38:09 Shizuoka prefecture used to be too far away from Tokyo to be considered as commuter town by traditional train commute. Once the Shinkansen became common place some people found out that it can be used as a commuter train, the value of the property in Shizuoka started increasing considerably. Of course, it's not for everybody, it requires a good paying job to make it worth while.
Very well done, especially if you consider that it is a highschool project. Well done. I like that you got important points such as the time saved by not having to go to an airport and checking etc... That is what makes rail travel that interesting here in germany, if I want to make a mid-distance trip, it makes much more sense to take the train, as I don't have to spend time in check-in on short to mid-distance trips, you sometimes travel in half the time than it would take on the plane. Though as a european/german, it is kind of funny when that teacher talks about a high-speed train being in excess of 50 mph! :D We go faster over steep gradients, and only our heaviest freight trains, which are shorter and lighter than US ones, travel at that speed. Our Commuter trains run up to 160 km/h, which is 99-100 mp/h, and that is mainly due to the signalling system as the olds lightsignals and PZB is enough to 160 km/h, and you need the LZB in cab signal system for more than 160. And of course there is track conditions, but most commuter trains in my region of germany run atleast 120 km/h (74 mp/h), with the majority being faster. Highspeed is 200 km/h (124 mph) for loco hauled intercity's on standard lines and highspeed lines, although there are locos that can go to 230 km/h in regular service. And for the ICEs that is dependent on the generation, the ICE 1 is limited to 230 km/h (142 mp/h) in standard service, while the ICE 2 can run at up to 280 km/h (173 mp/h) and the ICE 3 runs at 300 km/h (186 mp/h), though it has a permissible standard operation top speed of 330 km/h (205.5 mp/h). The only problem we in germany have is that over here the building of Highspeed Lines is financed at the expense of lines used by local and freight trains, and highspeed lines cost a lot of money, so you can build a lot of miles of standard track, one that goes up to a hundred miles for that. And at the moment, we have a lot of problems with congestion on those lines due to the money spent just on high-speed lines instead of improving the whole network. As long as you don't build Highspeed lines at the expense of the general network you should be fine. Well a highspeed train doesn't need to be a multiple unit (trainset made up of several powered units) it can be loco hauled as for example the OeBB's Railjet is, Loco-hauled (Taurus) with wagons, although they are usually used as a set. In fact, most High-speed trains are in fact loco-hauled, as a power-car is in essence a loco, just under a different name, the ICE1 and 2 both use power cars, the British Intercity 125 uses power cars, the Intercity 225 uses a Loco and a driving van trailer, all TGVs use power cars, the Acela, .......highspeed trains that are true EMU's as in having powered bogies under each car are pretty rare, yet. Examples include, the Class 390 Pendolino, the Class 395, the ICE3 and the ICE-T (the nodding dog), the Fiat ETR Series Pendolinos (the Class 390 is a derivate) and the Siemens Velaro series. As for certification and that no bullet train may be imported..............err can anyone tell me what the Acela is? A modified TGV, a highly modified one that is. As for the Certifications and such, the US railway certifiactions are in a massive need for overhaul, you don't have an in-cab signalling system yet, there is nothing like the PZB or AWS systems..... In short the US is way behind on railway tech and would need to modernize both the rules and the tech anyway.
Hopefully this gets off the ground soon. I'm really looking forward to seeing this up and running! Let's just hope that the people of California can see the use, promise, and pride of a system like this.
I like your documentary style Chance - quality, informative, good points, great interviews. ONE PROBLEM - your audio mix is pretty bad (sorry). The music track is nice, but the voices need to be hear above the music, very hard to hear....some interview sound tracks needed to be run through enhancement. I will try to contact you and IF I can help with audio, let me know. I would be happy to aid such a great documentary style that you had. If you can find it local, much better. If not, we'll be in touch. Thank you and keep us informed on California transit, a key to keeping growth moving.
I grew up in Virginia, lived from 2003-2013 in South Carolina, and am now living in the Northeast. I love the high-speed rail up here and use it regularly. The video is correct in saying that high speed rail becomes part of the culture of the towns and cities it serves. People use it. The blended approach (sharing trackage and stations with regional and commuter rail) works very well. It creates interconnectivity. New York's Penn Station serves about 30,000 Amtrak customers every day and hundreds of thousands of commuter rail passengers (and this isn't counting the city's other railway station). Now for a contrast... Whereas many of the 50+ roundtrips I made from Greenville, SC to South Hill, Virginia on Interstate 85 over the past ten years were less than enjoyable (try it after a day's work and in Charlotte traffic), now I get on a train in New York and am in Richmond in seven hours. The trip is enjoyable, relaxing - the lunch break at Washington Union Station is not an impingement on my travel time. Even in spite of occasional delays coming into Richmond, I love using Amtrak. I would gladly have used Amtrak in past years between South Carolina and Virginia if direct service had been available. Maybe if you Californians showcase good high-speed rail and prove its worth outside the Northeast, we in the Southeast will finally get our Southeast High Speed Rail Corridor from Washington, DC to Atlanta. May the LORD bless your efforts.
THis documentary is amazing and truly shows why the 68 BIllion Price Tag is so seemingly high: There's a lot of tie-in infrastructure upgrade projects and it's starting the HSR from scratch. It seems like a bargin when you see the full scope of the project Also, you must be very excited for the Fresno groundbreaking this monday
Otis Davis HSR tickets are sold at $90 from S.F. to L.A..Sacramento to L.A. might cost $100 one way.L.A to Las Vegas could be $45. After 3 years of operating, tickets prices will go down from $90 to $60 for riders because of more ridership on the HSR.
odstar21 that is a joke of a projection.... go see the cost of tickets in Europe and Asia where ridership is higher than this will be... the ridership projections are a joke too.
I would have loved to add more or clarify more information in my documentary, but as I said, one person can only do so much. I also run the risk of lengthening the documentary if I wanted to add more thorough information. HSR is a lot more complex than it sounds. If you do have any question, I can personally try to explain them to the best of my abilities.
This video was breathtaking in its economic scope, depth, and vision for the future. This is a must-see for all Econ I students all over the country! I so enjoyed this video that I will place it in Favorites, to revisit as often as I can.
This video deserves way more views and likes. I am very surprised by the length and quality of your presentation. I really would like to sit a few knuckle-headed people down and watch their reactions after watching this video. On the other hand, sometimes the information graphics and narration don't match up with the interview, and a few deeper questions aren't answered very clearly. I would also have tried to condense the video a little bit so ambivalent people don't fall asleep. GJ!
I highly ejoyed and praise this documentry for high speed rail lacks coverage on in America. Not only does it cover foreign and well established HSR abroad; it covers the aspect of expansion of HSR inspired by California as a motive for all regions to eventually access HSR, along with what exists currently in the Northeastern corridor. I appriciate how the fillmaker incorporated views from experts and common Californians and the depth of subject matter covered in related issues to pros and what few cons are associated to HSR. A documentry on this subject is not found on any other soruce and I'm excited to have discovered it!
