Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
United States The Almighty Buck Transportation

America's Most Exciting High Speed Rail Project Gets $3 Billion Grant From Feds (vice.com) 99

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Motherboard: A high-speed train from the greater Los Angeles area to Las Vegas took a big step closer to reality thanks to a $3 billion federal grant from the Department of Transportation and Joe Biden's signature infrastructure law. The proposed line will be built by Brightline West, a private company owned by Fortress Investment Group. It promises to use all-electric high-speed trains that can travel up to 180 mph, which will half the travel time from Los Angeles to Las Vegas without even taking into account the terrible traffic during peak travel times. The one catch is the LA station will be in Rancho Cucamonga, about 45 miles from Union Station (it is, however, connected via Metrolink trains). The Las Vegas station is more centrally located close to the airport. [...]

Brightline West may be the flashiest rail project in the U.S. at the moment, but it's hardly alone. The U.S. is experiencing a modest but real resurgence in rail expansion thanks to the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. In addition to Brightline West, a Raleigh-to-Richmond rail corridor received a $1 billion grant to be fit for reliable passenger service, a major boon to a region with good bones for passenger service and high demand that has become neglected and dominated by freight rail. North Carolina is experiencing record passenger rail ridership thanks to more service between Raleigh and Charlotte, two metro areas that have experienced massive population booms in recent decades and desperately need better rail service. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Act is also providing tens of billions of dollars in funding to upgrade Northeast Corridor infrastructure between Washington D.C. and Boston, the nation's busiest rail route. The other California High Speed rail route, the one that a state authority has been trying to build for decades that will only go from Bakersfield to Merced, also received $3 billion in federal funding.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

America's Most Exciting High Speed Rail Project Gets $3 Billion Grant From Feds

Comments Filter:
  • by PPH ( 736903 ) on Wednesday December 06, 2023 @04:48PM (#64061777)

    ... Vegas to LA will be via the poor wagon.

  • This rail line will only benefit tourists and the businesses that rely on them. If you're a Vegas high roller living in LA, you might like it. Otherwise, not so much.

    • Re:Why exciting? (Score:4, Informative)

      by CQDX ( 2720013 ) on Wednesday December 06, 2023 @05:04PM (#64061837)

      It's not like it used to be. There's much more to Las Vegas than just gambling. For one thing, they just got a new Raiders stadium near the Strip.

      • by mjwx ( 966435 )

        It's not like it used to be. There's much more to Las Vegas than just gambling. For one thing, they just got a new Raiders stadium near the Strip.

        You're right that Vegas isn't what it used to be. No free parking, everyone expecting massive tips, resort fees everywhere and resort fees have become extortionate at that. It's not a cheap destination any more.

      • oh boy. sportsball. Which you can never find in El Lay.

        Vegas IMHO would be a perfect target for tests of tactical nukes.

    • by Anonymous Coward
      Or you can just fly from LA to Vegas using the planes and airports that we already have and that have been paid for several times over. No need to waste $3 Billion on a train that we don't need.
      • Re:Why exciting? (Score:5, Interesting)

        by MachineShedFred ( 621896 ) on Wednesday December 06, 2023 @05:44PM (#64061971) Journal

        Except that flying fucking sucks. Fight your way through traffic to get to the airport, in order to get raped for parking. Then sit around for 2 hours while getting the "colonoscopy-lite" treatment from TSA and waiting for the aircraft crew to actually show up so you can board. Then sit on the airplane amongst the least considerate people on the planet that are all clustered around you for the 75 minute flight time, and pay hundreds of dollars for the privilege, to arrive at McCarran Airport in Vegas (where the HSR station is going to be, according to TFS). This will cost you $88 one-way according to the google search I just did, if you don't want to get stacked in the airplane like firewood (Spirit).

