Why will high-speed train from Vegas go to Rancho Cucamonga, CA instead of Los Angeles? 

And this is the real reason. It's cheap to run a new train down the middle of a freeway. Past Rancho, there's no easy right of way. At a minimum, they would need to quad track much of the San Bernardino Metrolink line, in places where there simply isn't room to do so, which means buying and tearing down buildings near the tracks. Better to just piggyback on Metrolink to get people to Rancho.

@@Geotpf It is better to use the metrolink Riverside tracks which have fewer level crossings, which can be upgraded to 4 electrified tracks and which are more straight, by negotiating an extension of the tracks from Rancho station to the Ontario airport underground. if it is necessary.

Don't over promise then. Don't disclose to the public that you will do something that you clearly haven't researched or got any permits, funds, or rights to do. Its pointless. It gets us all hyped up and when its underdelivered we see it as a waste of money. California HSR is one of those cases, Caltrain, BART are others. So I say unless ALL projects have 100% funding, 100% permits and are READY TO CONSTRUCT ON ANNOUNCEMENT then a law would ban them from disclosing ANYTHING until it can be completed in full as described. No more of this patchwork of shit. If that can't happen, then put it to a ballot vote. A ballot vote that will force that law.

​​@@celebrityrog it's just weird that every railway project in the US have these insane amount of bureaucratic paperwork, while new highway projects always pass through with ease.

@@ianhomerpura8937 agreed it is irrational, have a look at Australia which in many respects has a Lot of similarities, but they have lots of electrified trains and spend about 2/3 as much on rail as they do on highways. Big difference! And they are doing all the planning for HSR to run all the way right into their central stations and serve where people want to go.

Double tracking would be a pretty expensive upgrade. The reality is that first of all if you want to get into downtown you can just take metro link but the major other factor is that most people in LA don’t live in downtown. In fact most business doesn’t even take place downtown. So while in most cities most people will want to travel near the city center, LA is extremely sprawling and dense everywhere so a lot of people might not even go through downtown in the first place. Edit: just to confirm, it is an absolutely necessary project to double track to union station, and electrify. However not everything needs to take place at the exact same time and brightline will still be perfectly feasible without it. The main thing that’s going to decide its success is wether or not metro link aligns its schedule with brightline arrivals and departures (which should be around the same time since it’s a terminal station)

The biggest challenge for North American infrastructure projects is getting right-of-way. Building alongside a freeway is fairly straightforward.

I think your both missing that this is a private company not a government program. Its not about cutting your commute times its about getting tourists to Vegas with less headaches than a plane or roadtrip. Building into the city would wreck the margin.

@@airron5019 Getting to Union Station would make it easier for people to get on Brightline, since as a tourist staying in a CBD hotel or just flying into LAX and transferring straight to trains, it means once you get to Union Station, you're on the Brightline train and off to Vegas.

@@airron5019 It’s profitable because the right of way acquisition is straightforward.

Exactly. Brightline barely has the money to do their current plan (and that is with a lot of government support). Even last year, the plan was to terminate in Victorville until funding came through.

Well good for you 👏

It's just one extra train. Union Station to Rancho then Rancho to Vegas.

you are going to love Apple Valley

Yes, any transfer is very time consuming. RC is not the center of LA metro center, it's on the edge of it. There are four existing rail lines (including the BNSF double track main) between the Inland Empire and LA. Something could be worked out.

Downtown Los Angeles is not where people want to go. And certainly not Union Station. Most people on vacation would want to stay on the West Side, closer to the beaches and Universal Studios and maybe Hollywood. Or they would go to Anaheim and Disneyland. Los Angeles is too spread out.

Every trick in the book to make this project fail. Mass transit system never work in this way. It's actually the opposite, cities are to be built around mass-transit system. This project is going to be a big fail and then everyone who didn't benefit from this project will then use it as an example of why HSR just doesn't work in the USA. Lack of foresight from the planners of this project is shocking.

I used to ride the Maglev in D.C. to VA all the time, Pentagon City mainly.

San Bernardino's central station also offers express trains to and from L.A. Union Station, and San Bernardino International Airport lies only 1.5 miles to the East. Additionally, the City of San Bernardino owns an adjacent 43-acre site of a former mall that is perfect for redevelopment and that has the room to accommodate high-speed rail running between Las Vegas and San Diego and that will cross the future East‐West line running between Los Angeles and Phoenix, potentially.