I think you have a wonderful opportunity. UK introduced 125 services in 1976 and freight @ 80mph or there abouts and it was exciting times. These diesel fleets are now 38 years old and still in service and the gov constantly debating now if it can afford to leap again and join Europe's expanding network properly with HS1 etc (meanwhile we fall behind IMO although our commuter trains are generally fast). The US can just leap straight into 21cent, what an opportunity. I use the Eurostar a lot in preference to flying for 300 - 400 mile trips, straight into "downtown" European cities @ 200mph, it's quite awesome, they really do what it says on the tin.
@ 33.00 this is a Eurostar train normally used between London and Paris / Brussels at 186 MPH. Eurostars are modified TGV trains for use in the Channel Tunnel where special safety systems apply.
I can't wait to take a ride. I will get a folding bicycle take it with me everywhere I go and once I get to the destination station hop on the bicycle and explore the town.
I love California and I would move back if it weren't for this one issue. I just got so tired of sitting in endless traffic jams. It really wears on you.
Go HSR. Go for it. Best investment CA government has made in decades. It will actually have huge returns for all ca residents. Booming development along HSR path, increased property value in Central Valley, higher property tax income for ca government. Go for it like a war.
You're forgetting the TSA grope party queue, boarding times, and luggage pickup. That adds up to more than 2 hours, and we haven't even factored in the travel time to the airport, after which HSR becomes very competitive. International studies have shown that HSR will ALWAYS beat air travel so long as the travel time is no more than 3 hours.
Such a waste that the music in some parts of this documentary is so loud that you struggle to understand the people interviewed. BTW, this was typed on a train taking me from Amsterdam to Rotterdam at 190 mp/h.
The last time I heard statistics on the subjects, 1/3 of adult San Franciscans did not own cars, nor 70% of New York City. In fact I know people in San Francisco that have never bothered to learn to drive since they don't need to, though it somewhat limits some of the places they can go. Those same friends tend to travel to other parts of the world where transit is awesome instead of spending their vacation money here in California.
I am all for High Speed Rail after riding the rails of Europe. I would love to see the TGV/Talgo trains running up and down the Central Valley. Rail is more efficient than flying and if you can get to Los Angles from San Jose in 2.5 hours not only is it good for business trips its good for tourist too who want to spend a day in LA seeing the museums or vice versa someone going to San Francisco as well.
Europe had it right from the beginning with an excellent rail system, here in North America, the big Government Motors squeezed out the busses trains and street cars,together with tire manufacturers and other big pro car companies
The Time is now for the United States to have a National High Speed Rail Network featuring dedicated High Speed Lines where trains travel at more than 400 mph, have 18 coaches each, carry 1,800 passengers so easing congestion and pollution in the big cities.
I think alot of it has to do with the way California is set up. Too sprawled out in the first place, which makes more an increased need to commute and if its not easy to get to places via public transit, more cars will end up on the road.
As stated in the documentary, building the middle portion of the high speed network would link and therefore leverage existing transit systems in Los Angeles and Bay Area metros, e.g. CalTrain, the Capitol Corridor, BART, Metrolink, Altamont Express, and Amtrak Throughways. Improving and initially depending upon the existing systems to better complement the high speed rail link would have the two prong effect of increasing ridership and efficiency on these existing systems as well as opening the high speed track to service much sooner, generating ridership and fare income in the process. To build the urban ends first would have the opposite effects, risky and detrimental to the existing systems, for multiple reasons: the services would be duplicative, forcing them to divide up ridership, as such failing to significantly increase fare income while dramatically increasing expense; the high speed bits of track would then compete with the existing systems for said upgrades that some have been waiting decades to fund, much less complete; in turn these effects risk the viability of the existing systems thus threatening their continued existence into the high speed age; and finally all of these effects would create a terrible and lasting negative first impression for ridership, a reputation for high speed rail that would take a great number of years to overcome. Building the middle segment is definitely the wiser option. I look forward to riding high speed rail, having enjoyed the comfort and convenience in Europe and on the Acela. Sleep, read, play tabletop or video games, get business or homework done, eat watch the scenery go by, walk around rather than get stiff and cranky, and NOT breath auto fumes or endure loud airports for several hours.
I'm a pro-HSR person, and I've been researching/following this topic for several years, so I'm more or less on the same page as you. My concern is that some details aren't very clear; for example, the difference between normal trains and HSTs; you should have talked about Japanese EMUs rather than the TGV. I want to stress that my suggestions are basically nitpicks--this is a splendid documentary. The only thing I can really suggest is cutting down the number of informal interviews.
palmdale to la union takes over 2 hours. stockton to bay area takes a little under 2 hours. and thats not counting the majority of the line through the central valley. so when they say local transit will be upgraded, they really better mean it.
I think some of the congestion will be helped by the Panama Canal up grade project do to finish in 2015. When the new Panama Canal opens in 2015 a lot of those large ships that come from Asia will bypass LA and go through the Canal and dock and unload on the Eastern seaboard . That should help some, I hope.
While the SD-LA regions needs improved transportation, the regions are effectively served under one umbrella network of transport systems (Metro, Metrolink, Coaster, Pacific Surfliner, etc.). The same can also be said about the San Francisco Bay Area. The objective is to use HSR to connect these two regions with fast travel, effectively making the state small in respect to travel time. Hence why construction should start in the central valley.
Guys from cali, There where large discussions about building a HSR in the netherlands, extended from antwerpen to Amsterdam, Amsterdam - Paris. Basically the extension of LGV north. what we dont understand is the our partially privatized railcompany isn't running it efficient. In this documentairy there is allot on how to get it build nd fund it, but the thing is. RUNNING it is way more difficult than setting it up, I want to see realistic models of shedules first between rollingstock. What we see in france, and the netherlands... The bottomline is, Be sure to contract either ALstom or Siemens indeed for your Rollingstock. AnsaldoBredo SUCKS. Also you guys need HSR or at the very least electrified Intercity Rail that runs at speeds of atleast 140mph. Otherwise you are gonna choke to death in your cars, melting under the sun stuck between cars on the freeway. LOve your cars? Get this build so there is more room to drive and breath. Not building it now is somethng you are gonna regret. On a side-note. AUtobahn is highspeed motorways, with virtually no speed limit, it work allongside HSR
The big issue with the cost is the politically driven route selection. The original route took on two of the most difficult to construct (and costly) going over Pacheco and Tehacipi. This is a real mistake. Much cheaper to construct, but unfortunately, they are on the West side of the Central Valley, basically through the Coast Range at Pasa Robles. This would effectively stay away from the many towns in the Central Valley that are demanding and I mean demanding service.
I had no idea how large a project this is. Its not building a line. Its building a network from the ground up. Theres nothing there that even comes close. Im not entirely surpassed its so expensive. :P
The High Speed Boondoggle and the other criticisms like "The Train to Nowhere" the same things where said about Brightline/All aboard Florida & Texas Central Railway.
Good but slow paced documentary. The sound mixing is appalling; around 16 minutes the background music is so lout it almost drowns out the voice of the person being interviewed. Sound equalization is also poor - varying volume requiring repeated volume adjustment.
