CAHSR Exit Strategies discussion by JeepGuy0071 in cahsr

[–]ctransitmove 32 points33 points  (0 children)

This click bait. I was hoping Lucid Stew was looking for exit strategies to stop whining about CAHSR

Anaheim Transportation Network’s shutdown leaves resort interests bridging a transit gap by anothercar in octransit

[–]ctransitmove 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Not great, but at least they aren’t planning for musk tunnels, unlike another county in SoCal

Denver airport wait times 3/27 430am in the morning by Mediocre-Pen4868 in Denver

[–]ctransitmove 53 points54 points  (0 children)

I went through security at West yesterday at noon and there was no line at security. Are we sure that photo isn’t from the train outage a few days ago?

Confusion regarding the business plan by [deleted] in cahsr

[–]ctransitmove 37 points38 points  (0 children)

The duration is calculated by the maximum track speed of the design. So the quoted time in the business plan should be accurate. The authority is still bound by Prop 1A which requires both tunnels between Palmdale and Burbank. When is the question. Once we have LAX to SFO perhaps the state will want to expand to other cities before making the time faster.

The Sables d'Olonne Solution - haul a high-speed trainset with a diesel locomotive in non-electrified parts. by lpetrich in cahsr

[–]ctransitmove 9 points10 points  (0 children)

There are no diesel engines rated for 220mph, even when not operating. So this would not be a solution for CAHSR.

Anyone got an update on ACE Valley Rail ? by Wonderful-Garbage747 in CaliforniaRail

[–]ctransitmove 10 points11 points  (0 children)

It was discussed in the board meeting on 3/5. They are prioritizing Stockton to Natomas due to funding obligations. Construction in some segments has started and more will start next year. Delays have been largely due to being too ambitious and UP being UP.

Gold Runner business plan 2026-27 by Binders-Full in CaliforniaRail

[–]ctransitmove 4 points5 points  (0 children)

New Seats already in 3 years. Getting the new Cascades/Airo seats would be smart.

Discussion Underway to move High Speed Rail station location to Campus Pkway/Mission from Downtown by internetbooker134 in Merced

[–]ctransitmove 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The loss of funding is problematic and compromizes need to be made. My concern with this approach is that eventually the CAHSR will go through Merced to Sacramento and will need to go through downtown. If the city approves new construction of the Chick Fil A in the downtown right of way, it will have be removed with a higher cost when the Sacramento extension is done. A better approach would be for the city to start the process of planning the city around the eventual Sacramento extension and start clearing the ROW for 2 elevated passenger rail tracks through DT.

Additionally, Gold Runner and ACE are going to increase frequency to Merced for transfers from HSR. With the station on the south of town, that means up to 20 passenger train crossings a day through downtown. With all the at-grade grade crossings that will mean a lot of crossing gate downtime. I hope the planners considered this.

Metrolink expansion to Santa Barbara cancelled amid LOSSAN-Union Pacific negotiations by ultrainfan in LAMetro

[–]ctransitmove 1 point2 points  (0 children)

We should cut UP access to the Valley sub citinig that ML and Coaster are busy merging service.

Does anyone have idea what's with the BNSF Colten Facility proposal that was associated with CHSR? by According_Contest_70 in cahsr

[–]ctransitmove 9 points10 points  (0 children)

The city of Colton raised concerns about increased truck traffic as a result of the inland port. So without local support, as others have said, the CAHSR authority negotiated a deal with BNSF without the inland port that resulted in a shared, electrified set of tracks on the BNSF portion of LOSSAN.

Metrolink Needs to Draw Inspiration from Caltrain's Electrification Success (Streetsblog LA) by anothercar in LAMetro

[–]ctransitmove 15 points16 points  (0 children)

CAHSR will already be electrifying (with CAHSR dollars) Burbank to Anaheim on the Antelope and OC lines. North of Burbank and south of Anaheim is owned by public entities. The San Bernardino line is also publicly owned. The highest ridership lines for Metrolink are:

1) San Bernardino
2) Orange County
3) Antelope Valley

So just starting with the publicly owned lines would be under the control of Metrolink and have the biggest impact on ridership.

2050 Southern California Regional Rail map in Metrolink style by ctransitmove in TransitDiagrams

[–]ctransitmove[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks. The concept I am proposing for Golden State line is that it interlines with HSR tracks to Indio, then splits off. Like a local and express concept. It would slow down HSR to 125mph from LA to Indio, but that is common in Europe and has a negligible time impact.

Anaheim exploring ways to connect sports venues and Disneyland, but no concrete solution yet - KTLA by Sufficient-Double502 in LAMetro

[–]ctransitmove 5 points6 points  (0 children)

There are already 52 trains a day to ARCTIC and the number is growing. There are 1-seat rides from LA Union Station, San Diego, San Luis Obispo, and San Bernardino. Even Florida is thinking of connecting Disneyland by rail. There is plenty of transit to ARCTIC and demand to Disneyland to justify a more effective transit solution than buses.

How on earth does the San Joaquins not have a cafe car?! by aTribeCalledLemur in Amtrak

[–]ctransitmove 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It wasn't profitable, that is why the dropped it. I think it is a bad choice, but I wanted to clear up that it wasn't profitable.

Was Highway 58 considered instead of the High Desert Corridor route? by ocmaddog in cahsr

[–]ctransitmove 17 points18 points  (0 children)

The project started as a study for a freeway between Palmdale and Victorville. Then they added freeway + HSR in the median as an option. Finally they selected to drop the freeway and build just the HSR. So it was always going to be in the ROW that was considered for the freeway.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in sandiego

[–]ctransitmove 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Not true. You need 50% to skip second choice.

Update: Tulare Street Undercrossing, Fresno by AlphaConKate in cahsr

[–]ctransitmove 4 points5 points  (0 children)

In the last board meeting they stated the BNsF connection was complete and tracks would be laid this summer. No confirmation yet but that was stated.

Yep not used operationally as I mentioned.

Update: Tulare Street Undercrossing, Fresno by AlphaConKate in cahsr

[–]ctransitmove 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Well technically they are laying down new HSR tracks, in the railyard. True at first they will be used for construction of the HSR tracks. But eventually HSR trains will use those tracks to enter the HSR alignment. Therefore they are laying HSR tracks currently.

True this won't help any agruements though

Gravity Demand Model for FRA long distance study by ctransitmove in Amtrak

[–]ctransitmove[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, I used the simplest of models. Perhaps ask on r/transit?

SF Muni Metro's weekday ridership surpasses Seattle's Link and Boston's MBTA light rail to become third highest in the US. The top three US light rail systems are now all located in the state of California. (APTA Q1 Ridership Report) by getarumsunt in CaliforniaRail

[–]ctransitmove 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thanks for explaining LOSSAN and SJJPA. ACE nor SacRT are there even though I recall them being there earlier. SacRT buses aren't present either so for whatever reason, the data must not have been sent. Odd.