Comments on: Follow the People - Follow the Lights! http://trainblog.com/2007/10/follow-the-people-follow-the-lights/ TrainBlog - Blogging about passenger trains, high-speed rail, Amtrak, Caltrain, VTA, railroads, transit, public transportation, passenger rail advocacy and related politics. Wed, 08 Sep 2010 08:17:22 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5 By: State of High-Speed Rail Transport in US « Passing Loop http://trainblog.com/2007/10/follow-the-people-follow-the-lights/#comment-112857 State of High-Speed Rail Transport in US « Passing Loop Tue, 30 Dec 2008 13:14:35 +0000 http://trainblog.com/2007/10/follow-the-people-follow-the-lights/#comment-112857 [...] future is not all that bleak. California High-Speed seems to be picking steam. Newspapers and bloggers are joining the discussion about proposed routes. They are talking about and tracking the issues [...] […] future is not all that bleak. California High-Speed seems to be picking steam. Newspapers and bloggers are joining the discussion about proposed routes. They are talking about and tracking the issues […]

]]> By: Mike http://trainblog.com/2007/10/follow-the-people-follow-the-lights/#comment-78916 Mike Sun, 13 Jul 2008 21:38:14 +0000 http://trainblog.com/2007/10/follow-the-people-follow-the-lights/#comment-78916 Watching from Oregon with great interest the struggle for HSR in California to emerge from the womb and begin to grow. I hope I live long enough to ride on a true high-speed American train. Why agonize over the technical details of construction? A partnership with the great high-speed rail builders of Europe should calm all fears of mastering the terrain. Watching from Oregon with great interest the struggle for HSR in California to emerge from the womb and begin to grow. I hope I live long enough to ride on a true high-speed American train. Why agonize over the technical details of construction? A partnership with the great high-speed rail builders of Europe should calm all fears of mastering the terrain.

]]> By: Christopher Parker http://trainblog.com/2007/10/follow-the-people-follow-the-lights/#comment-65569 Christopher Parker Wed, 30 Jan 2008 18:38:26 +0000 http://trainblog.com/2007/10/follow-the-people-follow-the-lights/#comment-65569 1)Why are spurs bad for frequent north-south service between SF and LA? The line can handle a train at better than every 5 minutes, so there is enough capacity. The more trains that run on the route, the more the cost can be spread between many services. Spurs (or running extensions over existing rail lines) add a considerable benifit at relatively low additional cost. 2) No, this line is competing with the automobile. Most people who travel this route drive. True, the high-status people may most often fly, but most people are not high-status. So what will compete effectively with the automobile? Cheap, frequent and fast service is the answer that both Southwest Airlines and SNCF in France have found. There is a trade off when thinking about stops. A stop takes a lot longer for high speed rail - as much as 10 minutes, mostly deceleration and acceleration time. Also stops need to be located on passing tracks if they aren't to seriously compromise the capacity of the line. What is needed is a mix of non-stop and stopping trains. The more stops served, the more competitive the train will be against the automobile - but only if this is added service and does not compromise the other non-stop services. 1)Why are spurs bad for frequent north-south service between SF and LA? The line can handle a train at better than every 5 minutes, so there is enough capacity. The more trains that run on the route, the more the cost can be spread between many services. Spurs (or running extensions over existing rail lines) add a considerable benifit at relatively low additional cost.

2) No, this line is competing with the automobile. Most people who travel this route drive. True, the high-status people may most often fly, but most people are not high-status.

So what will compete effectively with the automobile? Cheap, frequent and fast service is the answer that both Southwest Airlines and SNCF in France have found.

There is a trade off when thinking about stops. A stop takes a lot longer for high speed rail - as much as 10 minutes, mostly deceleration and acceleration time. Also stops need to be located on passing tracks if they aren’t to seriously compromise the capacity of the line. What is needed is a mix of non-stop and stopping trains. The more stops served, the more competitive the train will be against the automobile - but only if this is added service and does not compromise the other non-stop services.

]]> By: Sylvain http://trainblog.com/2007/10/follow-the-people-follow-the-lights/#comment-64896 Sylvain Fri, 25 Jan 2008 02:08:04 +0000 http://trainblog.com/2007/10/follow-the-people-follow-the-lights/#comment-64896 Bonsoir! Je crois que la deuxième ligne ferroviaire à haute-vitesse en Amérique du Nord après le Corridor du Nord-Est va se réaliser. Car dans un article d'un journal de Californie disait que le Gouverneur de l'état de Californie M. Arnold Schwarzenegger veut soutenir la ligne à haute-vitesse projetée. Je crois que ce projet est en marche et va être mis bientôt sur les rails. Au Revoir et à bientôt. Good Evening! I guess that the second high speed rail line in North America after the Northeast Corridor will be realized. Cause an California's Newspaper article said that the State of California Governor Mr Arnold Schwarzenegger wants support the proposed high-speed line. Good Bye and See You Soon ! Bonsoir!