The audio issues would have been resolved but there is an unresolved bug in soundtrack pro that basically ruined 4 hours work of audio equalization. The audio would always peak out and become distorted due to the glitch and basically made the track unusable and I had to resort to second hand programs. As for the spelling, this whole movie was a one man thing. I had no one else help me. Something was bound to fall through the cracks. Cut me some slack...
Travel time to the train station is usually less than to the airport, not to mention train frequency is a lot higher than air service. 2hrs30mins, yes, but unlike the plane, you can utilize every single moment of your time on the train (there's no wifi at 34,000ft). The reason why people outside of the US say trains win is because other countries have invested in HSR and the US has not. HSR didn't create Europe or Japan; Europe and Japan built HSR, and there's no reason why the US can't.
i thoroughly support high speed rail. But the notion that high speed rail is going to reduce vehicular travel miles is probably not realistic. In Los Angeles, the metro rail has done virtually nothing to reduce the amount of vehicles on the road. It does however increase capacity for growth in smarter urban centers.
MilwaukeeF40C If transport wasn't regulated then half of the metro lines in Los Angeles wouldn't exists now and there would be a double decked freeway running right through downtown San Francisco. If land use was unregulated, there would be massive subdivisions north of SF to fuel further car-oriented sprawl and in turn fuel more demand for more cars. If transit systems were unregulated, they'd be quickly bought out and soon "decommissioned" for more auto oriented transport, similar to what happened to the LA trolley system. Now let's look at France, where everything is regulated. More money than ever was pumped into the Metro and to expanding city bus networks. Boulevards were narrowed to push demand towards transit and the massive transit network was made evermore efficient. Today, Paris has one of the most extensive and most efficient transit systems in the world. Trains come every 5 minutes, busses have their own lanes in some places. The primary reason why transit flourished in Paris is because the local and national government knew they needed to do something to ensure the city would properly function in the future. Now the people living in France can live better lives and can go practically anywhere because they have access to decent transportation that could have only been provided to them by the government.
A great documentary! However, I don't think High speed rail is the answer. It will bring a benefit, that much is certain. But, in order to get people out of aeroplanes and reduce pollution and the amount of land used, an even faster will need to be provided, for example, Maglev trains. This will reduce the amount of land used by rail even further, since the tracks can be build higher up. It is way more expensive, but worth the investment when you consider the environmental benefits.
I don't have my works cited on hand but most of the info can be found at both the CAHSR website and more specifically the HSR section on the International Union of Railways website. I also mentioned the specific works I used in parts of the documentary itself.
I am 100% in support of HSR and trains in general for California and the US. However, if these are the people that are trying to get us there, then I'm pretty sure we will not see HSR here this century. Having said that, this video fails to address what train passengers are going to do once at the primary train destination. Cities like SF lack the infrastructure and support services to get people to their final local destinations once they get off the train in a timely fashion. "Hoping" that the HSR destination cities eventually work something out is a great way to lose money and ultimately fail.
You call that 'dis-functional' over there? Wow. One square block of your extant transportation system transplanted here would be deemed a miracle, and tourist attraction.
As great as HSR is, this project is ridiculously expensive. TGV's are constructed at $16 million per mile, and this is somewhere in the hundreds of millions per mile. I don't understand...
You are mistaken. Yes, estimates for the cost per mile of CAHSR is higher than the global average but to say it is HUNDREDS of millions per mile is a drastic overstatement. First, the cost to construct LGV (tracks for TGV) ROWs is relatively cheaper because of a few reasons. 1. France heavily subsidies their rail infrastructure. 2. SNCF has been constructing LGVs for decades now. This will be the United States' first real attempt at HSR, prices will be high as a result. 3. France does not share some of the same terrain as California does. They don't have to deal with 2 mountainous passes directly dividing their North-South connection. A better reference for the cost per mile comparison is the Taiwan High Speed Rail Project. They spent a total of $18 billion to construct about 214 miles of track at about $84 million per mile. THSR by the way, made up their cost about 7-8 years after opening and now make a profit.
For California it's only $3 millions per mile,$24 billions,not including construction labor workers.Train station terminals about 2 to 3 billion dollars + solar panels,giants wind mills.The HSR train system will pay off everything fast in just 10 to 11 years. Each train sets cost about $ 10 million..France AGV train sets cost $30 million.
+Chance Wen And what about Alps? The Paris-Milan go through alps. And it's not SNCF which construct the LGV, it's Alsthom (for the train) and Réseau Ferré de France (RFF) which construct the lines. SNCF is the company which provides the service with a monopoly on the french roads.
Nick Hanley They have no experience in exporting them. They don't transfer any technology. So you will get the trains, without the maintenance nor the possibility to replicate them in the future.
If you look back in to the early 19th century the stage coach was doing what high speed rail will do in the US, create urban centralization. Think about it at every stage coach stop, city flourished from that stage coach stop. That is what high speed rail is going to bring. It's not anything new.
Only people with a brain the size of a shrimp think like that... Sorry for asking, but wasn't the USA he first to set feet on the moon? And your telling me that you can put cars on another planet and not build a railway? Come on, never heard that much rubbish before.
The United States is so far behind the times as far as high speed rail when you look at our am-trac system it makes us look like a third world country.
Tunnel arbitrage? HSR could share a tunnel system with San Jose VTA/BART tunnel downtown VTA/BART then repays HSR for its portion of the costs, this means HSR comes up the medium of highway 101 to the East of downtown.Millions of people then could own homes in the valley who now live/work in the Bay Area.I explain the idea more here yellowdragonblog.com/2014/11/19/vtabart-and-california-high-speed-rail-potential-synergies/
I live in California. This is INSANE! They are have now extending the completion date to 2025 and they claim now, they are going from San Jose to Bakersfield. WHY? So meth dealers can move to easier? There is no way they are going to finish this project on budget. They will ask for more money.Don't forget these are the same idiots that missed the cost of the new bay bridge by $5 Billion dollars and the bridge has many problems,which will require more money to fix, Untested bolts that are failing, Rusted and failing concrete due to water getting into the concrete, Bolts and cables that are not protected from saltwater. END this project!! It is a waste of tax payer money. Schools have roofs that leak, mold and mildew.The roads are cracked and broken and bridges / over passes didn't pass inspection. We don't have the money for this Train.
t1993ct2006c NO YOU DONT! What you need to do is encourage BNSF and Union Pacific to upgrade their lines to at least support 100mph for a majority of the trip. Far cheaper than this boondoggle
It boils down to a broken promise to Californians and the American people who pay for this dog. Let's face it: This is not high speed. It is not what we all signed up for, and we shouldn't have to settle for whatever they decide they can do with our money.
Does it occur to you that the reason California is in an economic downturn is because the state is piling enormous amounts of debt into projects like these? If this project has such high demand, why isn't it being constructed privately? Texas' high speed rail will be completed in half the time at half the cost by a private entity. (Oh and by the way, will require ZERO taxpayer dollars). Better be ready to compete with that as thousands of Californians move out of the state to places where their taxpayer dollars aren't wasted on pensions that we can't pay off and to subsidize the population that doesn't want to work to succeed.
