# Florida HSR news



## colobok

What do you think about these news?

http://www2.tbo.com/content/2011/jan/12/state-official-taxpayers-wont-be-on-hook-for-high-

State of Florida doesn't want to spend a penny on HSR.

Will private companies want?


----------



## Green Maned Lion

colobok said:


> What do you think about these news?
> 
> http://www2.tbo.com/content/2011/jan/12/state-official-taxpayers-wont-be-on-hook-for-high-
> 
> State of Florida doesn't want to spend a penny on HSR.
> 
> Will private companies want?


It means the project is dead. Which is for the best.


----------



## rrdude

It's certainly not the best project, but killing another HSR project is not the answer GML


----------



## Trogdor

What's unfortunate is that we should have to choose between a bad project and no project. It's like the NJ ARC tunnel. There are many better options that could have been done first.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

rrdude said:


> It's certainly not the best project, but killing another HSR project is not the answer GML


The ARC tunnel is a project that not only died, but I personally helped kill. Among its wonderous virtues were: not providing any additional connectivity to anyone but the Bergen lines, adding up to thirty minutes to peoples commute times, providing a genuine safety hazard, not providing useful back up to the aging North River Tunnels, and costing far too much damned money. And increased capacity less than NJ Transit simply converting their Penn Station fleet into MU cars with fast access doors, (ex., MTA M8s) while removing platform obstructions, a project that would have cost perhaps $2 billion.

Had it been built it would have greatly crippled the overall NJ commuter rail system. It would have negatively impacted some commuters in convenience and would have greatly hampered commuters with respect to time, especially those on the Morris & Essex, Montclair-Boonton, and North Jersey Coast Line.

I would never, ever argue with a project that helped seriously improve transportation for large numbers of people, helped seriously improve the general image of mass transit in this country, or provide for improved overall service in our system.

As a project, the ARC tunnel, as it was on the day Christie shot it dead, needed to be killed. Because it represented a multi-billion dollar bullet being shot into the foot of New Jersey's public transportation system.

The Orlando to Tampa HSR couldn't gain as many riders as half the California system if every single person traveling between Tampa and Orlando chose to ride the train. I notice that there hasn't been too much objection to it. I'll tell you why, too. Wendell Cox and others of his ilk probably have wet dreams about this project being built. They couldn't ask for a better marshaling point than this project to derail passenger rail in this country in its entirety.

This project isn't a big step forward, or a regular step forward, or a small step forward, or even a standing in the same place. Its a step backward from an image and PR campaign standpoint. It is being built to fail. It is better for it to fail before it is built.

*Edit:* I don't know why it took me so long to think of this, but: It is possible somebody might infer my position is consistent with that of the Lackawanna Coalition. It is, to a point (and only to a point) about the ARC Tunnels. It does not share my opinion about the Orlando-Tampa High Speed Rail.

I am talking for myself, not the group for which I am a member.


----------



## Rail Freak

Being from the Tampa Area (Clearwater) & new to this, It is interesting to hear different views (some more interesting than other's, LOL




!)


----------



## AlanB

Green Maned Lion said:


> not providing any additional connectivity to anyone but the Bergen lines, adding up to thirty minutes to peoples commute times, providing a genuine safety hazard,


Malarkey!



Green Maned Lion said:


> The Orlando to Tampa HSR couldn't gain as many riders as half the California system if every single person traveling between Tampa and Orlando chose to ride the train. I notice that there hasn't been too much objection to it. I'll tell you why, too. Wendell Cox and others of his ilk probably have wet dreams about this project being built. They couldn't ask for a better marshaling point than this project to derail passenger rail in this country in its entirety.


The Tampa-Orlando HSR system isn't designed to carry as many riders as Cali; much less half. It also doesn't cost as much as Cali's will. In fact, it's a little less than $3B; while Cali's is estimated at $35B and it may well go higher.

Oddly, I haven't seen much of anything from Wendell of late. But some of the other's have already been heard from.


----------



## amtrakwolverine

So what will Florida do? build some more 12 lane roads and put more cars on the road adding to rush hour congestion. Easy for the governors etc they don't drive in it they just fly around in a private yet and get a police escort to get them through the traffic jam. I bet that even if someone who had the money offered the state a check saying they would fund it the state would say get lost were not interested in HSR even if your paying for it.


----------



## pennyk

I-4 between Orlando and Tampa is a mess. I think it would be a bigger mess if more lanes were added to the interstate. I hope we get the HSR, but with our new governor and anti-rail legislators, it does not look good.

BTW - Floridians seem to be married to their cars. :lol:


----------



## Spokker

The article says that Florida taxpayers might not be on the hook for cost overruns and operations. It doesn't say they won't contribute the state match. That's a decision yet to be made.

