4 ms·

Rancho Cucamonga is not Los Angeles. Victorville is not Los Angeles. How the hell are you supposed to get to Rancho Cucamonga without a car? For Las Vegas peopl

by dheera 3y ago

Rancho Cucamonga is not Los Angeles. Victorville is not Los Angeles. How the hell are you supposed to get to Rancho Cucamonga without a car? For Las Vegas people going to LA, what the hell are you supposed to do when the train dumps you in the middle of Rancho Cucamonga? If you want real ridership, public transit in both LA and LV needs to be functional. Connect it to Union Station and LAX if you want some ridership. On the Las Vegas end make it stop smack in the middle of the strip. Otherwise this thing is useless. Also 125mph is not high speed rail. LA-LV in 2 hours + time spent getting to the train station + buffer time to avoid missing the train + long slow car rental line on the other end while 15 people ahead of you each have a chit chat with the one employee dealing with the rentals would be more time than just driving end to end. These people just don't get it. Try LA-LV in 1 hour and maybe we're talking. But really, fix public transit in both cities first.

jwkpiano1 3y ago
Metrolink goes right from Rancho Cucamonga to Union Station in about 75 minutes. Did you bother to check that before posting?
- lotsoweiners 3y ago
  How convenient.
focusgroup0 3y ago
>Connect it to Union Station and LAX if you want some ridership. FTA: >Brightline West [...] aims to lay 218 miles (351 kilometers) of new track almost all in the median of Interstate 15 between Las Vegas and Rancho Cucamonga, California. It would link there with a commuter rail connection to downtown Los Angeles
- Symbiote 3y ago
  I hope they can run a more frequent service, or at least alter the times to match up with the HSR, once service begins. It's currently only hourly after the morning, and doesn't run after 7pm. https://metrolinktrains.com/schedules/?type=station&originId=121&destinationId=107&weekend=0 https://metrolinktrains.com/schedules/?type=station&originId...
- dheera 3y ago
  > It would link there with a commuter rail connection to downtown Los Angeles So cut the commuter rail crap and just send the bullet trains to downtown Los Angeles? Put another way, they've cut 4 hours of driving into 3 hours of train riding where you can't even get 3 hours of sleep and have to haul your luggage to another platform, likely up and down some stairs, 2 hours into it. And you still need to deal with transit once you arrive, so add another hour to get wherever you're actually going in LA (if you're lucky with the traffic). Time savings is zero.
  - seanp2k2 3y ago
    Yup, just like flying between SF and LA. It takes the same amount of time as driving once you factor in all the other BS that airports entail. Charter planes are definitely faster but an order of magnitude more expensive. JSX is a decent alternative if you live near OAK and want to go to BUR. JSX out of SJC would be awesome, but not as awesome as a $50 high-speed train ride to LA that took the same time door-to-door as JSX.
kwhitefoot 3y ago
The British Rail HST started development in 1970 and was running at 125 mph in 1976. The US is only fifty years late.
- satiric 3y ago
  There's a lot of anecdotal evidence that some American steam locomotives went >120 mph in passenger service (the Milwaukee Road's F7's and the Pennsylvania Railroad's S1's, for example). I believe if you look at the PRR timetables, they had some routes that averaged 80 mph between stops, meaning they almost certainly hit a max speed at least over 100 mph. The US didn't have the same speed record contests that the Brits did though, so there's no official record. In 1947 a law was passed requiring trains above 79mph to have some kind of automatic train stop system, so that ended most of the high speed steam service.
  - lmm 3y ago
    The UK's record-setting locomotives were pre-war. The HSTs were only a moderate increment over the existing "deltics", but it gets much harder to add that extra bit of speed for true high-speed rail (and there's no real evidence that US steam trains ever achieved 125mph, even though 100mph+ running was routine on some routes).
    - satiric 3y ago
      For those interested, this is a good video that summarizes the US's high speed steam locomotives, from a YouTuber who works on steam locomotives (despite the title, it's fact oriented and there's not too much flag waving). There is some evidence, but it's not conclusive. https://youtu.be/hVtVk3T80hA?si=Y8PYYt4IRakKLRDg https://youtu.be/hVtVk3T80hA?si=Y8PYYt4IRakKLRDg
  - kwhitefoot 3y ago
    Great Western Railway locomotives had automatic stop long before the end of steam. Why would having to have that automated put an end to high speed steam service?
ggm 3y ago
They've started on the parts they could get land rights quickly, non-contentiously. The other bit, the (sub)urban runs each end will demand much more capex, and probably horrendous NIMBY pushback. Once this is done, the rest will follow. The speed claims are good: going in saying it will be shinkansen fast, 350kph would be suicidal when it can't do it. Going to market on 125MPH means when they exceed it (and they will) it will be better for them. I think they have made savvy financial choices. I get your pushback, it will suck living the commute delays either side. You think it kills it. I think it's a forcing function.
