California eyes French high speed train

[Flagg]

Source: AFP

California eyes French high speed train

PARIS, April 3, 2007 (AFP) - The US state of California is eyeing France's high speed train for a planned link between San Franciso and San Diego, the speaker of its state assembly said on Tuesday during a visit to France.

"We are contemplating in California the possibility of a high speed train that would go from the San Francisco Bay area to Los Angeles and San Diego, in South California. We're here to study the rail system," the speaker Fabian Nunez said.

France's TGV was on Tuesday attempting to set a new world speed record for a train on rails, with organisers aiming to hit at least 560 kilometres (350 miles) per hour.

"You have been ahead of time (in producing a) very practical rail system in France which can move people from one place to another," Nunez, California's third most powerful politician said.

<snip>

Read more: http://www.expatica.com/actual/article.asp?subchannel_id=25&story_id=38394

[wakeme2008]

1. High Speed trains would open so many cities.

Weekend in SF, no problem hop on the train in LA and you there....

[gorbal]

2. Okay, your forcing me to post this

I have been having trouble getting this song out of my head and this thread just brings it back-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uev2J_cBHjQ

[MHalblaub]

6. Better than with a plane but

I don't want to live near the tracks.

http://www.spiegel.de/videoplayer/0,6298,17262,00.html

Be careful both companies Alstom (TGV) and Siemens (ICE) are known to bribe.

[freethought]

40. Traveling on trains is awesome!!!

For anyone who has been to Europe and had the opportunity to travel on the rail system, it beats a plane hands down.
It was more comfortable, more relaxing, more pleasant and you get to see the countryside at eye-level. I had the chance to ride on the Italian rail system, Trenitalia, and do across-the-Alps ride from Venice to Vienna. I would not have changed anything.

I can see where traveling on the ground at that speed could un-nerve some people. On a plane, you're traveling at 500mph, but
one does not perceive to be traveling at that speed. On the ground, though, your perception would be different.

There is still the problem of cost. When people travel long distance it is that cheaper fare that they seek. The Acella was set up for the Northeast corridor as an alternative to flying to New York, Philly, or Washington D.C.. I have not heard about how much use the Acella gets. I do know that a round trip ticket from Boston to Ny,NY is about $100 and takes about 3 1/2 hours on Acella Express. Fly Jet Blue and the cost is about $80 bucks.

I would love to see this but the airlines will likely have none of it.

[Hieronymus]

66. Love the train. I've traveled through much of Europe by train and

it's awesome. One sees the countryside, can eat, sleep, or whatever. Also you travel from city center to city center .. no wasted time to and from airports.
California has been talking about a high speed train for years. The governor is not into the idea.

[freethought]

72. That's too bad

I was able to see part of Italy and part of Austria by rail. In Italy you get to see how people make use of their back yard, grape vines and vegtable gardens. Even people in high rise apartments will have plants of some sort on the balcony.
I found travel by train to be comfortable and relaxing.

I think Americans would warm to the idea if theywere given the chance to try it out vs. being herded
like cattle onto a plane.

I would like to see this go somewhere.

[Crayson]

78. Speed itself is not unnerving...

Ever driven 200 km/h ?
In a well sprung car with a hard steering wheel that doesn't wobble and decent noise isolation on a road that goes straight ahead, you don't notice the difference.

You only notice speed when a change of direction takes place or a bump in the road (vertical change of direction).
So basically you just have to build smooth railroad tracks with as few curves as possible and you can go at whatever speed you want(until crosswinds become a problem ^_^)

[Hieronymus]

96. I was unaware of the tremendous speed unless I looked directly down

at the ground. One is able to take in the scenery. Love it.
I also met some interesting people.:hi:

[Tektonik]

3. YES PLEASE

and while they're at it, link it to Las Vegas :P

[wakeme2008]

4. No you really do not want a High Speed Train to Lost Wages

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Tektonik]

5. shh leave me to my vices

:P

[yellowcanine]

9. And then Seattle. Sky is the limit. Better yet, sink a pneumatic tube off the coast.

http://zapatopi.net/inteli-tube/

[ronnykmarshall]

10. Wouldn't that be cool?

We fly to LV, but McCarin Airport (LAS) is a pain in ass.

