|
Post by johanragle on Oct 25, 2015 21:25:02 GMT -8
Yes facts and math are much less acceptable than the hsr authority's fantasy fact free math free numbers. That article is a good break down of how the schedule and budget of the Palmdale burbank segment are way off. I support hsr in concept, but the California hsr is a terrible project because it's many failures awful route planning and systematic frauds endanger hsr routes being built that could be successful. Like the east coast or LA to SD Look, I'm not going to bother going through his entire long-winded diatribe to offer rebuttals, but here's a quick recap of his sensationalism at work: First he brings up Seattle's Alaskan Way Viaduct fiasco and Boston's Big Dig as examples of cost overruns and delays in tunneling. Alaskan Way Viaduct was a giant bore tunnel in what was essentially mud. Who would have imagined it would be a trainwreck? The Big Dig was a major urban tearup. Of course it didn't go to schedule. You might as well compare apples to pomegranates. The only example that's even close to the proposed San Gabriel tunnels is the Swiss Gotthard Base tunnels... and those were completed on-time and on budget. Yes, what a great example of how not to do infrastructure. But he's not done yet. He dredges up anybody who can cast doubt on the geology of the project. The San Gabriels are a mess, but unlike the Santa Susana Mountains (a mess of folded sedimentary layers), they are a Late Triassic batholith that's been shoved up. He tries to portray the Gotthard Base Tunnels as being "easy" because of the Alps' uniformity. In fact, the Alps are extremely varied, ranging from hard granite to soft sedimentary and that didn't stop the Swiss. Tunnels have been done through faults before - Metro in fact constructed a very sophisticated box section where the Red Line crossed the Hollywood fault. But he only mentions that in passing, saying that the HSR tunnels will need to be "vastly more complex". Vartabedian, in a nutshell, is full of shit.
|
|
|
Post by culvercitylocke on Nov 4, 2015 7:35:34 GMT -8
The march to a 100 billion train continues as the hsr authority is forced to disclose more realistic numbers. And remember they only cut the budget down to 68 in the first place by illegally ending the hsr at burbank airport and shuttling passengers onto once a day diesel metrolink trains. If they had the train going to union station the price would have been billions higher. www.latimes.com/local/politics/la-me-bullet-cost-response-20151104-story.html
|
|
|
Post by johanragle on Nov 4, 2015 18:26:27 GMT -8
The march to a 100 billion train continues as the hsr authority is forced to disclose more realistic numbers. And remember they only cut the budget down to 68 in the first place by illegally ending the hsr at burbank airport and shuttling passengers onto once a day diesel metrolink trains. If they had the train going to union station the price would have been billions higher. Wheee! Vartabedian. Again. He's not even trying to hide the smell of excrement, he's just backpedaling and hoping nobody notices because they're too busy frothing over the $$$ figures that he's dangling from his fishing line.
WHAT PART OF "DRAFT" IS SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND?
|
|
|
Post by culvercitylocke on Mar 4, 2016 10:21:07 GMT -8
Panicked bullet train officials have officially delayed it another three years. Additionally they've reduced the tunnel diameter to save money, so it can only go 130 mph through tunnels now (again with the world's slowest bullet train) More significantly they've also eliminated emergency ventilation to save money. That last one seems to signal the project is dead. www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-bullet-plan-20160304-story.html But perhaps the delay will buy time to replace the route with a hyperloop, a two mile test track of which is currently under construction.
|
|
|
Post by johanragle on Mar 4, 2016 14:37:11 GMT -8
How is it, exactly, that we are unable to match projects that we accomplished fifty or a hundred years ago, or even match Japanese projects of similar scope and complexity today?
I'll tell you how: because everybody is so goddamned concerned about what shit they don't want going a hundred feet below their backyard, or a few miles away. Because entitled pricks think their "property rights" give them a magic veto on any public works project that comes within fifty miles of their house. Because these people think that power lines cause cancer, that sonic vibrations from trains passing through a tunnel hundreds of feet underground and miles away will induce earthquakes or some similar baloney, that the noise from a train is more disruptive than a gigantic concrete sewer full of noisy, polluting cars and tractor-trailers.
Ralph Vartabedian has a job at the LA Times because he appeals to the paper's affluent, mostly white, mostly suburban, don't-build-shit-in-my-backyard readership. He is not a reporter. He is a partisan hack. Any development that would cast the train in a good light is ignored; only the shit gets written up into an article. Let's completely ignore the economic advantages of the train. We'll put a tiny blurb from a Teamsters rep in at the end to make up for it, but not really, because we know that our affluenza-afflicted readership absolutely loathes the Teamsters.