Je crois que la deuxième ligne ferroviaire à haute-vitesse
en Amérique du Nord après le Corridor du Nord-Est va se réaliser.

Car dans un article d’un journal de Californie disait que le Gouverneur de l’état de Californie M. Arnold Schwarzenegger veut soutenir la ligne à haute-vitesse projetée.

Je crois que ce projet est en marche et va être mis bientôt sur les rails.

Au Revoir et à bientôt.

Good Evening!

I guess that the second high speed rail line in North America after the Northeast Corridor will be realized. Cause an California’s Newspaper article said that the State of California Governor Mr Arnold Schwarzenegger wants support the proposed high-speed line.

Good Bye and See You Soon !

]]> By: Claude Muncey http://trainblog.com/2007/10/follow-the-people-follow-the-lights/#comment-51376 Claude Muncey Tue, 20 Nov 2007 02:22:22 +0000 http://trainblog.com/2007/10/follow-the-people-follow-the-lights/#comment-51376 As someone who has spent a lot of time both driving and on occasion riding trains through much of both corridors, there are a few issues missing here. The Altamont corridor is already dense with both freeway and rail lines -- and there is already problems in finding additional lane/rail line space in certain areas. Trying to build a new line, whether or not it is up to LGV standards, across the pass, through the now crowded Livermore Valley, and through the Sunol area to hit the Santa Clara/San Jose area that Kirk seems to be talking about is not particularly feasible. As someone who has spent a lot of time both driving and on occasion riding trains through much of both corridors, there are a few issues missing here. The Altamont corridor is already dense with both freeway and rail lines — and there is already problems in finding additional lane/rail line space in certain areas. Trying to build a new line, whether or not it is up to LGV standards, across the pass, through the now crowded Livermore Valley, and through the Sunol area to hit the Santa Clara/San Jose area that Kirk seems to be talking about is not particularly feasible.

]]> By: Chris at Eurostar http://trainblog.com/2007/10/follow-the-people-follow-the-lights/#comment-44739 Chris at Eurostar Mon, 22 Oct 2007 16:45:10 +0000 http://trainblog.com/2007/10/follow-the-people-follow-the-lights/#comment-44739 It depends what the objective is - if it is a high-speed intercity route then it cannot stop at every settlement on the way. Of course that can change if there is capacity for high-speed commuter services to run alongside (as there will be here in the UK on our new High Speed 1 line). Also, it depends on the provision of connections to the new line & how fast they are, and its very hard to tell what that is from a map of that kind. It depends what the objective is - if it is a high-speed intercity route then it cannot stop at every settlement on the way. Of course that can change if there is capacity for high-speed commuter services to run alongside (as there will be here in the UK on our new High Speed 1 line).

Also, it depends on the provision of connections to the new line & how fast they are, and its very hard to tell what that is from a map of that kind.

]]> By: Kirk http://trainblog.com/2007/10/follow-the-people-follow-the-lights/#comment-43603 Kirk Fri, 12 Oct 2007 19:56:26 +0000 http://trainblog.com/2007/10/follow-the-people-follow-the-lights/#comment-43603 Why the "X"'s in the East Bay ? The lights look pretty bright over there. Isn't there more people in the East Bay than on the Peninsula ? It's probably the cost of a Bay crossing at Oakland right ? Wouldn't it be cheaper and quicker to build an HSR "bypass" in the I-5 Corridor between Santa Clarita and San Jose (via Altamont) ? Existing lines could be upgraded to provide feeder service. Why spend additional billions to give Fresno 1.5 hr. service to L.A. and S.F. ? You could still get to Fresno from L.A. or S.F. in 3 hrs., just like L.A. to S.F., and save billions of dollars, by using BNSF between Altamont and Bakersfield ! Why the “X”’s in the East Bay ? The lights look pretty bright over there. Isn’t there more people in the East Bay than on the Peninsula ? It’s probably the cost of a Bay crossing at Oakland right ?

Wouldn’t it be cheaper and quicker to build an HSR “bypass” in the I-5 Corridor between Santa Clarita and San Jose (via Altamont) ? Existing lines could be upgraded to provide feeder service.

Why spend additional billions to give Fresno 1.5 hr. service to L.A. and S.F. ? You could still get to Fresno from L.A. or S.F. in 3 hrs., just like L.A. to S.F., and save billions of dollars, by using BNSF between Altamont and Bakersfield !

