tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post7261005363611289554..comments2024-03-29T08:13:30.010-07:00Comments on Caltrain HSR Compatibility Blog: Metrolink Scorns ElectrificationClemhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01374282217135682245noreply@blogger.comBlogger36125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-72037944154727140252014-12-16T23:02:20.937-08:002014-12-16T23:02:20.937-08:00Thanks for the breaking info and reality adjustmen...Thanks for the breaking info and reality adjustment, Paul. Much appreciated.<br /><br />That aside, my point was that attempting to colour outside the HSR lines (whether they run straight and past Magic Mountain or take a nonsensical Magical Mystery Tour) in any initial phase, ie to take on electrifying freight or shared tracks, seems institutionally doomed. Rather, piggyback a mere handful of platforms and a mere handful of trains on the new stuff on one limited corridor, and then later maybe figure out what, if anything, to do with the rest of LA Basin Olde Tyme Commuter Rail. Get non-"FRA" Burbank—LAUS running before evening mentioning San Bernadino.<br /><br />Not that anything matters, because as we see with PBQD=CHSRA, Transbay and Caltrain, America's Finest Transprotation Planning Professionals will <b>always</b>, without fail, without exception, choose to do exactly the most wrong <i>and</i> most expensive <i>and</i> most inutile thing, and choose so with no extenuating circumstances. Just check out the "Corridor To Do List" at the top of the right-hand column of this blog. Shit from gold alchemy.Richard Mlynarikhttp://www.pobox.com/users/mly/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-89682336286765419842014-12-16T19:14:47.101-08:002014-12-16T19:14:47.101-08:00I'm not in charge Richard, just trying to make...I'm not in charge Richard, just trying to make something edible of what others are serving up.Paul Dysonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-80472922101768640182014-12-16T19:10:38.103-08:002014-12-16T19:10:38.103-08:00Lines on the HSR maps change frequently. I believ...Lines on the HSR maps change frequently. I believe that 4 tracks, 2 freight and 2 passenger would work, with a freight drill track added in some locations. This would assume electrified Metrolink and probably less frequent Surfliners. HS trains would run at 125 max. Let's face it, in HSR terms LAUS to Anaheim is an appendage, a branch line. Let's hope that in fact it goes at least to Irvine. The main line will go to San Diego. <br />Of course the development of Alameda Corridor East as an open access freight line would help but that is at least as far out there as HSR.Paul Dysonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-78311282053593997402014-12-16T12:56:32.717-08:002014-12-16T12:56:32.717-08:00Redondo Jc to Fullerton should be quad tracked, wh...<em>Redondo Jc to Fullerton should be quad tracked, which the former chief of Division of Rail agreed should have been done instead of the current triple track project.</em><br /><br />Last plans I saw HSR was a separate parellel double track line between Redondo Jc and Fullerton, has this been superseded? It would seem that triple track would be good enough in that case, especially if some metrolink and amtrak traffic were diverted to HSR. I have my doubts that even with quad tracking HSR would ever be practical on this line - there are over 70 freights per day, and a number of regular cross plant moves where trains have to cross the entire line.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10570027785365903956noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-67465610384631796152014-12-16T11:29:21.253-08:002014-12-16T11:29:21.253-08:00Paul, Magic Mountain stop/turnback assumes, as any...Paul, Magic Mountain stop/turnback assumes, <a href="http://www.cahsrblog.com/2013/06/the-truth-about-tejon/" rel="nofollow">as any <i>remotely</i> rational plan assumes, Tejon</a> and dedicated non-"FRA" ("FRA" in the colloquial sense of dino-trains) passenger tracks LAUS—Burbank—Santa Clarita—(possible future Hwy 138 eastward junction)—Bakersfield.<br /><br />Nothing I outlined involved any track sharing, let alone tunnel sharing, with freight RRs or with FRA-style freight-style Metrolink.Richard Mlynarikhttp://www.pobox.com/users/mly/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-77849684933168488052014-12-14T12:48:52.202-08:002014-12-14T12:48:52.202-08:00Excellent article, and good of you to raise awaren...Excellent article, and good of you to raise awareness of the compatibility issue!Clemhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01374282217135682245noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-24621510696978995712014-12-14T10:07:04.023-08:002014-12-14T10:07:04.023-08:00Of interest:
http://www.latimes.com/local/politics...Of interest:<br />http://www.latimes.com/local/politics/la-me-adv-bullet-metrolink-20141214-story.html#page=1Paul Dysonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-54004989982521811592014-12-14T10:01:14.889-08:002014-12-14T10:01:14.889-08:00Agreed Joey except that current plans call for 6 t...Agreed Joey except that current plans call for 6 tracks at Burbank Station in a 100ft RoW.Paul Dysonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-63037123859310002472014-12-13T21:51:43.044-08:002014-12-13T21:51:43.044-08:00No, but it hardly matters. The part of the Palmda...No, but it hardly matters. The part of the Palmdale-LA Metrolink route that is useful for HSR (Sylmar-LA), is wide enough for more tracks anyway.Joeyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16406340564037825796noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-7473326136779082352014-12-13T20:46:32.234-08:002014-12-13T20:46:32.234-08:00UP got a non-binding memorandum of understanding, ...UP got a non-binding memorandum of understanding, not a binding guarantee.Alonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17267294744186811858noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-42352240143238892412014-12-13T18:44:42.705-08:002014-12-13T18:44:42.705-08:00What difference does it make? The tunnel is usele...What difference does it make? The tunnel is useless for HSR under any scenario.Joeyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16406340564037825796noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-58223678735623841042014-12-13T16:46:09.270-08:002014-12-13T16:46:09.270-08:00We'll see whether the SCRRA uses the appointme...We'll see whether the SCRRA uses the appointment of a new CEO as an opportunity or if it's business as usual.Paul Dysonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-76898251818498710292014-12-13T16:44:57.581-08:002014-12-13T16:44:57.581-08:00Quite so but the HSR alignment from Palmdale provi...Quite so but the HSR alignment from Palmdale provides a bypass and leaves the tunnel for UP to enjoy (and maybe a residual stub end Metrolink to Princessa).Paul Dysonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-59844655306853232382014-12-13T14:25:52.381-08:002014-12-13T14:25:52.381-08:00Yes, Sylmar. But that tunnel is useless for HSR i...Yes, Sylmar. But that tunnel is useless for HSR in either case.Joeyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16406340564037825796noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-7586533072382566162014-12-13T12:22:19.855-08:002014-12-13T12:22:19.855-08:00Fillmore? I think you mean Sylmar. My original p...Fillmore? I think you mean Sylmar. My original proposal is predicated on the current HSR route via Palmdale. I don't see that changing, and I'm not judging whether that's good or bad, just playing the hand I'm dealt.Paul Dysonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-4171285415314632032014-12-12T23:42:57.995-08:002014-12-12T23:42:57.995-08:00Richard, the Magic Mountain idea runs into the sna...<i>Richard, the Magic Mountain idea runs into the snag of the limited clearance San Fernando Tunnel which is shared with UP double stack freights (to/from PNW).</i><br /><br />A new tunnel would have to be built between Valencia and Fillmore. HSR would ideally follow I-5 anyway, so the old tunnel wouldn't be suitable. Also, UP has obtained an agreement guaranteeing at least one non-HSR, non-electrified track between Palmdale and LA, but most of the San Fernando Valley ROW is wide enough that it hardly matters.Joeyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16406340564037825796noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-84887776320251161012014-12-12T13:28:15.357-08:002014-12-12T13:28:15.357-08:00Richard, the Magic Mountain idea runs into the sna...Richard, the Magic Mountain idea runs into the snag of the limited clearance San Fernando Tunnel which is shared with UP double stack freights (to/from PNW).. These could be diverted via Cajon and the Palmdale cutoff but UP would probably demand half a billion to do so and of course the agencies would cave. In addition the AV hosts a local freight as far as Princessa and an occasional block of empty grain hoppers.<br />Redondo Jc to Fullerton should be quad tracked, which the former chief of Division of Rail agreed should have been done instead of the current triple track project.Paul Dysonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-5109409006544359282014-12-12T13:12:34.460-08:002014-12-12T13:12:34.460-08:00A slight correction to arcady, UP owns 60ft on the...A slight correction to arcady, UP owns 60ft on the north side of the Coast line from Burbank Jc to Moorpark, LACMTA/VCTC the 40ft on the south side. Of course UP retains freight trackage rights on the Coast, the AV and the East Bank, which makes them think they still own the whole thing of course.Paul Dysonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-30949958004677904862014-12-11T16:27:26.152-08:002014-12-11T16:27:26.152-08:00Metrolink (well, really its member agencies) own t...Metrolink (well, really its member agencies) own the entire Antelope Valley Line, and Fullerton/Anaheim Canyon to the SD County line (south of which it's NCTD, also a passenger agency), as well as the East Bank and West Bank lines along the LA River, Union Station, and the San Bernardino Line as well as the Coast Line south/east of Moorpark. The problem is that a key part of the line, from Redondo Junction to Fullerton, is owned by BNSF, is part of their transcontinental line to the Port of LA, and has dozens of freight trains per day. South of Fullerton toward San Diego, there are rather fewer freights (I've heard something like 10 per day), but they're pretty big and it's currently San Diego's only functional freight rail connection, and the only one that goes through US territory.crzwdjkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06394805356595604336noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-85561112431305648452014-12-09T13:58:26.771-08:002014-12-09T13:58:26.771-08:00Paul, I know nothing about LA Basin rail beyond ca...Paul, I know nothing about LA Basin rail beyond casual tourism, so any actual facts you can provide would be wonderful to hear.