I won't say that I'm not disappointed the train won't be coming to LA sooner. But the early plan to connect to LA in phase 2 was always a bit over-optimistic, and the authority is now adjusting their schedule.
As for adjusting the tunnel diameter to save money, well, let's give a hearty round of applause to all the obstructionist Republicans out in rural California and their rabidly anti-government voter base! This is how infrastructure gets to die in America: a death of a thousand papercuts afflicted by those who have no interest in what they can do for their country, but who always ask what their country can do for them.
Anyway, have a nice day.
|
|
|
Post by culvercitylocke on Mar 4, 2016 15:30:29 GMT -8
Yeah the 13% reduction in tunnel size to save money and the decision to not comply with mandatory safety features both seem pretty significant developments that indicate the end is near fir the bullet train. The bureaucrats administering the hsr authority have had nice cushy jobs for eight years without having to build anything, I'm sure they're just trying to stretch that into a few more years of paychecks before the whole thing collapses.
|
|
|
Post by johanragle on Mar 4, 2016 16:34:10 GMT -8
If I had a nickel for every time somebody said that the end is near for the bullet train, I'd have a shitload of nickels.
Repeating a statement that is false in the hopes that it becomes true is called a self-fulfilling prophesy, and that is exactly what every opponent of the train has been doing so far. The conversation always started with "no, we can't", and then the opponents set about finding ways to stop it. Then, every time they had a legal victory or managed to get funding slashed by Congress, they'd take to the papers to crow about it.
This is what is wrong with the country. Kennedy said "We do these things not because they are easy, but because they are difficult." But all I hear these days is "Well screw that! If it's difficult, why the hell should we be stuck paying for it? Leave the problems to the next generation to fix!"
|
|
|
Post by culvercitylocke on Mar 4, 2016 19:06:57 GMT -8
We should be building the train in the ballot proposal voted on. Not this monstrous Frankenstein. Everything about the world's slowest bullet train is bad.
|
|
|
Post by johanragle on Mar 4, 2016 22:02:45 GMT -8
We keep getting forced to compromise on the plan from the ballot proposal because (A) nobody wants to actually pony up their share of funding, and (B) everyone keeps coming up with new and creative roadblocks to throw in the way of the project.
Let's not forget that the whole reason CHSRA started looking at the massive tunnels under the San Gabriels in the first place was because of NIMBYism from the residents in Acton and Santa Clarita, who are opposed to the train at any cost.
Vartabedian calling out the tunnel compromises without mentioning the reason why CHSRA was even looking for compromise measures in the first place is extremely deceptive, and just demonstrates his partisanship on this matter. He should go work for a tabloid, because what he's doing isn't journalism, it's sensationalism.
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Mar 4, 2016 23:58:14 GMT -8
One of the good things about HSR is that it has the time restriction written in the Bond Measure. Just think if we somehow had the same in Measure R, we certainly wouldn't have Farmdale and look at the Crenshaw Line. They added Leimert Park, which was good, but also Hindry and another station right on top of the Century Station. Now that line is over $2B and isn't exactly going to be fast. The Crenshaw Subway Coalition wants even more money for it and is threatening a campaign against Measure R2.
Also, we have a bunch of Measure R projects that have no hope of being built without another tax measure or additional money like the West Santa Ana branch or the Sepulveda Pass.
|
|
|
Post by culvercitylocke on Mar 5, 2016 11:11:24 GMT -8
We keep getting forced to compromise on the plan from the ballot proposal because (A) nobody wants to actually pony up their share of funding, and (B) everyone keeps coming up with new and creative roadblocks to throw in the way of the project. Let's not forget that the whole reason CHSRA started looking at the massive tunnels under the San Gabriels in the first place was because of NIMBYism from the residents in Acton and Santa Clarita, who are opposed to the train at any cost. Vartabedian calling out the tunnel compromises without mentioning the reason why CHSRA was even looking for compromise measures in the first place is extremely deceptive, and just demonstrates his partisanship on this matter. He should go work for a tabloid, because what he's doing isn't journalism, it's sensationalism. And that the current rail highway route initially proposed is geographicly unsuitable for HSR and would have still required 20 miles of tunnels to force the geography of the route to work and that route is longer and every mile is expensive, particularly as the area around the initial route is a much more built out region. It is smart to propose the more direct tunnels under the national park for study because of those complicating factors. Ultimately everything in California is controversial, except the Olympics, apparently. CEQA reform is definitely needed, the law is not intended to be used as it is.
|
|
|
Post by jdrcrasher on Mar 5, 2016 14:50:13 GMT -8
This project just keeps on devolving in its vision...