[IronLionZion]

35. Vegas/Nevada ought to pay for that train

since much of California's GDP will be directly deposited there if a high speed train is built.

meanwhile, YES Cal obviously needs trains. And SoCal definitely needs more local trains. Damn that traffic.

[entanglement]

7. Haven't people floated the idea of Maglevs in California in the past?

n/t

[Sirveri]

46. yes, and it never went ANYWHERE.

Always died on the table. Too damned expensive and the thought is that no one would use it.

[NormanYorkstein]

65. high tech Japanese maglevs make perfect sense for California

Imagine the cheap, fast, and environmentally friendly trip from SD-LA-SF. In fact CA is the perfect place for them, possibly even better than the North East which could use them as well. Japan has already perfected this technology, it's strictly a matter of politics that we don't have them already. It's a win-win for the economy and the environment.

[Crayson]

79. Energy consumption

I wonder.
How much power does a cool futuristic maglev eat?
Opposed to a conventional electrical train?

[TommyO]

94. Ask and ye shall receive

This is comparing Transrapid's maglev with the German ICE trains.

http://www.transrapid.de/cgi-tdb/en/basics.prg?session=9be8fa13451ed8b9&a_no=47

At similar speeds, the Transrapid maglev uses less electricity.

[Tektonik]

8. also it's really sad that a state has to go on organizing this

Whereas the federal gvmt should be in charge of this. If we were such a great country, we'd have a transcontinental high speed railline or at least high speed hubs (CA, Texas, great lake states, NE, etc)

[jwirr]

11. Mass transit is the way to go. If it were to come east across the

country many of the tracks are taken up but the land is often still owned by the old railroad companies.

[Duer 157099]

12. Oooo! I want one!

They should have done this 20 years ago

[TreasonousBastard]

13. About 15 years or so ago, Texas...

was planning a high speed train somewhere, but saw that Southwest Airlines was charging about $35 for a quick ride between, say, Austin and Houston. Figuring no one would take the train if they could fly that cheap, they dropped the idea.

Times have changed since then, of course, and it just might be time for train travel to be revived-- unless the trains start having stupid security hassles.

Dunno about 350mph, though. The French keep making these fast trains, but found that passengers get queasy looking out the windows at around 200mph. And just imagine one passing your back yard, or watching one go by at a grade crossing as the wind whips up tiny tornados...

Anyway, even our crappy old Long Island Railroad does over 90 on the better stretches, and AMTRAK's Acela does pretty well where the tracks aren't falling apart, so we can do a fast train if we want to.

[AnneD]

18. You can't get through West Texas fast enough....

and we are ideal for it. Imagine El Paso, Dallas, Fort Worth, San Antonio, Houston, and Laredo connected. What a paradise. I seem to remember tham talkiing about is once before.

[harpboy_ak]

26. no grade crossings

TGVs and Brit 125s don't have grade crossings, nor does Amtrak Acela. Trains always seem to be behind thick concrete walls in urban areas, and the trains slow down to around 100 mph when passing through stations.

TGVs aren't noisy compared to local trains. Their tracks are welded, eliminating much of the noise, and trains pass much more quickly, shortening the duration of the noise. And the TGVs are electric.

[Tesha]

76. Actually, the Acela does still have a few grade crossings. :-( (NT)

[ProudDad]

29. The trick

is to get a seat facing backwards.

It's no problem then...

[RaleighNCDUer]

14. Do we REALLY want high speed trains in earthquake country?

Any temblor over 3.0 would be a threat to the track and railbed, which would need electronic sensors along its entire length to alert to any breaks or undue stresses. I should think the track maintenance alone would be prohibitive.

