|
|
| Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV (1145288) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV |
|
|
Posted by Jersey Mike on Sun Mar 18 16:58:12 2012, in response to Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV, posted by WillD on Sun Mar 18 16:40:13 2012. It's a hell of a lot cheaper than adding lanes to the Bay Shore and Junipero Serra freeways. Or would you prefer we expand highways so you can keep your precious railfan window?It's called none of the above. Stick a fork in California, its done. Because it slashes travel times by as much as a half hour over Caltrain's status quo for a local between SF and Tamien. That is ultimately what matters to commuters. They could also add more express service which also cuts half an hour off the running time. I have now been fucked twice by those hourly daytime headways. If they are going to spend money, spend it first on increasing the number of trains What was that you said about California not having the ability to print money? Why would you suggest an alternative which is enormously more expensive for the Caltrain corridor if you're looking to reduce costs? Because it already exists to both SFO and Oakland and has been funded to San Jose. Now the credit card is maxed out with those projects there is little need to rebuild the Caltrain line again. Anyway your little electrified grade separated pipe dream will cost just as much as BART so why bother maintaining two systems at that point. Anyway, BART learned its lesson with MUs that can only work in the leading or trailing position. Let's hope the Caltrain planners will learn from history and purchase vehicles that can be coupled and passed through mid-train so they don't have to run 6-8 car trainsets all day. |
|
|
|