would be much preferable to taking the bus up there. Customs & Immigration could be handled at the destinations, so as not to slow the train down. Some of those BC shoppers who go to Blaine on the weekends would spend their shopping money in Seattle, instead. That wouldn't be bad.

Even so, there wouldn't be enough traffic to justify the cost. It's not a commute corridor, like on the East Coast between NYC and DC. It would be a drain on the state & provincial governments that would have to subsidize it, once it's up and running.

[mhays25]

We build lots of stuff on time and on budget. Sound Transit has been kicking ass since getting its house in order about 17 years ago. Ahead of schedule, below budget...

[OneTimeSEALover]

Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth

I understand your point, but at least in the NW, because there are few big population centers, you wouldn't get the bickering over stops like you see outside the LA area with the CA HSR project. More stops just slow it down. They're not supposed to be a milk run service; they're supposed to zip non-step between major cities.

The Northeast is more European. They never broke with the past to kowtow to the Big Three.

[Masterful_Man]

Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth

The CA highspeed rail project

I don't believe the CA highspeed rail project will involve mag-lev trains, sadly.

The highest speed you can get with trains on high speed rails is around 200 to 225 mph.
The downside with rail based trains are the high maintenance costs, the wear & tear, and safety issues (derailment being the huge one).

Mag-lev trains are much faster, with top speeds going well beyond 300 mph.
Mag-lev trains would be easier & cheaper to maintain since they have less wear & tear because the train cars don't actually touch the tracks, so there is no friction involved.
There is also fewer safety risks with mag-lev tracks.
Construction costs for a mag-lev system wouldn't be that much higher than the construction costs for a high speed rail system.

I'm not sure why California chose high speed rail over mag-lev.
High speed rail is already outdated technology, Europe and Japan have been using it for nearly 40+ years.
Mag-lev is the future.

[CrazyDonkey]

Sky-high upfront capital costs are what are dooming Mag-Lev. Even the state-capitalists in Beijing are thinking thrice about expanding their one "demonstration" line.

[OneTimeSEALover]

Air travel had a law establishing the FAA "to promote air travel". That must be unique in the travel industry. An actual government agency with no other charter but to make people want to fly more.

[scatcatpdx]

It would be too expensive and so 1900's

"In laying out a route, shown at right,
the project serves all nine specified
stations from Glasgow to London,
including six airports, along the single
line for a projected construction cost
of £19billion (US$29 billion)."

It will be probably more expensive because of the cot lay tracks all the admen, environmental regulatory and other cost. We already have a solution is cars on buses on one end and commuter airlines. I bet for 5 billion you can buy 40 Bombardier Q400, and have more enough for ground crew, pilots, staff and capital improvement for a commuter line form PDX including Hillsboro airport, Olympia, Tacoma and Seattle.

[CrazyDonkey]

Originally Posted by scatcatpdx

It would be too expensive and so 1900's

"In laying out a route, shown at right,
the project serves all nine specified
stations from Glasgow to London,
including six airports, along the single
line for a projected construction cost
of £19billion (US$29 billion)."

It will be probably more expensive because of the cot lay tracks all the admen, environmental regulatory and other cost. We already have a solution is cars on buses on one end and commuter airlines. I bet for 5 billion you can buy 40 Bombardier Q400, and have more enough for ground crew, pilots, staff and capital improvement for a commuter line form PDX including Hillsboro airport, Olympia, Tacoma and Seattle.

It's already happening (my emphasis):

The first time he heard the whirring of a commuter propeller plane, Larry Cripe knew something was wrong. It was the summer, and the plane was flying over his Burien home. That was not supposed to happen.

"The noise becomes unbearable," said Cripe. "We've now had as many as 60 flights in a day coming at low altitude. The turbo props are extremely noisy."

Burien may sue FAA over flight pattern change | KING5.com

I suppose it is all hunky-dory, as long as it isn't your house or town that is being effected. That property owners aren't being compensated for this is another form of public subsidy.

How much to add a fourth runway or a second airport? LOTS.