Many things factor into an underperforming economy and saying that the reason is enormous amounts of public debt is short sighted. You are also forgetting that California's economy has been improving over the last few years. The GAO and other entities have shown that the economy is steadily improving and that public debt is going down, even with projects like CAHSR. Why the Texas HSR project is substantially cheaper is the location that the rail line is being constructed. An HSR link between Houston and Austin is only 240mi on relatively flat terrain. A similar link between Los Angeles and San Francisco is over 300 miles with 1-2 mountainous passes along the route. Secondly, because this is a public endeavor the project must engage positively with the constituents that the project will impact. This includes farmers, home owners, etc. As a result, substantial portions of the line will be built either below or above grade to minimize visual and community impact. This, costs more money. You can either have a cheaper railway that will upset many or a more expensive railway that tries to keep everyone happy, very rarely can you have both. Also, private companies have begun to express interest in the CAHSR project. Major international contractors, like the entities that help construct the LGV ROWs in France have sent letters of interest to the Authority after the recent inclusion of HSR into the funding distribution of CA's new cap-and-trade system. The HSR project has also had major interest from private entities before like JR (Japan Rail). Unfortunately, JR had to pull out of the endeavor due to the 2011 Tohoku Earthquake. Lastly, most HSR were built with public dollars. The Shinkansen and TGV we're both public endeavors during their time and back then, HSR was still a highly experimental technology. All of these rail systems now return a profit from their operations. An example of this is the Taiwan HSR system which had substantial overages and delays but eventually turned a profit on the entire system.
Here's what Los Angeles did: They relied on freeways for way too long and then realized that they needed rail when the freeways were clogged almost 24/7 and air quality was a bad joke. By that time, building a rail system was enormously expensive--a lot more expensive than if they'd kept the rail system that they had and expanded it. Building a rail system for California NOW is a bargain when compared to building it several years into the future. Waiting until everything is perfect is the most expensive choice.
Chance Wen Just because it has been a public works project in other locations does not justify it here. You also speak of cap and trade along with other tax schemes as if they are also a good idea. I no longer live in the Bay Area due to the immense tax weight of the state. I also have many relatives leaving the state in droves for states like Arizona to get out from under the tax burden. You have corporations buying companies from other countries to move their national headquarters to avoid high taxes. California already has some of the highest taxes in the country and in actuality is loosing tax payers due to the cost of the massive entitlements in the state that are only getting worse under the policies of the current governor Jerry Brown. Fix the state, lower taxes, remove regulations and start encouraging people to stay. Remove the entitlements. People do there best when they have to and not when they are coddled. The HSR system is a desperate attempt to distract from the reality of the state.
Douglas Hull Ha Douglas if you think California is having trouble now just wait until the Panama Canal is finished in Jan. 2016. Every port on the East Coast is getting ready.
LA to San Francisco in less than Three Hours. That train is going to make too many stops for that to happen. You know every one wants the train to stop in their small town. I have a plain to make this happen. So the train would make those stops in the small towns without giving up the overall trip time of 3 hours, maybe even cut 20 or 30 minutes out of the 500 Mile trip. Surely I am not the only person in the world that has this all figured out.
You do know that there are such things as express services right? The 2:40hr time frame is for an express service directly from SF to LA, no intermediary stops.
Chance Wen Hi Chance what I was saying is if they don't have all the people that live in those small towns backing this, it will never get finished. I saw the 2:40 time, I am talking about 2:40 and servicing those small towns.
joemc111 California Proposition 1A stipulates that HSR service from San Francisco to LA be 2 hours and 40 minutes and that the completed serviceable line have a total of 22 stations. Prop 1A DOES NOT say, that service must be equivalent to 2 hours and 40 minutes from any particular station on the line. Beside that point, local and limited rail service will fulfill the gap. There's not just one train running on the same line.
Chance Wen No what I am saying is if trains are running every 10 or 15 minutes at rush hour times the train should make stops at all stations where people are getting off or on the train. It dosn't matter what you think, this train will never work if that does not happen. My new ideas will make this all possible.
I reckon that by the time California (or america in general) gets going with some more nuanced, sustainable, high speed very long distance public transport infrastructure which does not just rely on more roads and more planes, it'll be 2100 at the very earliest. The existing physical and legislative infrastructure does not lend itself easily to innovative development such as HSR. Additionally the whole subject gets submerged under endlessly intractable and stale political arguments about the prioritisation of 'personal freedom' (I want to drive whenever and wherever I want for ever) over the almost pathological hatred of public funding (which is viewed by many in the same light as 'communism'). Nonetheless america is already experienced in making a non-publicly funded HSR system work; it's called Acela. May not be the fastest HSR network out there but it shows it's viable. Here in the UK we're arguing about how to develop the second generation HSR system and Japan's putting their original 50 year old HSR vehicles in museums!
![เปิด อาณาจักร หมื่นล้าน "สาระตั้ม" l [Nickynachat]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/3XE0nPF4YkQ/mqdefault.jpg)
![BOWKYLION - วิงวอน (ex-change) [Official MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/cLdnZWDaO-w/mqdefault.jpg)
38:09
Shizuoka prefecture used to be too far away from Tokyo to be considered as commuter town by traditional train commute.
Once the Shinkansen became common place some people found out that it can be used as a commuter train, the value of the property in Shizuoka started increasing considerably.
Of course, it's not for everybody, it requires a good paying job to make it worth while.
Very well done, especially if you consider that it is a highschool project.
Well done.
I like that you got important points such as the time saved by not having to go to an airport and checking etc...
That is what makes rail travel that interesting here in germany, if I want to make a mid-distance trip, it makes much more sense to take the train, as I don't have to spend time in check-in on short to mid-distance trips, you sometimes travel in half the time than it would take on the plane.
Though as a european/german, it is kind of funny when that teacher talks about a high-speed train being in excess of 50 mph! :D
We go faster over steep gradients, and only our heaviest freight trains, which are shorter and lighter than US ones, travel at that speed.
Our Commuter trains run up to 160 km/h, which is 99-100 mp/h, and that is mainly due to the signalling system as the olds lightsignals and PZB is enough to 160 km/h, and you need the LZB in cab signal system for more than 160.
And of course there is track conditions, but most commuter trains in my region of germany run atleast 120 km/h (74 mp/h), with the majority being faster.
Highspeed is 200 km/h (124 mph) for loco hauled intercity's on standard lines and highspeed lines, although there are locos that can go to 230 km/h in regular service.
And for the ICEs that is dependent on the generation, the ICE 1 is limited to 230 km/h (142 mp/h) in standard service, while the ICE 2 can run at up to 280 km/h (173 mp/h) and the ICE 3 runs at 300 km/h (186 mp/h), though it has a permissible standard operation top speed of 330 km/h (205.5 mp/h).
The only problem we in germany have is that over here the building of Highspeed Lines is financed at the expense of lines used by local and freight trains, and highspeed lines cost a lot of money, so you can build a lot of miles of standard track, one that goes up to a hundred miles for that.
And at the moment, we have a lot of problems with congestion on those lines due to the money spent just on high-speed lines instead of improving the whole network.
As long as you don't build Highspeed lines at the expense of the general network you should be fine.
Well a highspeed train doesn't need to be a multiple unit (trainset made up of several powered units) it can be loco hauled as for example the OeBB's Railjet is, Loco-hauled (Taurus) with wagons, although they are usually used as a set.
