Comments on: Board chair’s upbeat take on bullet train at sharp odds with MSM https://calwatchdog.com/2014/07/16/board-chairs-upbeat-take-on-bullet-train-at-sharp-odds-with-msm/ Wed, 25 Mar 2015 05:52:22 +0000 hourly 1 By: Sean https://calwatchdog.com/2014/07/16/board-chairs-upbeat-take-on-bullet-train-at-sharp-odds-with-msm/#comment-88236 Wed, 16 Jul 2014 23:26:57 +0000 http://calwatchdog.com/?p=65860#comment-88236 Why didn’t the HSR follow I-5 which is one of the straightest roads in the central valley? The French company TGV was going to bid on its operation until they saw it going through the middle of the central valley agricultural towns, increasing its length, costs, and adding major complications to obtaining rights of way. The HSR in California is simply overspecified and they’ve managed to make it impossible to produce a viable railroad that can meet all its objectives.

]]> By: Robert S. Allen https://calwatchdog.com/2014/07/16/board-chairs-upbeat-take-on-bullet-train-at-sharp-odds-with-msm/#comment-88217 Wed, 16 Jul 2014 21:55:41 +0000 http://calwatchdog.com/?p=65860#comment-88217 That was no response to a real concern. All passenger trains are vulnerable to grade crossing accidents, and worse with higher speeds.

]]> By: Robert S. Allen https://calwatchdog.com/2014/07/16/board-chairs-upbeat-take-on-bullet-train-at-sharp-odds-with-msm/#comment-88216 Wed, 16 Jul 2014 21:54:00 +0000 http://calwatchdog.com/?p=65860#comment-88216 That was no response to a real concern. All passenger trains are vulnerable to grade crossing accidents, and worse with higher speeds. The HSR bond measure (2008 Prop 1-A) specified it was for “Safe, Reliable” HSR. Evidently I was not didactic enough for Ken.

]]> By: Ken https://calwatchdog.com/2014/07/16/board-chairs-upbeat-take-on-bullet-train-at-sharp-odds-with-msm/#comment-88210 Wed, 16 Jul 2014 20:43:19 +0000 http://calwatchdog.com/?p=65860#comment-88210 In reply to Robert S. Allen.

No, you are being too didactic. The train should go 120mph wherever it can. Ideally a great percentage of appropriate high speed roadbed is in the offing. Crossings must be elevated where necessary. It is true the whole system has to be inserted spatially from its surroundings, as much as is “humanly” possible. This cannot be a Tootervile Trolly spending the greater part of each hour doing 35mph. As for terrorism, we cannot let the thought stop high speed rail. All public conveyances extant are subject to terrorism. Perhaps if we grow a brain and slam our borders shut for a while we can diminish the possibility of terrorism? I would think so.

]]> By: Robert S. Allen https://calwatchdog.com/2014/07/16/board-chairs-upbeat-take-on-bullet-train-at-sharp-odds-with-msm/#comment-88185 Wed, 16 Jul 2014 16:26:26 +0000 http://calwatchdog.com/?p=65860#comment-88185 High Speed Rail needs a secure, fenced, grade separated track. Prop 1-A bonds in 2008 were for “…Safe, Reliable…” HSR. Caltrain has dozens of grade crossings and station platforms along 50 miles between San Jose and San Francisco.—

This “Blended Rail” would be NEITHER SAFE NOR RELIABLE. Yet CHSRA talks of upping the 79 mph speed limit to about 120 mph. Initial HSR to the Bay Area needs to end at San Jose, with nearly seamless transfers there to Caltrain, Capitol Corridor, VTA rail, and BART.—

Grade crossings are vulnerable to accident, sabotage, and even terrorist plots. They don’t belong on HSR. Picture Bourbonnais IL in 1999. Amtrak on 79 mph track (same as Caltrain now) hit a steel-laden truck, derailed two locomotives and 11 of 14 cars, killed 11 passengers, and injured 128. See Wikipedia. The records are replete with grade crossing accidents.—

Beyond San Jose there is a better, safer, more reliable, and lower cost alternative: upgrade the UP/Amtrak East Bay route via Santa Clara and Mulford to Oakland and Sacramento. Include a transfer station in Oakland at the BART overhead: trains on four minute or less headways to San Francisco’s downtown Embarcadero station in six minutes.

]]>