It will be faster (and possibly cheaper) to take the high-speed rail back and forth instead of driving [...]
I'm sorry to keep bringing this up, but: If it's economically feasible and perhaps profitable -- why have no entrepreneurs ventured...?
If people wanted to ride trains from LA to LV, someone would have made lots of money providing that service...
Having it go along the coast would be the obvious, though certainly expensive, choice. More people, more valuable real estate, more traffic that wouldn't be SF-to-LA. Even the '"easier" desert route [...]
Then there's the changing nature of Nevada's economy.
The coastal route merely recognizes the realities of our geography: Trains crossing the northern valleys disembark at Bakersfield, put their riders on buses to go over the grapevine -- and, usually, let them ride into LA on the bus: There are no economical rail routes after that.
I think the country is well out of sync with the general world where progress is the order of the day and they cannot all be wrong. Know all the usual stuff about distances and so on but the power of the motr car industry was something else. Even in other places where the car is taking off rail is still a big and constantly modernising thing. Unfortunately the plot has been essentially lost over there unless it is just freight traffic.
Of course knew about that for decades as well.
Page created in 0.075 seconds with 43 queries.