However, while HSR will probably ultimately be profitable, I doubt it will be in its first year. Some support will have to be offered somewhere. We are talking an infant industry here.

The hypocrisy is expecting HSR to operate without subsidy when roads fail to do that and airlines need government bailouts. But HSR advocates keep saying that HSR makes profits all over the world, and it may come to bite them in the ass early on.


----------



## George Harris

A comment: It was neither the designers nor the builders, nor even operations part of White Star Lines that claimed that the Titanic was unsikable. It was some publicist / pitchman / salemen / promoter or groups of these people that said it. The ones that had any real relationship with the ship knew better. Anyone that thinks anything build by mankind is either indestructable or perfect is hallucinating.

When it comes to high speed rail: Neither the uninvolved or unrealistic opponents nor the publicists, unrealistic politicians, nor the unrealistic proponents will have it right. (Is unrealistic politicians a redundancy?)

Whether the initial ridership estimates are either higher or lower than than the initial ridership will really make no difference. The anti-rail people will find something wrong with them Yes, it will take time for people to change thier habits. Initial ridership will be quite a bit lower than it will be after 5 or more years.

Whether it is ultimately profitable or not will be as much based on what all gets hung onto it by the politicians than what should really be part of a practical operation.

In its own way, Florida's system has more ridership and profit potential than California. Due to the terrain and climate, it should be much cheaper to build and operate than the California system. No seismic zones, no mountain ranges, so no long tunnels and high bridges, and with their high proportion of retirees and out of state tourists, a ridership that should be greater than the population size and density would suggest to be likely. (Hiow many of these retirees are finding themselves with mobility, eyesight, physical impairment, or other issues that make driving either impractical or impossible and the normal airport hassles both daunting and exhausting? These people find themselves close to a take trains ro stay home situation.)


----------



## Spokker

One potential problem, Disney's free shuttle buses to and from the airport. They are heavily advertised by Disney and offered during the booking process. Last I heard, you check into your room at the airport and your baggage will be delivered to your hotel room. The coach ride is completely free and designed to keep you from renting a car and visiting other Orlando destinations. Mickey Mouse meets your children at the airport for Christ's sake. It's a loss for Disney to operate, but very, very effective. I can see this service, if continued, competing with high speed rail.


----------



## George Harris

Unless they cut their nose of to spite their face, Disney will do what it takes to make the train to Disney World trip a good experience also. One of the major reasons the first go round of the Florida HSR died was that it had been thoroughly hijacked by Disney so as to make it inconvinent to go anywhere else in the Orlando area. At this point it lost much of its support and gave ammunition to the opponents. The concept's death at that point became the best achievable solution.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

George Harris said:


> (Hiow many of these retirees are finding themselves with mobility, eyesight, physical impairment, or other issues that make driving either impractical or impossible and the normal airport hassles both daunting and exhausting? These people find themselves close to a take trains ro stay home situation.)


None of this has actually stopped them from driving, however, as Allstate, Geico, and others can probably tell you sulking into their vodka about it.


----------



## henryj

George Harris said:


> Unless they cut their nose of to spite their face, Disney will do what it takes to make the train to Disney World trip a good experience also. One of the major reasons the first go round of the Florida HSR died was that it had been thoroughly hijacked by Disney so as to make it inconvinent to go anywhere else in the Orlando area. At this point it lost much of its support and gave ammunition to the opponents. The concept's death at that point became the best achievable solution.


I agree with this guy: "quit lying, and quit showing pics of these 200-mph+ trains they use in Japan & Europe ... wanna see hi-speed' rail? run over to Ft Lauderdale to see that 'hi=speed' shuttle that runs up to WPB - anyway, put any rail initiative on the ballot, count results fairly - it'll fail for a 3rd time - and then put it to rest, bury this dinosaur, let it sleep with the fishes."

Florida needs to make up it's mind what it wants. It has HSR, Tri-rail, Metro rail, Sun rail and Amtrak. None of this is being coordinated. Each looks at it's territory as a stand alone entity. Orlando to Tampa is a short distance, less than 100 miles. Amtrak takes two hours to make this run. How much time do you want to save and what is it worth. Higher speed rail would work just as well and cost much less and it would help Amtrak also. My understanding of the HSR proposal is Amtrak would not be using it-what a waste. California went the same route hence the moniker 'train to nowhere'. They had no plans to run the current San Jouquins on the first segment thus speeding up their schedule. They were just going to let the track sit there or run the so called trains to no where as a demo. What are these people thinking? They aren't, that is the answer. It's a real shame because we are going to miss out on opportunities to build a good passenger rail system because of these boongoggles. I have ridden Europe's first class rail system and it works well. There the so called HSR segments are just integral parts of an overall system, not some stand alone prima donna. If we are ever to make any progress in this country then these projects need to be part of an overall system and plan, not some knee jerk project like Florida's. Personally, I have always thought of these groups as just a bunch of partying politicians feeding at the trough and putting out slick paper reports and fancy slide shows to justify their existance and continuing studies funded with taxpayer money. Now that they are faced with getting some real money and having to actually build something that works they are just lost. I hope their Governor kills it.