- dheera 3y ago
  Thing is, I'm really a big public transit fan. I see time and time again that the US just doesn't get how to build a public transit system that the middle class wants to use, and would prefer to use when they already have a car. In countries where it works, it's a non-issue to get to/from the train station on both sides, and the train stations have ample good food options (real food; not a Dunkin Donuts), clean restrooms, direct connections to subways without having to even exit the building. It's an all-around pleasant experience. I suppose, if they can go to market on 125mph, fine, but I'm rather pessimistic that anyone who lives in LV or LA (especially) would use it considering the sad state of public transit in both cities. To be honest, faster rail between Boston - NYC - Washington (on the order of 1.5 hours between Boston-NYC and 1.5 hours between NYC-Washington, which is doable at Shinkansen/CRH speeds) would be a better market in my opinion until the west coast can get their shit together with public transit (if ever). There's plenty of business need on the east coast for faster trains, the space for the rails is already carved out by Amtrak's stupidly-slow Acela Express, and all 3 cities have excellent public transit, good enough that a significant chunk of the population of all 3 actually lives car-free.
  - coding123 3y ago
    Tons, I mean TONS of people drinking alcohol and or consuming THC will want to use that service. There will be piss all over the train if they don't put in a bathroom. which they wont because they never do...
JumpCrisscross 3y ago
> If you want real ridership, public transit in both LA and LV needs to be functional Perfect is the enemy of the good. Even if everyone who takes the train drives from Los Angeles to Rancho Cucamonga (or takes an Uber), they're still offsetting less-efficient transportation modes.
pants2 3y ago
It's approximately a 4 hour drive by car. The train might be able to do it in 2 hours, but of course there's the overhead you mention. The drive costs around $40 in gas one-way. If this train is indeed $80 per ticket one-way, then I fail to see how it will be competitive with driving. A group of 5 going to Vegas would pay 10X the cost of driving and lose a lot of flexibility.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago
  > A group of 5 going to Vegas would pay 10X the cost of driving and lose a lot of flexibility But they'd gain back the time they would have spent driving. Pretty much everyone I know in Los Angeles flies to Las Vegas, though it's an admittedly biased sample.
  - dheera 3y ago
    > Pretty much everyone I know in Los Angeles flies to Las Vegas Huh what? Almost everyone I know in LA drives to Las Vegas just to avoid having to deal with airports. And when you arrive in Las Vegas you already have your favorite car filled with your favorite snacks.
    - xcrunner529 3y ago
      And so the train will avoid the hassle and comfort issues of airport/airlines and you’re not screwed paying for parking (which you left out of your example for some reason).
      - sokoloff 3y ago
        Plenty of strip casinos offer free parking. Anything off-strip almost certainly has a free option nearby as well. I’ve probably driven 100+ days in Vegas over the years and doubt I’ve paid more than $100 in total for parking over that span.
yieldcrv 3y ago
> long slow car rental line on the other end while 15 people ahead of you each have a chit chat with the one employee dealing with the rentals it will be a fast line of ubers and yellow taxis but okay 2005 called. jokes aside, Brightline has delivered before. It has potential for grift but I think they’ll pull this one off. They already plan to use metrolink from downtown LA Union Station. not perfect but decent coordination.
mixmastamyk 3y ago
Rancho C. famously has a train station, now metrolink to downtown. From Union Station everywhere.
whartung 3y ago
My understanding is that it will share with the Metrolink station already in Cucamonga. Also there are already plan for a major bus hub for the regional area in Cucamonga as well. The magic that makes this work is that the right of way is down the middle of the existing I15 freeway. No real impact studies are likely necessary for that route, and once they hit Barstow, it’s quite flat. Friday commute traffic out of LA and OC to the area at the bottom of the pass is absolutely impacted by the crush of traffic heading over the Cajun pass into the high desert. Not all of it is Vegas bound, but much of it is. I am curious how they will get through the pass. I’m assuming they’ll lease ROW from either UP or BNSF, as they own the two sets of tracks currently over the pass.
el_don_almighty 3y ago
I saw Bugs Bunny take a train to Rancho Cucamonga https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWHYRjYYLqY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWHYRjYYLqY
- el_don_almighty 3y ago
  Ooops, it was ppp pp p pp Porky PP p pp PP P PIg