I hate to say it, but at this point i'm starting to wonder if maglev might be the best option long-term. Sure, it's probably gonna be easily north of $100 billion and take 50 years to build, but let's be honest with ourselves: Are we REALLY going to see ANY type of high-speed rail in the US anytime sooner than that with the maniacs currently controlling Congress right now?
And let's face it, for all we know the new TGVs in Europe might be reaching their limits in terms of realistic speed, whereas maglev has a MUCH higher ceiling. With the latter maybe you could someday (100 years from then) "upgrade" it by turning it into a "vacuum" train by enclosing it air-tight, pushing speed potential MUCH higher (>1000 mph).
|
|
|
Post by culvercitylocke on Mar 5, 2016 22:34:54 GMT -8
Or instead of waiting a hundred years we can wait a few months for the hyper loop test, which is the vacuum tube you described basically.
|
|
|
Post by andert on Mar 6, 2016 14:49:31 GMT -8
If the hyperloop concept ends up working and being cost-effective, I think it will probably have a place in the transportation landscape, but wasn't one of the critiques of it that it couldn't come close to matching the capacity of traditional high speed rail? If it can't, then it seems like it occupies a different space than HSR -- more like a luxury express service, since demand would vastly outweigh a fixed supply. Better than doing nothing, of course, but perhaps the hyperloop operates in addition to HSR and not instead of HSR. Or am I totally off-base on the capacity issue?
|
|
|
Post by erict on Mar 6, 2016 19:21:51 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by andert on Mar 6, 2016 23:13:14 GMT -8
The hyperloop is functionally much more advanced. It allows you to approach speeds that previously might only be obtained in a vacuum tube without requiring total vacuum (which would be almost impossible to maintain over those distances). Instead, an intake at the front end of the capsule takes in the small amount of air that is in the tube and ejects it against the tube on all sides, allowing the capsule to essentially glide frictionlessly along the length of the tube while avoiding the cost of maglev, driven along the way by linear induction motors. In theory, it would be remarkably fast -- LA to SF in 35 minutes -- and far more cost efficient than a maglev train. It would only really work for stops that are substantially far apart, though, as it requires a long distance to accelerate to and decelerate from those speeds. It's also been criticized as perhaps not being the world's most comfortable mode of travel, though that can probably be worked on.
|
|
|
Post by matthewb on Mar 7, 2016 1:09:29 GMT -8
The "hyperloop" doesn't exist. If it did, it would be uncomfortable, low capacity, and difficult or unable to incorporate intermediate stops. Furthermore, the main expense of high speed rail, property acquisition, would be at least as big of an issue, as a pneumatic tube has to be ridiculously straight. How will you get through mountains when you require a ridiculously large turning radius?
If you want to wait *another* X years for the technology to be properly developed before building something at least as difficult to build as high speed rail, that has lower capacity, no or insufficient intermediate stops, is claustrophobic, inflexible, and uncomfortable, be my guest. I prefer to build what we can do today. HSR is flexible, useful, comfortable, and can effectively replace air travel within California. I prefer to do that rather than get distracted by something that doesn't exist.
|
|
|
Post by culvercitylocke on Mar 7, 2016 12:39:13 GMT -8
The hyperloop test track is being built as we speak.
The ca hsr will not replace any appreciable volume of LA to SF air trip as the train ticket is more expensive than airfare, takes 4 hrs end to end (factoring in all the stops, and all the switching to low speed trains necessary on the route) plus the inevitable TSA security process the government will insist on for the nation's only HSR line, riding the train will be incredibly inconvenient and uncompetitive with air transport.
|
|
|
Post by johanragle on Mar 8, 2016 15:47:24 GMT -8
If - and that's a big IF - the Hyperloop concept proves successful, I'm absolutely sure it will get mired down in the same mundane engineering, environmental, and property issues that are currently bedeviling CHSRA. There is no reason to halt progress on a "good enough" high speed rail solution in anticipation of a Perfect Magic Bullet that may or may not live up to expectations.
