Lol, I went to fact check this when I saw it in the video.

How can we trust anything in this video if the producers think Pittsburgh has Acela service to Philly? It hardly even has decent slow Amtrak service.

And it's not "business travelers" or commuters. It's people going from CA to LV for the weekend, pleasure trip.

@@pastorjerrykliner3162 I can hardly wait to try it.

Yea and it won't be available until 2099

@@lunchmeatkingpin2567 2099 I think is a bit optimistic if we are leaving it up to CAHSR.

@@PapillonTraining He was putting it into PR's terms. What that translates to in American Transit Planning is approximately 2247

It will be finish by 2030.

​@@TheCriminalViolin 2244, we would have Earth Space dock finish.

And Eugene. Not including the Eugene/Springfield metro is illogical. I understand it, but it isn't reasonable to exclude it. The highest ridership segment consistently on the Amtrak Cascades line is Eugene to Portland. It was also the segment which was relentless to force Amtrak to reinstate service when they continued to ignore doing so after the pandemic. The ridership metrics in that southern 1/3 are dedicated riders and the number of them grows year over year, too. They punch WAY above their weight. It'd be like not including Tacotown in the line. It just doesn't make any sense to exclude.

@@TheCriminalViolin salem and olympia or tacoma too to further bolster ridership

@@namedtruman Well this is about including Vancouver BC in the line rather than the video's Portland to Seattle concept. So Tacotown (Tacoma) and Olympia are automatically included between Portland & Seattle. So it is just Salem and Eugene that were missing off the concepts of both the video and the OP. And if Portland to Eugene is a part of the corridor, then naturally at least Salem would receive a stop. So the whole line south to north would be: Eugene/Springfield Salem/Keizer Portland Olympia Tacoma or SeaTac (airport) Seattle Bellingham Vancouver BC As for the IC/ICE line, it would go south to north as follows: Eugene/Springfield Albany Salem/Keizer Tualatin/Tigard Portland Vancouver Kelso/Longview Chehalis/Centralia Olympia/Lacey Tacotown SeaTac Seattle Everett Bellingham Surrey Vancouver BC In my mind, that's the most logical, utopian way to set up the HSR and ICE lines for such a rail system for the corridor. The only reason I don't include Vancouver WA on the HSR line is because of how close it is to Portland, and that means it would heavily impact the speed and consistency of the HSR line negatively if added. What's worse is the trade-off is not any better, as it would mean inducing even more demand and congestion on the I-5 Bridge than it's already egregious parking lot congestion levels. So there is just no winning there unfortunately. I suppose we could presume there is a passenger rail bridge or tunnel built specifically for these lines to cross the river, making it entirely proprietary, and that then would likely make it far more feasible to include them on the HSR line, though again, the proximity to Portland station is still going to have a negative impact overall, even if it would be greatly lessened. Logistics are like this though - a pain in the ass.

@@TheCriminalViolin i feel more local stops (woodburn or white rock for example) should be added to the intercity line because the current cascades line tries to be both local and express at the same time, and the addition of a high-speed line could further differentiate the two. additionally, i think that it would make more sense for the intercity train to go to oregon city instead of tualatin, for both the aforementioned local service reason and to not compete with the westside express service.

@@namedtruman It wouldn't compete with the WES at all. The WES has incredibly LOW ridership, is only a 1 or 2 car train, runs 6 times per day each direction), is actually quite slow, especially compared to a ICE line, and without a stop on the west side (where the bulk of the metro populace is), would force westsiders (like myself) to go to Downtown Portland in order to ride it at all, which is itself very slow, especially in the summer give MAX can only go 30mph when it is 90 or above, and for driving, it's not much better given the constant miles long crawl on all the major aerials in and out of the city. I do like the idea of placing a stop in OC though to give the east side a option, however that would be better suited if it was a ICE or IC line that went to PDX instead of downtown. Also just for clarity, ICE is different than IC (Intercity) as the e means Express, as it has limited stops, and functions as the higher speed gap filler between true regional/local/IC routes and true HSR routes. I spend a lot of time in NIMBY Rails, and recently started up a west coast project after focusing on Texas and that region. I have placed stops in more places than I initally anticipated for the ICE route, so in one particular part (Washington) it becomes more of a IC than a ICE. I put stops in Bellingham, Mount Vernon/Arlington, Shoreline, Mountlake Terrace, West Seattle, Renton, Kent, Auburn, Puyallup, Lacey, Centralia (more central to the surrounding towns), Castle Rock, Kelso/Longview, Woodland and Salmon Creek for the smaller towns. I even slapped one in DuPont because of Joint Base Lewis-McChord. For here in Oregon I added in Beaverton, Wilsonville (replaced Tualatin's HSR station for the ICE line with this), Woodburn, Albany, Corvallis and Junction City for our smaller stations and towns. For BC I tossed in Surrey as it makes perfect sense in every where to make sure they get at least a ICE stop, especially since I opted to not give them a HSR stop. I also considered White Rock, and decided to say "fuck it" and gave them a ICE stop too (thus Blaine as well) since they're border towns, to make it potentially quicker & easier for folks in the region to cross the border. Usually with Border town stations, they integrate the whole security and crossing protocols and checks in ahead of time, which vastly minimizes the actual time it takes to cross the border compared with the usual car, bike or on foot crossings. Theoretically, we could finally do something similar to many other countries and actually implement a "advanced validation and check" system at point of purchase pf tickets and of course arrival at the station, which would take off even more crossing time. So I do make sure to hit up plenty of the smaller towns along the way throughout Oregon & Washington for the ICE route idea. Of course the major issue is, the logistics of actually deciding on where the stations and thus alignments are for these services (HSR & ICE) is, once it's decided, in real life, that's it. There is all but guaranteed nothing more than just the HSR line that would get funded and built out. I doubt they'd even consider anything extra like ICE services (even though they REALLY should for a large number of reasons). So all else goes directly into the "utopian vision" bin where it's all imagination and again... all but fact it'll never ever be. So say we do instead choose to hit up OC over anywhere on the westside for the HSR line - that'd be final and we'd never get another line or station for anywhere else. It would also mean we'd need to do sweeping curves into downtown and out of downtown from/to the Vancouver and OC ends. Downtown is more out of the way than it looks and feels. But that would also mean even more expense in order to navigate under or over the Willamette a second time in the heart of the urbanized area of the eastside. If that station was on the westside, you'd only have the one crossing instead. Again, it's all logistics in the end, and logistics are a royally pain in the ass, as they ALWAYS end up forcing changes most people wouldn't want, sometimes even really destroying a vision or plan completely because of some stupid thing that comes up. in fact, that would actually end up with THREE crossings in the greater metro than just the one if it went to OC, as it would have to cross again around Wilsonville & Canby in order to properly service a logical station in Salem/Keizer And yeah, as you can tell by now, I am a diehard of transit and transit planning, so once I get going, I go DEEP. I could go on and on forever about this kind of thing. haha.

