There is more talks about the HSR line and its connections. IMHO the joining of the new HSR line to connect with the LAX area has much merit. Several persons want the Bakersfield - LAX gap closed and others want to connect to Metrolink at Palmdale. Connections to SFO are more difficult because of the need to either build new track to connect with Caltrain at Gilroy or go further north and connect with the ACE line to San Jose or even bypass San Jose to the new Trans bay terminal being built in downtown SFO.
It may be that as the central valley HSR line is built and electrified maybe an interim loco such as a higher speed ALP-45DP. That would enable electric operation over Caltrain SFO to San Jose; diesel to central valley; electric to Bakersfield / Palmdale diesel to LAX Union station. These plans may enable critics of building first in central valley gain a better understanding. .
blue streak 1 There is more talks about the HSR line and its connections. IMHO the joining of the new HSR line to connect with the LAX area has much merit. Several persons want the Bakersfield - LAX gap closed and others want to connect to Metrolink at Palmdale. Connections to SFO are more difficult because of the need to either build new track to connect with Caltrain at Gilroy or go further north and connect with the ACE line to San Jose or even bypass San Jose to the new Trans bay terminal being built in downtown SFO. It may be that as the central valley HSR line is built and electrified maybe an interim loco such as a higher speed ALP-45DP. That would enable electric operation over Caltrain SFO to San Jose; diesel to central valley; electric to Bakersfield / Palmdale diesel to LAX Union station. These plans may enable critics of building first in central valley gain a better understanding. .
Is anybody even thinking about the interoperability issues? You can't just wave your hands and make the regs go away or get a waiver.
Also, you can change power in 5-10 minutes. Amtrak did it all the time at New Haven...HEP and all. Most likely better to run with a 8000 HP electric and a pair of 4000 HP diesels than a single, much less capable dual mode.
Even better yet, just build out the gaps and run all diesel with California cars at 110 mph, then sneak up on the rest.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
oltmannd Also, you can change power in 5-10 minutes. Amtrak did it all the time at New Haven...HEP and all. Most likely better to run with a 8000 HP electric and a pair of 4000 HP diesels than a single, much less capable dual mode. Even better yet, just build out the gaps and run all diesel with California cars at 110 mph, then sneak up on the rest.
Don, you have to watch yourself with all of those practical suggestions. Folks in the advocacy community may run out of things to worry about :-)
If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
Next stop: Malfunction Junction
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-bullet-legal-20120326,0,6325897.story
You just can't make this stuff up.
Now, that stuff is not made up, but it is not surprising. They have mandated themselves into a corner.
Maybe the problem is trying to build the HSR where the people are, what with the "green" Bay Area people saying "you are bringing HSR past my community over my dead body" and what not. Why not build the thing where the people ain't. That is, you build where there is open space and let people move next to the HSR train stations with new development rather than push this thing into city cores where people don't want it?
oltmannd Next stop: Malfunction Junction http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-bullet-legal-20120326,0,6325897.story You just can't make this stuff up.
If I were a California taxpayer, the morphing of the estimated cost of the project to $98.5 billion before a spade of dirt has been turned would be troublesome. Come to think of it, as a federal taxpayer, I will be helping to pay for the California HSR project. If I remember correctly, the initial costs estimates were in the neighborhood of $32 billion. Then they rose to $40 billion followed by $45 billion and so on and so forth. Sounds like they are on a cost escalator. Equally difficult to swallow is the argument that California HSR will be able to operate without subsidies. That may be true in an operational sense, but I would be greatly surprised if they will be able to cover their fully allocable costs.
In retrospect, it's a good thing we built the best part of this country, including railroads, before NIMBYs, greenies and the EPA acquired the power to stop everything in its tracks. Otherwise, they -- along with the rest of us -- would be living in sod houses and burning cow pies for fuel.
The plot so far...for those who missed Malfunction Junction, seasons one and two (available on Comcast On Demand...)
CA voters APPROVE a ballot initiative to build a HSR line from LA to SF. Has to go all the way. 12 trains an hour (12!!! really!!!). Has to be electrified.
If that's not bad enough, they have to build NEW track in urban areas. Can "mix" you know...
Then the price tag doubles. (of course....) and people poke holes in the ridership estimates. (you can't just multiply the number of seats x load factor x number of trains - but that's what they did!)
Then a dose of sanity sets in. Gotta "mix" in urban areas. (even the French do this - doesn't make sense NOT to. Costs too much and then there are the NIMBYs... Build the HSR line where land is cheap. Use what you got elsewhere.)
Still, nobody has thought through the "mixing" idea. Mixing means FRA compliant trains, like Acela. 150 mph with a good tailwind. Sucks down lots of juice moving it's beefy body down the track. Or 110 mph diesel hauled trains. This is supposed to be a 220 mph thing. And the FRA sez the first part goes on the flat in the Central Valley, not connected to anything. So the equipment choices are looking like a Venn diagram with no overlap...but that doesn't seem to worry anybody, yet.
This is a comic opera and the fat lady is warming up!