        If they can keep the ticket cost down, they have a real shot at making a useful service here. You can get to the HSR station in the LA area (inland empire, really) via MetroLink (not paying airport parking), and then walk onto the train with no security hassle or bullshit bag checking fees or other random fees meant to extract the money they didn't get on the ticket price, where you have far more legroom than practically any commercial aircraft while you blast down the I-15 corridor at 2x the speed of freeway traffic. And upon arrival in Vegas, you can get into one of Elon's weird "Tunnel Teslas" to go wherever the fuck you're going without having to wait on a baggage claim, etc.

        Obviously all of this depends on the contractor who is building it to not cake their pants or cause cost overruns that doom the project before a single passenger rides it, which isn't a given. But if they do it right, and it becomes somewhat successful, it could prove that this kind of thing makes sense to connect various cities, which would reduce the amount of air traffic and freeway traffic, which means less airport and freeway expansions.

        • by OYAHHH ( 322809 )

          Think about it........Just for one second........ Do you believe that exactly one terrorist action on a high speed train will not bring about all the crap we have to put up with while flying? Don't be naive.

          • Do you believe that exactly one terrorist action on a high speed train will not bring about all the crap we have to put up with while flying?

            There has been a terrorist action already, in 2015 [wikipedia.org]. Former high school classmates Anthony Sadler, Alek Skarlatos, and Spencer Stone were made Knights of the Legion of Honour for their part in subduing the attacker.

          • At least you can't crash a train into a skyscraper, or wisk the passengers off to Libya as hostages.
          • Think about it.........Just for one second......... If that was a tempting thing to do at all, don't you think it probably would have happened in Europe by now, where they have high speed rail already deployed in multiple countries, including a tempting undersea tunnel that would not react well to an explosive device?

        • Re:Why exciting? (Score:5, Insightful)

          by hey! ( 33014 ) on Wednesday December 06, 2023 @06:25PM (#64062107) Homepage Journal

          There's a constant tension in the air industry between shoveling passengers into hub airports on giant wide body aircraft and flying them point to point on modest sized aircraft.

          *Of course* flying point to point is what everyone would prefer, so why don't they do that? Because there's just not enough landing slots for everyone to fly that way; and certainly this will get worse as more and more people fly. This is why Emirates flies gigantic airplanes like A380s; there's not enough landing slots to get all the passengers they need to carry in and out of Dubai on medium sized planes.

          If you expect the volume of air travel to increase, you're going to have to increase the size of planes and airports to accomodate that -- possibly build additional airports where existing ones can't be expanded. An efficient and well-designed intermodal link to the LA metro area by rail at Las Vegas could make a lot of sense and maybe avert having to build another airport.

          • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

            I'm not sure they can increase the size of aircraft. The A380 was so big that it required special extra large berths, and most airports either couldn't accommodate them or didn't want to.

            • The A380 requires a code F sized box at the gate, same as the 747. The A380 needed reinforced tarmac, though, since it is quite heavy.

          • "there's just not enough landing slots for everyone to fly that way"

            In the US for example only 3 airports have actual slots, and there are only specific times of day when they are really slot constrained. There's definitely no constraints in Dubai which has a whole other airport whose expansion is stalled because they don't actually need it.

            The real bound is that the major cost of a flight in getting the airframe off the ground. As revenue is largely a function of distance you maximize your return on capita

        • Yeah, if you think the final ticket price will be 88 dollars I have some bottom land in Florida to sell you.

        • Re:Why exciting? (Score:5, Interesting)

          by BetterSense ( 1398915 ) on Thursday December 07, 2023 @12:48AM (#64062681)
          This man understands that trains are nothing like airplanes. Soon, hopefully Americans will get to find this out for themselves.

          I actually like riding on trains, but I'd be happy if I never stepped foot in an airport again. Once Americans get a taste of what it's like to travel on modern trains, ticket price practically won't matter.

          For a Vegas train, you won't be waiting until you get to Vegas to start the party. The party's gonna start when you get on the train. Siemens is already advertising a special trainset with a new party car for this route..."Party at high speed" https://www.mobility.siemens.com/us/en/portfolio/rail/rolling-stock/high-speed-and-intercity-trains/american-pioneer-220.html
          • I actually like riding on trains, but I'd be happy if I never stepped foot in an airport again. Once Americans get a taste of what it's like to travel on modern trains, ticket price practically won't matter.