[soothsayer]

17. yes, it will make an awesome disaster movie! Japan has 'em, tho,

don't they? Earthquakes AND bullet trains, right?

[MindPilot]

43. Gamera, Godzilla and other train-eating radioactive monsters!!!

The Japanese are sow screwn!!

[CrispyQ]

47. Gotta love the BOC

With a purposeful grimace and a terrible sound
He pulls the spitting high tension wires down

Helpless people on a subway train
Scream bug-eyed as he looks in on them

He picks up a bus and he throws it back down
As he wades through the buildings toward the center of town

Oh no, they say he's got to go
Go go godzilla, yeah
Oh no, there goes Tokyo
Go go godzilla, yeah

History shows again and again
How nature points up the folly of men
Godzilla!

[depakid]

19. When gas prices rise to $6, $8 and $10 per gallon

Californians are going to wish that they had a whole lot more of them....

[Tektonik]

22. yes we do

just need to consult the japanese engineers about their earthquake safety standards w/ high speed trains

[Xithras]

23. The longest stretch will be in the Central Valley

Luckily, we're fairly earthquake proof out here. The geology of the valley floor tends to absorb earthquakes and reduces their intensity dramatically. The only real earthquake dangers will be at the two ends of the line, which will necessarily be lower speed because of the geography and heavy population in the areas it will be crossing.

[Le Taz Hot]

80. I was just thinking the same thing.

The Valley is growing exponentially due to the impossibly high cost of entering the real estate market on the coast. More and more people are commuting from Bakersfield to Tulare, Visalia to Fresno, Merced to Modesto, etc. To have this wonderful system and only run a coastal route would not serve most Californians. Running it through the Central Valley (with stops at San Francisco/Oakland) provides a CENTRAL location making it more accessible to more people.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

50. Japan has way more earthquakes than California

and you haven't experienced rail travel until you've done a rail journey in Japan.

To think that our country could have worked on non-automotive transportation instead of fighting wars for oil. It probalby would have cost less in money and definitely less in lives and lost prestige.

[Solon]

59. Japan has them, and that's earthquake country...

They have had something like one accident in like the past 20 years too, a pretty good track record.

[happyslug]

74. If properly designed NOT a problem. look at BART during the last SF Earthquake.

BART was shut down for the duration of the Quake (Design safety feature), but immediacy up and running within minutes of the end of the quake.

[Crayson]

77. If China can build a railroad to tibet...

Over glaciers through the desert and with extreme cold/heat differences each day... the US should be able to build a railroad track with some flexible Segments in it that can withstand a bit tension

Track like that simply work as in the following sketch.
The tracks can be pulled apart with no problem.
Iron train tracks stretch and tense all the time due to heat.

------------ ------------------------
.............\ \
.............. \ \
----------------- ---------------------

[Tesha]

84. Oddly enough, the Shinkansen does okay.

> Any temblor over 3.0 would be a threat to the track and railbed,
> which would need electronic sensors along its entire length to
> alert to any breaks or undue stresses.

Oddly enough, that's *EXACTLY* what the Shinkansen does and
so far, they seem to be doing okay, even with some significant
earthquakes.

Tesha

[RaleighNCDUer]

85. Excellent. That answers my only real objection.

Now we just have to get past the auto and aircraft lobbies...

[The Stranger]

15. How does it avoid wildlife on its tracks at that speed?

[RaleighNCDUer]

16. I should think that a few strands of hot wire strung alongside would

do the trick. At least for anything big enough to be a danger to the train.

[Selatius]

27. Wrong spot, sorry n/t

[Xithras]

24. Wildlife?

Splat.

Deer are almost nonexistent along the routes proposed by the HSRA, and Central Valley Elk are an endangered species that only exist on a few reserves nowadays. There are no wolves, practically no cougar, and no bear along the route. The only "wildlife" the train may hit are rabbit, foxes, and small human children. They'll just go splat.