In fact, most High-speed trains are in fact loco-hauled, as a power-car is in essence a loco, just under a different name, the ICE1 and 2 both use power cars, the British Intercity 125 uses power cars, the Intercity 225 uses a Loco and a driving van trailer, all TGVs use power cars, the Acela, .......highspeed trains that are true EMU's as in having powered bogies under each car are pretty rare, yet.
Examples include, the Class 390 Pendolino, the Class 395, the ICE3 and the ICE-T (the nodding dog), the Fiat ETR Series Pendolinos (the Class 390 is a derivate) and the Siemens Velaro series.
As for certification and that no bullet train may be imported..............err can anyone tell me what the Acela is?
A modified TGV, a highly modified one that is.
As for the Certifications and such, the US railway certifiactions are in a massive need for overhaul, you don't have an in-cab signalling system yet, there is nothing like the PZB or AWS systems.....
In short the US is way behind on railway tech and would need to modernize both the rules and the tech anyway.
Hopefully this gets off the ground soon. I'm really looking forward to seeing this up and running! Let's just hope that the people of California can see the use, promise, and pride of a system like this.
I like your documentary style Chance - quality, informative, good points, great interviews. ONE PROBLEM - your audio mix is pretty bad (sorry). The music track is nice, but the voices need to be hear above the music, very hard to hear....some interview sound tracks needed to be run through enhancement. I will try to contact you and IF I can help with audio, let me know. I would be happy to aid such a great documentary style that you had. If you can find it local, much better. If not, we'll be in touch. Thank you and keep us informed on California transit, a key to keeping growth moving.
I grew up in Virginia, lived from 2003-2013 in South Carolina, and am now living in the Northeast. I love the high-speed rail up here and use it regularly. The video is correct in saying that high speed rail becomes part of the culture of the towns and cities it serves. People use it. The blended approach (sharing trackage and stations with regional and commuter rail) works very well. It creates interconnectivity. New York's Penn Station serves about 30,000 Amtrak customers every day and hundreds of thousands of commuter rail passengers (and this isn't counting the city's other railway station). Now for a contrast... Whereas many of the 50+ roundtrips I made from Greenville, SC to South Hill, Virginia on Interstate 85 over the past ten years were less than enjoyable (try it after a day's work and in Charlotte traffic), now I get on a train in New York and am in Richmond in seven hours. The trip is enjoyable, relaxing - the lunch break at Washington Union Station is not an impingement on my travel time. Even in spite of occasional delays coming into Richmond, I love using Amtrak. I would gladly have used Amtrak in past years between South Carolina and Virginia if direct service had been available. Maybe if you Californians showcase good high-speed rail and prove its worth outside the Northeast, we in the Southeast will finally get our Southeast High Speed Rail Corridor from Washington, DC to Atlanta. May the LORD bless your efforts.
Fantastic documentary. Extremely well done. This is the future! Thank you!!!
THis documentary is amazing and truly shows why the 68 BIllion Price Tag is so seemingly high: There's a lot of tie-in infrastructure upgrade projects and it's starting the HSR from scratch. It seems like a bargin when you see the full scope of the project
Also, you must be very excited for the Fresno groundbreaking this monday
You bet I am! Once actual earth is moved and tracks are laid, the dynamic behind the entire project will change, especially in the public eye.
Hooray for the future! I hope High Speed 2 here in the UK similarly takes off!
Otis Davis HSR tickets are sold at $90 from S.F. to L.A..Sacramento to L.A. might cost $100 one way.L.A to Las Vegas could be $45. After 3 years of operating, tickets prices will go down from $90 to $60 for riders because of more ridership on the HSR.
Otis Davis One month total is $48,125,000.One year total $5,775,000,000.00.California will have about 25,000 or more HSR tickets sold per day.
odstar21 that is a joke of a projection.... go see the cost of tickets in Europe and Asia where ridership is higher than this will be... the ridership projections are a joke too.
Very good points!
Go CAHSR
Texas is also building a high speed railroad between Dallas and Houston in partnership with the Japanese company that builds Shinkansen.
Brightline has it now.
I would have loved to add more or clarify more information in my documentary, but as I said, one person can only do so much. I also run the risk of lengthening the documentary if I wanted to add more thorough information. HSR is a lot more complex than it sounds. If you do have any question, I can personally try to explain them to the best of my abilities.
This video was breathtaking in its economic scope, depth, and vision for the future. This is a must-see for all Econ I students all over the country! I so enjoyed this video that I will place it in Favorites, to revisit as often as I can.
This video deserves way more views and likes. I am very surprised by the length and quality of your presentation. I really would like to sit a few knuckle-headed people down and watch their reactions after watching this video.
On the other hand, sometimes the information graphics and narration don't match up with the interview, and a few deeper questions aren't answered very clearly. I would also have tried to condense the video a little bit so ambivalent people don't fall asleep.
GJ!
I highly ejoyed and praise this documentry for high speed rail lacks coverage on in America. Not only does it cover foreign and well established HSR abroad; it covers the aspect of expansion of HSR inspired by California as a motive for all regions to eventually access HSR, along with what exists currently in the Northeastern corridor. I appriciate how the fillmaker incorporated views from experts and common Californians and the depth of subject matter covered in related issues to pros and what few cons are associated to HSR. A documentry on this subject is not found on any other soruce and I'm excited to have discovered it!
damn impressive for high school student
I think you have a wonderful opportunity. UK introduced 125 services in 1976 and freight @ 80mph or there abouts and it was exciting times. These diesel fleets are now 38 years old and still in service and the gov constantly debating now if it can afford to leap again and join Europe's expanding network properly with HS1 etc (meanwhile we fall behind IMO although our commuter trains are generally fast). The US can just leap straight into 21cent, what an opportunity. I use the Eurostar a lot in preference to flying for 300 - 400 mile trips, straight into "downtown" European cities @ 200mph, it's quite awesome, they really do what it says on the tin.
I like the Sim City 4 meta vibe in this... nicely done.
This is a really good documentary, Good job dude!
Thanks, very informative. Well done!
All the simcity music in this video is a nice touch
@ 33.00 this is a Eurostar train normally used between London and Paris / Brussels at 186 MPH. Eurostars are modified TGV trains for use in the Channel Tunnel where special safety systems apply.
I can't wait to take a ride.
I will get a folding bicycle take it with me everywhere I go and once I get to the destination station hop on the bicycle and explore the town.
I love California and I would move back if it weren't for this one issue. I just got so tired of sitting in endless traffic jams.
It really wears on you.
Go HSR. Go for it. Best investment CA government has made in decades. It will actually have huge returns for all ca residents. Booming development along HSR path, increased property value in Central Valley, higher property tax income for ca government. Go for it like a war.
This video makes me a lot more confident about the Central Valley route.
20190310 Still debating? China is building 10 km HSR each day now.
Build it, and they will come!
You're forgetting the TSA grope party queue, boarding times, and luggage pickup.
That adds up to more than 2 hours, and we haven't even factored in the travel time to the airport, after which HSR becomes very competitive. International studies have shown that HSR will ALWAYS beat air travel so long as the travel time is no more than 3 hours.