There is a better chance the FEC will be running 110 mph trains north from Miami before they even stick a shovel in the ground in California.
oltmannd The plot so far...for those who missed Malfunction Junction, seasons one and two (available on Comcast On Demand...) CA voters APPROVE a ballot initiative to build a HSR line from LA to SF. Has to go all the way. 12 trains an hour (12!!! really!!!). Has to be electrified. If that's not bad enough, they have to build NEW track in urban areas. Can "mix" you know... Then the price tag doubles. (of course....) and people poke holes in the ridership estimates. (you can't just multiply the number of seats x load factor x number of trains - but that's what they did!) Then a dose of sanity sets in. Gotta "mix" in urban areas. (even the French do this - doesn't make sense NOT to. Costs too much and then there are the NIMBYs... Build the HSR line where land is cheap. Use what you got elsewhere.) Still, nobody has thought through the "mixing" idea. Mixing means FRA compliant trains, like Acela. 150 mph with a good tailwind. Sucks down lots of juice moving it's beefy body down the track. Or 110 mph diesel hauled trains. This is supposed to be a 220 mph thing. And the FRA sez the first part goes on the flat in the Central Valley, not connected to anything. So the equipment choices are looking like a Venn diagram with no overlap...but that doesn't seem to worry anybody, yet. This is a comic opera and the fat lady is warming up! There is a better chance the FEC will be running 110 mph trains north from Miami before they even stick a shovel in the ground in California.
This is one of the best responses that I have read since becoming a Trains forum participant.
Where the beefy Acela gobbles up electric power is in braking and then reaccelerating to attempt a rapid schedule among many speed restrictions. Regen braking only recovers part of the lost energy in slowing down and then speeding up again. Otherwise I don't see weight as being a big issue in power consumption as aerodynamics dominates at high speed. But with all of those thingies sticking up on the roof, don't know how optimal the Acela is from an aerodynamics standpoint.
Where weight is a concern in HSR is longevity and maintenance of the track. Weight, and especially axle weight of "nose suspended" traction motors is a concern, even for 110 MPH operation. The British are said to have studied this and concluded that the common type of traction motor setup in just about every Diesel locomotive in the U.S. pounds the ballast and subgrade to dust. For HSR, you want some kind of shaft drive as in the PCC streetcar (and the Shinkansen, essentially a big, fat PCC car) or "quill drive" (gear drive to a hollow "quill" shaft around the axle, that floats around the axle and supplies torque through cups and springs on the old GG-1, through a flexible linkage on modern European locomotive). Is this even on the Amtrak radar screen for their next Diesel order if they want the fleet to be 125 MPH capable, or is long-term damage to the track "in someone else's budget"?
And this business of 220 MPH is something I have wondered about. It is as if someone picked a number on the upper range of where countries with lots of experience operating HSR are headed and said, "I'll have what she's having!" And their Web site trip calculator seems to assume that 220 MPH is maintained throughout the system, without having to slow down, stop at intermediate stations, and speed up again, and without having any speed restrictions in urban areas. To go from 40 MPH (average schedule of the Pacific Surfliner taking into account intermediate stops) to 220 MPH end-to-end seems like a big leap. And even China is backing off running their HSR full bore until they sort out the maintenance expense.
Paul,
I'd like to see the Pacific Surfliner get up to 60 MPH average between LA and SD - though #599 takes 56 minutes to travel the 57 miles from Solana Beach to Irvine, which includes the time for the stop in Oceanside. 110 MPH running with serious attention paid to slow spots (e.g. between Rose Canyon and Sorrento Valley) would do wonders for increasing ridership. I would imagine that improving the speed on the Capitol Corridor would also generate a healthy increase in ridership.Both of those corridors also handle a fair amount of freight, so the track will beat up enough to preclude running faster than 110 MPH.
220 MPH is unrealistic at this time. I wouldn't object to requiring the lines to be upgradeable to 220 MPH, but 150 MPH trains could get the LA - SF time down to 4 hours. This doesn't directly compete with air times between those cities, where the traveler arranged his/her schedule around the flight times. OTOH, 4 trains an hour each way with a load factor that allows hopping on he train without a reservation, may actually save time for many business travelers compared to air travel.
One other thought: The LA - Las Vegas HSR proposal would make a lot more sense if it started in the LA basin - seems to me that the two entities could combine forces for the portion of the line from the high desert (Palmdale/Victorville) to the LA basin. I don't see either the Las Vegas or California HSR being built in my lifetime.
- Erik
Paul Milenkovic For HSR, you want some kind of shaft drive as in the PCC streetcar (and the Shinkansen, essentially a big, fat PCC car) or "quill drive" (gear drive to a hollow "quill" shaft around the axle, that floats around the axle and supplies torque through cups and springs on the old GG-1, through a flexible linkage on modern European locomotive). Is this even on the Amtrak radar screen for their next Diesel order if they want the fleet to be 125 MPH capable, or is long-term damage to the track "in someone else's budget"?