Speaking of which, we already have a persistent "Suicide By Train" problem here in the Central Valley. I can't WAIT to see what adding a 200MPH train system to the mix does to THAT problem!

[rman]

30. must be miraculous French technology

(they have wildlife there to)

[Kolesar]

45. Very tall fences

The right of way is very secure to keep out critters and fools.

[LifeDuringWartime]

20. great potential

Maybe if it works out in California it will happen on the east coast. High speed trains connecting Boston>NY>DC would be great.

[NuttyFluffers]

61. already sorta exists in Amtrak Acela. goes up to 150 mph.

that said, other countries' trains go faster. you'd think USA would get penis envy over that... could be a marketing tool in the future to reluctant americans, though.

[Xithras]

21. By 2009? Bwahahahahaha!

That truly is funny. The route chosen by the CA-HSRA parallels the existing SP rail corridor up the Central Valley. This route ALREADY has problems with the slow lumbering freight trains that cut these cities in half, and very few have any sort of grade separation. Widening this route to encompass two parallel high speed rail lines is going to require the construction of HUNDREDS of bridges and underpasses, and the destruction of thousands of homes and businesses. There are literally dozens of tiny farmvilles along the route where kids walk across un-gated railroad tracks every day on their way to school, and there are SCHOOLS that are built right up against the rail lines. Every one of those is going to require full grade separations and/or pedestrian overpasses. In other areas, the rail corridor is a narrow canyon snaking between warehouses and factories. Are we going to demolish the factories to widen the corridor? How are we going to handle cross-track traffic by freight trains?

We'll be doing good just to have the right-of-ways and overpasses taken care of by 2017, and that just gets us into a position where we can actually START building the rail lines themselves.

[SKKY]

51. Well, if everything thinks like you do, why even bother????

...I mean, we might as well just stick with the current system no?

[Xithras]

56. You misunderstand, I support high speed rail.

I just disagree with the chosen route, and think the timeline put forward by Nunes is laughable. I drive over that corridor twice a day, every day. I know what it looks like, and I know what kind of upgrades will be needed to make HSR a safe choice for California along this route. We're not talking about laying rail through wide open countryside here, we're looking at running it through existing towns and cities with considerable grade-level cross traffic. We're talking about running through an area that has it's own brand of fog, one that can set in for days straight and drop visibility to 15 feet or less in rural areas.

The HSRA should have selected a route along I-5, where only a handful of towns exist, where cross traffic is minimal, and where the land is mostly undeveloped. I can understand their desire to link in as many towns as possible to the system, but in doing so they magnified the complexity of the project a thousandfold. I wholly support the concept of high speed rail, but I can see no way for them to have the selected routes operational before 2025. The people who are promoting this as only being "a few years away" are selling a pipe dream.

[Xithras]

57. Oh, and one other thing.

We already have regular Amtrak service that runs through the same rail corridor, from San Francisco and Sacramento all the way down to Bakersfield. In fact, if you're feeling adventurous, you can hop the SJ in Emeryville and ride it all the way to Bakersfield. But not LA. Why not LA? Because NOBODY HAS EVER BOTHERED TO LINK US. There is rail in LA, there is rail in the Central Valley, there's just this annoyingly large disconnect in the middle called the Grapevine. If they would just link that section (which has been talked about pointlessly for 100 years), you and I could ALREADY ride a 4-5 hour Amtrak express line from LA to SF, with no other upgrades required. Would it be as cool as a TGV? No, but it would be useful, and it could be up and running in only a few years. Instead of starting with something practical and upgrading it as ridership increases, we're stuck waiting for grand plans that MIGHT result in a functioning system in twenty or so years. Maybe.

If you buy an Amtrak ticket from SF ot LA today, you have two options. 1) You can spend 13 hours on the Coast Starlight; or 2) You can spend 5 hours on the San Joaquin, stopping at every podunk town along the way (and before you podunks get mad, that's a self-effacing podunk). When you reach Bakersfield, you get shoved onto a ratty old bus for an additional two hour road trip to the LA station.

