Supporters celebrate board’s approval of passenger rail

7 comments:

• EmperorSmith posted at 6:58 pm on Mon, Mar 21, 2011.

  Posts: 774

  I like high speed rail, extend it to Vegas but the mnt terrain here is a draw back.

  • Link

   

• Steve7 posted at 7:14 am on Tue, Mar 22, 2011.

  Posts: 9

  The train's secret weapon will be free high-speed internet access on board. This will close the deal for many riders.

  • Link

   

• ofuque2 posted at 7:35 am on Tue, Mar 22, 2011.

  Posts: 67

  I truly think this is a great idea. Especially extending it to the north and south ends of the state. Unfortunately, this will only be a boon for consulting engineers in my lifetime. I'll never get to ride it. Hundreds of millions of dollars will be spent "studying" the plan. It will get canceled due to the high cost several times. It might finally get built with huge cost overruns and major delays. You would think that people in this country would know how to build a railroad after a couple of hundred years.

  • Link

   

• EJHOLUB posted at 8:41 am on Tue, Mar 22, 2011.

  Posts: 3

  This is not a new idea.....this has been kicked around for fifty years that I know of today. It is a great idea but let's add Flagstaff and Yuma. Later let's branch out to LA and San Diego.
  As was mentioned, wirelss and all the rest must be aboard along with food.
  Also, placement or location is critical. This rail system must be within sight of the current highways for inspiration but also logistics purposes while making it magetic or electric driven. No real study is needed....dig up the old ones and apply todays' concerns or technology....do it before 2015. [beam]

  • Link

   

• mlimberg posted at 10:58 am on Tue, Mar 22, 2011.

  Posts: 55

  Good idea if the lite rail system in the Valley begins to turn a profit.

  Another Liberal Project without data or a clue.

  • Link

   

• Dale Whiting posted at 4:42 pm on Tue, Mar 22, 2011.

  Posts: 3705

  The problem with public transportation like busses and light rail is the fact that when oil was cheap and land was cheeper, we built towards Apache Junction, etc. so that we could all have huge back yards and not hear dogs barking. Low density makes all forms of public transportation problematic. But when one looks at further distances, density is not the concern. It's population served at each stop, regardless of density. And as we learned when we built all of our highways into the suburbs, population growth will follow the road.

  With "an estimated 11,400 vehicles mak[ing] the trip daily between Phoenix and Tucson" and treble that number by 2050, the question is how many would choose to take a train rather than drive? Certainly a sizable number do not go beyond either destination. And "high speed" implies traveling much faster than 65 or 70 mph, perhaps as fast as 150 to even 210 mph. Then the question becomes "Will the time saved in traveling from destination to destinatin, about 45 minutes by my quick reconning, be lost trying to go from destination to the precise location?

  When we hop on a bus at the destination, after parking our car at the origin, a half hour car ride from the destination to the precise location easily can take an hour and a half on a bus! So unless the precise location is also the destination, we'll all drive.

  I'd guess the real competition will come from taking those who fly to or from Tucson to catch a flight out of Sky Harbor. So the high speed rail needs to pass close by both airports.

  Key to feasibility will be having a number of small and convienently scheduled trains leaving at peak times and limiting the number of stops along the way. Automated trains would be good. Labor costs can be huge.

  • Link

   

• Dale Whiting posted at 4:43 pm on Tue, Mar 22, 2011.

  Posts: 3705

  P.S. For location, place the tracks down the Interstate Highway medians.

  • Link