by dheera 3y ago

jwkpiano1 3y ago

Metrolink goes right from Rancho Cucamonga to Union Station in about 75 minutes. Did you bother to check that before posting?

lotsoweiners 3y ago
How convenient.

focusgroup0 3y ago

>Connect it to Union Station and LAX if you want some ridership. FTA: >Brightline West [...] aims to lay 218 miles (351 kilometers) of new track almost all in the median of Interstate 15 between Las Vegas and Rancho Cucamonga, California. It would link there with a commuter rail connection to downtown Los Angeles

Symbiote 3y ago
I hope they can run a more frequent service, or at least alter the times to match up with the HSR, once service begins. It's currently only hourly after the morning, and doesn't run after 7pm. https://metrolinktrains.com/schedules/?type=station&originId=121&destinationId=107&weekend=0 https://metrolinktrains.com/schedules/?type=station&originId...
dheera 3y ago
> It would link there with a commuter rail connection to downtown Los Angeles So cut the commuter rail crap and just send the bullet trains to downtown Los Angeles? Put another way, they've cut 4 hours of driving into 3 hours of train riding where you can't even get 3 hours of sleep and have to haul your luggage to another platform, likely up and down some stairs, 2 hours into it. And you still need to deal with transit once you arrive, so add another hour to get wherever you're actually going in LA (if you're lucky with the traffic). Time savings is zero.
- seanp2k2 3y ago
  Yup, just like flying between SF and LA. It takes the same amount of time as driving once you factor in all the other BS that airports entail. Charter planes are definitely faster but an order of magnitude more expensive. JSX is a decent alternative if you live near OAK and want to go to BUR. JSX out of SJC would be awesome, but not as awesome as a $50 high-speed train ride to LA that took the same time door-to-door as JSX.

kwhitefoot 3y ago

The British Rail HST started development in 1970 and was running at 125 mph in 1976. The US is only fifty years late.

satiric 3y ago
There's a lot of anecdotal evidence that some American steam locomotives went >120 mph in passenger service (the Milwaukee Road's F7's and the Pennsylvania Railroad's S1's, for example). I believe if you look at the PRR timetables, they had some routes that averaged 80 mph between stops, meaning they almost certainly hit a max speed at least over 100 mph. The US didn't have the same speed record contests that the Brits did though, so there's no official record. In 1947 a law was passed requiring trains above 79mph to have some kind of automatic train stop system, so that ended most of the high speed steam service.
- lmm 3y ago
  The UK's record-setting locomotives were pre-war. The HSTs were only a moderate increment over the existing "deltics", but it gets much harder to add that extra bit of speed for true high-speed rail (and there's no real evidence that US steam trains ever achieved 125mph, even though 100mph+ running was routine on some routes).
  - satiric 3y ago
    For those interested, this is a good video that summarizes the US's high speed steam locomotives, from a YouTuber who works on steam locomotives (despite the title, it's fact oriented and there's not too much flag waving). There is some evidence, but it's not conclusive. https://youtu.be/hVtVk3T80hA?si=Y8PYYt4IRakKLRDg https://youtu.be/hVtVk3T80hA?si=Y8PYYt4IRakKLRDg
- kwhitefoot 3y ago
  Great Western Railway locomotives had automatic stop long before the end of steam. Why would having to have that automated put an end to high speed steam service?

ggm 3y ago

They've started on the parts they could get land rights quickly, non-contentiously. The other bit, the (sub)urban runs each end will demand much more capex, and probably horrendous NIMBY pushback. Once this is done, the rest will follow. The speed claims are good: going in saying it will be shinkansen fast, 350kph would be suicidal when it can't do it. Going to market on 125MPH means when they exceed it (and they will) it will be better for them. I think they have made savvy financial choices. I get your pushback, it will suck living the commute delays either side. You think it kills it. I think it's a forcing function.