For HSR, you want some kind of shaft drive as in the PCC streetcar (and the Shinkansen, essentially a big, fat PCC car) or "quill drive" (gear drive to a hollow "quill" shaft around the axle, that floats around the axle and supplies torque through cups and springs on the old GG-1, through a flexible linkage on modern European locomotive). Is this even on the Amtrak radar screen for their next Diesel order if they want the fleet to be 125 MPH capable, or is long-term damage to the track "in someone else's budget"?
I think it looks more like a fixed cost to Amtrak. They have a deal with the host road and they pay by the train, typically. If they decide on more complicated equipment, it costs them right now, but they won't have a chance to recover any costs until the next time the operating contract comes due. I suppose they could renegotiate with the host RR, but it would it would be a big pain to get everyone to understand and figure out a new rate. It would also change the way the RRs look at equipment. It is either "OK' or "not OK". There's not much attention paid to "better" or "worse".
erikem One other thought: The LA - Las Vegas HSR proposal would make a lot more sense if it started in the LA basin - seems to me that the two entities could combine forces for the portion of the line from the high desert (Palmdale/Victorville) to the LA basin. - Erik
One other thought: The LA - Las Vegas HSR proposal would make a lot more sense if it started in the LA basin - seems to me that the two entities could combine forces for the portion of the line from the high desert (Palmdale/Victorville) to the LA basin.
This is exactly what I was thinking and is what I suspect the Victorville-Vegas people were thinking.
Anyway, according to this
http://www.railwaygazette.com/index.php?id=44&no_cache=1&tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=15058&cHash=cb638f164a04f96685ebdc680570078e
They've set aside 2 billion to upgrade CalTrain and the SoCal corridor to electric. This makes some sense for CalTrain which already runs high speed express service on the line and is 90% commuter. The question, as was pointed out above is where to tap into the system. Which of course has been a fight since the beginning.
The SoCal Corridor is a bit more murky to me. The original SP line through Antelope valley, as far as I know, sees very light freight usage. On the other hand, unlike the NEC, this is a single track line and I don't see how a portion of $2billion can fix that. And getting from LA Union to Anaheim Electrified is a mystery to me. I'm sure BNSF would like to have the Transcon be electrified, but is there really capacity on that line, even electrified? I can't imagine there is.
So what I'm saying I guess is, I see how this solves the problems on the North end (the wording of the bond measure not withstanding) I don't see how they make SoCal work.
Also, if it were me, I would spend the 2 Billion on CalTrain and SoCal first...or at least at the same time as the valley line gets built. I suspect there are operational advantages to this being electrified even without the project being completed and it would be tangible work for people to see. It probably doesn't justify it's costs without the rest of the network, but again, there's probably public perception and good will out the proverbial ying-yang to doing it.
Also, on the Pacific Surfliner, when I was living in Carlsbad, I found that the Pacific Surfliner came very close to being a wash with driving when going from Oceanside to Anaheim (Disneyland) on a weekend afternoon. The main time difference was the bus ride from either Angels stadium or Fullerton Station to the parks. Going home after 10PM of course there was no comparison, because as everyone knows, at that time of night, the OC freeways are approved for 110MPH running already. Or at least that is what observation tells me. :D
South of Solana Beach was a bear, and when combined with the G-d awful transit options in SD (to get from Santa Fe Station to your number 1 SD tourist destination (SD Zoo) you must first walk 5 blocks then board a city bus.) made taking the trip into SD untenable except on the worst of Del MAr Fair days.
I would love to see 110 MPH on the LOSSAN portion of the Pacific Surfliner route - though having an Amtrak train blasting through a Coaster or Metrolink station sounds like good lawsuit fodder. This particularly of interest as I am supposed to start commuting by train from Solana Beach to Irvine/Santa Ana in a couple of months or so. I'll be lucky if any significant speedup (i.e. more than 5 minutes) occurs before I retire. The train isn't likely to save trip time over driving but would allow me to get some work done on the way up and back (and probably a lot less annoying).
The climb up Miramar Hill really slows things down heading to SD. I would imagine tunneling between Sorrento and Rose Canyon would cost a major fraction of a billion, but would probably generate more rail passenger miles per dollar spent than HSR over the Tehachapis. Taking the Coaster to downtown from Cardiff is probably a bit slower than by car, but I don't have to worry about parking (e.g. jury duty). Raising track speed and digging the tunnel would make the Coaster very competitive.
Getting to the Zoo or museums by Coaster and public transit is not convenient, though my older son and I had a good time doing that for his twelfth birthday.
P.S. The most likely way that I see HSR taking off is if the contrail problem from airliners becomes a major climate change concern. At high altitudes, the contrails tend to trap more heat than they reflect.
I did it a couple times, it can be fun. It's also fun to take the round about train/trolly trip to Reeds Hobby shop.
But it still sucks.
I would think that the low hanging fruit of getting the Camp Pendelton portion up to 110 might happen. And that would cut off a few minutes. San Clemente is the worst part of that section as I recall.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.