SA 3482.
SEC. 720. AIR-RAIL CODESHARE STUDY.

(a) CODESHARE STUDY.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Transportation, in coordination with the Federal Aviation Administration and the Federal Railroad Administration,
shall conduct a study of—

(1) the current airline and intercity passenger rail codeshare arrangements;
(2) the best methods for encouraging better integration of future airline and intercity passenger rail schedules; and
(3) the feasibility of increasing intermodal connectivity of airline and intercity passenger rail facilities and systems to improve passenger travel.

(b) CONSIDERATIONS.—The study shall consider—
(1) the potential benefits to passengers from the development of a more efficient travel network through the implementation of more integrated scheduling between airlines and Amtrak or other intercity passenger rail carriers achieved through codesharing arrangements;

(2) statutory and regulatory challenges or barriers to greater integration of future scheduling through implementation of codeshare arrangements between airlines and Amtrak or other intercity passenger rail carriers;

(3) financial or other challenges to implementing more integrated codeshare arrangements between airlines and Amtrak or other intercity passenger rail carriers; and

(4) airport operations that can improve connectivity to intercity passenger rail facilities
and stations.

(c) REPORT.—Not later than 1 year after commencing the study required by subsection
(a), the Secretary shall submit a report on the study to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee on Transportation
and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives. The report shall include any conclusions of the Secretary resulting from the study, the Secretary’s recommendations for improving intermodal connections between airlines and intercity passenger rail, and the Secretary’s recommendations for regulatory or legislative changes necessary to facilitate codeshare arrangements between airlines and Amtrak and other intercity passenger rail carriers.

Well, tickle away.

The LAWA is owned by the City of LA, and LAX is their flagship airport, but LAX has some problems.

It’s overcrowded, has poor transit (though that will change), can’t expand to handle more flights and bigger planes (like A380) due to community opposition, the local community wants less emphasis on LAX and more on the other airports, and LAWA has already acquiesced.

ONT getting a HSR station is no accident, LAWA asked for it. And it makes some sense to do this and relieve LAX, even though it’s better to serve downtowns with HSR instead of airports. If only Palmdale and LAWA would create a plan to develop PMD and integrate the HSR station into an air terminal like Rafael has discussed before.

“In the future, Ontario plans to build the tallest office and condo towers in the city on this property, just north of the airport. The tower complexes are planned to be multiple urban villages. Tower heights could reach up to 500 ft / 50 story towers. These “villages” will be some of the tallest buildings in all of Greater LA due to the massive airport and the un-restrictive building height limits. Los Angeles will always be taller by 20 floors but Ontario is expected to be a close second. ”

This makes no sense. The FAA will not allow these buildings if they obstruct the navigable airspace. This is from the FAA (https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/portal.jsp).

CFR Title 14 Part 77.13 states that any person/organization who intends to sponsor any of the following construction or alterations must notify the Administrator of the FAA:

any construction or alteration exceeding 200 ft above ground level
any construction or alteration:
within 20,000 ft of a public use or military airport which exceeds a 100:1 surface from any point on the runway of each airport with at least one runway more than 3,200 ft
within 10,000 ft of a public use or military airport which exceeds a 50:1 surface from any point on the runway of each airport with its longest runway no more than 3,200 ft
within 5,000 ft of a public use heliport which exceeds a 25:1 surface
any highway, railroad or other traverse way whose prescribed adjusted height would exceed the above noted standards
when requested by the FAA
any construction or alteration located on a public use airport or heliport regardless of height or location.

[blockquote] The Obama Administration as part of its love affair with big government, believes that the nation’s deregulated and successful transportation system needs annother, perfunctory overhaul that will have government controlling more of the economy but forcing Americans to use trains. Commissar LaHood has made it clear that Fearless Leader believes that people will be powerless to resist his transformation of America if he can strike at the very core of national identity…free and fair passage between the states. [/blockquote]

Ontario is planned to be the size of present day Phoenix.

[/blockquote]

What? Phoenix is over 500 square miles, Ontario is barely 50. Perhaps you meant the airport?

In any case, it’s wishful thinking that Ontario is going to become the second city in the LA Metro area. Los Angeles World Airports (i.e. the City of Los Angeles) owns Ontario Airport and would be just tickled pink if the arrival of HSR kept pressure off it’s flagship airport, LAX by allowing Ontario to serve more passengers and possibly have more international flights.

Instead, in all likelihood HSR will just spur a housing bubble outside of Riverside in the Inland Empre and do little to make this a reality.

I mentioned integrated ticketing and scheduling in the German examples (there are others) because the know-nothing “objection” to non-monopoly service provision is that those must be lost. That’s not the case, in Germany or France or in Sweden or where ever: if the tendering process is undertaken competently then the public doesn’t know and doesn’t care about who is being paid to run the trains. What they notice is more trains, cleaner trains, running more reliably, a better attitude from the employees they encounter, and no increase in the tax subsidies and fares they pay.

I completely agree with that.

Or you can have Amtrak now and forever.

I’m not in Amtrak area. It’s kind of similar though, we’re stuck with another dreadful monopoly over here and it won’t change in at least another 10 years. :( The DOT and regional governments managed to sign 10-year agreement just days before new EU rules requiring tenders kicked in.

Well my original point was that every system had its strenghts and weaknesses and Germany happens to lack anything else besides the funding.

The first system that will see actual HS competition will likely be Italy, where they finished HS spine recently and NTV is procuring new AGVs to dig into Frecciarossa market starting next summer.