The numbers have been done before. If the Grapevine were crossed by rail, and the EXISTING rail lines were linked, we could have a 4.5 hour express LA to SF run right now, with existing technology. So why aren't we doing it?

[NuttyFluffers]

62. why aren't we doing it? 'cause it's not a freeway...

and 20+ years of republican governors and their appointments to commisions tends to preclude anything beyond freeways. used to hear horror stories from my dad and his friends when they worked for Cal Trans. said it was great in the '60s, and then all hell broke loose, california lost its mind and went republican for ages. apparently prosperity was getting boring.

[Le Taz Hot]

81. Um, 'scuse me,

A lot of fine people live in those "podunk towns." You know, places like, oh, I don't know, SALIDA. Sorry to inconvenience you but those people would be able to make use of this form of transportation as well.

LTH
Speaking from the podunk town of Fresno.

[Xithras]

90. As I said, self-effacing podunk :-)

As a native Modestan who has spent his entire life living between Merced and Stockton, and who now calls Salida home, I think I've earned the right to call these podunkvilles. There are cows across the street from my house, and chickens in my back yard, and I'm OK with that. There's nothing wrong with being podunk :)

And yes, I know we'd want to make use of this form of transportation, but that wasn't the point of the discussion. The Amtrak San Joaquin currently runs between Sacramento and Bakersfield, with a spur to the SF Bay Area. The SJ stops at lots of little towns along the way, and is a great resource. If the Grapevine were crossed, I would fully expect the San Joaquin's service to be extended into LA as well.

My post was simply about the establishment of a non-stop express route between LA and SF. There is no reason why an express route and a local service route cannot exist on the same track (it's all about the scheduling). Two trains leave SF. One heads to LA non-stop, while the other stops in all the towns in between.

Again, it can be done on existing tracks with existing equipment, if they would just cross the Grapevine.

[mainer]

25. You go, California! I'm so proud of my native state.

What is it about California that always puts them ahead of the curve?

I love the trains in France, and this would be such a leap forward for the U.S.

[Selatius]

28. The US has been reduced to look to Europe for solutions. That's how far the US has fallen.

I'm not meaning to slam Europe, but we gotta look at reality here. The US would rather spend more money on the interstates than on upgrading railroad tracks and locomotives to achieve European-level sophistication. That's because the US campaign system is really a system of legalized bribery, and big car makers and the road lobby have lots of money to spend on Capitol Hill.

[NormanYorkstein]

67. forget EU, Japan is leading the way in

super high-tech everything and decent environmental standards. Have you seen the latest Honda robots? Japan is trying to keep its lead over China, forget the US. We've already destroyed our industrial base, our best bet is to get the high-tech Japanese stuff and integrate it as quickly as possible into the US.

[mopinko]

31. they should run it all the way to sacto.

so close to the capitol. they should go all the way.

[nashville_brook]

32. i'm amazed and disappointed in the naysaying here

"can't do it b/c of earthquakes."
"noise would suck."
"it'll take forever to build."
"the companies will be bribed."
"what about wildlife?"

not what i expected. this should spark the imagination to expansiveness. instead, we generate reasons why NOT to do it. this is not good.

[kirby]

34. What about terrorism?

Dont forget that one? A high-value target for derailment.

[nashville_brook]

37. and rust! and and... people might trip upon boarding!

[kirby]

41. Dont forget tumbleweeds...

Have you ever seen a bullet train tangle with a tumbleweed at 350mph?

[MindPilot]

42. Yeah let's not do anything because the "terrorists" might attack it.

A freight hauling several hundred tons of nasty chemicals would be a good target too so all the trains should quit running.

In fact let's all just stay home and be afraid. There are terrorists everywhere you know.

[BrokenBeyondRepair]

54. problem solved.. we won't let CIA agents/assets on or near the train

[nashville_brook]

55. word.

[Sapere aude]

58. If you read anything about the building of railroads in this country you will read about the

naysayers from the early 1800's until now. It goes with the territory. Some of them were right on some were really foolish.