Dude, I hear music from Sim City 4 around 1h09m... did not expect that! :P
+Jeffrey Bridgman lol
Shinkansen is THE coolest train in the world. Period.
I agree. Thank you Japanese and Kawasaki that China has the High Speed rail.
Such a waste that the music in some parts of this documentary is so loud that you struggle to understand the people interviewed.
BTW, this was typed on a train taking me from Amsterdam to Rotterdam at 190 mp/h.
It's about time US started catching up with Asia and Europe in high speed rail transportation.
The last time I heard statistics on the subjects, 1/3 of adult San Franciscans did not own cars, nor 70% of New York City. In fact I know people in San Francisco that have never bothered to learn to drive since they don't need to, though it somewhat limits some of the places they can go. Those same friends tend to travel to other parts of the world where transit is awesome instead of spending their vacation money here in California.
I am all for High Speed Rail after riding the rails of Europe. I would love to see the TGV/Talgo trains running up and down the Central Valley. Rail is more efficient than flying and if you can get to Los Angles from San Jose in 2.5 hours not only is it good for business trips its good for tourist too who want to spend a day in LA seeing the museums or vice versa someone going to San Francisco as well.
I like how this documentary uses music and some buildings from SimCity 4 haha.
Europe had it right from the beginning with an excellent rail system, here in North America, the big Government Motors squeezed out the busses trains and street cars,together with tire manufacturers and other big pro car companies
I agree that GM sucks! You can watch "Actual Proof of Why GM Chevy Sucks! - Part 11".
Andrew Gems Freight by train in Eurostan: 10%
Freight by rail in America: 40%
And trucks are way more inefficient than trains or cars
Music louder than interviews - why?
Somebody is a fan of simcity~
Took you long enough. Good work, Chance. :)
The Time is now for the United States to have a National High Speed Rail Network featuring dedicated High Speed Lines where trains travel at more than 400 mph, have 18 coaches each, carry 1,800 passengers so easing congestion and pollution in the big cities.
Very well made documentary! Video quality is great and interviews feel professional. Keep up the good work!
I think alot of it has to do with the way California is set up. Too sprawled out in the first place, which makes more an increased need to commute and if its not easy to get to places via public transit, more cars will end up on the road.
The fruits of your labor finally breathe life :3
As stated in the documentary, building the middle portion of the high speed network would link and therefore leverage existing transit systems in Los Angeles and Bay Area metros, e.g. CalTrain, the Capitol Corridor, BART, Metrolink, Altamont Express, and Amtrak Throughways. Improving and initially depending upon the existing systems to better complement the high speed rail link would have the two prong effect of increasing ridership and efficiency on these existing systems as well as opening the high speed track to service much sooner, generating ridership and fare income in the process. To build the urban ends first would have the opposite effects, risky and detrimental to the existing systems, for multiple reasons: the services would be duplicative, forcing them to divide up ridership, as such failing to significantly increase fare income while dramatically increasing expense; the high speed bits of track would then compete with the existing systems for said upgrades that some have been waiting decades to fund, much less complete; in turn these effects risk the viability of the existing systems thus threatening their continued existence into the high speed age; and finally all of these effects would create a terrible and lasting negative first impression for ridership, a reputation for high speed rail that would take a great number of years to overcome. Building the middle segment is definitely the wiser option. I look forward to riding high speed rail, having enjoyed the comfort and convenience in Europe and on the Acela. Sleep, read, play tabletop or video games, get business or homework done, eat watch the scenery go by, walk around rather than get stiff and cranky, and NOT breath auto fumes or endure loud airports for several hours.
I'm a pro-HSR person, and I've been researching/following this topic for several years, so I'm more or less on the same page as you. My concern is that some details aren't very clear; for example, the difference between normal trains and HSTs; you should have talked about Japanese EMUs rather than the TGV.
I want to stress that my suggestions are basically nitpicks--this is a splendid documentary. The only thing I can really suggest is cutting down the number of informal interviews.
It's a shame your sound system is so bad or I would watch it to the end. Music background is driving me nuts.
palmdale to la union takes over 2 hours. stockton to bay area takes a little under 2 hours. and thats not counting the majority of the line through the central valley. so when they say local transit will be upgraded, they really better mean it.
Not a film student yet. But hopefully soon!
Great documentary with interesting facts and figures. Great commentry. Love the model of China's bullet train.
Any update about this project?
antaryjczyk Nothing has been built and it's costing the US tax payer billions
I think some of the congestion will be helped by the Panama Canal up grade project do to finish in 2015. When the new Panama Canal opens in 2015 a lot of those large ships that come from Asia will bypass LA and go through the Canal and dock and unload on the Eastern seaboard . That should help some, I hope.
While the SD-LA regions needs improved transportation, the regions are effectively served under one umbrella network of transport systems (Metro, Metrolink, Coaster, Pacific Surfliner, etc.). The same can also be said about the San Francisco Bay Area. The objective is to use HSR to connect these two regions with fast travel, effectively making the state small in respect to travel time. Hence why construction should start in the central valley.
Guys from cali,
There where large discussions about building a HSR in the netherlands, extended from antwerpen to Amsterdam, Amsterdam - Paris. Basically the extension of LGV north.
what we dont understand is the our partially privatized railcompany isn't running it efficient.
In this documentairy there is allot on how to get it build nd fund it, but the thing is. RUNNING it is way more difficult than setting it up, I want to see realistic models of shedules first between rollingstock.
What we see in france, and the netherlands... The bottomline is, Be sure to contract either ALstom or Siemens indeed for your Rollingstock.
AnsaldoBredo SUCKS.
Also you guys need HSR or at the very least electrified Intercity Rail that runs at speeds of atleast 140mph.
Otherwise you are gonna choke to death in your cars, melting under the sun stuck between cars on the freeway. LOve your cars? Get this build so there is more room to drive and breath. Not building it now is somethng you are gonna regret.
On a side-note. AUtobahn is highspeed motorways, with virtually no speed limit, it work allongside HSR
The big issue with the cost is the politically driven route selection. The original route took on two of the most difficult to construct (and costly) going over Pacheco and Tehacipi. This is a real mistake. Much cheaper to construct, but unfortunately, they are on the West side of the Central Valley, basically through the Coast Range at Pasa Robles. This would effectively stay away from the many towns in the Central Valley that are demanding and I mean demanding service.
- real nice vid
i enjoyed it!
dope:)
We chinese are very happy to help our US friends build the high speed rail.
Sheldon Young Lol a Chinese guy named Sheldon Young
The only way to make this work is to make the routes absolutely dedicated. That means NO freight or other passenger traffic at all.
I had no idea how large a project this is. Its not building a line. Its building a network from the ground up. Theres nothing there that even comes close. Im not entirely surpassed its so expensive. :P
The High Speed Boondoggle and the other criticisms like "The Train to Nowhere" the same things where said about Brightline/All aboard Florida & Texas Central Railway.
What software did they use to edit this?
What's with the crappy and irrelevent music throughout?
Half the time it drowned out the interviewees.
