Comments on: 2010: The Year Ahead In California HSR http://www.cahsrblog.com/2009/12/2010-the-year-ahead-in-california-hsr/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=2010-the-year-ahead-in-california-hsr California High Speed Rail support blog, spreading news and info about the high speed trains project approved by California voters in November 2008. Thu, 09 Feb 2012 09:54:49 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3 By: Joey http://www.cahsrblog.com/2009/12/2010-the-year-ahead-in-california-hsr/comment-page-1/#comment-45051 Joey Wed, 06 Jan 2010 02:05:42 +0000 http://www.cahsrblog.com/?p=2680#comment-45051 Sadly, no. Sadly, no.

]]> By: lyqwyd http://www.cahsrblog.com/2009/12/2010-the-year-ahead-in-california-hsr/comment-page-1/#comment-45042 lyqwyd Wed, 06 Jan 2010 00:46:23 +0000 http://www.cahsrblog.com/?p=2680#comment-45042 Your comment was too long and rambling for me to read. I read the first 4 paragraphs and didn't see anything relevant to make me want to read more. Are you for or against HSR? Are you for or against a tunnel in Anaheim? Your comment was too long and rambling for me to read. I read the first 4 paragraphs and didn’t see anything relevant to make me want to read more. Are you for or against HSR? Are you for or against a tunnel in Anaheim?

]]> By: lyqwyd http://www.cahsrblog.com/2009/12/2010-the-year-ahead-in-california-hsr/comment-page-1/#comment-45041 lyqwyd Wed, 06 Jan 2010 00:44:19 +0000 http://www.cahsrblog.com/?p=2680#comment-45041 that comment above was supposed to be a reply to another comment, not to the post in general, is there a way to delete comments? that comment above was supposed to be a reply to another comment, not to the post in general, is there a way to delete comments?

]]> By: lyqwyd http://www.cahsrblog.com/2009/12/2010-the-year-ahead-in-california-hsr/comment-page-1/#comment-45040 lyqwyd Wed, 06 Jan 2010 00:39:29 +0000 http://www.cahsrblog.com/?p=2680#comment-45040 Sorry, couldn't read that whole post, too long and rambling. Are you for or against HSR? Are you for or against a tunnel through Anaheim? Sorry, couldn’t read that whole post, too long and rambling. Are you for or against HSR? Are you for or against a tunnel through Anaheim?

]]> By: Spokker http://www.cahsrblog.com/2009/12/2010-the-year-ahead-in-california-hsr/comment-page-1/#comment-44948 Spokker Tue, 05 Jan 2010 00:56:48 +0000 http://www.cahsrblog.com/?p=2680#comment-44948 Alon, the LA River nuts are in full opposition to HSR if it has any alignment next to the "river." Alon, the LA River nuts are in full opposition to HSR if it has any alignment next to the “river.”

]]> By: Alon Levy http://www.cahsrblog.com/2009/12/2010-the-year-ahead-in-california-hsr/comment-page-1/#comment-44946 Alon Levy Tue, 05 Jan 2010 00:50:36 +0000 http://www.cahsrblog.com/?p=2680#comment-44946 Ken, bear in mind that both the support and opposition for HSR seem to be concentrated in the Bay Area and possibly Orange County. LA itself doesn't seem to care much. Ken, bear in mind that both the support and opposition for HSR seem to be concentrated in the Bay Area and possibly Orange County. LA itself doesn’t seem to care much.

]]> By: jimsf http://www.cahsrblog.com/2009/12/2010-the-year-ahead-in-california-hsr/comment-page-1/#comment-44867 jimsf Mon, 04 Jan 2010 07:23:20 +0000 http://www.cahsrblog.com/?p=2680#comment-44867 like the "if you lived here you'd be home now" billboards! like the “if you lived here you’d be home now” billboards!

]]> By: Caelestor http://www.cahsrblog.com/2009/12/2010-the-year-ahead-in-california-hsr/comment-page-1/#comment-44864 Caelestor Mon, 04 Jan 2010 05:36:21 +0000 http://www.cahsrblog.com/?p=2680#comment-44864 Does adding 10-15 extra minutes really make HSR not competitive with airlines? Anyways, HSR needs well-located train stations (i.e. where the people live) in urban centers, not along freeways. Does adding 10-15 extra minutes really make HSR not competitive with airlines?

Anyways, HSR needs well-located train stations (i.e. where the people live) in urban centers, not along freeways.

]]> By: Alex2000 http://www.cahsrblog.com/2009/12/2010-the-year-ahead-in-california-hsr/comment-page-1/#comment-44862 Alex2000 Mon, 04 Jan 2010 05:05:26 +0000 http://www.cahsrblog.com/?p=2680#comment-44862 no.. just a Cincinnatus rather than a Sulla. no.. just a Cincinnatus rather than a Sulla.

]]> By: Alon Levy http://www.cahsrblog.com/2009/12/2010-the-year-ahead-in-california-hsr/comment-page-1/#comment-44838 Alon Levy Sun, 03 Jan 2010 23:36:45 +0000 http://www.cahsrblog.com/?p=2680#comment-44838 It's not that they can't afford it - it's that they spend the money on trivialities. For example, take the latest study, proposing $11 billion improvements to take Acela travel times down to 2:15/3:00. The highlights of the study: $1.3 billion for Moynihan Station, $2 billion for quad-tracking 60 miles of curvy track in Maryland without any mention of curve elimination or bypass tracks, an increase in Connecticut cant deficiency from 3" to 5", next-generation trains subject to new FRA standards rather than off-the-shelf, capacity issues that assume tracks are limited to 20-24 tph even as new signaling allows 30 tph. It’s not that they can’t afford it – it’s that they spend the money on trivialities. For example, take the latest study, proposing $11 billion improvements to take Acela travel times down to 2:15/3:00. The highlights of the study: $1.3 billion for Moynihan Station, $2 billion for quad-tracking 60 miles of curvy track in Maryland without any mention of curve elimination or bypass tracks, an increase in Connecticut cant deficiency from 3″ to 5″, next-generation trains subject to new FRA standards rather than off-the-shelf, capacity issues that assume tracks are limited to 20-24 tph even as new signaling allows 30 tph.

]]>