            You've obviously not been on a flight to Mexico or Vegas. You know it's gonna be a fun flight when your neighbors crack open a bottle. Of course it's been a while for me, maybe they crack down on this stuff now. Used to be the stewardess' would look the other way. MGM Grand Air was nothing but a party back in the 80s and I also vaguely remember going upstairs to the lounge on a flight to Hawaii way back in the day (70s I think), that seemed like a pretty good party too.

            The reason what happened to airlines w

            • You know it's gonna be a fun flight when your neighbors crack open a bottle.

              Federal law prohibits bringing alcohol onto airplanes.

              Used to be the stewardess' would look the other way.

              Yeah, it's been a long time since you've flown. They're called "flight attendants" now, lots of them have hairy knuckles (and some are men), and they do not look the other way.

              • Federal law prohibits bringing alcohol onto airplanes.

                If you think laws keep people from doing things: Welcome to America! I hope you enjoy your stay.

          • I actually like riding on trains, but I'd be happy if I never stepped foot in an airport again. Once Americans get a taste of what it's like to travel on modern trains, ticket price practically won't matter.

            Nah. If rail travel in the US ever gets popular we'll implement all of the same rigamarole and security theater we have in airports, ensuring that train travel sucks just as much. The airlines will lobby for it.

        • "You can get to the HSR station in the LA area (inland empire, really) via MetroLink"

          A Shin-Angeles station sounds clever until you realize that there's only 3 regional trains per hour in the peak direction on MetroLink. That's about half the frequency of just the Nozomi departures at Shin-Osaka, plus it's only 2 miles from Osaka station.

          You can't just assume that the regional network will expand; you actually have to expand it too.

      • by Ichijo ( 607641 )

        $3 billion is dirt cheap. How many tens of billions of dollars do you think it would cost taxpayers to add another runway to LAX?

        • by OYAHHH ( 322809 )

          There is ZERO reason to add another runway at LAX. There are things called jumbo jets. You need more capacity add an aircraft, not at government expense mind you, that is twice as large. There is zero reason why a 787 cannot be used instead of a 737.

          Need even more capacity? Let's see, there are things called regional airports. Long Beach, Burbank, John Wayne, Riverside, to name a a few are well within a much shorter car ride than having to make one's way all the way to LAX or a centralized HSR station.

          • by jbengt ( 874751 )

            There is ZERO reason to add another runway at LAX. There are things called jumbo jets. You need more capacity add an aircraft, not at government expense mind you, that is twice as large. There is zero reason why a 787 cannot be used instead of a 737.

            That assumes all the existing runways can handle larger planes - probably true for LAX, I'm not going to research it.
            But you can't just dock a jumbo jet at a gate designed for a regional jet. Switching to larger aircraft would require lots of changes to the a

        • $3 billion is dirt cheap.

          $3B is NOT the price. It is only the size of the federal grant.

          The proposed price is $12B. The rest will be paid by California, Nevada, and private investors.

    • You do know that there are instantly-sold-out concerts, sporting events, and various conventions that also happen in Las Vegas, yes?

      Just one Taylor Swift concert night would probably drag 100k people to town, and she'd doing multiple nights in most of her locations because of the vastly expensive stage and equipment setup. Having electrified high-speed rail between the second largest metro area in the country and the concert venue would probably save many tons of CO2 emissions for that one night alone.

    • And in 10 years it will be pointed to as an example of how wasteful mass transit its.
  • by Baron_Yam ( 643147 ) on Wednesday December 06, 2023 @04:57PM (#64061815)

    Treat the cars like data packets and build a switched network or modern pneumatic tube system.

    When I reach a hub, if necessary have my car automatically moved to another train. If a hub is congested on a long trip, route around it.