Good but slow paced documentary. The sound mixing is appalling; around 16 minutes the background music is so lout it almost drowns out the voice of the person being interviewed. Sound equalization is also poor - varying volume requiring repeated volume adjustment.
The audio issues would have been resolved but there is an unresolved bug in soundtrack pro that basically ruined 4 hours work of audio equalization. The audio would always peak out and become distorted due to the glitch and basically made the track unusable and I had to resort to second hand programs. As for the spelling, this whole movie was a one man thing. I had no one else help me. Something was bound to fall through the cracks. Cut me some slack...
Who will build your trainsets?, Alstom, Talgo ,Siemens ,Bombardier, Athern, BACHMAN, Kato, Atlas ,WHO???
Travel time to the train station is usually less than to the airport, not to mention train frequency is a lot higher than air service. 2hrs30mins, yes, but unlike the plane, you can utilize every single moment of your time on the train (there's no wifi at 34,000ft). The reason why people outside of the US say trains win is because other countries have invested in HSR and the US has not. HSR didn't create Europe or Japan; Europe and Japan built HSR, and there's no reason why the US can't.
Critique: What if my company I set up at a rail station wants to allow smoking in our rooftop trillium garden? Would we be welcome?
i thoroughly support high speed rail. But the notion that high speed rail is going to reduce vehicular travel miles is probably not realistic. In Los Angeles, the metro rail has done virtually nothing to reduce the amount of vehicles on the road. It does however increase capacity for growth in smarter urban centers.
MilwaukeeF40C
If transport wasn't regulated then half of the metro lines in Los Angeles wouldn't exists now and there would be a double decked freeway running right through downtown San Francisco.
If land use was unregulated, there would be massive subdivisions north of SF to fuel further car-oriented sprawl and in turn fuel more demand for more cars.
If transit systems were unregulated, they'd be quickly bought out and soon "decommissioned" for more auto oriented transport, similar to what happened to the LA trolley system.
Now let's look at France, where everything is regulated. More money than ever was pumped into the Metro and to expanding city bus networks. Boulevards were narrowed to push demand towards transit and the massive transit network was made evermore efficient. Today, Paris has one of the most extensive and most efficient transit systems in the world. Trains come every 5 minutes, busses have their own lanes in some places. The primary reason why transit flourished in Paris is because the local and national government knew they needed to do something to ensure the city would properly function in the future. Now the people living in France can live better lives and can go practically anywhere because they have access to decent transportation that could have only been provided to them by the government.
Erik, bear in mind what the video said: the number of travelers is increasing.
MilwaukeeF40C Hey man, you need to clean up your language.
Digging the simcity background music!
Public/Private?
A great documentary! However, I don't think High speed rail is the answer. It will bring a benefit, that much is certain. But, in order to get people out of aeroplanes and reduce pollution and the amount of land used, an even faster will need to be provided, for example, Maglev trains. This will reduce the amount of land used by rail even further, since the tracks can be build higher up. It is way more expensive, but worth the investment when you consider the environmental benefits.
What sources did you use for this video?
I don't have my works cited on hand but most of the info can be found at both the CAHSR website and more specifically the HSR section on the International Union of Railways website. I also mentioned the specific works I used in parts of the documentary itself.
LoL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Thats the music from the VAB in Kerbal space program!
How can I get my partner from Augusta, Ga to Philadelphia via train from April 2nd and return him in a week?
I am 100% in support of HSR and trains in general for California and the US. However, if these are the people that are trying to get us there, then I'm pretty sure we will not see HSR here this century.
Having said that, this video fails to address what train passengers are going to do once at the primary train destination. Cities like SF lack the infrastructure and support services to get people to their final local destinations once they get off the train in a timely fashion. "Hoping" that the HSR destination cities eventually work something out is a great way to lose money and ultimately fail.
Possibly. Maybe is I get new equipment in the future.
I hope America eventually gets it done, I’m not optimistic though
You call that 'dis-functional' over there? Wow. One square block of your extant transportation system transplanted here would be deemed a miracle, and tourist attraction.
As I write this it is March 2020 and the system is so far over budget that the Gov. has discontinued it!
What is the music at 1:11:56? I like it.
It's from the SimCity 4 soundtrack.
Cal" EPA is so intrusive nothing like a high-speed railway will ever be built
As great as HSR is, this project is ridiculously expensive. TGV's are constructed at $16 million per mile, and this is somewhere in the hundreds of millions per mile. I don't understand...
You are mistaken. Yes, estimates for the cost per mile of CAHSR is higher than the global average but to say it is HUNDREDS of millions per mile is a drastic overstatement. First, the cost to construct LGV (tracks for TGV) ROWs is relatively cheaper because of a few reasons. 1. France heavily subsidies their rail infrastructure. 2. SNCF has been constructing LGVs for decades now. This will be the United States' first real attempt at HSR, prices will be high as a result. 3. France does not share some of the same terrain as California does. They don't have to deal with 2 mountainous passes directly dividing their North-South connection.
A better reference for the cost per mile comparison is the Taiwan High Speed Rail Project. They spent a total of $18 billion to construct about 214 miles of track at about $84 million per mile. THSR by the way, made up their cost about 7-8 years after opening and now make a profit.
For California it's only $3 millions per mile,$24 billions,not including construction labor workers.Train station terminals about 2 to 3 billion dollars + solar panels,giants wind mills.The HSR train system will pay off everything fast in just 10 to 11 years. Each train sets cost about $ 10 million..France AGV train sets cost $30 million.
+Chance Wen And what about Alps? The Paris-Milan go through alps. And it's not SNCF which construct the LGV, it's Alsthom (for the train) and Réseau Ferré de France (RFF) which construct the lines. SNCF is the company which provides the service with a monopoly on the french roads.
They should just have Japan build it for Christ sake they have experience building them
Nick Hanley They have no experience in exporting them. They don't transfer any technology. So you will get the trains, without the maintenance nor the possibility to replicate them in the future.
rail travel has been obsolete for 50 years
If you look back in to the early 19th century the stage coach was doing what high speed rail will do in the US, create urban centralization. Think about it at every stage coach stop, city flourished from that stage coach stop. That is what high speed rail is going to bring.
It's not anything new.
There is no true high speed rail in America. Sad.
*****
Our tracks need work, theres too many crossings and they share with freight.
Only people with a brain the size of a shrimp think like that... Sorry for asking, but wasn't the USA he first to set feet on the moon? And your telling me that you can put cars on another planet and not build a railway?
Come on, never heard that much rubbish before.
U totally forgot about the Acela Express which runs between Boston and DC
I do talk about the Acela. Watch the rest of the film.
Heh, Guess you didn't forget about new york.
Great
Simcity 4 Oil Plant 9:14 :O
The United States is so far behind the times as far as high speed rail when you look at our am-trac system it makes us look like a third world country.
Tunnel arbitrage? HSR could share a tunnel system with San Jose VTA/BART tunnel downtown
VTA/BART then repays HSR for its portion of the costs, this means HSR comes up the medium of highway 101 to the East of downtown.Millions of people then could own homes in the valley who now live/work in the Bay Area.I explain the idea more here yellowdragonblog.com/2014/11/19/vtabart-and-california-high-speed-rail-potential-synergies/
SimCity 4!
