California bullet train cost surges by $2.8B

Re:California bullet train cost surges by $2.8B by inferiorhuman on Wednesday January 17, 2018 @08:00PM (#16173693)

At least at the San Francisco end, the terminus is in the heart of downtown San Francisco near a bunch of major transi tlines. SFO is 45+ minutes away via BART (OAK is a little closer, SJC is way further away). SFO via car is going to be highly variable, less than 45 minutes best case, but worse in traffic.

Additionally there's the problem of airport expansion. There aren't a lot of palatable options as filling in the bay is (rightfully) a non-starter for most people. High speed rail wouldn't replace air travel but it would complement it (especially with the related regional improvements like electrifying Caltrain).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:California bullet train cost surges by $2.8B by dwg on Thursday January 18, 2018 @12:11PM (#16178807)

Yeah I see no problem with more choices if they make sense. My reply was in refutation to the point that flying is not faster than high speed rail because of time needed at airport, which is not my experience. Since travel time to/from the station/airport depends on the situation, it doesn't make sense to include it in a general statement (to which I was replying).

[ Parent | on HN ]