I see. So you've admitted that it'll be 10x a reasonable budget, and by going through the Central Valley it can't possibly meet the 2 1/2 hour time originally q

I see. So you've admitted that it'll be 10x a reasonable budget, and by going through the Central Valley it can't possibly meet the 2 1/2 hour time originally quoted. I think we're done here: over-promising, under-delivering, exactly what the conventional wisdom says. (Considering the tracks can't run in a straight line, 400 miles LA-SF is a ballpark figure. Even if the train averaged 200 mph, that'd be two hours. With stops, much more. But the projected route will be way longer than 400 miles, with more stops, and a slower average speed.) How the project ought to be done is pretty irrelevant; how it's actually going to be done, or has been done, is all that matters.