California High-Speed Rail (CAHSR) System

Discussion related to commuter rail and transit operators in California past and present including Los Angeles Metrolink and Metro Subway and Light Rail, San Diego Coaster, Sprinter and MTS Trolley, Altamont Commuter Express (Stockton), Caltrain and MUNI (San Francisco), Sacramento RTD Light Rail, and others...

Moderator: lensovet

Backshophoss
Posts: 6367
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2012 7:58 pm

Re: California High-Speed Rail (CAHSR) System

Post by Backshophoss » Tue Aug 06, 2019 6:10 pm

In the end of this "nightmare" becomes an "Improved route" for the San Joaquin services.. So this is how CaHSR dies on the vine.
And Metrolink,Coaster Caltrain with LOSSAN get needed $$$$ to improve service.
The Land of Enchantment is not Flyover country!

eolesen
Posts: 569
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 12:01 am

Re: California High-Speed Rail (CAHSR) System

Post by eolesen » Wed Aug 07, 2019 1:28 am

Huh.. That sounds a lot like what Anderson has been pushing for a strategy.... Build up the corridors, grow the ridership, and gradually increase the demand and support for higher speed services.

David Benton
Posts: 8783
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 11:29 pm
Location: New Zealand

Re: California High-Speed Rail (CAHSR) System

Post by David Benton » Mon Nov 04, 2019 1:14 am

Looking over the next options, I would think Palmdale - Tehapachi is the logical next section to complete. Its relatively easy , unpopulated with few roads to cross. Much is at ground level .
It would allow a passenger to be on the train from L.A to Tehapachi, a short bus trip to Bakersfield , then rail to existing destinations.
I'm sort of wondering why they didn't close this gap first. Probably because the L.a Palmdale , and Bakersfield - Tehapachi sections either side require a lot of tunnels and viaducts.
Moderator worldwide railfan , Rail travel & trip reports
The only train trips I regret are the ones I didn't take.

User avatar
lensovet
Posts: 1114
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 7:30 pm
Location: SF Bay Area, CA

Re: California High-Speed Rail (CAHSR) System

Post by lensovet » Fri Nov 15, 2019 10:51 pm

David Benton wrote:
Mon Nov 04, 2019 1:14 am
Looking over the next options, I would think Palmdale - Tehapachi is the logical next section to complete. Its relatively easy , unpopulated with few roads to cross. Much is at ground level .
It would allow a passenger to be on the train from L.A to Tehapachi, a short bus trip to Bakersfield , then rail to existing destinations.
I'm sort of wondering why they didn't close this gap first. Probably because the L.a Palmdale , and Bakersfield - Tehapachi sections either side require a lot of tunnels and viaducts.
It's been beaten to death but people hate mode transfers. train → bus → train? who would take that? rail fans don't count.
Paul Borokhov

Last RRPicArch addition – NJ Railfan.

NJT RailCalifornia commuter (mod)

Tadman
Posts: 9732
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 10:21 am

Re: California High-Speed Rail (CAHSR) System

Post by Tadman » Mon Jan 13, 2020 11:19 am

The algebraic method of computer highway capacity is a non-starter. Consider my recent drive from Chicago to Milwaukee: work zones, traffic jams, accidents, off ramps, bad weather left lane grannys... None of these allow for the two second rule and 55-65mph driving. The realistic average speed for that whole trip was nowhere near 65mph, and quite a lot of it was crawling past accidents, waiting to merge for road work, stoplights at on ramps...

Consider the Top Gear races where Clarkson drives a massively overpowered car and Hammond/May are forced to take public transit the whole way. While this is a parody of real lift, it illustrates just how limited drivers in something like a Nissan GTR or Mustang GT350 are despite being quite nimble and powerful.

I was quite disappointed with the entire CAHSR effort, but HSR and HrSR will play a relevant role in the future. Traffic in the really large metroplexes is just getting to be too heavy.
Dig the new rr.net Instagram account: @railroad_dot_net

Return to “California Commuter & Transit”