We could not have been the country we are without the railroads yet the railroads were some of the most evil corporations in existence. Anytime someone crosses the rails in front of a train and gets creamed it is the railroads fault.

[nashville_brook]

86. who's fault is it when someone gets hit by a car?

[RaleighNCDUer]

83. I am not a naysayer - I just posed a couple questions.

I've always favored rail, support the commuter rail plans in this area, and hope that high speed rail will be a part of our future. But I also look at the earthquake board and see the number of daily quakes in California. As others have pointed out, Japan has learned how to do it - it is just an engineering problem. But it only takes a single disaster to wipe out an industry. Look at the Hindenburg. Perhaps Atlanta to Houston might be a better first choice for HS rail, so that we can learn what we need to learn before having to factor in earthquake-proof engineering.

[nashville_brook]

87. your post goes to the heart of the matter -- Atlanta to Houston is *interstate*

and this project is a CALIFORNIA-funded proposal precisely because federal government won't support commuter rail... and we all know the reason why...

[RaleighNCDUer]

89. Good point. nt

[huskerlaw]

33. *BEGS*

OMG, that would be FABULOUS.

[MindPilot]

36. Be a good way to silence the "San Diego needs a new airport" crowd

Don't need a new airport; that train could get you from San Diego's Union Station to LAX in 30 minutes.

[OrangeCountyDemocrat]

38. I've Got $100 That Says This Will Never Happen

Early 2009????? WHAT ARE THEY SMOKING????

California can't even get their act together enough to have a train which goes from L.A. to Las Vegas. It's ridiculous. Either spend a ton on gas to drive 4.5 hrs. by car, or else deal with the hassles of going by plane, which end up taking a few hours also.

Yeah.....I'd be willing to put money on the fact they're just blowing hot air to make themselves look good. NEVER HAPPEN!!

[MindPilot]

44. Unfortunately you are probably right

I used to love that run from LA to Vegas. I could get on the train in SD and go all the way to Vegas. It took about 10 hours but who cares? Spend it in the party car. Get off the train and stagger to a downtown hotel.

[Retrograde]

52. it benefits politicians

who need to get from their homes in the south of the state (LA/San Diego) to the state capital in Sacramento. With flying getting to be more of a hassle, and driving through the Central Valley being boring at best, there's a big incentive for a train connecting the 2 regions. Current debate seems to be how it will connect to San Francisco, which is a few ridges away.

California's been slowly and quietly building rail connections: I know people who commute from the delta region - not quite Sacramento,but close - to Silicon Valley by train.

[ProudDad]

64. Ferry from Jack London Station n/t

[Hosnon]

88. That's the key. If enough interests align, it'll get built. NT.

[Xithras]

91. You can commute from the Mother Lode to the SV by rail.

The Capitol Corridor route runs from Roseville to the Bay, and I'd assume that it's the same train your people are riding. In fact, you can hop the Capitol Corridor in the Silicon Valley, transfer to one of the San Joaquins in either Oakland or Sacramento, and ride the train all the way down to Bakersfield. You just can't cross that last 80-odd mile stretch to LA.

[Stinky The Clown]

39. This should also be considered in the Northeast Corridor where AMTRAK runs ....

The Metroliner service and the new Acella service.

Except for one short stretch of very tight turns in Bridgeport, CT, the track can probably handle clsoe to these speeds already (all concrete ties and welded rail) so upgrade might be financially viable. The service is already well used. It is, even now, quite literally faster door-to-door between DC and NYC to take the train than to fly. If Richmond gets added to the service now existing between DC and Boston, and speeds go up, this could seriously reduce the need for air travel in these already too crowded skies.

[Odin2005]

48. We need to start building those all over the country.

I'd love a high-speed train line between here (Fargo) and Minneapolis. The only passenger train service we have in Fargo now is a weekly AMTRAK train.