----------



## Devil's Advocate

Maybe HSR should only be proposed for the dwindling numbers of deep-blue states from here on out?


----------



## MattW

Um, I believe that California will now be running the San Joaquins at increased speed down the hew HSR test track before the HSR actually gets going full time.


----------



## henryj

MattW said:


> Um, I believe that California will now be running the San Joaquins at increased speed down the hew HSR test track before the HSR actually gets going full time.


Only because some people put the pressure on them. That wasn't the original plan. How stupid is that? What kind of a lack of common sense does it take to concoct a plan that doesn't take into account the current service?


----------



## Green Maned Lion

daxomni said:


> Maybe HSR should only be proposed for the dwindling numbers of deep-blue states from here on out?


Wait for the Tea Party to have full influence. Like all hyper-anything, they will move people the heck back to the left. If the Democrats want to regain the House all they need to do is sponsor a Sarah Palin talk show.


----------



## henryj

Green Maned Lion said:


> daxomni said:
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe HSR should only be proposed for the dwindling numbers of deep-blue states from here on out?
> 
> 
> 
> Wait for the Tea Party to have full influence. Like all hyper-anything, they will move people the heck back to the left. If the Democrats want to regain the House all they need to do is sponsor a Sarah Palin talk show.
Click to expand...

Your probably right GML. If only we could just get some common sense people in government.


----------



## Devil's Advocate

henryj said:


> Green Maned Lion said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daxomni said:
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe HSR should only be proposed for the dwindling numbers of deep-blue states from here on out?
> 
> 
> 
> Wait for the Tea Party to have full influence. Like all hyper-anything, they will move people the heck back to the left. If the Democrats want to regain the House all they need to do is sponsor a Sarah Palin talk show.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> [You're] probably right GML. If only we could just get some common sense people in government.
Click to expand...

I honestly don't know about the country at large, but in the case of our federal government we've generally been moving to the right for as long as I can remember. ObamaCare of today is barely any more daring than the Republican health care initiatives/deflections of the 1990's, yet it was portrayed as if leftist guerrillas had written every page with the blood of capitalists. We are living in strange times where even self-identified populists are loudly demanding less help and fewer protections even as they and their families fall through larger and larger tears in our quickly eroding safety net. It's almost insane.


----------



## George Harris

henryj said:


> California went the same route hence the moniker 'train to nowhere'. They had no plans to run the current San Jouquins on the first segment thus speeding up their schedule. They were just going to let the track sit there or run the so called trains to no where as a demo. What are these people thinking? They aren't, that is the answer. It's a real shame because we are going to miss out on opportunities to build a good passenger rail system because of these boongoggles. I have ridden Europe's first class rail system and it works well. There the so called HSR segments are just integral parts of an overall system, not some stand alone prima donna. If we are ever to make any progress in this country then these projects need to be part of an overall system and plan, not some knee jerk project like Florida's.
> 
> 
> MattW said:
> 
> 
> 
> Um, I believe that California will now be running the San Joaquins at increased speed down the hew HSR test track before the HSR actually gets going full time.
> 
> 
> 
> Only because some people put the pressure on them. That wasn't the original plan. How stupid is that? What kind of a lack of common sense does it take to concoct a plan that doesn't take into account the current service?
Click to expand...

Henry: Five minutes of on line searching would put the lie to what you are saying.

First a quote from the FRA Criteria for selection:



> The FRA requires that any rail project using ARRA funds be capable of demonstrating “operational independence”/ “independent utility” upon completion. A project is considered to have operational independence “if, upon being implemented, it will provide tangible and measurable benefits, even if no additional investments in the same service are made.” Examples of these benefits include “operational reliability improvements, travel‐time reductions, and additional service frequencies resulting in increased ridership.” In practice, this requirement means that the improvements can be used for existing or new intercity rail passenger operations, including Amtrak and other intercity service Importantly, such service is clearly specified as being “intercity service” as opposed to enhanced commuter rail service.


