The suburban sprawl created by India’s economic growth has resulted in what may be the world’s most dangerous rail commute. According to Mumbai police: 3,404 people, or about 13 each weekday, were killed in 2006.

“According to the authority’s 2005 estimates, a high-speed trip to LA from San Francisco would set you back $56 — twice as high as the 1999 estimates, but still about a quarter of what an economy TGV ticket costs.”

The Rail Europe site is a site that caters to (i.e., overcharges) gullible US tourists. Using it for a TGV fare reference is like assuming that SF cable car commuters pay the $5/ride tourist fare. Of course we don’t – we pay about $1/ride using the Fast Pass.

I can price out roundtrip itineraries from Paris to Marseilles for as low as 66 Euro on the SNCF website, and that is without even using a rail discount card (which many Europeans have). Using current nominal exchange rates, that is about $88 for a roundtrip, but that is mainly because the US dollar happens to be so weak right now. A more realistic exchange rate, given that domestic rail travel is a non-tradable good, would be the purchasing power parity exchange rate, which would put the price at around $69. Still more than $56, but it’s nowhere near 4 times as much.

Of course, this being the US, I expect we might build (and possibly run) the system in a less efficient manner than the French. On the other hand, it wouldn’t be burdened with the need to cross-subsidize the rest of the system (TGV profits are expected to help make up for losses on SNCF regional/commuter trains), because it would be a totally separate entity from Amtrak.

All this is beside the point. You were complaining about being caught in the traffic in a bus, and hinting that a LRV would alleviate that. It is not the LRV that would speed it up, it is the dedicated right of way.

You can be arrested for walking on most roads. You have to use a parallel right of way instead, usually a sidewalk. There are many rail rights of way that have parallel rights of way for cars, pedestrians, bicycles, etc. There are a number of BART rights of way that have them, such as in Albany and El Cerrito.

Streetcar lines that survived did so only because they had at least some dedicated rights of way. This included all of the Key System lines that made it past the end of the depreciation cycle in the late 1940′s, and all of the San Francisco lines, with the possible exception of the new T line.

Transbay bus lines operate on rights of way dedicated to buses (and occasionally carpool vehicles) even now. It increases their speed by bypassing the toll plaza.

But all this is beside the point. Speed comes when there is a right of way that reduces traffic impediments. My point was that it is not necessary for the vehicle to run on rails, and there are significant advantages to using more flexible vehicles, usually buses, that can use the dedicated right of way for speed, and other roads for versatility. Just like cars using freeways as well as streets.

My argument:
If you walk down any train ROW, you will be arrested.
If you bicycle down any train ROW, you will be arrested.
It’s OK bike and walk along any road/highway ROW,
as long as it’s not considered “limited access”.
Transit buses use the same highways my car does.
Light rail tracks (Muni, VTA, wherever) are used by no
other person, agency, or transit provider than the one
and only. BART track are used only
by BART. Heavy rail tracks other than Caltrain are all privately owned,
by my understanding. Caltrain tracks are only used by Caltrain. The few
instances of more than one user (of say the Union Pacific
tracks by Amtrak or ACE) involves heavy negotiations, payment
of fees, and fixed schedules.

G