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      It's much easier to just have passengers walk between cars. Think about it, you would have to have allocated seating to ensure people are on the right car, no urban commuter style trains where you just sit where you like.

      Trains actually work really well when combined with busses. If you look at how Japan does it, most train stations have a bus terminal and taxi rank attached to them. Everything is coordinated so you get off the train and onto your bus, and because it's the terminal the busses are not usuall

      • It takes organization to get people on the correct train, too.

        Switching at the car level would require a lot of thought to be sure, but it offers a lot of potential efficiencies. Plus (at least for me) there's a 'cool factor'.

  • Excellent! (Score:5, Funny)

    by avandesande ( 143899 ) on Wednesday December 06, 2023 @05:07PM (#64061847) Journal
    That is enough money for an environmental impact study!
    • by mjwx ( 966435 )

      That is enough money for an environmental impact study!

      Jokes aside, I suspect the big issue is going to be some dirt farmer who owns a patch of dust out the back of Baker who refuses to sell up because he won't let the gubbermint tell him what to do.

  • They're the only ones to benefit. Besides, CA has received billions to build high-speed rail to connect SF to LA and after a decade of "work" they are still struggling to get a training running in the San Joaquin Valley, a huge, relatively desolate and flat farming area of the state. They should kill the SF-LA plan and go for LA-LV which should have more riders than a LA-SF link. If LA-LV works, they can use the proceeds for the next rail project.

  • Why do $3 billion of the people's money go to a private company? What do we get for the? The ability to ride it? That doesn't seem any better than a government built railway. At least it would be owned by the people who paid for it.
    • by CQDX ( 2720013 )

      TLDR, is OWNED by a private company? Or just BUILT by a private company? Because as far as I know, there aren't any government agencies in the US that specialize in building HSR.

      • Brightline has done some private lines in Florida and other places. So my presumption is it would be the same as that. They use the term â€oePrivate railâ€
    • Why do $3 billion of the people's money go to a private company? What do we get for the? The ability to ride it? That doesn't seem any better than a government built railway. At least it would be owned by the people who paid for it.

      Will it ever be built? This is likely $3bn of future C-suite bonuses. And we'll be tossing another 3bn on the pile in a few years when we're no further along than we are today on the actual rail.

      Hey, the telcos and their constant need for more government money to build out high speed access that never gets built is a great prototype for milking money from the government. This is another great example of that premise.

  • More boondoggle pork!

  • It isn't a line from Los Angeles to Las Vegas, it's Rancho Cucamonga to an airport. What's the point of a rail line that doesn't go city centre to city centre, you know, where all the places people want to go to are? Who TF wants to go to Rancho Cucamonga or an airport?
    • by Ichijo ( 607641 )

      Who TF wants to go to...an airport?

      People who fly to them?

      I can't tell if that was a serious question.

      • It's supposed to be an intercity train but it doesn't go from city to city, it goes from a small town (outside a city) to an airport (outside a city). One of the big advantages of rail travel is that it's quiet & can go directly into city centres, thereby cutting down journey times substantially, i.e. no waiting around for connections or taking much slower forms of transport for the final leg of the journey.

        In many cases, it's feasible to walk from the train station to the hotel, office, home, etc.,
        • by Ichijo ( 607641 )

          It's supposed to be an intercity train but it doesn't go from city to city, it goes from a small town (outside a city) to an airport (outside a city).

          By that measure, there are no intercity flights!

          • Exactly. That's why trains, i.e. the ones that go from a central city station to a central city station are better than flying.
        • by hawk ( 1151 )

          > to an airport (outside a city).

          *most* of what is generally called "Las Vegas" is actually outside the city, in county. Including the entire "Las Vegas Strip".

          The western boundary of the airport is, in fact, Las Vegas Blvd, from Tropicana at the north to Sunset at the south. The other side of the street is (*gasp*) strip resorts.

          So for Las Vegas, the airport is a central enough location to which planes and local busses connect, with a huge uber/lyft transfer center.

