upvote
Seattle just got done building light rail tracks over a floating bridge.

It is an insane engineering achievement. A train literally running on tracks on a road that is floating on water!

reply
Fair. Maybe I'm too much if the weeds of this because all I can think of is how much of a fight it was to pass ST2 and ST3 and how we haven't even started on the Ballard line despite voting for it in 2016 (10 years ago!) and how it might be delayed forever.
reply
I get that it is neat but it's hardly the Hoover dam is it?
reply
It's not exactly brain surgery, is it?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THNPmhBl-8I

reply
No, it's significantly more complex.
reply
No, it's not an insane engineering achievement. It's just a normal one, because nobody else has floating bridges, nobody else needed it. It's also years late and costs 10x more than it should.

It's also the wrong stupid technology. The trains are constrained on space because of the low-floor bullshit. It's the longest light rail in the country, it's too fucking long and slow. Even if we fully built out ST3 it can't handle more than ~20% of commuters. It can't be expanded with express tracks because it's built deep underground, so the commute is so much slower than the equivalent in other countries and will NEVER compete with the automobile except during peak rush hour. The northern stations are next to the freeway so over half the land that could be transit-oriented development can't be, and then what's left is devoted to parking anyway. Complete, total waste of a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, built and planned by people who don't and won't ever use transit.

That 10x cost directly makes it so we can't build out our system properly and we keep building out car infrastructure because people would rather have a car and save 2 hours a day commuting.

reply
> No, it's not an insane engineering achievement. It's just a normal one, because nobody else has floating bridges, nobody else needed it. It's also years late and costs 10x more than it should.

Your other points aside -

Doing something no one else has ever done is the definition of an engineering achievement.

There isn't a set of best practices. There aren't a bunch of off the shelf parts, there aren't any contractors who can help you out because they've done it a dozen times before. It is an original engineering challenge.

Pulling it off is by definition an achievement.

That said, 100% agree about the station placement. Heck the stations that are well placed were poorly designed, they should be profitable by including commercial real estate and residences, with the revenue from both going to Sound Transit to pay for the system.

But no, we didn't do that and I can't even get a cup of coffee, in Seattle, at our light rail stations.

reply
I don't think you're wrong. Every time someone says we can't do high speed rail it makes me very sad. And as far as Seattle goes... my commute is substantially affected by the I-5 closures. It's somewhat shocking to me that we allow infrastructure to decay as much as we do.

I'd be happy about the light rail expansion if they weren't talking about delaying the Ballard line indefinitely. :(

reply
The commute is slow because the light rail is slow. It's the wrong technology for commuter rail and there are too many stops. (I'm assuming you live north).

(more details: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47457884)

reply
Can't do highspeed rail because it's too impractical and expensive, while we're spending a west coast highspeed rail network worth of money on the least popular war in US history.
reply
California is spending the money and what they're building is useless (oh big passenger demand from Merced to Bakersfield, fuck right off with that) and costs 10x what China, France, Japan, etc pay.
reply
Evidently tax cuts for the wealthy are more important than infrastructure.
reply
deleted
reply
Those projects would literally be impossible today with the environmental regulations in place, especially in California.
reply
If you watch the OP, you'll see that the construction of this aqueduct caused billions of dollars worth of environmental devastation. Rail all you want against regulations, but when an argument boils down to "I wish we didn't have to internalize all these costs and could just push them off on someone else", I'm not especially sympathetic.
reply
LA has paid billions to remediate, but the actual cost is incalculable. Not sure who is "railing against regulations" but there are obviously downsides to heavy environmental regulations. Debatable if CA is striking the right balance.
reply
Certainly that’s part of it, but also just NIMBYism. Los Angeles were able to defeat the Owen’s Valley farmers back then, I don’t think they would be now.
reply
We're literally right now building a huge high speed rail project that is planned to link san diego to san francisco through LA, bakersfield and fresno. Progress is made on it daily. https://www.youtube.com/CAHighSpeedRail
reply
That may be true for some twisted definition of "building". Most people would say the money is simply being wasted by bureaucrats, consultancies, etc.
reply
And when did that project start and how much has it cost and how far can you ride on what they've completed up until now?
reply
Progress is made on it daily? Great. How soon can I ride it?
reply
Caltrain, from SF to SJ, is part of the California high speed rail system, and you can ride it right now. It's now electrified at 25KV, welded rail, concrete ties, and compatible with high speed rail. The Stadler trains are capable of 125MPH but are run slower because there are so many stations.
reply
It’s too complicated to corruptly make money off of a large project like that. It’s much easier to just buy a bunch of drugs and needles and give it to the methheads, or spend money on homeless while building zero homes.
reply