4 ms·

The Link light rail project won't even reach Everett until 2036. That's about 40 miles of track in the 40 years since the project was approved. How is this su

The Link light rail project won't even reach Everett until 2036. That's about 40 miles of track in the 40 years since the project was approved. How is this supposed to work?

abcpassword 7y ago
It’s not. This is a pork project for anyone paying attention. If approved, this would be another disastrous boondoggle.
- jeltz 7y ago
  Isn't that worrying? That your country cannot do large infrastructure projects anymore. The US mamaged to build the interstates in the past and other poorer countries like Spain have successfully built extensive high speed railway networks.
  - meddlepal 7y ago
    Not really, the reality is there isn't enough demand for this kind of project. Between the fact there isn't that much traffic between these cities daily already and the terrain I have a hard time seeing this being worth it over air travel.
  - minikites 7y ago
    >That your country cannot do large infrastructure projects anymore. The US mamaged to build the interstates in the past The political right has convinced a large portion of the US population that _any_ government spending is wasteful and unnecessary. Those people don't see government spending as an investment, they see it as theft.
    - swebs 7y ago
      That's a pretty ridiculous strawmen argument.
      - minikites 7y ago
        >Anti-tax activist Grover Norquist famously declared, "I don't want to abolish government. I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub."
        swebs 7y ago
        And his name is often invoked because he's such a fringe extremist. I doubt even 5% of Americans would agree with him, much less the ~40% who identify as right-leaning as you seem to imply.
        organsnyder 7y ago
        He holds a massive amount of sway within the Republican party.
        larkost 7y ago
        It does not really matter whether those ~40% would agree. It only matter what portion of those would vote for someone who does. As a floor for that number I would submit that the Freedom Caucus has 32 of the 198 Republican seats in the house (~16% or Republican seats). Those Representatives have pretty much declared that they agree with him. So some percentage above that.
  - Nasrudith 7y ago
    Definitely and it highlights issues all around from the pork vehicles such that road budget proportion is a proxy for corruption to the idiot racist NIMBYs who block public transit claiming it will bring burglars to the neighborhood - when anyone can tell you trying to move furniture on a train is not easy, and a train with police on board and in phone contact is pretty much the worst escape vehicle you can choose.
  - paggle 7y ago
    Yes that is worrying and true. And it means that the upcoming century won't be America's the way that the previous ~century was. But that doesn't mean that we should just embark on the boondoggle anyways. If a once-capable professional athlete is aching and in pain and can't perform the way he used to, the solution isn't to step out on to the field and just give it a go. It's to fix what's ailing him first, or to just accept that his career is over.
Mvhsz 7y ago
High speed rail could share track with commuter lines in some cases, as acela does in the northeast corridor. And building through the rural parts of the state is generally easier, California essentially decided to only build the rural segment of their high speed rail due to cost. But in general you're correct that projects requiring new right of way are very challenging and expensive. Especially high speed rail with limited turn radius. Since the article mentioned a low-usage rail link between the cities, I would prefer to see a campaign to increase ridership. Maybe you could incrementally upgrade segments of that route that could support high speed rail.
- joking 7y ago
  it's not one of the problems with the us rail system, that the infrastructure is owned by private transport companies? how could you improve those railways if they are not yours to modify on first place?
- ken 7y ago
  Does sharing track ever work? Amtrak already has to share track with freight, and that's why Seattle to Portland is officially "3.5 hours" but the margin of error on that is +hours.
  - Mvhsz 7y ago
    Not from the PNW, but it sounds like amtrak rents track from a freight line to run this route. So it works in the sense that they got something resembling inter-city rail service for a tiny fraction of the capital costs up front. Even so, I'm guessing that there are options other than $50B of high speed track to improve the route. Maybe there's a few segments of track where a large fraction of the delays happen, and 30 miles of amtrak-owned track would really improve on-timliness. Just getting it from +hours to +minutes might draw some new users.
- chroem- 7y ago
  > High speed rail could share track with commuter lines in some cases Having ridden those very commuter lines, I can say that is not an option here. They are limited to 40mph along those routes because they follow a very windy path along the shoreline. There have been derailments from trains going too fast.