The above is what lead to the selection of a segment in the Central Valley. The specific section was further refined in the following:

Board%20Meeting%20Agenda%20Item%203%20-%20Presentation%20on%20Selection%20of%20First%20Section%20-%20Appendix%20A[1].pdf

It would be very useful if you could put some knowledge behind your opinion.


----------



## henryj

George Harris said:


> henryj said:
> 
> 
> 
> California went the same route hence the moniker 'train to nowhere'. They had no plans to run the current San Jouquins on the first segment thus speeding up their schedule. They were just going to let the track sit there or run the so called trains to no where as a demo. What are these people thinking? They aren't, that is the answer. It's a real shame because we are going to miss out on opportunities to build a good passenger rail system because of these boongoggles. I have ridden Europe's first class rail system and it works well. There the so called HSR segments are just integral parts of an overall system, not some stand alone prima donna. If we are ever to make any progress in this country then these projects need to be part of an overall system and plan, not some knee jerk project like Florida's.
> 
> 
> MattW said:
> 
> 
> 
> Um, I believe that California will now be running the San Joaquins at increased speed down the hew HSR test track before the HSR actually gets going full time.
> 
> 
> 
> Only because some people put the pressure on them. That wasn't the original plan. How stupid is that? What kind of a lack of common sense does it take to concoct a plan that doesn't take into account the current service?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Henry: Five minutes of on line searching would put the lie to what you are saying.
> 
> First a quote from the FRA Criteria for selection:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The FRA requires that any rail project using ARRA funds be capable of demonstrating “operational independence”/ “independent utility” upon completion. A project is considered to have operational independence “if, upon being implemented, it will provide tangible and measurable benefits, even if no additional investments in the same service are made.” Examples of these benefits include “operational reliability improvements, travel‐time reductions, and additional service frequencies resulting in increased ridership.” In practice, this requirement means that the improvements can be used for existing or new intercity rail passenger operations, including Amtrak and other intercity service Importantly, such service is clearly specified as being “intercity service” as opposed to enhanced commuter rail service.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The above is what lead to the selection of a segment in the Central Valley. The specific section was further refined in the following:
> 
> Board%20Meeting%20Agenda%20Item%203%20-%20Presentation%20on%20Selection%20of%20First%20Section%20-%20Appendix%20A[1].pdf
> 
> It would be very useful if you could put some knowledge behind your opinion.
Click to expand...

Well George, thank you for the lecture, but that is what I read on other sites and saw in the media. I really don't have the time to peruse every detail of the law as you apparently do. Obviously many thought otherwise as it got the nickname 'train to nowhere'. So I stand by what I said. When the interestate highways were built they were part of a grand plan. So even though they were built piece meal everyone knew what the plan was and acepted it. As each section was completed it was hooked into the existing highway system so you could actually drive on it and experience it even though the complete route was not finished. There is no such plan for high speed rail or passenger rail in general. There are web sites with pretty color maps but there is no overall plan as such. Maybe eventually there will be. Lets hope so.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

henryj said:


> Well George, thank you for the lecture, but that is what I read on other sites and saw in the media. I really don't have the time to peruse every detail of the law as you apparently do. Obviously many thought otherwise as it got the nickname 'train to nowhere'. So I stand by what I said. When the interestate highways were built they were part of a grand plan. So even though they were built piece meal everyone knew what the plan was and acepted it. As each section was completed it was hooked into the existing highway system so you could actually drive on it and experience it even though the complete route was not finished. There is no such plan for high speed rail or passenger rail in general. There are web sites with pretty color maps but there is no overall plan as such. Maybe eventually there will be. Lets hope so.


Henry, George and I are generally on diametric opposite ends when it comes to politics, so it is probably interesting to look at the few places we generally do agree.

Newspapers aren't in the business of reporting news. They are in the business of selling newspapers. Train to nowhere? Sounds so damned cool, doesn't it? Its an HSR train going nowhere! EXTRA EXTRA READ ALL ABOUT IT! AND THE ADS IN THE PAPER!

The paper can even claim, "Authorities have not commented on whether or not the new HSR track will be used by other trains in the meantime." If you don't ask, they don't tell. So its true, but extremely misleading.

You are getting information on California HSR from two sources: the media, biased towards newspaper sales and other things... and George Harris, a railroad engineer working on the project!

Who do you believe... the notoriously inaccurate media or somebody with firsthand knowledge?


----------



## henryj

Green Maned Lion said:


> You are getting information on California HSR from two sources: the media, biased towards newspaper sales and other things... and George Harris, a railroad engineer working on the project!
> 
> Who do you believe... the notoriously inaccurate media or somebody with firsthand knowledge?


Obviously GML I would defer to George. However, if the plan all along was to reroute the San Joaquins(I can never spell that) to the new alignment as it was completed to enhance the current service, then they did a **** poor job of communicating that didn't they.

