Quote:
Originally Posted by wakamesalad
It will be very slow for world HSR standards.
|
No. The design speed will be 250. The planned operating top speed will range from 200-220. These speeds will be among the fastest in the world. Faster than all operating HSR in Europe. China is the only current operator AFAIK of regularly scheduled 200+ mph HSR. Shinkansen may be close. CHSR will not be "slow for world HSR standards." You seem to not know what you are talking about.
Quote:
|
The top speed at 200 mph and will be slowed down when in metropolitan areas to 125 mph to as slow as 90 mph.
|
As does every HSR system on the planet. I'm not sure how this is seen by you as unique in the proposed CHSR system. The brief slowing of non-stop trains will make of little difference in overall trip time.
Quote:
|
There are trains in China that top out at 300 mph.
|
I assume you are referring to the Shanghai Airport express maglev. You must because that is the only thing that goes 300mph in China unless its flying in the sky. The airport maglev is a totally different technology, is relatively short and is completely isolated from the rest of the HSR system. It is not part of the larger system, a system China, with an infrastructure investment exponentially larger than the US (a choice one makes), chose to be traditionally steel/steel 200mph+ HSR even though clearly a higher top speed is obtainable with maglev. How is the California HSR plan any different? Thus the maglev example is a bad one and a disingenuous one.
Quote:
|
It has too many stops. The routes are distant because of the geology of the coastal mountain ranges. It is exhibit A of how this state/ country has turned into a bloated, wasteful, inefficient, rusted cog.
|
It makes no sense to invest 65 billion dollars and bypass multiple metropolitan areas in the Central Valley. None. The goal should and is more than just shuttling people between the cosmo of the north to the cosmo of the south. The geology of the coastal mountain ranges has literally nothing to do with the routing with the system with the exception of the questionable decision of choosing Palmdale to enter and exit the LA basin. As for the criticism of the state/country, you simultaneously sound like a conservative crank and dreamy liberal. Muy confusing. Also not really sure what it has to do when you seem to be stating that building a world class HSR system is dumb and bad, but replacing it with a vomit slide tube in the ground that services a couple thousand rich folks a day between the cosmo of the north and the cosmo of the south is a great and worthy thing that we should be willing to wait 20-30-50 years for instead. Well never really because the technology is ridiculous, impractical, unproven and would probably be so expensive its not even worth discussing. I will give Musk credit though for thinking outside of the box, but that's where my admiration ends.
Quote:
|
Use the money to build and implement urban rail systems and with the money left over, fund the hyperloop for longer distances.
|
I'm all for building and implementing urban rail systems. But with the few million left over from the tight budgeting of important urban rail projects, I think the closest you'd come to funding a "hyperloop" would be a slick scale model. Also, see above. With the money left over... that's a good one.