The Link light rail project won't even reach Everett until 2036. That's about 40 miles of track in the 40 years since the project was approved. How is this supposed to work?

abcpassword 7y ago

It’s not. This is a pork project for anyone paying attention. If approved, this would be another disastrous boondoggle.

jeltz 7y ago
Isn't that worrying? That your country cannot do large infrastructure projects anymore. The US mamaged to build the interstates in the past and other poorer countries like Spain have successfully built extensive high speed railway networks.
- meddlepal 7y ago
  Not really, the reality is there isn't enough demand for this kind of project. Between the fact there isn't that much traffic between these cities daily already and the terrain I have a hard time seeing this being worth it over air travel.
- minikites 7y ago
  >That your country cannot do large infrastructure projects anymore. The US mamaged to build the interstates in the past The political right has convinced a large portion of the US population that _any_ government spending is wasteful and unnecessary. Those people don't see government spending as an investment, they see it as theft.
  - swebs 7y ago
    That's a pretty ridiculous strawmen argument.
    - minikites 7y ago
      >Anti-tax activist Grover Norquist famously declared, "I don't want to abolish government. I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub."
      - swebs 7y ago
        And his name is often invoked because he's such a fringe extremist. I doubt even 5% of Americans would agree with him, much less the ~40% who identify as right-leaning as you seem to imply.
        organsnyder 7y ago
        He holds a massive amount of sway within the Republican party.
        larkost 7y ago
        It does not really matter whether those ~40% would agree. It only matter what portion of those would vote for someone who does. As a floor for that number I would submit that the Freedom Caucus has 32 of the 198 Republican seats in the house (~16% or Republican seats). Those Representatives have pretty much declared that they agree with him. So some percentage above that.
- Nasrudith 7y ago
  Definitely and it highlights issues all around from the pork vehicles such that road budget proportion is a proxy for corruption to the idiot racist NIMBYs who block public transit claiming it will bring burglars to the neighborhood - when anyone can tell you trying to move furniture on a train is not easy, and a train with police on board and in phone contact is pretty much the worst escape vehicle you can choose.
- paggle 7y ago
  Yes that is worrying and true. And it means that the upcoming century won't be America's the way that the previous ~century was. But that doesn't mean that we should just embark on the boondoggle anyways. If a once-capable professional athlete is aching and in pain and can't perform the way he used to, the solution isn't to step out on to the field and just give it a go. It's to fix what's ailing him first, or to just accept that his career is over.

Mvhsz 7y ago

High speed rail could share track with commuter lines in some cases, as acela does in the northeast corridor. And building through the rural parts of the state is generally easier, California essentially decided to only build the rural segment of their high speed rail due to cost. But in general you're correct that projects requiring new right of way are very challenging and expensive. Especially high speed rail with limited turn radius. Since the article mentioned a low-usage rail link between the cities, I would prefer to see a campaign to increase ridership. Maybe you could incrementally upgrade segments of that route that could support high speed rail.

joking 7y ago
it's not one of the problems with the us rail system, that the infrastructure is owned by private transport companies? how could you improve those railways if they are not yours to modify on first place?
ken 7y ago
Does sharing track ever work? Amtrak already has to share track with freight, and that's why Seattle to Portland is officially "3.5 hours" but the margin of error on that is +hours.
- Mvhsz 7y ago
  Not from the PNW, but it sounds like amtrak rents track from a freight line to run this route. So it works in the sense that they got something resembling inter-city rail service for a tiny fraction of the capital costs up front. Even so, I'm guessing that there are options other than $50B of high speed track to improve the route. Maybe there's a few segments of track where a large fraction of the delays happen, and 30 miles of amtrak-owned track would really improve on-timliness. Just getting it from +hours to +minutes might draw some new users.
chroem- 7y ago
> High speed rail could share track with commuter lines in some cases Having ridden those very commuter lines, I can say that is not an option here. They are limited to 40mph along those routes because they follow a very windy path along the shoreline. There have been derailments from trains going too fast.