Arrow is a stupid distraction the SBCTA uses so it can exploit the Pacific Electric Right of Way as a trail. Southern Pacific had control but somehow lost it to the county. single track standard guage. Route 66 goes underneath the Pacific Electric in fontucky.

Bc A they know the California project to have first dibs. B building into DTLA is probably triple the budget of the RC to Vegas line. C why not wait until the state and fed ready to put money into the last leg of the project

@@nicksalgado22 They wouldn't be laying new tracks, they'd use the existing tracks to get to Union Station.

⁠@@VegasElementYou gotta make sure the track standards are met, as well as build electrification and grade separation. Not to mention Union Station will have to be upgraded fully, especially the platforms to provide level boarding, along with other infrastructure like electrification. So odds are they're gonna wait for CAHSR to actually go to LA and build a dedicated section for HSR. (But that will take 40 years because they aren't getting the proper funds in the first place) But at least it's better than not having high speed rail at all.

What do you mean “we agreed to”? This is not part of the CA HSR project.

Because it would be illegal. The US doesn't make high speed trains, which are lighter, and the crash standards are different. Trains in the rest of the world are designed to not crash, and crumple in a crash like your car does. US-made trains on the other hand are designed to be like tanks and just plow through anything they run into. You can't legally put global-standard trains on US tracks unless US trains are forbidden from those tracks. i.e. if they electrified the Metrolink line and put Brightline trains on it, Metrolink wouldn't be able to run its American-style trains on the line legally (and if the US train crashed into Brightline, the Brightline train would be obliterated).

Sounds like some thing Mr. Benny would say!

That would happen if Cal HSR actually reached LA. Right now that project is overbudget partly because of land aquisitions, and they haven't even finished the first phase, which won't connect to LA or SF or Sacramento yet. Until the government or investors see success with Brightline West, funding for an upgraded link to DTLA probably won't happen, especially not because of Cal HSR.

@@Netizpossible California HSR will go to downtown LA. It has nothing to do with the Brightline West line. It is taking a long time because it is a huge project and it has never been done before in this country. There is no institutional knowledge to lean on. Brightline is using rails and trains compatible with Cal HSR exactly for the purpose of eventually piggybacking on their lines to DTLA.

Correct.

That's essentially what flying United to Newark is.

Many commuter trains don't offer luggage service. Just bring your suitcase on the train with you.

@@Ven100 My comment is in response to the news reporter who claimed there would be luggage service to transfer suitcases from Brightline trains to Metrolink trains.

Wouldn’t take a train in a million years no way no how

@@robertherman1146 Why not?!

They should extend the Las Vegas Monorail to the airport and the future Brtightline Station.

$280 not to deal with the TSA might be worth it

​@@PelosiStockPortfoliowhat makes you think they won't have that type of system implemented also because it's a train?

Yeah in some places like in San Bernardino you can fly to Vegas for half that price

@@supertec2023 Durrr... because trains currently exist and they dont have anything like TSA

​@@supertec2023 because it's a train. Yes.

STOP! BEING! ANNOYING!

just as long as it has a decent bar car on the train, i'll be fun

Even with a transfer to MetroLink, DTLA to Vegas is ~3.5 hours which is still far better than driving (especially in peak hours) and close to the total time flying when factoring in airport pre-departure arrival, deboarding, and baggage claim (if you have checked luggage).

You take metro link smart guy

You can do that here too but the difference is that train schedules suck and the trains are slow and inconvenient. But yeah you can pretty much connect to most important cities in the US by train. But we do have a long way to go to catch up to Europe but also building rail link doesn’t make sense everywhere in the US as we just don’t have the population density of city pairs that Europe has. We have the best network of inland airports which can help us travel faster. But there are a few key routes and regions that definitely need good rail links like Texas, California, northeast(it already does have one) , Pacific Northwest and the Chicago hub region.

The average American is fine with slop since they are averse to taxes and proper levels of public funding , unfortunately

@@kdhemingo that used to be true but with wages going less further than they used to I think the next generation is going to ask for more public services. It has its pro and cons.

@@portcybertryx222 That's a lot of information but that's not the reason. Those are central governments with a socialist economy that provides any amount of tax money the government dictates that people must pay to build whatever the government pleases. This is why cars are a luxury inn most countries. In the USA of course, we have the freedom to choose what we want to spend most of our money on with the exception of democrat ran states. Simply put, most states don't have enough tax money to pay for high speed rail & when they do like California they completely miss manage the project because they don't understand how to run a business in a capitalist country. This is why Bright line is winning & CHSR continues to run out of money & fall behind schedule. They build stations based on politically motivated reasons rather than on what is financially sustainable.

