Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Going through the Central Valley and stopping in Fresno, Madera, Kings-Tulare, Bakersfield... (etc) to get to Los Angeles is not faster either. Buy a fully autonomous car and go point-to-point faster/cheaper/better.

The train will stop at SFO and BUR -- if the train's last-mile delivery is better then we should focus on that last-mile rather than the stretch in the middle that is already well-solved.




> Buy a fully autonomous car

Make sure you put a winged pony on the shopping list too. They're a great fashionable match any time you're making fantasies of acquiring things that don't exist.


At least one of those is far closer to reality than the other.


While that's true, the less flippant question is whether fully autonomous cars -- where "fully autonomous" is defined as being able to climb in one, kick back and do your work with no concern the way you conceivably could on a train -- will (a) exist, (b) be road-legal, (c) be widely available, and (d) be generally affordable within a timeframe that makes a high-speed rail line moot. I don't think that's remotely a given.


We're going to have autonomous cars that can drive SF-LA long before we have high-speed rail. Self-driving cars from the big players are planned for the 2020-2021 model years.


I have this weird feeling that before we have many of them in mass production, we'll have a single car that fits this description.


This is peak Hacker News: "Don't buy a $50 train ticket - buy a not-actually-invented yet probably $120,000 car instead".

The high-speed rail project is a shit show, but more cars is not the answer either.


More cars, or at least more car trips,—independent of whether they need drivers or what kind of powerplant they have—is, in fact, exactly the problem at which HSR is directed.


Almost no one will buy autonomous cars. You will just hail one for less than the cost of gas.

Only rich people and people in and out of a car all day (full time parents, car-based workers, etc) will buy them.


And every family and anyone who likes having a car. I'd expect not more than 10-20% to stop buying cars. Having your own car is about more than just access to transportation.


You will just hail one for less than the cost of gas.

If the cost of the ride is less than the cost of gas, how is the operator making a profit? Especially since they have to cover more than just the cost of gas.

(an Uber-style "use VC money to subsidize below-cost services" model is not sustainable in the long term, by the way)


In addition to closeparen's point that such autonomous cars will be electric, they will also have much lower mantenance costs due to the lower internal complexity of doing away with the ICE.


This is self evidently true because incredibly complex software implementations that interact with the real world have no maintainance requirements.


... hoping sarcasm. But you never know on here...


I think the point is that they’ll be electric.


Some trains will run sf-sj-la without further stops. Those will be far faster than air if you are traveling between city centers.


Not really. The platform-to-platform time from LA to SF is going to be, at best, a little less than three hours. That's comparable to the time it takes to fly from LAX to SFO plus the ~30 minute BART ride to downtown SF.

LA is so spread out that departing from LAX or Union Station doesn't make a big difference. Most people are going to have to fight traffic to get to either location.


It is only two tracks. How can they run express services at the same time as stopping services?


Having an extra track at the station and timing so that they pass while the other train stops. You don't have services every 5 minutes so that works quite well usually. Worst case the express train has to go a bit slower before but they tend not to go at maximum speed so can catch up again later.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: