Here we go again!
Some wide-eyed optomists held a public meeting last night to announce that they are:
Going to build a high-speed rail link from Las Vegas to Victorville, CA:
Pardon me while I dust myself off from ROFLMAO!!!!
When the local news channel announced this, the weather announcer made the comment I used to title this thread. I think he got it right.
Victorville is a nice town, on the desert above Cajon Pass. It isn't downtown LA. According to Mapquest, it's a 2 hour 42 minute drive to Sin City. (I have driven it in less.) If it's a 1 hour 30 minute rail run, that's a rail advantage of 72 minutes:
Unless these things are going to run on rapid-transit headways, the minuses can easily exceed 72 minutes.
Then there's the economics involved. Will a round-trip ticket, car rental (or taxi fare) in Las Vegas and the PITA factor exceed the price of 500 miles worth of motor fuel and vehicle expenses? (Say WHAT???)
If I was a California driver who had just fought my way across the LA Basin and climbed Cajon Pass, I might make a pit stop in Victorville. I rather doubt that I'd park my ride in a park-and-ride to take a train, simply because it's there.
Chuck (Skeptical Sin City resident railfan)
If they plan to locate it within the ROW of I-15 they may be able to achieve the elapsed times mentioned. But that will not happen if they hope to use the ROW of BNSF and UP. The alinement constraints of the UP ROW from Daggett to LV will not come close to allowing the speeds projected. And the BNSF from Victorville to Daggett is a very busy RR which would certainly restrict the HSR.
The $8B to get this up and running is certainly low and the maintenance costs to keep the track in a condition to operate at those speeds will be significant; along with the slowing of trains while maintenance happens.
Now that $T are randomly thrown around in DC the low level politicians and buearocrats feel free to talk in $B. They usually are not even close in their cost estimates.
tomikawaTTHere we go again! Some wide-eyed optomists held a public meeting last night to announce that they are: Going to build a high-speed rail link from Las Vegas to Victorville, CA: 120 MPH trains - 1 1/2 hour travel time (graphics looked like cartoon Acela.) Privately funded - no government money! (They expect $8B to cover it.) Construction to begin in 2010 - maybe. (Can they even get an EIS done before 2011?) Pardon me while I dust myself off from ROFLMAO!!!! When the local news channel announced this, the weather announcer made the comment I used to title this thread. I think he got it right. Victorville is a nice town, on the desert above Cajon Pass. It isn't downtown LA. According to Mapquest, it's a 2 hour 42 minute drive to Sin City. (I have driven it in less.) If it's a 1 hour 30 minute rail run, that's a rail advantage of 72 minutes: Minus parking, then getting to the platform. Minus waiting for the train to depart. Minus getting off the train and renting a car/finding a taxi/waiting for the hotel's shuttle bus. Unless these things are going to run on rapid-transit headways, the minuses can easily exceed 72 minutes. Then there's the economics involved. Will a round-trip ticket, car rental (or taxi fare) in Las Vegas and the PITA factor exceed the price of 500 miles worth of motor fuel and vehicle expenses? (Say WHAT???) If I was a California driver who had just fought my way across the LA Basin and climbed Cajon Pass, I might make a pit stop in Victorville. I rather doubt that I'd park my ride in a park-and-ride to take a train, simply because it's there. Chuck (Skeptical Sin City resident railfan)
They are looking for a bit faster than that, 150mph. Here is a link to the Draft EIS
DesertXpress EIS
They are looking at using a variant of either the Bombardier Meridian (as used in the UK) if they go the 125mph DMU route, or more likely the 150mph Bombardier Regina (as used in Sweden) if they go with an electrified EMU.
Is it not possible that this is an end run around the plans for HSR of the Obama administration? Notice the draft EIS was released by the actiing administrator of the FRA. Also the date is Mar 17, 2009. Could it be that if this project was started then when the costs exceeded financing ( typical in the 19th century) that the US government would be pushed into taking over the project? Would AMTRAK eventually be asked to operate tihis service as another subsidized LD run? As much as I support HSR the idea of a possible end run around a well (?) thought out plan of implementing HSR grates against me.
blue streak 1Is it not possible that this is an end run around the plans for HSR of the Obama administration? Notice the draft EIS was released by the actiing administrator of the FRA. Also the date is Mar 17, 2009. Could it be that if this project was started then when the costs exceeded financing ( typical in the 19th century) that the US government would be pushed into taking over the project? Would AMTRAK eventually be asked to operate tihis service as another subsidized LD run? As much as I support HSR the idea of a possible end run around a well (?) thought out plan of implementing HSR grates against me.