Europe, my dear is smaller and much more dense than the US, for them HSR makes sense. For the US, flights make sense because of it's size, corridors are probably not a bad idea but a full HSR network is not.

The actual reason is because funding and deadlines would be a lot harder to make. Edit: it’s also because LA wants people to use its metrolink and other country rail systems. That makes it more profitable for LA. Clearly they’re still greedy whether it’s for rail or road transportation.

I live on nyc , the Acela most of the time doesn’t hit that speed. And there’s too much traffic on the north east corridor.

@@user-vj3qy3rg9p The Acela travels at 125+ mph for more than half of its route. This is exactly how about half of the HSR in Europe and about half of the Shinkansen lines work in Japan. Each system tends to have a few faster lines, but the bulk of the HSR lines worldwide are the Acela kind - upgraded express rail with 125-ish mph speeds. Only the scratch built new networks in Spain and China don't have more than half of their HSR networks consist of Acela-like HSR lines.

That’s why there’s an expansive bus and rail network across Los Angeles, i frequently take Metrolink to Disneyland.

Do you have a car to get around in when you fly?

@@mikevale3620 People who can afford to fly, aren't getting on a train with the rest of the peasants

@@renzog1237 Trains provide a higher quality of life than cars and planes. I live in LA without a car, not because I can't afford one but because they suck.

And get stuck in gridlock traffic… nah I prefer avoiding traffic.

how is that halfway rancho is like 45mins from la and rancho is another 3 and a half ours from Vegas. do u not know math?

@@sqxpn1433 brightline’s proposed timetables have the trip from rancho to Vegas at 1 hr and 50 minutes with stops in the High Desert, the entire trip from Vegas to LA Union Station can be completed in 3 hours with a 25 minute transfer at Rancho Cucamonga, 2 hours and 50 minutes with a 15 minutes transfer and, 2 hours and 35 minutes with a 10 minutes transfer. Brightline’s initial schedule will guarantee transfers between 10-15 minutes and when Brightline service is increased to half hourly, 10 minute transfers will be guaranteed for all trains and trips.

@@pinhead35 only days are you are stuck in traffic are Fridays and Sundays. That's why I do my Vegas trips not on those days and it's always a straight shot no traffic. Another option is at night, if you leave it night there is no traffic either.

US cities are just not designed for mass transit system. In other countries trains connect CBD of one city to CBD of another city with metro links between the CBD and the outer suburbs where people live. Also zoning for housing is done in such a manner that poorer people are always prioritised to have access to mass transit system as richer more affluent people can afford to have private vehicles and drive a bit further. In the USA, most cities do not even take into consideration how people will access mass transit system while doing City planning.

$28 Billion is cheap?????

You try so hard huh?

Have you SEEN what it is going to look like inside??? Crime is the plague of the poor and impoverished, you cant afford to LOOK at how much it costs to ride this thing.

@@meganwynn372 First class seats

@@meganwynn372 you’re a fake bot account.

This isn't a city subway system. Is there rampant crime on Amtrak? I think you know the answer.

They will pressure the workers.. Nothing new

Las Vegas is involved and it actually goes to a place people want to go.

Great points and it’s something I’ve been saying in other posts. Additionally, this will be Brightline’s first HSR project. Their Florida projects are similar but not the same.

With Caltrain and California high speed rail there was fierce opposition to the projects, brightline is facing zero opposition, Caltrain wiring took longer because it is also complicated to electrify an ACTIVE railroad. Brightline is constructing a new railroad from scratch and already has the necessary approvals to allow for completion in 2028. If the schedule goes over, brightline will be forced to pay hefty fines to Unions and Operators.

Plus the workers having to deal with the heat a lot of the year, they will probably have to work at night but it is still hot in the desert at night in the summer but at least they won't have the blazing sun on them.

Does that also factor in and include time spent at the airport prior to boarding?

Brightline is in direct competition with those flights since traffic getting TO lax adds 1-2 hours to your trip on top of airport security which adds 2 more hours. Brightline will consistently take 2 Hours and 40 minutes from Union Station to Las Vegas with a transfer to metrolink included in the time estimate.

@@pinhead35 Metrolink currently takes 74 minutes between LA and RC. Brightline West will take about two hours to reach Las Vegas. Add in say a 10-15 minute transfer at RC, and that's about a 3 1/2 hour trip. Probably still about on par with flying between downtown LA and the Strip, plus the train will be more consistent with its travel time than a plane might, and especially compared to driving I-15.