And the Florida HSR thingy(the original topic) was turning into a giant boondoggle so on that I have to agree with you and others on here that oppose it in it's current form.

As I stated above, there seems to be no coherent plan for passenger rail, just a bunch of disjointed splinter groups, each with their own agenda. Whats needed is a national policy like the interstate highway project of the 1950's and 60's to really get the trains running. Not likely in today's political environment.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

henryj said:


> Obviously GML I would defer to George. However, if the plan all along was to reroute the San Joaquins(I can never spell that) to the new alignment as it was completed to enhance the current service, then they did a **** poor job of communicating that didn't they.


Either that, or the media, with their own agenda, chose to obfuscate it as they often do.


----------



## George Harris

Henry:

I have spent most of my working life on rail transportation projects, mostly transit plus high speed rail with a little freight thrown in for flavor. ALL that have been built have carried more people that originally projected, and certainly way more than the nay-sayers. So if I seem a little thin-skinned with some of the people making pronouncements with little to no knowledge or understanding of the subject, I am.

What the media chooses to see of much of what is going on in this field is the same as a person watching a duck swim without realizing that most of the action is below the waterline where it cannot be seen unless you get your head under the water.

Yes, there is a certain amount of disjointedness, most of it politically based. However, the funding for the silly and senseless is far less than those in opposition suppose. On the other hand, a certain amount of geographic disjointedness is to be expected when you look at the population distribution in this country.

As to the interstate highway comparison: People tend to forget that it was in the interstate standards that in low traffic volume areas the Interstates could be built as two-lane highways, but with right of way purchased so that a second side could be added later. The right of way requirement was very low cost, as in all cases the low volume portions were in areas where land values were very low. There were several long stretches that were built that way. I think all now have the second set of lanes in place. Also, wehn the Interstates were built, the segments that would have high traffic volumes were built first. The Interstate construction began in 1956 and was supposed to take 25 years. It took longer, and of course many segments have had lanes added since.

I would suggest a look at the following two reports. You can ignore their conclusions if you so choose, but do look at the map showing the location of the high density areas of the country and the current air traffic flows in these areas. Like the interstates, the objective is to start in the high traffic density areas and work out.

www.america2050.org/pdf/HSR-in-America-Complete.pdf

www.america2050.org/pdf/Where-HSR-Works-Best.pdf

Another little thought: The TGV and ICE lines in Europe for the most part do not run city center to city center, but tie into the existing network some distance outside the city centers and finish the trip on the existing network. That little fact is the main driver behind the relatively small vehicles used in the European HSR systems. Recall that European freight traffic is very low in relation to the population and thier freight trains are short and light.


----------



## Eric S

henryj said:


> When the interestate highways were built they were part of a grand plan. So even though they were built piece meal everyone knew what the plan was and acepted it. As each section was completed it was hooked into the existing highway system so you could actually drive on it and experience it even though the complete route was not finished. There is no such plan for high speed rail or passenger rail in general. There are web sites with pretty color maps but there is no overall plan as such. Maybe eventually there will be. Lets hope so.


Isn't the CA HSR just such a "grand plan" (a statewide rail plan)? And the first segment (the so-called train to nowhere, although I'd hardly characterize Fresno and Bakersfield as "nowhere") of the initial phase (between the Bay Area and LA area) would seem to be just like the first segments of the Interstate highway system, with the later phases (extensions to Sacramento and San Diego) representing the full system.


----------



## JJJ

I actually can't see how the San Joaquins could use the HSR track. I don't think it's going to happen.

Bakersfield is fine, HSR and Amtrak will share the same station...

But then the HSR tracks continue "express" to Fresno. Amtrak has 4 stops along the way. How does amtrak service those stops on a different set of tracks?

And once arriving at Fresno, the HSR station will be 3/4 of a mile west of the Amtrak station. Would Amtrak abandon their depot for 4 or 5 years?

The only way I can see it working is if the number of trains increases and Amtrak offers express service, Bakersfield-Fresno-Madera (and then all local stops north of that).

I think the San Joaquin grand plan includes going for 6 trains a day (each way) to 10, so that may be possible.


----------



## George Harris

JJJ said:


> I actually can't see how the San Joaquins could use the HSR track. I don't think it's going to happen.
> 
> Bakersfield is fine, HSR and Amtrak will share the same station...
> 
> But then the HSR tracks continue "express" to Fresno. Amtrak has 4 stops along the way. How does amtrak service those stops on a different set of tracks?
> 
> And once arriving at Fresno, the HSR station will be 3/4 of a mile west of the Amtrak station. Would Amtrak abandon their depot for 4 or 5 years?
> 
> The only way I can see it working is if the number of trains increases and Amtrak offers express service, Bakersfield-Fresno-Madera (and then all local stops north of that).
> 
> I think the San Joaquin grand plan includes going for 6 trains a day (each way) to 10, so that may be possible.