I know I said the “city” of san bernardino, but I was really referring to sb county as a whole, which Rancho Cucamonga is included in.

@@fourth_placeI love how you call it gross. Rancho is much better and cleaner of an area than LA 😂

100%. The Pittsburg to Harrisburg section is very slow and runs once or twice a day

Why can’t brightline build new rail? One of the biggest problems with amtrak throughout the country is that they own a very small percentage of rail track and are at the mercy of cargo and other passenger rail services, causing hours of cumulative delays sometimes. Yes it would bring an upfront cost for brightline to build their own rail, but at the end of the day the customer is going to be happier and keep coming back when they don’t constantly have to stop for whoever owns the rail and has first priority.

@@fourth_place, they "CAN" build new rail, but it's expensive. They built new, dedicated rail between Orlando and Coco Beach (the only, true "high speed" section) but that's 40 miles of the entire length. The rest was able to capitalize on existing trackage. If Brightline had to build the entire length of "new" and dedicated railway, they wouldn't have been able to do it. And just look at the headaches with all the "at grade crossings" Brightline has to deal with down through Fort Lauderdale and Miami. If they could afford to, of course they would love to pay for the grade-separations and dedicated bridges, etc... But then "Brightline" would never be able to afford it and there'd be no "Brightline" at all.

@@pastorjerrykliner3162 fortunately, building on their Florida success, Brightline West will be true new built high speed rail. Of course, now the nay sayers have moved the goal posts and are complaining about not being able to completely double track. I do believe they will continue to build on their successes.

@@PapillonTraining, I don't want to take anything away from Brightline... My point is that, really, they did things in a way that was responsible and sustainable. I think that, sooner than later, they WILL double track the whole Orlando-Coco section; they built that into the plans.

It goes much farther and isn't a local line like Metra.

wholeheartedly agree

The expansions would require the line would be expanded north of Cocoa station with stops in St Augustine and Jacksonville before crossing the border into Georgia.

Considering all the railroad infrastructure has been taken for US 1, I don't ever see this happening. One thing that KW has going for it is the water. There is already a high-speed ferry route that runs from Fort Myers to KW and, if there isn't already such a service from Miami, that would make more sense than re-building the "Overseas Railroad."

@@pastorjerrykliner3162 If Key Largo for example would have a station, it would have Amtrak, Brightline and Tri-Rail. You'll have a major connection and then have Amtrak and Brightline stop at Marathon in Middle Keys But another thing about the Florida Keys route is the concern of the environment that could impact the coral reefs and the potential risk of hurricanes

europeans dont know how to behave at sporting events

Frankly, the advancement and success that Brightline / Brightline West have already achieved compared to Amtrak's appalling half-century history, I think private industry maybe the future for train travel in the US. Let's check in on this again if Brightline West is open on time in 2028 and compare notes to where California High Speed Rail will be at that time.

which is why we use planes that go 500mph for long distanxes

Exactly, the entire state of AZ is a one big prison.

I think that minimum of 125mph/200 km/h average isn't realistic. A minimum of a 125mph/200 km/h top speed should be more realistic.

California is the NIMBY Capital of the U.S., indeed.

This is a Brightline dedicated video, not CAHSR.

And public transit shouldn't have to be profitable.

@@StefanWithTrains3222 true however you have to remember this is a private company, unlike the government that makes Trillions so it needs a income source.

I appreciate your enthusiasm but a very specific set circumstances and serendipity fell into place to make Brightline Florida happen. It is highly unlikely to happen again.

@@StefanWithTrains3222, fine...it "shouldn't have to be profitable," but it should make sense and be usable. Building, for the sake of building, has gotten us transit options that don't actually work for people, so they get low ridership. The low ridership/usage numbers then get "they shouldn't have to be profitable" thrown as an excuse--rather than addressing the issues--which then causes the problem to repeat. The desire to "build high speed rail" just to build it, rather than asking "will it actually get used" and "is it sustainable" isn't the answer.

@@maestromecanico597 This!