Best case, if the Hyperloop does in fact live up to Elon Musk's wildest dreams at absurdly low costs, we can float a tube off the coast for an express SD-LA-SF-Portland-Seattle route, and leave HSR for more mundane inland commuting needs.
|
|
|
Post by jdrcrasher on Mar 12, 2016 13:12:13 GMT -8
If - and that's a big IF - the Hyperloop concept proves successful, I'm absolutely sure it will get mired down in the same mundane engineering, environmental, and property issues that are currently bedeviling CHSRA. There is no reason to halt progress on a "good enough" high speed rail solution in anticipation of a Perfect Magic Bullet that may or may not live up to expectations. Best case, if the Hyperloop does in fact live up to Elon Musk's wildest dreams at absurdly low costs, we can float a tube off the coast for an express SD-LA-SF-Portland-Seattle route, and leave HSR for more mundane inland commuting needs. Yeah Hyperloop has to at least build a test track first. Heres the problem: The current plan for CAHSR is already a SHELL of the original 2008 plan. By the time its built and all the lawsuits and compromising are over with, it WILL NOT be "good enough". PERIOD. And once again, I ask you folks this question: Do you REALLY believe we're going to be getting any more funding from the Feds (or State, for that matter) that will be needed for any type of high-speed rail in the US anytime sooner than the time it would take to build a Maglev system instead?
|
|
|
Post by culvercitylocke on Mar 12, 2016 15:50:46 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by culvercitylocke on Mar 18, 2016 7:20:16 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by johanragle on Mar 18, 2016 7:58:14 GMT -8
Right - they'll muster the forces to block a state train route initiative, but where was the massive outcry when developers flattened multiple acres of the Tujunga Wash to build the Angeles National Golf Club? I used to live in Tujunga and I always thought that was the worst travesty - although the planned community that was added a number of years back that razed the hillsides above the wash was arguably even worse. You want outrage, Shadow Hills & S-T residents? Protest these greedy developers, because a big master-planned community will have a much, much greater impact on everything than a narrowly defined train route. Now: to counterbalance this thread's slant toward all things Vartabedian, here's a column a couple weeks ago from Michael Hiltzik, also in the LA Times, in which he argues that CA HSR is troubled but necessary. Now, I mean, for heaven's sake, this is a forum of transit enthusiasts. Surely we could try to be more supportive of a system to improve our state's public transit network? Yes, it has flaws, but we're still in the design process. Now is when those flaws need to get fixed, so instead of cheering obstructionists on, we should be looking at their criticisms and identifying ways to address them, as Roger Rudick argues in this piece for Streetsblog SF.
|
|
|
Post by culvercitylocke on Mar 26, 2016 10:41:34 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by culvercitylocke on Apr 8, 2016 22:29:21 GMT -8
Lots of bullet train news, the headline is they are no longer trying to build the tehachipi section at grades the train isn't specced for so its good they finally had a few Math and physics lessons In this process. Always good to learn the engineering basics on the job, right? Also, tunneling under Fullerton, elevated through east la, a stop at Norwalk, and best news, entering union station at grade. This project is still a disaster from all the scoping changes that made the costs vastly exceed the benefits of the line, but at least it's a little less of a disaster today. It's a shame if it is built that being so cost ineffective it'll kill any other hsr anywhere in the country. www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-bullet-train-reports-20160409-story.html
|
|
|
Post by johanragle on Apr 11, 2016 10:53:44 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by culvercitylocke on Apr 11, 2016 12:37:55 GMT -8
If it was actually a high speed line (it will be the slowest hsr line in the world!) and didn't feature the scoping bloat that dooms American infrastructure, I'd support it. However the project is a mega disaster from all conceivable metrics.
I wonder if one benefit if stopping so cal construction is that a few years in the future they realize they're 50 billion over budget with no so cal construction yet and as a result toss out the Palmdale dog leg and save 20 billion as a result. Palmdale was only added for the possibility if enriching the real estate speculators in the state legislature who were hoping they could enrich themselves and increase suburban sprawl in Palmdale by adding hsr there.
Iirc, a grapevine route was part of the eir.
|
|
|
Post by johanragle on Apr 12, 2016 11:17:29 GMT -8
At this point, I really don't care how close to the speed goals CHSRA will be. Amtrak's San Joaquin currently ends in Bakersfield, so if you want to take a train up to NorCal, you have two options: slog through traffic on an Amtrak Thruway bus to Bakersfield, or take the glacially slow Coast Starlight that runs one trip a day. Great for honeymooners, terrible for average travel let alone any sort of business use.