I live in California. This is INSANE! They are have now extending the completion date to 2025 and they claim now, they are going from San Jose to Bakersfield. WHY? So meth dealers can move to easier? There is no way they are going to finish this project on budget.
They will ask for more money.Don't forget these are the same idiots that missed the cost of the new bay bridge by $5 Billion dollars and the bridge has many problems,which will require more money to fix, Untested bolts that are failing, Rusted and failing concrete due to water getting into the concrete, Bolts and cables that are not protected from saltwater. END this project!!
It is a waste of tax payer money. Schools have roofs that leak, mold and mildew.The roads are cracked and broken and bridges / over passes didn't pass inspection. We don't have the money for this Train.
+Mike William We need to create a fast train. I am all for this project. We need other lines like this.
t1993ct2006c NO YOU DONT! What you need to do is encourage BNSF and Union Pacific to upgrade their lines to at least support 100mph for a majority of the trip. Far cheaper than this boondoggle
ps- sorry, really hate when I forget my comment: I wish you'd have had a bit more $ to throw at sound. I might have helped had I been nearby. :)
See how that girl looks around so much? She is just recalling what she's been taught.
It boils down to a broken promise to Californians and the American people who pay for this dog. Let's face it: This is not high speed. It is not what we all signed up for, and we shouldn't have to settle for whatever they decide they can do with our money.
we need flying cars, it's 2014 where's our flying cars dammit?
JimmyG 2014?? Lol. It's 2018 and we still don't have flying cars!
who needs flying cars when you have flying trains
China will build this rail for California
Does it occur to you that the reason California is in an economic downturn is because the state is piling enormous amounts of debt into projects like these? If this project has such high demand, why isn't it being constructed privately? Texas' high speed rail will be completed in half the time at half the cost by a private entity. (Oh and by the way, will require ZERO taxpayer dollars). Better be ready to compete with that as thousands of Californians move out of the state to places where their taxpayer dollars aren't wasted on pensions that we can't pay off and to subsidize the population that doesn't want to work to succeed.
Many things factor into an underperforming economy and saying that the reason is enormous amounts of public debt is short sighted. You are also forgetting that California's economy has been improving over the last few years. The GAO and other entities have shown that the economy is steadily improving and that public debt is going down, even with projects like CAHSR.
Why the Texas HSR project is substantially cheaper is the location that the rail line is being constructed. An HSR link between Houston and Austin is only 240mi on relatively flat terrain. A similar link between Los Angeles and San Francisco is over 300 miles with 1-2 mountainous passes along the route. Secondly, because this is a public endeavor the project must engage positively with the constituents that the project will impact. This includes farmers, home owners, etc. As a result, substantial portions of the line will be built either below or above grade to minimize visual and community impact. This, costs more money. You can either have a cheaper railway that will upset many or a more expensive railway that tries to keep everyone happy, very rarely can you have both.
Also, private companies have begun to express interest in the CAHSR project. Major international contractors, like the entities that help construct the LGV ROWs in France have sent letters of interest to the Authority after the recent inclusion of HSR into the funding distribution of CA's new cap-and-trade system. The HSR project has also had major interest from private entities before like JR (Japan Rail). Unfortunately, JR had to pull out of the endeavor due to the 2011 Tohoku Earthquake.
Lastly, most HSR were built with public dollars. The Shinkansen and TGV we're both public endeavors during their time and back then, HSR was still a highly experimental technology. All of these rail systems now return a profit from their operations. An example of this is the Taiwan HSR system which had substantial overages and delays but eventually turned a profit on the entire system.
Here's what Los Angeles did: They relied on freeways for way too long and then realized that they needed rail when the freeways were clogged almost 24/7 and air quality was a bad joke. By that time, building a rail system was enormously expensive--a lot more expensive than if they'd kept the rail system that they had and expanded it. Building a rail system for California NOW is a bargain when compared to building it several years into the future. Waiting until everything is perfect is the most expensive choice.
Chance Wen Just because it has been a public works project in other locations does not justify it here. You also speak of cap and trade along with other tax schemes as if they are also a good idea. I no longer live in the Bay Area due to the immense tax weight of the state. I also have many relatives leaving the state in droves for states like Arizona to get out from under the tax burden. You have corporations buying companies from other countries to move their national headquarters to avoid high taxes. California already has some of the highest taxes in the country and in actuality is loosing tax payers due to the cost of the massive entitlements in the state that are only getting worse under the policies of the current governor Jerry Brown. Fix the state, lower taxes, remove regulations and start encouraging people to stay. Remove the entitlements. People do there best when they have to and not when they are coddled. The HSR system is a desperate attempt to distract from the reality of the state.
Coastalcamper Ca California as like most other states can't even keep their roads in good repair let along talk about a high speed train.
Douglas Hull Ha Douglas if you think California is having trouble now just wait until the Panama Canal is finished in Jan. 2016. Every port on the East Coast is getting ready.
O hate driving this would help in a lot a road radge
Sf to la no stops,,,in a straight line maybe 150 mph,,,,anything other s a lie,,,,,do the math,,,
LA to San Francisco in less than Three Hours. That train is going to make too many stops for that to happen. You know every one wants the train to stop in their small town. I have a plain to make this happen. So the train would make those stops in the small towns without giving up the overall trip time of 3 hours, maybe even cut 20 or 30 minutes out of the 500 Mile trip. Surely I am not the only person in the world that has this all figured out.
You do know that there are such things as express services right? The 2:40hr time frame is for an express service directly from SF to LA, no intermediary stops.
Chance Wen
Hi Chance what I was saying is if they don't have all the people that live in those small towns backing this, it will never get finished. I saw the 2:40 time, I am talking about 2:40 and servicing those small towns.
joemc111 California Proposition 1A stipulates that HSR service from San Francisco to LA be 2 hours and 40 minutes and that the completed serviceable line have a total of 22 stations. Prop 1A DOES NOT say, that service must be equivalent to 2 hours and 40 minutes from any particular station on the line. Beside that point, local and limited rail service will fulfill the gap. There's not just one train running on the same line.
Chance Wen No what I am saying is if trains are running every 10 or 15 minutes at rush hour times the train should make stops at all stations where people are getting off or on the train. It dosn't matter what you think, this train will never work if that does not happen. My new ideas will make this all possible.
joemc111 I'm sure a statistician and timetable/service planner would love to hear your idea.
I reckon that by the time California (or america in general) gets going with some more nuanced, sustainable, high speed very long distance public transport infrastructure which does not just rely on more roads and more planes, it'll be 2100 at the very earliest. The existing physical and legislative infrastructure does not lend itself easily to innovative development such as HSR. Additionally the whole subject gets submerged under endlessly intractable and stale political arguments about the prioritisation of 'personal freedom' (I want to drive whenever and wherever I want for ever) over the almost pathological hatred of public funding (which is viewed by many in the same light as 'communism'). Nonetheless america is already experienced in making a non-publicly funded HSR system work; it's called Acela. May not be the fastest HSR network out there but it shows it's viable. Here in the UK we're arguing about how to develop the second generation HSR system and Japan's putting their original 50 year old HSR vehicles in museums!