4 ms·

It has to get to SF and LA to be a success. A Fresno->SF express train would be a massive boondoggle.

RosanaAnaDana 4y ago
What you don't want to go to Fresno?
lokar 4y ago
A SF->Fresno->LA train will be a boondoggle. They should have used the existing right of way on I5, no stops between SJ and LA.
- SECProto 4y ago
  > They should have used the existing right of way on I5, no stops between SJ and LA. If you build high speed rail, you want ridership. Adding Fresno to the line takes the distance from San Jose to LA from roughly 340 miles to 366, adding roughly[1] 7 minutes to the route for express trains - hardly a dealbreaker. This also allows other trains to stop at Fresno and Bakersfield, adding a population of ~1million to the route, increasing its' viability. A straight shot down I-5 would save a few minutes but severely limit the economic and social benefits it will have by increasing access to the central valley. [1] 26 miles/220 miles per hour = 7.1 minutes. Trains that stop will add a few more minutes. Equivalent systems in every country with HSR have a mixture of express trains and local trains in this situation
  - Someone 4y ago
    Nitpick: on a 26 mile stretch with stops at both end, that train will do closer to half its top speed. It has to decelerate and accelerate one more time. I think that will add closer to 15 minutes to the time on the full stretch. But yes, they need riders, and thus intermediate stops. Most train passengers don’t ride the full track, just as most highway drivers don’t ride the entire highway.
    - SECProto 4y ago
      Yes, that is why I explicitly noted the "express train" thing in my footnote. The route itself is longer, so a direct train will take a little bit longer. A local train that stops will add more time.
  - mlyle 4y ago
    Bigger nitpick: 220MPH is the top speed. Average speed is going to be more like 130MPH, so more like 12 minutes (before considering the time for any stop).
    - SECProto 4y ago
      What is the speed on the central section though? The average is very heavily weighed down by track sharing on the SF end
      - lokar 4y ago
        And it will have to slow down through Fresno even it it express and not stopping
- seanmcdirmid 4y ago
  I5 doesn’t go through the Bay Area.
gedy 4y ago
They should have gone down the 101 corridor in the central coast area. The weather is pleasant and I could see people living along route and commuting to SF or LA. Central Valley was a dumb move.
- justapassenger 4y ago
  From high speed rail point of view, 101 corridor makes even less sense to put any stations there.
  - Gibbon1 4y ago
    Yeah there are a lot of people living on the east side of the Central Valley and few on the central coast.
- RhodesianHunter 4y ago
  High speed rail doesn't make frequent stops. The whole point is to get between major cities quickly.
  - kshacker 4y ago
    But you can use the same track to run high speed rail going the full distance as well as a lower speed train going only half the way (or it could be high speed too just with an extra stop).
- runarberg 4y ago
  I’m confused doesn’t the 101 corridor go down the coast between Salinas and San Luis Obispo? And doesn’t the existing Coastal Starlight go along it? I’ve actually taken that train. It takes 12 hours. A lot of that is padding because of the unreliability of the tracks, but also because the route is really tight. I doubt you would be able to improve the tracks there such that 5-6 hours would be possible, let alone the 2 hours through the valley.
  - gedy 4y ago
Gibbon1 4y ago
Much of the work in the Central Valley incorporates grade separation for the existing freight rail lines. So they have a small win every time they replace an at grade crossing with an overpass.

What you don't want to go to Fresno?

A SF->Fresno->LA train will be a boondoggle. They should have used the existing right of way on I5, no stops between SJ and LA.

SECProto 4y ago
> They should have used the existing right of way on I5, no stops between SJ and LA. If you build high speed rail, you want ridership. Adding Fresno to the line takes the distance from San Jose to LA from roughly 340 miles to 366, adding roughly[1] 7 minutes to the route for express trains - hardly a dealbreaker. This also allows other trains to stop at Fresno and Bakersfield, adding a population of ~1million to the route, increasing its' viability. A straight shot down I-5 would save a few minutes but severely limit the economic and social benefits it will have by increasing access to the central valley. [1] 26 miles/220 miles per hour = 7.1 minutes. Trains that stop will add a few more minutes. Equivalent systems in every country with HSR have a mixture of express trains and local trains in this situation
- Someone 4y ago
  Nitpick: on a 26 mile stretch with stops at both end, that train will do closer to half its top speed. It has to decelerate and accelerate one more time. I think that will add closer to 15 minutes to the time on the full stretch. But yes, they need riders, and thus intermediate stops. Most train passengers don’t ride the full track, just as most highway drivers don’t ride the entire highway.
  - SECProto 4y ago
    Yes, that is why I explicitly noted the "express train" thing in my footnote. The route itself is longer, so a direct train will take a little bit longer. A local train that stops will add more time.
- mlyle 4y ago
  Bigger nitpick: 220MPH is the top speed. Average speed is going to be more like 130MPH, so more like 12 minutes (before considering the time for any stop).
  - SECProto 4y ago
    What is the speed on the central section though? The average is very heavily weighed down by track sharing on the SF end
    - lokar 4y ago
      And it will have to slow down through Fresno even it it express and not stopping
seanmcdirmid 4y ago
I5 doesn’t go through the Bay Area.

gedy 4y ago

They should have gone down the 101 corridor in the central coast area. The weather is pleasant and I could see people living along route and commuting to SF or LA. Central Valley was a dumb move.

justapassenger 4y ago
From high speed rail point of view, 101 corridor makes even less sense to put any stations there.
- Gibbon1 4y ago
  Yeah there are a lot of people living on the east side of the Central Valley and few on the central coast.
RhodesianHunter 4y ago
High speed rail doesn't make frequent stops. The whole point is to get between major cities quickly.
- kshacker 4y ago
  But you can use the same track to run high speed rail going the full distance as well as a lower speed train going only half the way (or it could be high speed too just with an extra stop).
runarberg 4y ago
I’m confused doesn’t the 101 corridor go down the coast between Salinas and San Luis Obispo? And doesn’t the existing Coastal Starlight go along it? I’ve actually taken that train. It takes 12 hours. A lot of that is padding because of the unreliability of the tracks, but also because the route is really tight. I doubt you would be able to improve the tracks there such that 5-6 hours would be possible, let alone the 2 hours through the valley.
- gedy 4y ago

Gibbon1 4y ago

Much of the work in the Central Valley incorporates grade separation for the existing freight rail lines. So they have a small win every time they replace an at grade crossing with an overpass.