dheera 3y ago
Thing is, I'm really a big public transit fan. I see time and time again that the US just doesn't get how to build a public transit system that the middle class wants to use, and would prefer to use when they already have a car. In countries where it works, it's a non-issue to get to/from the train station on both sides, and the train stations have ample good food options (real food; not a Dunkin Donuts), clean restrooms, direct connections to subways without having to even exit the building. It's an all-around pleasant experience. I suppose, if they can go to market on 125mph, fine, but I'm rather pessimistic that anyone who lives in LV or LA (especially) would use it considering the sad state of public transit in both cities. To be honest, faster rail between Boston - NYC - Washington (on the order of 1.5 hours between Boston-NYC and 1.5 hours between NYC-Washington, which is doable at Shinkansen/CRH speeds) would be a better market in my opinion until the west coast can get their shit together with public transit (if ever). There's plenty of business need on the east coast for faster trains, the space for the rails is already carved out by Amtrak's stupidly-slow Acela Express, and all 3 cities have excellent public transit, good enough that a significant chunk of the population of all 3 actually lives car-free.
- coding123 3y ago
  Tons, I mean TONS of people drinking alcohol and or consuming THC will want to use that service. There will be piss all over the train if they don't put in a bathroom. which they wont because they never do...

JumpCrisscross 3y ago

> If you want real ridership, public transit in both LA and LV needs to be functional Perfect is the enemy of the good. Even if everyone who takes the train drives from Los Angeles to Rancho Cucamonga (or takes an Uber), they're still offsetting less-efficient transportation modes.

pants2 3y ago

It's approximately a 4 hour drive by car. The train might be able to do it in 2 hours, but of course there's the overhead you mention. The drive costs around $40 in gas one-way. If this train is indeed $80 per ticket one-way, then I fail to see how it will be competitive with driving. A group of 5 going to Vegas would pay 10X the cost of driving and lose a lot of flexibility.

JumpCrisscross 3y ago
> A group of 5 going to Vegas would pay 10X the cost of driving and lose a lot of flexibility But they'd gain back the time they would have spent driving. Pretty much everyone I know in Los Angeles flies to Las Vegas, though it's an admittedly biased sample.
- dheera 3y ago
  > Pretty much everyone I know in Los Angeles flies to Las Vegas Huh what? Almost everyone I know in LA drives to Las Vegas just to avoid having to deal with airports. And when you arrive in Las Vegas you already have your favorite car filled with your favorite snacks.
  - xcrunner529 3y ago
    And so the train will avoid the hassle and comfort issues of airport/airlines and you’re not screwed paying for parking (which you left out of your example for some reason).
    - sokoloff 3y ago
      Plenty of strip casinos offer free parking. Anything off-strip almost certainly has a free option nearby as well. I’ve probably driven 100+ days in Vegas over the years and doubt I’ve paid more than $100 in total for parking over that span.

yieldcrv 3y ago

> long slow car rental line on the other end while 15 people ahead of you each have a chit chat with the one employee dealing with the rentals it will be a fast line of ubers and yellow taxis but okay 2005 called. jokes aside, Brightline has delivered before. It has potential for grift but I think they’ll pull this one off. They already plan to use metrolink from downtown LA Union Station. not perfect but decent coordination.

mixmastamyk 3y ago

Rancho C. famously has a train station, now metrolink to downtown. From Union Station everywhere.

whartung 3y ago

My understanding is that it will share with the Metrolink station already in Cucamonga. Also there are already plan for a major bus hub for the regional area in Cucamonga as well. The magic that makes this work is that the right of way is down the middle of the existing I15 freeway. No real impact studies are likely necessary for that route, and once they hit Barstow, it’s quite flat. Friday commute traffic out of LA and OC to the area at the bottom of the pass is absolutely impacted by the crush of traffic heading over the Cajun pass into the high desert. Not all of it is Vegas bound, but much of it is. I am curious how they will get through the pass. I’m assuming they’ll lease ROW from either UP or BNSF, as they own the two sets of tracks currently over the pass.

el_don_almighty 3y ago

I saw Bugs Bunny take a train to Rancho Cucamonga https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWHYRjYYLqY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWHYRjYYLqY

el_don_almighty 3y ago
Ooops, it was ppp pp p pp Porky PP p pp PP P PIg