          OK, that idiotic monorail doesn't go

    • The Las Vegas airport is right in the middle of the city center.
      I agree the Los Angles side needs to be better connected though.

  • Spent most my life in L.A. and left after I retired because of all the traffic making was used to ten, fifteen minutes drives to an hour or more. So a rail system that you still have to drive all the way across town to get to a Metro station to take you out to the new rail station is a joke. From where I lived I could just drive to LAX in a half hour and catch a jet to Vegas about a 40 minute flight.

    The thing basically should of gone South from Sacramento to San Francisco down to Los Angeles on to Oran

  • Seems like the most uninteresting route possible
    LA to SF is exciting
    SD to LA to SF to Portland to Seattle is really exciting

  • The other Koch brother died too?

  • by hdyoung ( 5182939 ) on Wednesday December 06, 2023 @07:10PM (#64062207)
    High speed trains require a population that doesn’t actively set out to tear down anything and everything it can. All it will take is one crazy right-winger whipped up into a frenzy by Trump, Carlson, Jones or Rogan, and a single pickup truck filled with bricks.

    You should note that all American infrastructure is built to be either a) extremely durable (our buildings and bridges) or b) inaccessible to florida men (we shoot them if they drive out onto the airport tarmac). Anything less gets wrecked by our own population. HS trains are a bad combination of fragile and accessible.

    I love the idea but it’s simply not suited to our culture.
    • "a single pickup truck filled with bricks"

      That's merely a complicated means of rapidly disassembling a pickup truck.

  • Having the LA station 45 miles (= ~72km) outside of town? Are they deliberately setting this up to fail? I can't tell if it's malice or incompetence.

  • This Citynerd Youtube video [youtube.com] goes into the time and cost of the new rail vs. car vs. air.
    • Dude? That video is like 19 minutes long!
      Who has that kind of time?
      For crying out lound 19 minutes is almost long enough to go one mile on I-5 during rush hour.

  • Unfortunately, this Big Dig pork project doesn't really solve a problem except to ferry gambling addicts to their slot machines. Cities from LA to San Diego need to substantively reorganize (go vertical near commercial areas) so they don't encourage long commutes and traffic.
  • So far all the discussion is about funding and comparisons to airplanes. What about all nerdy technology aspects?
    "Speeds up to 180mph" - what would be the AVERAGE speed over that distance? In comparison 180mph is about the average speed of the TGV rail network in France.
    Is this really a point-to-point connection, or is the rail connecting to rail network at the ends? E.g. TGV can run on slower speeds on standard tracks, so that it can serve the old city centers (where HSR track building might be a probl
  • Las Vegas' maximum number of visitors from everywhere in the world was 42 million just before the pandemic. Somehow, this project estimates that 50 million people travel from Los Angeles to Las Vegas every year. Their numbers are a just a bit off. A reasonable estimate is around 4 million. A very generous estimate is that half would use this rail route.

    This is a $12 billion project receiving $3 billion in grants. To break even in 20 years would require 2 million people per year to pay $300 each for a round

  • So they're building a more environmentally friendly transportation method to get to a ridiculously unenvironmentally friendly destination (a distant city in a resource desert).
  • by Hoi Polloi ( 522990 ) on Thursday December 07, 2023 @10:24AM (#64063547) Journal

    I'd take the train in NC but the problem is unless someone is picking you up from the station you'll be stuck. They don't have car rentals near the stations so you'd have to hire a cab/uber to get anywhere and if you want to explore the area that isn't going to work. If I was just going to a hotel then to a work meeting it wouldn't be that bad but I'm sightseeing. The stations also tend to be in rough parts of the cities and not exactly appealing to walk from.

  • Now, if Amtrak would stop pricing long-distance as though it were a cruise ship, rather than transportation....

    And bring back sleepers.

    • Exactly. I've tried to use Amtrak over and over and I look at the price and say 'hiring a limo and having me driven there would likely be cheaper'
  • This is the so-called "privately funded non-government" project.

Factorials were someone's attempt to make math LOOK exciting.

Working...