We are beginning to go around in circles here.

Two things I copied in already:



> The FRA requires that any rail project using ARRA funds be capable of demonstrating “operational independence”/ “independent utility” upon completion. A project is considered to have operational independence “if, upon being implemented, it will provide tangible and measurable benefits, even if no additional investments in the same service are made.” Examples of these benefits include “operational reliability improvements, travel‐time reductions, and additional service frequencies resulting in increased ridership.” In practice, this requirement means that the improvements can be used for existing or new intercity rail passenger operations, including Amtrak and other intercity service Importantly, such service is clearly specified as being “intercity service” as opposed to enhanced commuter rail service.





> The above is what lead to the selection of a segment in the Central Valley. The specific section was further refined in the following:Board%20Meeting%20Agenda%20Item%203%20-%20Presentation%20on%20Selection%20of%20First%20Section%20-%20Appendix%20A[1].pdf


I could go over the issues you raised point by point, but I really do not want to take the time or hunt around for the source information. Suffice to say, all you points have been considered and dealt with. Also, there is a potential station between Fresno and Bakersfield. The HSR line between Fresno and Bakersfield follows the BNSF track used by Amtrak.

There are six trains each way on the San Joaquin route right now.


----------



## JJJ

If all those points have been considered and dealt with, than why haven't I read about it?

All Ive seen is that "independent utility" means that if the central valley rail is completed, and the rest is canceled, there are enough funds set aside to connect both ends of the track to BNSF.

I've read nothing about funds to replace the stations infrastructure at wasco, corcoran and hanford, and what would be done with the Fresno station which was renovated 6 or so years ago. Especially important is to consider that HSR will pass most of these cities in an elevated structure, making station infrastructure much more expensive than the madera-style slab of concrete with a sign.

Amtrak california is about providing access to the entire state, not simply serving the largest cities in express mode.

Again, I could see amtrak sending some trains down the new tracks, and some down the old ones, but no other solution.


----------



## The Davy Crockett

Funny, I thought this thread was on Florida HSR. :unsure:


----------



## Trogdor

JJJ said:


> If all those points have been considered and dealt with, than why haven't I read about it?


Just a guess, but perhaps you haven't been reading in the correct places.

If you're depending on the news media to tell you everything you need to know, well......


----------



## George Harris

Trogdor said:


> JJJ said:
> 
> 
> 
> If all those points have been considered and dealt with, than why haven't I read about it?
> 
> 
> 
> Just a guess, but perhaps you haven't been reading in the correct places.
> 
> If you're depending on the news media to tell you everything you need to know, well......
Click to expand...

JJJ, regardless of what impressions are being left by the public press, neither the California High Speed Rail Authority nor the Federal Railroad Administration are staffed by incompetents. You have some very impressive and committed people on both sides here. There is a good deal of information that is public, and I certainly can't provide anything that is not in the public domain. Suggest you do through search on the issues and when doing so skip those sites that provide more heat (opinions) than light (factual info) on the matter.

*Go past the "news" and opinionated and find the facts.*

The above applies to what is going on in Florida as well.


----------



## JJJ

George Harris said:


> neither the California High Speed Rail Authority nor the Federal Railroad Administration are staffed by incompetents. You have some very impressive and committed people on both sides here. There is a good deal of information that is public, and I certainly can't provide anything that is not in the public domain. Suggest you do through search on the issues and when doing so skip those sites that provide more heat (opinions) than light (factual info) on the matter.
> 
> *Go past the "news" and opinionated and find the facts.*
> 
> The above applies to what is going on in Florida as well.


The agency doesnt have to be staffed with incompetents to make critical mistakes or to mislead the public.

It happens all the time with projects, both public and private.

I'm not saying that is what is happening here, I'm just saying there is ample precedent.

If you are telling me that there is a document spelling out how the San Joaquin can run on the new HSR tracks, and make all San Joaquin local stops, then it is very hard to find.

And if the local press is not providing all the information, than it is a failure of the HSR folks for not providing all the details. Take the Fresno Bee, it is as pro-HSR as can be, and yet not a word has been said about the future of the San Joaquin. Considering their "look at all the fog" story included a picture of people waiting at the amtrak station, it is certainly not because they are unaware of it.


----------



## Spokker

JJJ said:


> And if the local press is not providing all the information, than it is a failure of the HSR folks for not providing all the details.


