[HamiltonJay]

Don’t kid yourself, bullet from LA/SD to SAN FRAN will have pleanty of riders. This is a 500 mile trip, if it pulls it off in 2.5 hours or less, it will have pleanty of passengers, provided the cost is at or below plane fare.

In air flight time for such a trip is about 1.5 hours. With additional overhead that flying takes in terms of time on the ground etc, you are looking at absolutely comparable travel times.

I don’t know if I agree with building a bullet train vs say a maglev, since bullet trains are already 40+ year old technology, but I have no doubt that high speed rail of some sort between those 2 points will be successful.

Of course had Cali not squandered countless wealth on insane social programs over the last 40 years, they could have built the damn thing themselves hundreds of times over.

[thesharkboy]

Don’t kid yourself, bullet from LA/SD to SAN FRAN will have pleanty of riders.

Then why doesn't private enterprise build and operate the train? Either it will be profitable or not. If not, then it shouldn't be built. If so, then a private entity should build it. Government should not be involved.

[School of Rational Thought]

I’ve taken the train between LA and SF.

I suppose this new technology requires replacing all or building tracks along side the old. Land acquisition will be the biggest cost.

Train travel is Europe is great. The US however might be too politically correct to do it right.

Poeple just don’t know how to behave anymore.

[I_Like_Spam]

>>In air flight time for such a trip is about 1.5 hours. With additional overhead that flying takes in terms of time on the ground etc, you are looking at absolutely comparable travel times.<<

How do you figure that times will be comparable? Passengers will still have to travel to and from the train station- just as they have to travel to and from the airport if they wish to fly. Do people really live or want to go to places closer to the train station?

[Tarpon]

I will wait ... People don’t ride trains in the USA, unless it’s for fun.

[Reeses]

provided the cost is at or below plane fare.

That's impossible to do without taxpayer subsidies because it requires more energy to drive the train at half the speed. The bullet train fares in Japan are more expensive than comparable Southwest Airlines fares if they were available, and Southwest takes no taxpayer money, pays taxes, and makes a profit.

[paul51]

but I have no doubt that high speed rail of some sort between those 2 points will be successful.

Can you share those numbers with us?

[GregoryFul]

When I was a college student in the 60-70s, air travel was half the price of train travel for the marginal passenger (standby), and generally much faster. When will the various governments learn that private enterprise will find the most efficient solution - at least if most government gets out of the way - to provide a service or good to the people?

Men in government (MIGs) should butt out, they are the problem. These men are incessantly arrogant, puffed up with their self-importance, and excellent brain, but mostly ignorant about the particulars of an industry they feign and lie about their competence to lead and specify.

[calex59]

There is a plane that leaves Sacramento every hour on the hour for LA and points around LA. I am sure a bullet train would be welcome if the delay times for boarding were improved over those of waiting to get on a plane. Takes one hour to fly from Sac to LA or the vicinity. Takes 3 hours just to get on the plane. If a bullet train took 2.5 hours to get from Sac to LA there would be many business passengers willing to pay as long as the price was consistent with airfares, Ditto SF and LA, San Diego.