California bullet train cost surges by $2.8B

Re:California bullet train cost surges by $2.8B by SamReidHughes on Wednesday January 17, 2018 @09:32PM (#16174171)

Averaging 100mph is unrealistic for I-5 most of the time. You'll get stuck behind cars doing 80 in the left lane while semis sit in the right, and that can last for miles and miles. I think things were faster in 2010-11, when the economy was slower, but I only drove it twice then -- even then, 90mph was more realistic.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:California bullet train cost surges by $2.8B by dx034 on Thursday January 18, 2018 @03:56AM (#16175670)

Which is fine I guess? If I'm going above the speed limit I have no issues staying on the left lane if I continue passing other cars. I don't have to always make space for someone 30+mph above the limit (both legally and morally).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:California bullet train cost surges by $2.8B by SamReidHughes on Thursday January 18, 2018 @12:44PM (#16179296)

If you're only going 10 over just like everybody else you belong in the right lane.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:California bullet train cost surges by $2.8B by Retric on Thursday January 18, 2018 @08:55PM (#16183484)

Sure, on current infrastructure 100MPH is unrealistic in that area, but if they added more roads so you could do 100MPH nobody would call it high speed transit.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:California bullet train cost surges by $2.8B by SamReidHughes on Thursday January 18, 2018 @09:07PM (#16183558)

Honestly if they added a third lane to I-5, that would be good enough. At least from Grapevine to 152.

[ Parent | on HN ]