Much of the details have not been finalized. The project is in the draft EIR/EIS phase.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

JJJ, the man you are arguing with is one of the many members of the team you are disparaging.


----------



## JJJ

Green Maned Lion said:


> JJJ, the man you are arguing with is one of the many members of the team you are disparaging.


I don't mean to come off as combative or insulting, and if that's how my comment appeared, I apologize.

I have just been following this project for the past few years, including reading almost every publicly available document and have not found the answers to my questions.

I've found that the best way to prevent nimby-style opposition is to cancel any misinformation before it begins. Once a talking point against a project is established, it's hard to kill. A recent california example would be the "rail to nowhere" which was repeated not just in local press, but in papers across the country. A ludicrous argument, but since it wasn't stamped out BEFORE becoming a talking point, it became hard to dispute false article after article.

Another example would be the Ohio HSR, which was constantly criticized on the "39mph average speed"....which again, was a pure falsehood.

And going back a couple of decades, the infamous mcdonalds coffee case, which the majority of the population holds up as a frivolous case, but was actually gross negligence on the part of mcdonalds, not someone digging for money and a crazy court handing it over.

So going back to the original point, either the HSR authority has a clear, thought out plan on how to handle the San Joaquin, but has not presented the case to the public....or they have nothing, and are hiding the fact that they hope the entire HSR line is built and people forget about the san joaquin.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

People are stupid, and the more information you give them... well: You have the right to remain silent, anything you say can be misquoted and used against you.


----------



## George Harris

JJJ said:


> I've found that the best way to prevent nimby-style opposition is to cancel any misinformation before it begins. Once a talking point against a project is established, it's hard to kill. A recent california example would be the "rail to nowhere" which was repeated not just in local press, but in papers across the country.


Doesn't really seem to work that was. Certainly has not with you.

I have tried to think of some polite way to comment on the assurance and certainty of solutions presented by people that are mostly ignorant of the situation, but can't, so I will say no more than this sentence.



> And going back a couple of decades, the infamous mcdonalds coffee case, which the majority of the population holds up as a frivolous case, but was actually gross negligence on the part of mcdonalds, not someone digging for money and a crazy court handing it over.


And the basis for the certainty behind this pronouncement is??????



> So going back to the original point, either the HSR authority has a clear, thought out plan on how to handle the San Joaquin, but has not presented the case to the public....or they have nothing, and are hiding the fact that they hope the entire HSR line is built and people forget about the san joaquin.


I give up. Nothing about this or any other part of this project is as simple and straightforward as you seem to think. There is really no point in trying to confuse you will facts.


----------



## JJJ

George, every response to me in this thread has been thinly veiled insults, and waving off the concerns, and not a single fact.

Examples:

"I could go over the issues you raised point by point, but I really do not want to take the time or hunt around for the source information."

"Suggest you do through search on the issues and when doing so skip those sites that provide more heat (opinions) than light (factual info) on the matter."

"Doesn't really seem to work that was. Certainly has not with you."

How about answering my questions or linking me to a document that addressed those concerns?

You say you "give up" but at no point have you actually started anything.

Once again, instead of running around calling people ignorant, why not address the simple question? You're just making it seem that I am right and no real plan for running the San Joaquins on the HSR track has been created. All I am asking is to see how amtrak trains could call upon cities like wasco when running on the new tracks which will lack stations at those cities.

As for the mcdonalds case, they served the coffee at a dangerous 180 °F and had been doing so for years even after countless complaints. The media simply passed it along as "stupid women doesnt realize coffee is hot"

Wikipedia has a good summary of the case.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonald%27s_coffee_case


----------



## George Harris

JJJ said:


> George, every response to me in this thread has been thinly veiled insults, and waving off the concerns, and not a single fact.


I enjoy having my job and want to be part of this project way too much to give out information other than links to information that is already available to the public. Therefore, you will have to do your own searching to see what has been publically released. I do not need it for what I am doing.



> As for the mcdonalds case, they served the coffee at a dangerous 180 °F and had been doing so for years even after countless complaints. The media simply passed it along as "stupid women doesnt realize coffee is hot"


The "dangerous 180F" is simply lawyer talk. I have been making coffee with boiling water as long as I have been making coffee. Water boils at 212F at sea level, so I would not consider 180F to be beyond reason for the temperature of the coffee in the cup. If it drop it on myself, it is my fault and no one else's.

Either way, the McDonald's example is completely extraneous to the subject at hand.


