It’s not necessarily the worst idea ever to launch a Bakersfield to Fresno high speed line and to have your train traverse the Bay Area and LA corridors at a lower speed until work on those are complete.
But my understanding is that they were feting a plan which left passengers with a 20 mile bus bridge to Bakersfield, and that’s just deranged
There is no existing rail corridor acceptable for passenger travel between Bakersfield and Lancaster/Palmdale (let alone to LA). There is one rail line that traverses the Tehachapi pass (famous for the Tehachapi loop https://www.railfanguides.us/ca/tehachapi/index.htm) however that corridor is not fit for passenger service barring major and expensive upgrades.
Personally if it were up to me I would have started the CAHSR between Bakersfield and LA simply because of the lack of any current rail connection. However this is by far the most expensive portion of the phase 1 plan, and given the lack of funding it is no surprise they started with the cheapest portion.
The risk of starting it in Fresno is that if you don't finish (which I think is likely), you are left with something of very little value srving few people with low need for rail.
If you start in SF or LA, you at least have a fast train serving an area with terrible traffic and a population of millions.
California’s bullet train delays have basically nothing to do with fundamental challenges like seismic engineering, and everything to do with planning permission issues / NIMBYs and California specific regulations on one hand, and with bad management on the other.
Earthquakes have little to do with it. They are simply an excuse for horrible policy. Go explain to Japan why earthquakes should prevent them from building effective infrastructure.
Funny enough, the same company that built the high speed rail in Florida is now going to build a high speed rail line from Southern California to Las Vegas. It appears that this project will start construction soon.
