California bullet train cost surges by $2.8B

Re:California bullet train cost surges by $2.8B by kelnos on Wednesday January 17, 2018 @07:07PM (#16173342)

The intermediate stops bite both ways, though: if you're on a train that stops several times in the central valley, and in SJ, I'd expect your travel time to be a bit more than 45 minutes.

Why not spend (a small fraction of) that money to improve Caltrain and service between Caltrain and the central valley in a different manner?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:California bullet train cost surges by $2.8B by chipotle_coyote on Wednesday January 17, 2018 @08:44PM (#16173929)

They are spending money to improve Caltrain; the plan is to move to electrified trains by 2021. It's the "service between Caltrain and the Central Valley" part that's a more significant challenge.

I'm not convinced that the current HSR project is the best way to do it, but I'm also not aware of any serious counterproposal -- and it's hard to even imagine one that wouldn't also be a huge, expensive undertaking with limitless opportunity for missed schedules, cost overruns and undue optimism.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:California bullet train cost surges by $2.8B by ubernostrum on Wednesday January 17, 2018 @09:54PM (#16174275)

I'm not convinced that the current HSR project is the best way to do it

Most criticism boils down to a "perfect is the enemy of the good" problem. Anything that isn't the most perfect possible solution from a given critic's viewpoint is attacked as a "boondoggle" while ignoring that opening up the corridor and making it easier to travel between SF, LA, and smaller cities in between will be a good thing (and that there's plenty of evidence for it in similar rail lines elsewhere).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:California bullet train cost surges by $2.8B by chipotle_coyote on Friday January 19, 2018 @02:36PM (#16189049)

Yep, I agree. That's what I (imperfectly) meant by the lack of serious counterproposals: I'm not sure the current HSR is the best approach, but I haven't seen anyone come up with a better idea, and I'd rather have something than nothing.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:California bullet train cost surges by $2.8B by kelnos on Thursday January 18, 2018 @10:53PM (#16184026)

I agree that it's a good thing, but is it good enough to warrant its price tag, when we're painfully aware of significant issues with our existing transit systems?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:California bullet train cost surges by $2.8B by ubernostrum on Saturday January 20, 2018 @07:21PM (#16196211)

If only some of the money for HSR were going to be used to improve existing transit systems as well as building a new line.

(hint: some of the money is going to be used to improve existing transit systems!)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:California bullet train cost surges by $2.8B by kelnos on Thursday January 18, 2018 @10:52PM (#16184020)

The main problems with Caltrain seem to be cost, too-infrequent trains, and delays. Does electrification address that?

And even if it does, this doesn't improve VTA, BART, SF Muni, etc.

[ Parent | on HN ]