http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/2007040...il_070403135131

PARIS (AFP) - The US state of California is eyeing France's high speed train for a planned link between San Franciso and San Diego, the speaker of its state assembly said on Tuesday during a visit to France.

"We are contemplating in California the possibility of a high speed train that would go from the San Francisco Bay area to Los Angeles and San Diego, in South California. We're here to study the rail system," the speaker Fabian Nunez said.

France's TGV was on Tuesday attempting to set a new world speed record for a train on rails, with organisers aiming to hit at least 560 kilometres (350 miles) per hour.

"You have been ahead of time (in producing a) very practical rail system in France which can move people from one place to another," Nunez, California's third most powerful politician said.

"Today you'll be breaking a new speed record with your high speed train, the timing of our venue couldn't have been better."

The record attempt was to be tried on a 73-kilometre (45.3 mile) stretch of track between Paris and the eastern city of Strasbourg.

Weather permitting, the experimental Train a Grande Vitesse (TGV) will aim to break a 17-year-old speed record for a traditional rail-based train of 515.3 kilometres (320.2 miles) per hour. That was set by an earlier version of the TGV.

Nunez, who was holding talks with the Alstom company and French railway officials, said California was also looking at other trains, but had a particular interest in the French model.

"We've had several meetings with industrials. We are looking at the other models, but we are particularly interested in the French model," he said.

California is more adaptable to the French experience. The example of the Paris-Lyon liaison is an experience that is very similar to what we want to do in California between San Francisco and LA."

The planned high speed train link would go from Sacramento in the north to San Diego in the south via San Francisco and Los Angeles, covering a distance of 1,100 kilometres (683 miles). The time of the trip between San Francisco and Los Angeles would be reduced to two and a half hours.

Nunez said the timeline for the plan was early 2009.


Socal to norcal in 2 and a half hours? I wonder what path of California would allow such speeds without having any obstacles or mountains to cut through.

sucks this will be in before anyone starts on a vegas to LA train

whoa this sounds awesome the central valley is pretty flat and there's always tunnelling and bridges like the ones used for the magnetic levitation train in japan

___________________

looks like they broke the record... 357.2mph

___________________

Aside from which train, think the big debate was the actual path the train would take up here in the bay area...

Would it either

1. Come from the south to San Jose, then wrap around the Bay and go up to Sacramento, I think kinda how the current train system goes?

or

2. Sorta follow the path of I-5 and go through the Altamonte Pass (hills you pass through up here along I-580 between Livemore and the area where it splits off to go to I-5). Think there were a couple other things regarding Altamonte Pass, too, but I forgoet. Just remember this being considered the cheapest way and most likely.

Dave

id take the train to the bay area.. screw vegas.

___________________
-Chris
"the night moves me" NIGHTMOVES.ME nightlife+lifestyle photography

fuck vegas, keep california wealth in california

___________________

wonder how much it would cost to ride, is my big question. They've gotta be able to go cheaper than $50 bewteen SF and LA, or else I may as well just get on a Southwest flight and get there in a bit over an hour. Sure, airports cause travel to take longer, but to get people to ride the train (over taking a plane) it'll have to be cheaper than airfare.

this would be incredible. i would use it almost every weekend to go from LA to san diego...

quote:

Originally posted by progressiveMOJO wonder how much it would cost to ride, is my big question. They've gotta be able to go cheaper than $50 bewteen SF and LA, or else I may as well just get on a Southwest flight and get there in a bit over an hour. Sure, airports cause travel to take longer, but to get people to ride the train (over taking a plane) it'll have to be cheaper than airfare.

plane tickets to sacramento arent that cheap in general. they average for a round trip $150. im from there. i have flown there too many times. more often than not the super cheap $39 one way trip isnt available. so really as long as a round trip is no more than $110 then thats perfect. although i personally would still take the plane. the less traveling time the more partying time i have!

quote:

Originally posted by JoNMiTz this would be incredible. i would use it almost every weekend to go from LA to san diego...

seriously! i wouldnt have to drive to belo anymore! i could take the train and forget about traffic and being tired as fuck driving back!

quote:

Originally posted by progressiveMOJO wonder how much it would cost to ride, is my big question. They've gotta be able to go cheaper than $50 bewteen SF and LA, or else I may as well just get on a Southwest flight and get there in a bit over an hour. Sure, airports cause travel to take longer, but to get people to ride the train (over taking a plane) it'll have to be cheaper than airfare.

true, but i'd much rather take a train over a plane, especially if it was just about as fast.
don't have to deal with the fucking airport, going through security (and having them take away your contact solution and your toothepaste) and then waiting at the gate for your plane. don't have to deal with being packed on a plane like a sardine. don't have to close up your laptop during take off and landing (plus on most trains they have a power jack so you can plug in your laptop). don't have to wait for the light to go on so you can go to the bathroom.

I'd much rather pay the $100 round trip for the "super fast train" which takes 2.5 hours rather than the $100 southwest airfare round trip which will take just as long with the waits at the airport, not to mention with southwest you have to line up 45min before your plane starts boarding just so you can get a good seat.

honestly i would rather have a cape. That way i can travel anywhere i want. The only downside would be that you really can't carry that much luggage.


UP UP AND AWAY!