]]> By: Badtux http://trainblog.com/2007/10/follow-the-people-follow-the-lights/#comment-43261 Badtux Mon, 08 Oct 2007 08:01:24 +0000 http://trainblog.com/2007/10/follow-the-people-follow-the-lights/#comment-43261 The high speed rail is to compete with airlines, not with bus or commuter train. It doesn't matter that there's more people living along the Altamont Pass corridor, because the train won't stop there. There's already commuter rail serving those areas, BART, ACE (to Stockton), and Capital Corridor (to Sacramento). The advantage of the Altamont Pass route is that it requires less track for the Sacramento and Stockton spur, plus the environmental advantage of routing it over an already-existing rail corridor. The disadvantage is that the track will be significantly more expensive if you're running it directly from the trestle across San Francisco Bay to Altamont Pass due to passing through built-up areas and even running it parallel to the remains of the old trestle across the southern part of San Francisco Bay and the wetlands on either side will send environmentalists into the same tizzy that the Pacheco Pass route sends them into. The Pacheco Pass route does have a slight distance advantage over the Altamont Pass route, meaning a slightly faster trip from San Francisco to Los Angeles. Since the whole point is speed, that's not a small thing. On the other hand it's a tougher route to build because the Sierra Diablo are pretty wide down there. Basically, toss a coin. In my opinion the Pacheco Pass route is the correct one because it gets from SF to LA faster and the whole point is speed, but if it's too hard to build due to environmental issues, Altamont will work. The high speed rail is to compete with airlines, not with bus or commuter train. It doesn’t matter that there’s more people living along the Altamont Pass corridor, because the train won’t stop there. There’s already commuter rail serving those areas, BART, ACE (to Stockton), and Capital Corridor (to Sacramento). The advantage of the Altamont Pass route is that it requires less track for the Sacramento and Stockton spur, plus the environmental advantage of routing it over an already-existing rail corridor. The disadvantage is that the track will be significantly more expensive if you’re running it directly from the trestle across San Francisco Bay to Altamont Pass due to passing through built-up areas and even running it parallel to the remains of the old trestle across the southern part of San Francisco Bay and the wetlands on either side will send environmentalists into the same tizzy that the Pacheco Pass route sends them into.

The Pacheco Pass route does have a slight distance advantage over the Altamont Pass route, meaning a slightly faster trip from San Francisco to Los Angeles. Since the whole point is speed, that’s not a small thing. On the other hand it’s a tougher route to build because the Sierra Diablo are pretty wide down there.

Basically, toss a coin. In my opinion the Pacheco Pass route is the correct one because it gets from SF to LA faster and the whole point is speed, but if it’s too hard to build due to environmental issues, Altamont will work.

]]> By: Brandon Farley http://trainblog.com/2007/10/follow-the-people-follow-the-lights/#comment-42907 Brandon Farley Fri, 05 Oct 2007 05:20:01 +0000 http://trainblog.com/2007/10/follow-the-people-follow-the-lights/#comment-42907 Wow! Someone really knows how to rotate and tilt a map to depict Sacramento being a short hop to the Bat Area! Geesh! HSR should provide frequent and direct service between north and southern California. Commuter benefits of HSR should not be a requirement, but relegated as a secondary objective. The system should be about statewide travel and competing with airlines and long-distance auto travel. HSR branch lines or spurs are bad for frequent and direct north-south service to major metro areas. No more than 2 should be constructed; one to San Francisco and one to Sacramento. SoCal also has two; one to Irvine and one to San Diego. Wow! Someone really knows how to rotate and tilt a map to depict Sacramento being a short hop to the Bat Area! Geesh!

HSR should provide frequent and direct service between north and southern California. Commuter benefits of HSR should not be a requirement, but relegated as a secondary objective.

The system should be about statewide travel and competing with airlines and long-distance auto travel. HSR branch lines or spurs are bad for frequent and direct north-south service to major metro areas. No more than 2 should be constructed; one to San Francisco and one to Sacramento. SoCal also has two; one to Irvine and one to San Diego.

]]> By: Marcel Marchon http://trainblog.com/2007/10/follow-the-people-follow-the-lights/#comment-42661 Marcel Marchon Tue, 02 Oct 2007 18:31:22 +0000 http://trainblog.com/2007/10/follow-the-people-follow-the-lights/#comment-42661 I disagree. I think the main purpose should be to capture as many potential passengers as possible. That's why it needs to go through inhabited areas. Nobody lives in the empty areas south and east of San Jose, so what's the point of building a rail line through that "underserved area"? Also, Altamont provides a much shorter, faster and better route for Bay Area to Sacramento connections. I disagree. I think the main purpose should be to capture as many potential passengers as possible. That’s why it needs to go through inhabited areas. Nobody lives in the empty areas south and east of San Jose, so what’s the point of building a rail line through that “underserved area”? Also, Altamont provides a much shorter, faster and better route for Bay Area to Sacramento connections.

]]>