A tale of two trains: Brightline vs California high speed rail

[AZRWinger]

You do know there is a substantial difference in the topography of the two states, yes?

A state where the elevation varies between sea level and a MAX altitude of 345 feet (in the panhandle not on the Brightline route) is going to most assuredly have a DRASTICALLY lower cost compared to a state that is chock full of mountains, yes?

But yeah you, you got them now! Comparing a flat railroad across Florida is absolutely comparable to California with thousands if not tens of thousands of feet in elevation change between any two given cities.

So, the radically underestimated costs for the California line were due to not knowing the route's elevation changes. Of course we are discussing a Democrat ruled state that failed to adequately account for the loss of electric power from solar generation at sundown.

Certainly California has more mountains than Florida. Specifically which high mountain passes does the LA/SF route traverse? What's the altitude change for each?

 

[Randomutation]

Florida's Brightline and California's high speed rail show the difference between capitalism and socialism when it comes to providing infrastructure. Yes, the market can and should provide infrastructure.

Brightline is:

1) Privately funded
2) Cost about 20 - 50 million dollars per mile
3) Was built in under 5 years.
4) Is fully operational, runs to 125mph, is profitable, and expanding.

California's high speed rail project is:

1) Government funded
2) The current projected cost for the full system is now over $200 million dollars per mile - over four times higher than brightline.
3) Voters approved the train in 2008 with a promise to connect san francisco to LA by 2020. But construction didn’t even begin until 2015, and nearly two decades later, not a single train is running. Meanwhile, cost overruns have pushed the price tag past $100 billion.


The results speak for themselves: one train serves the people, the other serves bureaucracies. One didn’t cost taxpayers a dime, the other cost them a fortune.

Good point. So, do you also think it would make sense to let capitalism determine how many foreign workers are needed in the private sector instead of having it dictated by the federal government?

 

[Noodlegawd]

Oh wow 125mph.

Those sorts of insane speeds were only reached in Europe in 1976 in the UK.
Wow, welcome to the train tech of the 70's.

The CA HSR goes 0 mph, and is only planned to connect 2 cities that almost no one ever travels between.

 

[Noodlegawd]

You do know there is a substantial difference in the topography of the two states, yes?

A state where the elevation varies between sea level and a MAX altitude of 345 feet (in the panhandle not on the Brightline route) is going to most assuredly have a DRASTICALLY lower cost compared to a state that is chock full of mountains, yes?

But yeah you, you got them now! Comparing a flat railroad across Florida is absolutely comparable to California with thousands if not tens of thousands of feet in elevation change between any two given cities.

There are no mountains between Bakersfield and Merced. And there still isn't a high speed rail line between then either.

 

[Peter]

There are no mountains between Bakersfield and Merced. And there still isn't a high speed rail line between then either.

It is possible for trains to get through mountains with tunnels.
Switzerland has a tone of mountains and trains that go through them just fine.
You may have heard of this place called The Alps which are quite big.

 

[upsideguy]

That’s true.

High speed rail will only occur is a few places. East Coast, LA to SF and LA to Las Vegas. In most areas the distances are too great and trips would take too long. People would rather endure air flight or drive.

"High speed" rail works really well when you have metropolitan areas all lined up 100 miles apart or so. Consider the Northeast.... the corridor of Boston, Providence, New Haven, Stamford, New York, Newark, Philadelphia, Wilmington, Baltimore, Washington is ideal. Not all of the traffic goes from Boston to Washington, but the train serves all points in between with high speed.

There are many equivalent corridors that can be strung together consider Boston to St Louis with stops in Worcester, Springfield, Albany, Syracuse, Rochester, Buffalo, Erie, Cleveland, Columbus, Cincinnati and Louisville. Again, most of the passengers of the train get on and or off at the intermediate stops.... all get a very fast, efficient and hopefully frequent service that is more cost effective than an auto or plane. There are several corridors thoughout the US, including in Texas and on the West Coast that would equally rich.

Why the beef about publicly funded trains? Europe’s seem to work fine.

Agreed. All of our airports (and aviation infrastructure) and roads are public funded, as are most of our sports venues (though the latter is more a matter of sports owners shaking down cities -- its another discussion). Public financing is appropriate when the project ultimately improves commerce and quality of life in a community. Personally, I believe high speed rail infrastructure to be a righteous use of taxpayers money, it will deliver returns to the communities served and the country as a whole.

Actually one of the reasons our domestic passenger rail system failed was undue reliance on private finance when they had to compete with transportation modes that were publicly financed.

 

[aociswundumho]

Good point. So, do you also think it would make sense to let capitalism determine how many foreign workers are needed in the private sector instead of having it dictated by the federal government?

Definitely. Cheap labor is a gift.

 

[Safiel]

"If you build it, they will come."

When I was in Italy, there was no shortage of cars - anywhere. Yet, the trains were full.

