California High-Speed Rail Thread

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I wish them well, but I don't see this as being anything other than a massive boondoggle that California can't afford.  The lack of ridership interested in stopping at the intermediate points means that even once it is built this is basically going to be comparable to flying between the endpoints, and the time difference will be so insignificant, most people will base their decision on price.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I wish them the best of luck but there is no way this will make any money due to the prohibitive construction costs. Construction in California already costs more due to the hills and the earthquake risks. Throw in some mentally handicapped environmentalists and you start to understand why it takes so long to build anything in California. Due to them and the NIMBYS, many in Bay Area cities which voted 60%+ for HSR, the costs for the finished product will be out of this world. At that point it will either be uncompetitive vs air travel or it will be subsidized by the tax payers. Those who think there isn't a market for this don't know what they are talking about, but at the same time no one is going to pay more to travel by rail rather than plane.

If the legislature is serious about this, they should have tried to shield it from lawsuits somehow but I don't see it happening and the costs will keep ballooning.

Wouldn't be like that over here.

You've got reasonably short distances such that once you include the time costs of security, takeoffs, and landings that it is possible for train trips to take less time than flights.  San Francisco to Los Angeles, especially with the circuitous route needed to avoid the coastal mountains, will not be shorter than flying, even on an express that makes no local stops.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I strongly doubt a rail from LA to SF will ever be finished. It makes zero sense. It's cheaper and to fly. It't not needed. It is not the Bowash corridor that needs high speed rail, because the air lanes are full and with bad weather, things descend into chaos. But the Bowash corridor has lots of folks all along the line, while between LA and SF is largely nothing. What a waste.

I'm sure I accept all the logic here. It seems that an LA-Bakersfield-Fresno-Merced-San Jose-SF link is comparable to the Paris-Lyon-Marseille TGV in length and would serve a greater population. There are domestic French flights, but that particular TGV line successfully competes and covers its operating costs. Other than Lyon there's not much in the way of major population centers between Paris and Marseille along that main French line either.

France isn't nearly as mountainous (between its population centers) as California is.  So construction costs will generally be lower in France.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

For all those questioning the attractiveness of HSR connections, here a German example. Let's assume I am based somewhere near Hamburg and have a business meeting in Frankfurt / Main. The distance is around 500 km (a bit over 300 miles). By car, it takes me around 5 hours each way (including a toilet/ refreshing break, but excluding any traffic jam), which is above what I consider to be manageable for a one-day return-trip.

<snip - discussion of alternatives>

The main problem with your example is that it neglects geography.  HSR from SF to LA is geographically going to be a lot more like Milan to Frankfurt than than Hamburg to Frankfurt.  You've got those California mountains to deal with plus unless you do not care about having any other stations along the way that might make use of the tracks and thus help defray the expense, you'll be detouring thru the Central Valley