GojiMet86 wrote: ↑Tue Feb 16, 2021 8:51 pm
Here is the core of the actual statement in its original bureaucratese:
Key to this proof-of-concept and initial operations are passing tracks for trains operating interim service. In addition, track elements necessary for ultimate expanded dual track operation would be constructed, thus minimizing future service interruptions and costs. This will allow the Authority to phase track implementation throughout the Central Valley in a way that meets cash flow and funding availability.
“It’s not the ultimate vision, we will certainly need two tracks,” said Lipkin.
A. Passing tracks are not needed on a double track line.
B. Track elements necessary for ultimate expanded dual track operations would not be needed on a double track line.
C. Minimizing future service interruptions installing the second track would not be needed if built initially for dual tracks.
Everything in points A, B, &C suggest an initial single track operations. So the newsman was correct. The one not telling the truth was the spokesperson for the CHSR Authority - in their own words.
Initial operations and ultimate operations are two different things! The newsman was talking about initial operations, the CHSR spokesperson was sweeping initial operations under a rug and talking about ultimate operations if and when additional grants and funding was found.
Additionally, leased used HSR trainsets running at 40 mph lower maximum speeds would not be needed if the dual tracks were built initially. They could just go and buy or lease new train sets that could operate at the maximum track design speed.