Opinions/Editorials
See other Opinions/Editorials Articles
Title: Not all trains have to be boondoggles
Source:
Orange County Register
URL Source: https://www.ocregister.com/2019/10/ ... trains-have-to-be-boondoggles/
Published: Oct 30, 2019
Author: Editorial Board
Post Date: 2019-10-30 17:30:04 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 1396
Comments: 6
California’s high-speed rail system has been a slow-motion train wreck since 2008, when voters approved an initiative providing nearly $10 billion in bonds to fund a starter segment of a system to connect San Francisco to Los Angeles. An Orange County Register columnist rightly termed it “the very definition of a boondoggle.” This bullet train has been plagued with cost overruns. There’s no need for it, given that Southwest Airlines already takes passengers from L.A. to the Bay Area quicker and cheaper than rail ever will. Gov. Gavin Newsom scaled it back to focus on a segment through the San Joaquin Valley. It’s a far cry, though, from the original grandiose promises. It’s time to pull the plug. But high-speed rail, like most forms of transit, is not bad per se — provided such projects are based on their ability to cost-effectively solve transportation needs. By contrast, this one was designed with the political motive of luring Californians out of their cars to fight against climate change. This is what happens when government ideologues, rather than transportation planners, conceive major projects. By contrast, a proposed high-speed rail route connecting Los Angeles with Las Vegas has taken steps toward reality. A privately funded group is seeking regulatory approvals in Nevada and California. Trains could be running as early as 2023. This could address an actual traffic problem — as anyone knows who has driven north on Interstate 15 on a Friday night. Crowds want to go from Southern California to Vegas, which explains why the line has attracted private investment and the state plan to link Bakersfield to Merced has not. We’re not thrilled the Las Vegas project developer is seeking $800 million in tax-exempt private activity bonds, even though it’s a far cry from the $68 billion-plus in direct subsidies sought by California bullet-train officials. We’ll watch how this idea progresses. It’s a reminder, though, that transit systems based on demand and funded by investors can offer real-world solutions. Maybe our government can learn from them. At the very least, such projects are unlikely to become taxpayer sinkholes.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Deckard (#0)
Well that depends on how you look at it.... Plus there's only 1 place to get on {LAX airport} and 1 to get off {SFO airport} In contrast, trains usually have at least 3 different stops in major metro areas (for example: south-metro, central-metro and north-metro) So right off the bat, you save time driving to the one that's closest to where you're coming from, and get off at the one that's closest to your final destination... And the train only takes maybe 3~5 minutes at each station to let passengers on & off, so there's no lengthy delay there... (Not to mention no lengthy baggage security lines like they got in airports) And riding the train is much more spacious, no only for passengers, but also for any carry-on baggage they may be bringing with them... No... The OC Register Editorial Board doesn't understand the facts... They're merely an Echo Chamber for partisan talking points, and in the process, obstruct development of competitive transportation infrastructure in the state.
Good points. When you total all the rigamarole you have to go through to board a plane, the traveling time would be pretty much even The proposed bullet train route would ideally get a train passenger from 1 end of California to the other in only 2 hours and 40 minutes. A plane from LA to San Fran - 1 hour 21 minutes. And like you said, that doesn't count all the waiting around, add two hours minimum there. I don't know if you have to go through TSA to get on a train nowadays, there was some talk about it a couple years ago. Apparently the train they have now takes over 7 hours.
Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen. That's right. They say that you're supposed to get to the airport 2 hours before a domestic flight. Airports are not at the heart of downtown (except for ancient airports like San Diego's). LAX isn't. Neither is San Francisco's. You have to get to the airport. Park. Get inside, two hours before your flight, and while FLIGHT time may be thus and so, TAXI time at both ends adds time. At the destination, you have to wait for baggage. With all of the ancillaries associated with flight, and the inconvenient outlying places that airports lie, and taxi times, one must realistically add 3.5 hours to flight time. Essentially, anything within a 5 hour drive circle is faster to drive, or take a train.
Yeah, current Amtrak trains share the track with heavier freight trains and are limited to a maximum 79 mph... In contrast, Wikipedia says California HSR will travel at speeds up to 220 mph (slower in heavily populated metro segments, of course) along dedicated tracks... That's the problem with most of the rest of the country... the freight railroads are happy with their slow, lumbering freight trains and don't want to upgrade the tracks & signals to accommodate high speed passenger service... So passengers are stuck with poor service while the tracks are clogged with slow-moving corn/soybeans/coal/oil getting shipped overseas or cheap crap being imported from China & Mexico...
Yet even on the east coast lines that are heavily traveled and have been upgraded many times over the decades, giving the railroads and legislators and railroad regulatory bodies many chances to provide true high-speed rail service, they barely manage to exceed the speed of any car cruising on the same route alongside the train. And these are trains that are paying their own way without major subsidies.
True HSR requires dedicated infrastructure that is totally separate from freight service. So far, that doesn't exist anywhere in the USA... But a few segments are under construction, however I don't know which may be operational first: California or Houston to Dallas...
given that Southwest Airlines already takes passengers from L.A. to the Bay Area quicker and cheaper than rail ever will.
Are they just looking at flight time from LAX to SFO?
Or are they looking at time wasted in traffic getting to LAX in the first place, parking your car and then waiting around to get through airport security before boarding the plane... and since carry-on luggage is severely restricted, you spend a lot more time in the baggage area before going to the car rental area or Uber...
#2. To: Willie Green (#1)
time wasted in traffic getting to LAX in the first place, parking your car and then waiting around to get through airport security before boarding the plane...
The essential feature of government is the enforcement of its decrees by beating, killing, and imprisoning.
Those who are asking for more government interference are asking ultimately for more compulsion and less freedom.
#3. To: Willie Green (#1)
#4. To: Deckard (#2)
Apparently the train they have now takes over 7 hours.
#5. To: Willie Green (#4)
In contrast, Wikipedia says California HSR will travel at speeds up to 220 mph (slower in heavily populated metro segments, of course) along dedicated tracks...
#6. To: Tooconservative (#5)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]