Even if the HSR plan wound up being pared back to nothing more than a San Diego-San Francisco run of the San Joaquin, as long as it ran 2-3 roundtrips per day, I'd be happy. It takes 6 hours (plus traffic) to drive LA-SF; as long as a train's timetable is competitive with driving, it'll be usable.
As for Palmdale, I agree that real estate speculators likely had a lot to do with it. However, if we're ever going to expand high-speed rail beyond California, it does make a logical jumping-off point for Nevada. Assuming that ever gets done. It's shaky reasoning, but that seems to be all that's left.
Finally, I live out in San Bernardino now. My choices for a home were either that or Lancaster. It was the lack of connectivity and services (nearest Kaiser hospital is Panorama City) that tipped the scales in favor of the IE. I'm definitely not in favor of enabling sprawl, but a HSR station in Palmdale would make commuting to LA so much easier than the current TWO HOUR Metrolink ride (on a good day, without breakdowns or collisions!) from the Antelope Valley.
|
|
|
Post by culvercitylocke on Apr 19, 2016 7:40:38 GMT -8
At this point, I really don't care how close to the speed goals CHSRA will be. Amtrak's San Joaquin currently ends in Bakersfield, so if you want to take a train up to NorCal, you have two options: slog through traffic on an Amtrak Thruway bus to Bakersfield, or take the glacially slow Coast Starlight that runs one trip a day. Great for honeymooners, terrible for average travel let alone any sort of business use. Even if the HSR plan wound up being pared back to nothing more than a San Diego-San Francisco run of the San Joaquin, as long as it ran 2-3 roundtrips per day, I'd be happy. It takes 6 hours (plus traffic) to drive LA-SF; as long as a train's timetable is competitive with driving, it'll be usable. As for Palmdale, I agree that real estate speculators likely had a lot to do with it. However, if we're ever going to expand high-speed rail beyond California, it does make a logical jumping-off point for Nevada. Assuming that ever gets done. It's shaky reasoning, but that seems to be all that's left. Finally, I live out in San Bernardino now. My choices for a home were either that or Lancaster. It was the lack of connectivity and services (nearest Kaiser hospital is Panorama City) that tipped the scales in favor of the IE. I'm definitely not in favor of enabling sprawl, but a HSR station in Palmdale would make commuting to LA so much easier than the current TWO HOUR Metrolink ride (on a good day, without breakdowns or collisions!) from the Antelope Valley. The speed is important it is in the name. If you want a new regular rail line do that. Likewise if the metro link is that bad, improve the metro link. and remember that wobbly two hour metro link route built 100 years ago is the route hsr is scheduled to follow on the 68 billion plan. given the speed constraints of a train on the metro link route, it is unlikely hsr will be much faster than the metro link train. Or they could abandon the ancient route and tunnel directly, but that sort of scoping change will add billions to the already astronomical price. San Diego is part of an alleged phase two of the hsr line and is not included in the ballot measure that authorized hsr. San Diego to la is the only place where there is sufficient demand for hsr service due to a lack of alternatives and inability to increase the capacity of freeway and air options for la to San Diego. Naturally, given that is the only part of the state with sufficient demand to support service, we are not actually building it. This is because the democrat party power structures are all centered in the Bay Area, and they believed they would be unable to persuade the north half of the state to support the ballot measure if la to San Diego were the project. So instead of a project built where demand was, instead of a project that could pass a cost benefit analysis like European or Japanese infrastructure, they immediately scope-bloated the project up to include every village north of la and south of Sacramento and now we're in our current 100 billion boondoggle for a train where there is little demand for the service.
|
|
|
Post by fissure on Apr 19, 2016 21:12:15 GMT -8
Likewise if the metro link is that bad, improve the metro link. and remember that wobbly two hour metro link route built 100 years ago is the route hsr is scheduled to follow on the 68 billion plan. given the speed constraints of a train on the metro link route, it is unlikely hsr will be much faster than the metro link train. Or they could abandon the ancient route and tunnel directly, but that sort of scoping change will add billions to the already astronomical price. I appreciate having a poster that isn't part of the pro-transit circlejerk, but could you please criticize the project on its merits instead of completely making shit up? That's like saying the 405 can't be faster than Sepulveda Boulevard because the latter winds through the pass. Guess what: move some dirt around and build some retaining walls and you can go straighter (and therefore faster) than the 19th century route! Even when the plan was to follow SR14, it didn't exactly follow the Metrolink tracks. The "scoping change" to tunnel directly already happened: the current alignment options don't even go near Santa Clarita.
|
|