All you have to do is give the customers something they want, even if they don't know what that is. Just ask Apple.

Not entirely sure of that.

The new Silver Line (Washington DC Metro) extension initially had a very poor ridership and has only grown modestly in recent years, except for traffic from the Dulles Station, which has been decent. And despite the fact that it is a very clean, safe and well maintained system, the subway simply isn't doing well enough to justify the new lines.

They built it. They didn't come.

At the intracity level, I would invest instead in high speed bus systems (bus rapid transit) which utilize the existing car infrastructure. Buses can serve a far more diversified area than fixed rail infrastructure.

There are some systems, such as New York City, where the subways do well, but these tend to be outliers, rather than the rule.

Note that I am talking of the United States only. The different cultures found overseas tend to be less attached to cars and more likely to use public transit.

And I just can't see even taking the risk on high speed rail, when we have these things called jet aircraft that get people to and fro very fast.

Yes, Brightline has done decently in Florida, but it serves a relatively limited area, southeast Florida and Orlando. The farther you extend such things, the more expensive infrastructure is needed.

I would rather spend the money improving our ATC systems and other air travel related infrastructure. I would preserve our existing intracity infrastructure, such as subways, but put new money towards buses.

I would dismantle Amtrak, except for the northeast corridor, the Autotrain and a handful of short distance routes. I would shit can all the long hauls.

I would not opposed LIMITED expansion of light rail, which, along with bus rapid transit, has done well nationwide. And I would support limited and well thought out expansion of commuter rail, such as Virginia Railway Express.

Put the money where there is the least risk and most promise of return.

 

[Randomutation]

Definitely. Cheap labor is a gift.

Yeah and it turns out to be a gift for everyone. Businesses get improved profits, customers get reduced costs, and the foreign laborers are making more money (I presume) than they could make in their home country. Win, win, win, all the way around. No need for big government to butt in and "fix" anything by deporting people who benefit the economy. Let capitalism - not big brother - determine it.

 

[Peter]

Definitely. Cheap labor is a gift.

It's a shame Trump is deporting all the cheap labour then.

 

[maxparrish]

I found it relaxing, though a little slow. But sleeping on the train was nice. Dining with complete strangers right in front of you 3 feet away wasn't my favorite part though. My wife and I did the trip from Illinois to Texas together,and then somewhat more than a year later I drove to Texas and did the trip back on the Texas Eagle solo.

You might have had a point, if the flat California central valley portion, the first part to be delivered (someday), was not currently costing 100 million dollars per mile, still many times greater than Brightline.

 

[maxparrish]

Oh wow 125mph.

Those sorts of insane speeds were only reached in Europe in 1976 in the UK.
Wow, welcome to the train tech of the 70's.

For those who insist on passenger rail service in the US, pick your poison. HSR at "high speeds" which is and will suffer mega losses till the Sun burns out or Brightstar as modest speeds which will either lose significantly less or, perhaps remotely possible, to provide a small profit in the near future.

What is obvious to those of us who are not enamored with choo-choo trains and don't find nobility in burning wheelbarrows of money to fund someone else's hobby train interests at full scale, those who support HSR don't give a damn about its waste of billions of dollars.

HSR is just another form of monument building, grandiose public architecture and projects to show the public and the world how great a nation is. In the Soviet Union they built the Moscow subway, the White Sea Canal, and many giant statutes Lenin and then Stalin. What it cost is labor and lost lives, some transportation not even working (the White Sea Canal was never usable) didn't matter = Daily Worker touted its glory and good communists beamed with pride...cost was irrelevant.

So it is with HSR - a US money pit whose success is measurable only in its bragging rights to showing impressive speed, not its profit, use, or benefit.

Just more nationalistic hype - this time from the "progressives".

 

[RF667799]

You might have had a point, if the flat California central valley portion, the first part to be delivered (someday), was not currently costing 100 million dollars per mile, still many times greater than Brightline.

My point was just relative to those two times I rode the Texas Eagle between Illinois and Texas.

 

[aociswundumho]

It's a shame Trump is deporting all the cheap labour then.

More than a shame, it's terrible. Cheap labor means lower prices for American consumers, lower costs for American companies, and the "cheap" workers are making 6 to 8x as much as they earn in mexico. It's a win/win/win scenario and the complete idiot Trump thinks it's bad.

 

[aociswundumho]

Yeah and it turns out to be a gift for everyone. Businesses get improved profits, customers get reduced costs, and the foreign laborers are making more money (I presume) than they could make in their home country. Win, win, win, all the way around. No need for big government to butt in and "fix" anything by deporting people who benefit the economy. Let capitalism - not big brother - determine it.

I just wrote something very similar to this below and I swear I didn't read your post first. I even used the win/win/win.

 

[Randomutation]

I just wrote something very similar to this below and I swear I didn't read your post first. I even used the win/win/win.