Cheaper yes, faster no. Airports take forever.

You can also take your belongings with you on the train if you don’t trust their checked baggage system, (which in Florida is really good and reliable), unlike airplanes, there is no carry on luggage limit.

This isn't mass transit. The LA metro is dirty and dangerous. The Mayor finally admitted that this week. People get stabbed every day on buses and trains

Many drive because it is the only true option.

somebody needs a hug

Enjoy having less traffic!

Has any placed stayed the same after 15 years ? Including yourself?

@@562LA2THEBAY lived there from 1996-2009

CAHSR only plans to have 55 miles of 220-250 mph high speed rail tunnels as part of a 500 mile long system.

California high speed rail ran out of money & fell behind schedule because you build stations for politically motivated reasons rather than based on what's finically sustainable. The real answer is because of the high taxation & the fact it's stupid to build something with a business model that hasn't been proven yet. That's how business works. You have to start small & then invest more when that business proves to be successful. This is why we only had three stations here in Miami where as you guys have nothing yet.

@@shechshire Brightline has a very good business model, CAHSR does not.

Do not count on CAHSR reaching SoCal anytime in a decent future timeframe (40 miles of tunnels). So the High Desert Corridor may end up being a "higher" speed type connection at best to hopefully an upgraded Metrolink Antelope Valley line.

It'll cost the same as a flight.

People in cars are 100x more likely to be injured than those riding Metro. I have no reservations letting my children ride the trains by themselves.

Plus, Brightline is going to be a little slower than what is internationally recognized as high speed rail.

@@mathieufaltys Oh wow even Brightline West?

Sounds like a conspiracy 😂😂😂😂😂

​@@supertec2023Sounds like BS.

wrong. the chinese y hindu's of India are buying up all new single family houses in Chino, Chino hills upland Cucamonga, Ontario Fontana. look at the assessor's map in San berdo county. it is an invasion by non-NATO countries. this DIMLINETRAIN is going to Apple Valley. THAT'S IT!! do you really think Dimlinebis going up and down the hill everyday? IMPOSSIBLE! remember parts flying off the Las Vegas Monorail?? same thing. it is a tourist trap. I love Las Vegas Strip ! STOP YUCCA MOUNTAIN!! no nuclear waste in Nevada...that's what Utah is for

FL has tickets for $50

@@Cyrus992 and sales during the holidays

Have fun holding your pee

​@@CancelRU-vid026 so you mean you would've peed inside the train once they build the high speed railway line?

$10 for a weekend pass. But as noted in the segment, Metrolink fare may be a moot point if a paid Brightline ticket can be used to board Metrolink for free.

The Amtrak up to Santa Barbra is regularly standing room only with the Ventura line carrying tens of thousands of passengers daily.

High speed electric multiple unit trains were invented way after the jet engine making high speed rail more futuristic than airplanes.

I heard about this older, but far more efficient way of transporting people long distance at a high capacity, its called a train.

Airplanes suck. Airports suck even worse.

The federal government is going to pay for a big part of it, so it is us taxpayers who are footing the bill. Don't worry, Brightline will keep all the profits.

lol you’re talking about the wrong system hun.

@@ZorroDaddy the one in this video is Brightline which travels from LA to Vegas, privately financed and organized, they have a service they started from scratch operating in Florida. The one from governor brown goes from LA to San Fransisco. Brightline’s project will be taking advantage of the progress California High Speed Rail has made with planning to get trains all the way to Los Angeles with a Private Public Partnership that will allow brightline trains to share tracks with California High Speed Rail, Brightline is also thinking about a service expansion between San Fransisco to Las Vegas using California’s project.

@@pinhead35 Thank you, saw that on TV reporter Investigative report, made me it clear that all are connected, gave names and all, I think report was around 2020, they mentioned "sharing tracks" and how Tax payer money been used.

Trains are way more efficient than planes and provide a much better quality of life.

@@mathieufaltys you living in da 50's? Sorry not true today.

@@danielsmith8773 I"m guessing you've never lived in a place with a robust train network. With trains you have no TSA, no ID checks and plenty of room to stretch out or walk around. Instead of the annoying engine noise you get a peaceful view of the landscape as it goes by. Travel with a group and party the whole way. No need to show up two hours early, just get there ten seconds before the door closes. Overall, planes just suck and airports suck even worse.

I'd welcome such if feasible however that's just not the case anymore. Red car etc in L.A. those were the days.