[truedelphi]

49. I have been thinking about this ever since Imoved 3 hours

From S.F.

I would love a train. A year ago gas prices in my car cost me
$ 28 - now it would be about $ 36.

But just for the convenience of being able to go to S.F> even if I was tired or in no mood to drive, I'd be willing topay double the gas fare.

[Lorien]

60. I know what you mean

I live in Orlando, and I'd travel to Miami, the Keys, Palm Beach, etc. REGULARLY if such a rail line ran North and South in this State. Floridians have demanded one for years, but Jebby always claimed the funding didn't exist (thanks to tax cuts for the rich).

[BrokenBeyondRepair]

53. and that's all CA will do.. is "eye" it

[ProudDad]

63. We gotta get rid of the Groppensteroidenfuhrer first

with his goddamn hummer collection....

[Puzzler]

68. The thing to remember here...

... is that it's not just the high speed train, but the actual raiway it runs on. And I don't mean decent tracks, either. The TGV main lines are completely NEW custom built railways... from the ground up. So when the US (or any other country) eyes the TGV, they should think of it in terms of building a brand new super interstate (and more!). The line that the TGV broke the new world speed record was itself brand new.


-P

[sandnsea]

69. Portland is 170 miles from me

I could be there in 30 minutes. I cannot even believe we aren't doing this. This ought to be at the top of the list. I'd be going to Portland all the time if I could get there in 30 minutes. Rural people wouldn't be cut off from the city, city people wouldn't feel pressured to live where the big money jobs are. It would recreate the country entirely. Really makes me mad that we don't have this. It's so stupid.

[divineorder]

95. Cinci Here

I think out here of the possibilities. Weekends in Chicago, Montreal. afternoon trips to Detroit. Afternoon trips to Indy. Vermont weekends. And the other way? Weekends in Nashville, the Smokey Mountains. Maybe weekends in DC. I just think it would revolutionize tourism in this country because of the speed. And not just tourism. 350 mph means I could take jobs in Cleveland or Chicago and still come home for weekends. And trains can move in almost any weather-which is something we tend to forget with planes. As long as visibility is decent, and the tracks can be cleared, people can go-go-go.

[xchrom]

70. the state would have to underwrite this

to be able to get to competitive ticket pricing -- but the benefits would be fantastic.

i'd really love to see washington, oregon, california and nevada all talking about getting this up and running.

rather than higgeldy piggeldy coming on board one at a time.

[JI7]

71. why don't we have this system already ?

i would love it. and doesn't it help tourism ? so there is an economic benefit also.

[sofa king]

73. Let me know when the LA-Paris line opens.

[happyslug]

75. Big Question is "HOW MANY STOPS"?

The more stops the slower the overall speed of the train will be. Ideally two trains should be running at the same time, a High Speed Train with few Stops (San Fransisco to LA to San Diego for Example), followed by a "Local" that has more stops and can take twice as long. The slow train can thus feed the faster train (and in many ways the Slow local train in more important, for it get people USE ot the idea of going by train). If I was making a Recommendation is first a Train line between Seattle Washington and San Diego with request stops (and a branch to Sacramento) and if that is successful follow up with a high speed train with fewer stops.

[LibDemAlways]

82. Someone had better figure out a way to keep the

train from intersecting any roads because here in LA the commuter trains have repeatedly come into contact with cars and people on the tracks.

As much as I'd love to see high speed transportation come to CA, I'm not sure the populice is smart enough to stay the hell out of its way.

[bamacrat]

92. We need to create a bullet train interstate system, secondary to our roads...

One that connects the five or ten largest cities on the east coast with the five or ten on the west, with stops in between. Might sink the airlines, but no emissions, and scenic.

[SemperEadem]

93. that would be nice...

they're going to have to build a separate rail line which doesn't cross streets and roads... the current rail lines do. Metrolink is always involved in a crossing accident where someone decides to try to beat the train. They need to build a comparable 'Northeast Corridor', which doesn't cross streets and roads.