I heard the news of the funds for the California's hi speed rail from San Fransisco to L.A. were cut by the Trump Administration and relocate the funds for his border wall. Trump plan to take back $2.5 billion for his border wall. Cali. says no to the federal government and I think the state might take this to court. I'm on California's side. I know Hi speed rail isn't cheap but the project has began in 2008. I know politics shouldn't be here but I had to bring this up and it angers me. I'm a railfan have been since I was three. I want to see a hi speed rail network built in this country and catch up with the rest of the modern world.

your thoughts.

This is not Railway Preservation.

Mike Stillwell
Buena Vista, VA.

Sure, I'll get in before the thread is locked. Let's get some facts in here first, shall we? 3.5 billion was earmarked for the project. CA received 2.5 billion. After announcing that the project could not meet cost and time goals, the remaining 1 billion was rescinded by the Trump Administration. Nothing has been reallocated yet.

As your moderator, this is not preservation... and if continues will be moved to the railfan forum...

As someone born in California, Cali is a city in Columbia... California, Cal, CA, or Calif are all refer to a large state on the US west coast...

I"m sorry you guys for everything. I shouldn't have posted this. I"m sorry. this is on the wrong forum. I would delete this but I don't know how. This is my mistake I'm sorry

OK -- maybe relevant. Is there anything in the CA HSR project that is preservation related?

Remember ISTEA? That was transportation funding that had some preservation grants.

The federal grants were contingent on the entire project being built - which it isn't. As for the money going for the border wall, no, federal funds are allocated via the budget passed by Congress; President Trump can't just dictate where the money goes despite the delusions of Governor Newsom.
Good article on the debacle here: https://www.railwayage.com/passenger/wh ... peed-rail/
America is unlikely to have HSR outside of the NEC, it's just too costly and inefficient, we're actually ahead of the rest of the world.

CD

You need to stop watching NSNBC

All of this ties in with the fact that this country is hostile to railroads in general.

Yes, I know not everyone is like this--and certainly there are people on this forum who will hate what I'm saying--but there are enough people with money and influence who make rail expansion ten times harder in this country than it should be.

And yes, that includes rail preservation--from the people who want to see us disappear for a trail, to main line roads that want nothing to do with passenger service, much less excursions, and even more with steam power.

Part of this is the mistaken notion that the highway system and the air system are self supporting. They are not; just on cash flow, our road system is underpriced by at least 40 cents per gallon. Yes, the road system is subsidized; it doesn't pay for itself, much less earn a profit, which everyone demands a railroad to do.

This can be fought, we can win, we can persuade, but it is like climbing the Rockies, if not Everest.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/1 ... 19-08%3A00

https://www.newsweek.com/will-why-liber ... ains-68597

I usually don't reply to things like this, and I'll probably get flamed for it.

I'm a big supporter of rail. The problem is not the project, it's all the cost overruns and mismanagement. Remember, you can't always believe the media.
As for the President, like him or not(I do), he's a businessman. If he sees mismanagement and waste, he's not going to want to throw more money at it. Don't forget, we're paying for it.

Should it be built, YES.

Should it be done right and affordable, Absolutely.

I believe the feds have offered matching funds for transportation, which would require some private or local investment. Not a bad way to do things, as it automatically adds accountability and it's not a 100% free "gimmie.". As a result though, I don't think there have been too many takers. Speaks volumes.

The entire concept was defective from the day they started it. The keystone of any California HSR project must be a base tunnel through the Grapevine: Bakersfield to Santa Clarita/Burbank. Once you do that, the bulk of it is behind you. Now you have the existing San Joaquins getting to L.A. in one more hour instead of fooling with the buses. Then the next upgrades become perfectly obvious, and you make them one by one with immediate results to show for it. That route also makes the target travel times very achievable with proven European HSR tech.

Also, the base tunnel would profit lavishly from patronage by the freight railroads at night, with Tehachapi being limited to hazmat and traffic that can't wait until the evening.

They were trying to cheap out on this base tunnel, and send the route on a truly goofy "3 sides of a square" route that made absolutely no sense whatsoever. I suspect the reason is profit margin on the part of the contractors; the goofy route was easier to build with less variables, and thus, more profitable. I doubt they would've saved any money in the end.

Mods, please move this to where it belongs or lock it. I try to avoid it but it keeps going to the top.

Thanks!

I'm personally not sure why it wasn't already moved when a moderator's already acknowledged it shouldn't be here.

Amazed it hasn't been locked yet, so let me add a perspective from someone who has been involved as a 40 year NARP member, a lifelong fan, former Amtrak and CSX employee, and someone who has seen railroading in foreign countries. Our passenger trains are woefully inadequate, Acela is nowhere near real HSR (defined as 186 mph/300 Km/ph or higher), and we have suffered from bloviating politicians who have wanted to jump 3 or 4 steps from PennCentral level track to maglev without any steps in between that would have made public acceptance of the idea far more appealing. No country with successful HSR has only HSR, they have an extensive network of conventional speed rail, and light and heavy electric passenger rail as well. If I had the money, I would sponsor a junket of influential policy makers and politicians on a selected tour of European rail systems of many types to show them what is possible, even in supposedly too low-density, too big America.