This proposal was started before Obama became President, and before the credit crisis broke. The obvious reason for locating the endpoint at Victorville is that land for the station and ROW would be obtainable more easily and cheaper than if the line continued deeper into the built up area of the LA Basin. I would think that with Credit much harder to obtain from Banks right now the project will be on hold as far as investors are concerned. Nevertheless the plan looks better reasoned than most put out there by many government agencies and with the market better judged. Notice that they didn't try to go all out for maximum speed having judged that a premium price for further time savings in a leasure market would not pay off, and also that they have chosen to purchase off the shelf hardware with only a modified seating arrangement, to minimize the financial risk of having new hardware developed.
Perhaps the Desert Express folks are not looking at the ARRA stimulus rail money but planning to tap a different high speed rail plan authorized in 2008 at the instigation of Congressman John Mica (R-Fla).
That authorization allows private companies to bid for building/operating dedicated high speed rail lines. Those bidding must submit a formal "Expression of Interest" by September 14, 2009. Under the 2008 law, a federal commission wil be appointed and formal recommendations to Congress must be released by February 2010. While Congress has only authorized $5 million in the 2008 law, the President has said he wants $ 1 billion a year for high speed rail for the next five years. Who knows how much will be appropriated when the Congress announced a second stimulus program in 2010?
Tony
have read just a sampling of the very large EIS (over 40mb). The EIS is very detailed and obviously has alot of thought. The Victorville terminus still has me worried. Now if AMTRAK could operate from San Diego and LA union station to Victorville with several pickup stops then the route could be much more viable. Then you immediately get to the question of thru train operation question. Haven't gotten to the maximum grades proposed. The use of DMUs or EMUs bring up several questions of passenger comfort. All I have ridden you either hear diesel noises or electrical whines.
If EMU through service was implemented then AMTRAK locomotives could pull train to Victorville and the EMUs proceed. DMUs would have a hard time meeting the California emissions requirements and might need to be AMTRAK locomotive hauled also. The use of 1 or 2 HHP8 style locomotive hauled conventional cars might be the better way to operate this route. The conventional equipment then could be interchanged easily. Again the grades that will be encountered has to be considered..
blue streak 1have read just a sampling of the very large EIS (over 40mb). The EIS is very detailed and obviously has alot of thought. The Victorville terminus still has me worried. Now if AMTRAK could operate from San Diego and LA union station to Victorville with several pickup stops then the route could be much more viable. Then you immediately get to the question of thru train operation question. Haven't gotten to the maximum grades proposed. The use of DMUs or EMUs bring up several questions of passenger comfort. All I have ridden you either hear diesel noises or electrical whines. If EMU through service was implemented then AMTRAK locomotives could pull train to Victorville and the EMUs proceed. DMUs would have a hard time meeting the California emissions requirements and might need to be AMTRAK locomotive hauled also. The use of 1 or 2 HHP8 style locomotive hauled conventional cars might be the better way to operate this route. The conventional equipment then could be interchanged easily. Again the grades that will be encountered has to be considered..
Either way with DMU or EMU the trainsets are not going to be made FRA compliant with the freight rail network, so the must be on their own separate Right of Way. The EMUs for sure are capable of handling up to 4% gradients without too much trouble, though obviosly not at 150 mph while climbing. The use of locomotives such as the HHP-8 with conventional passenger coaches, might be enough to make the operation unprofitable except under the best circumstances. The greater weight will increase energy consumption and increase track maintenance.
BTW- wasn't the old March AFB site in Victorville where they were looking to put another airport for the LA area?
Did anyone attended the public hearings APR 28 - APR 30?
Have waded into the EIS some more. Three things stood out.
1. Minimum clearance proposed to be 16'9". Bad! That would preclude any double deck cars (ie Superliners) from being operated on the route. Even if they used their own equipment they could never use high clearance capacity passenger equipment. But this clearance would also limit much maintenance equipment and require special designed equipment and also slow any maintenance down with that low clearance. The NEC suffers from that same restriction even though they have higher clearances in places.
2. DMUs are listed as a possibility but their proposal uses a smaller car than standard US passenger cars. However getting the track in and operating DMUs while waiting for CAT to be installed might be an advanage.
3. EMUs are listed because their thinking is that with every car powered they are more reliable service and do not have to be turned. Wouldn't it be better to put a motor on each end of a train to get the HP/weight ration needed and no turning would be required?. That would also help meet the FRA crashworthness requirements in case any interchange is ever contemplated?.
According to the AAA, the true cost of driving a car in SoCal is $0.565 a mile. If the trip distance from Victorville to Vegas is 250 miles, then a round trip would cost $282.50. A round trip ticket costing $140 would be a bargain for a driver with no passengers. Add a passenger and it's a tie..
Extending the service into the LA Basin would increase ridership a lot, particularly if it linked up with Metrolink service on the San Berdoo line.
My son's father-in-law lives in Pomona and commutes weekly to Vegas where he rents a condo. He currently drives and would love to take a train. He looked into Greyhound and didn't like the service. He would even like something like the old Desert Wind. Really high speed is not an issue since he can rest and nap on a train, whereas the drive leaves him frazzled.
Jack
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.