I guess that it's because it's such a logical and obvious assessment of the situation that different people will say almost the same thing independently.

 

[maxparrish]

My point was just relative to those two times I rode the Texas Eagle between Illinois and Texas.

My apologies, I intended to reply to another poster and hit the wrong reply button.

 

[RF667799]

My apologies, I intended to reply to another poster and hit the wrong reply button.

Not a problem.

 

[Noodlegawd]

It is possible for trains to get through mountains with tunnels.
Switzerland has a tone of mountains and trains that go through them just fine.
You may have heard of this place called The Alps which are quite big.

Tell it to the people making excuses about mountains. I was pointing out that mountains can't be used as an excuse for the poor excuse of a train line that CA is miserably failing to built.

By the way, the entire country of Switzerland is just over 200 miles at it's widest point, which is about the same distance as is covered by the Brightline train in Florida. And the vast majority of the population lives in the relatively flat part of the country.

 

[Peter]

For those who insist on passenger rail service in the US, pick your poison. HSR at "high speeds" which is and will suffer mega losses till the Sun burns out or Brightstar as modest speeds which will either lose significantly less or, perhaps remotely possible, to provide a small profit in the near future.

What is obvious to those of us who are not enamored with choo-choo trains and don't find nobility in burning wheelbarrows of money to fund someone else's hobby train interests at full scale, those who support HSR don't give a damn about its waste of billions of dollars.

HSR is just another form of monument building, grandiose public architecture and projects to show the public and the world how great a nation is. In the Soviet Union they built the Moscow subway, the White Sea Canal, and many giant statutes Lenin and then Stalin. What it cost is labor and lost lives, some transportation not even working (the White Sea Canal was never usable) didn't matter = Daily Worker touted its glory and good communists beamed with pride...cost was irrelevant.

So it is with HSR - a US money pit whose success is measurable only in its bragging rights to showing impressive speed, not its profit, use, or benefit.

Just more nationalistic hype - this time from the "progressives".

So, hsr is somehow unable to make a profit in the US even though it can in the rest of the world?
Maybe if it wasn't demonised by so many people it might stand a chance?

 

[madman]

Florida's Brightline and California's high speed rail show the difference between capitalism and socialism when it comes to providing infrastructure. Yes, the market can and should provide infrastructure.

Brightline is:

1) Privately funded
2) Cost about 20 - 50 million dollars per mile
3) Was built in under 5 years.
4) Is fully operational, runs to 125mph, is profitable, and expanding.

California's high speed rail project is:

1) Government funded
2) The current projected cost for the full system is now over $200 million dollars per mile - over four times higher than brightline.
3) Voters approved the train in 2008 with a promise to connect san francisco to LA by 2020. But construction didn’t even begin until 2015, and nearly two decades later, not a single train is running. Meanwhile, cost overruns have pushed the price tag past $100 billion.


The results speak for themselves: one train serves the people, the other serves bureaucracies. One didn’t cost taxpayers a dime, the other cost them a fortune.

the "party" of anti-technology

 

[jmotivator]

Florida's Brightline and California's high speed rail show the difference between capitalism and socialism when it comes to providing infrastructure. Yes, the market can and should provide infrastructure.

Brightline is:

1) Privately funded
2) Cost about 20 - 50 million dollars per mile
3) Was built in under 5 years.
4) Is fully operational, runs to 125mph, is profitable, and expanding.

California's high speed rail project is:

1) Government funded
2) The current projected cost for the full system is now over $200 million dollars per mile - over four times higher than brightline.
3) Voters approved the train in 2008 with a promise to connect san francisco to LA by 2020. But construction didn’t even begin until 2015, and nearly two decades later, not a single train is running. Meanwhile, cost overruns have pushed the price tag past $100 billion.


The results speak for themselves: one train serves the people, the other serves bureaucracies. One didn’t cost taxpayers a dime, the other cost them a fortune.

Interesting timing on this tread. I recently stumbled on a YouTube channel by a guy whose whole channel is about riding the trains of the world.

You learn pretty quickly watching that video that the much applauded European train system isn't really all that great, with the high speed rail options being extremely limited.

Highspeed Passenger Rail is approximately 2% of the total European rail system.

 

[jmotivator]

Ah yes just UnitedHealthCare the solution to all public goods.

This will work out fine for everyone.

And what would California's example be?

 

[jmotivator]

the "party" of anti-technology

Ah yes. The high technology of ... trains.

 

[jmotivator]

Oh wow 125mph.

Those sorts of insane speeds were only reached in Europe in 1976 in the UK.
Wow, welcome to the train tech of the 70's.

The United States Railway system is largely freight rail which, for safety reasons, limits track speeds to 125 mph.

This is similar to Switzerland whose highly integrated passenger and freight rail lines have a 125 mph limit.

The Brightline's speed cap isn't bound by technology, only logistics, given that it uses East Coast Railway track which is used primarily for freight.