----------



## Devil's Advocate

George Harris said:


> JJJ said:
> 
> 
> 
> George, every response to me in this thread has been thinly veiled insults, and waving off the concerns, and not a single fact.
> 
> 
> 
> I enjoy having my job and want to be part of this project way too much to give out information other than links to information that is already available to the public. Therefore, you will have to do your own searching to see what has been publically released. I do not need it for what I am doing.
Click to expand...

You write as though you think your views are somehow beyond questioning simply because they came from you. As if your login alone is enough to trump any possible challenge. The level of arrogance you bring to the forum is really a sight to behold George.



George Harris said:


> The "dangerous 180F" is simply lawyer talk. I have been making coffee with boiling water as long as I have been making coffee. Water boils at 212F at sea level, so I would not consider 180F to be beyond reason for the temperature of the coffee in the cup. If it drop it on myself, it is my fault and no one else's.


Actually, there was a lot more to the story than than the temperature of the coffee or what it would do to the skin of a senior citizen. In fact studying the Liebeck case helped open my eyes to many important aspects of our legal system and to how our media chooses to cover them. If only you were willing and able to put down your knee-jerk playbook for a moment you might learn that not everything you first assumed is always correct. Taking time to reconsider previous assumptions is one of mankind's most invaluable abilities, but only for those who are willing and able to employ it.


----------



## Spokker

Message boards should be for fun arguments, not speech and debate. I cite my sources on term papers, not the Internet. There's always Google if you want more information.


----------



## leemell

daxomni said:


> George Harris said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JJJ said:
> 
> 
> 
> George, every response to me in this thread has been thinly veiled insults, and waving off the concerns, and not a single fact.
> 
> 
> 
> I enjoy having my job and want to be part of this project way too much to give out information other than links to information that is already available to the public. Therefore, you will have to do your own searching to see what has been publically released. I do not need it for what I am doing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You write as though you think your views are somehow beyond questioning simply because they came from you. As if your login alone is enough to trump any possible challenge. The level of arrogance you bring to the forum is really a sight to behold George.
> 
> 
> 
> George Harris said:
> 
> 
> 
> The "dangerous 180F" is simply lawyer talk. I have been making coffee with boiling water as long as I have been making coffee. Water boils at 212F at sea level, so I would not consider 180F to be beyond reason for the temperature of the coffee in the cup. If it drop it on myself, it is my fault and no one else's.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Actually, there was a lot more to the story than than the temperature of the coffee or what it would do to the skin of a senior citizen. In fact studying the Liebeck case helped open my eyes to many important aspects of our legal system and to how our media chooses to cover them. If only you were willing and able to put down your knee-jerk playbook for a moment you might learn that not everything you first assumed is always correct. Taking time to reconsider previous assumptions is one of mankind's most invaluable abilities, but only for those who are willing and able to employ it.
Click to expand...

I've read the complete report on the coffee suit as well and I'm with George on this one, if you take possession of a cup of hot coffee, YOU are responsible for its safe usage from that point on. It cannot get any hotter than 212 degrees so be prepared for that. All the rest is lawyers and the nanny state.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

> You write as though you think your views are somehow beyond questioning simply because they came from you. As if your login alone is enough to trump any possible challenge. The level of arrogance you bring to the forum is really a sight to behold George.


I wouldn't say that George is arrogant so much as he knows what he is talking about in the realm you are discussing with him and I think he is tired of people who know very little on this subject attempting to show him that they know more than he does. And I don't blame him. He can be arrogant on other subjects, which I do find annoying, such as:



> Actually, there was a lot more to the story than than the temperature of the coffee or what it would do to the skin of a senior citizen. In fact studying the Liebeck case helped open my eyes to many important aspects of our legal system and to how our media chooses to cover them. If only you were willing and able to put down your knee-jerk playbook for a moment you might learn that not everything you first assumed is always correct. Taking time to reconsider previous assumptions is one of mankind's most invaluable abilities, but only for those who are willing and able to employ it.


Very much so. McDonald's lack of empathy for their customers, and the lack of response in the face of an unbelievable indication of the risks involved, meant that the suit was entirely justified. Unfortunately, withour knowing the history behind that case and the details involved, it is very dificult to see more that a ridiculous lawsuit.


----------



## Devil's Advocate

Green Maned Lion said:


> I wouldn't say that George is arrogant so much as he knows what he is talking about in the realm you are discussing with him and I think he is tired of people who know very little on this subject attempting to show him that they know more than he does. And I don't blame him.


I guess I simply don't see the point in mocking guests for misunderstanding the situation while refusing to explain what they got wrong. Seriously, what's the point? Having our own views challenged is not always enjoyable, but over time it can help us to solidify our positions or to discover defects in our assumptions. Choosing to be generous with judgment but stingy with knowledge is a recipe more suited for resentment than enlightenment.


----------