<br /><br />At one stage I at least had an OK conception of ROW ownership in the relevant corridors (Santa Clarita—Burbank; Burbank—LAUS; LAUS—Santa Fe Springs; Santa Fe Springs—Fullerton; Fullterton—Anaheim; Anaheim—Orange; Orange—San Clemente; San Clemente—Oceanside) but that's evaporated.<br /><br />I do know how many passenger trains are scheduled today (by looking at Metrolink and Amtrak(shudder) public timetables), but freight (real freight, not hypothetical negotiation tactic freight) is a also mysterious.<br /><br />I guess the first impression I have is that selling anything as a "regional trunk line" is going to be of no interest to an agency that isn't interested in any of those words!<br /><br />My second is that "colouring outside the lines" of the CHSRA project sounds doomed to failure given a totally disinterested Commuter Railroad agency. To me it seems like even talking about anything beyond Anaheim (well I throw in an extra 3km to Electrolink/Metrolink transfer at Orange) seems doomed, except as a long-term mumbled aside. As godawful as CHRA=PBQD are, it seems that adding a few commuter trains a c couple extra platform faces to a standalone "HSR" line is infinitely easier than dealing with wiring Metroilnk and/or freight tracks and sinking into the morass of HSR/FRA mixed traffic and extended networks and compatibility and conversion.<br /><br />(The Secret Agenda, of course, being that it isn't much of a technical or even fiscal stretch to eventually do some wiring south of Orange later, but shhhhhh.)<br /><br />So as A Project — which is all that the involved, non public-responsive, earmark-obsessed parties care about — I can do toss out a few geographically and politically ignorant ideas:<br /><br />* As part of building non-FRA [which nit-pickers may note I am using as "non-freight-signalled, non-freight regulated, non-freight vehicles, almost certainly non-existing-Metroilnk-vehicles", freight-segregated tracks with very limited and controlled track connections] HSR from Santa Clarita/Magic Mountain (TEJON!) to LAUS, throw in a couple extra platform faces at all the existing Metrolink station locations for joint Electrolink/HSR <i>maybe</i> throw in some sort of Metrolink/Electrolink transfer in Burbank.<br /><br />* With a route length of ~50km, a tiny handful of stops, and ~150kmh design speeds, 60 minute Eletrolink turns would be far from ambitious, meaning a grand total of ten Electrolink trains (including spares and maintenance) would suffice to operate at 15 minute headways around HSR. The "maintenance facility" for such a minute and brand-new and <i>non-US-designed</i> fleet could be little more than a shed and a couple of tracks for several years.<br /><br />* As part of building non-FRA LAUS—Anaheim, throw in a couple extra platform faces at all the existing intermediate Metrolink station locations for joint Electrolink/HSR use.<br /><br />* LAUS Run Through Tracks are Electrolink/HSR Run Through Tracks. LAUS "HSR station" (underground, off-site, in the latest insane concept plans I've seen) are two island platforms and four Electrolink/HSR joint use platform faces at LAUS. This of course is The Big Problem, having an unacceptable <b>negative</b> cost of many billion dollars.<br /><br />* Build non-FRA Anaheim—Orange, with some sort of Metrolink/Electrolink transfer (and a Cunning Plan that Electrolink trains might, one day, continue to Points South.)<br /><br />* Buy another handful of Electrolink trains, and it might be time to consider a modest-sized Electrolink Maintenance Facility, mostly sharing the site that CHSRA has its eyes on near Anaheim.<br /><br />Richard Mlynarikhttp://www.pobox.com/users/mly/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-30548997394185824412014-12-07T15:07:53.362-08:002014-12-07T15:07:53.362-08:00Oh look. Pavlov! Ding ding ding!Oh look. Pavlov! Ding ding ding!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-68399868945572653532014-12-06T23:25:36.046-08:002014-12-06T23:25:36.046-08:00It's just awful the way New Jerseyans have all...It's just awful the way New Jerseyans have all those electric trains that go into Manhattan and the way Pennsylvanians have trains that go all the way into Philadelphia and have had them for over a century. With level boarding. It's just awful the way Denver decided that it wasn't worth the effort to figure out which of the gazillion different kinds of trains used in Europe they would go with and instead picked something that won't have any regulatory problems and will be off the shelf for as long as there are trains. Just awful. Adirondacker12800https://www.blogger.com/profile/17108712932656586797noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-52390717038633580412014-12-06T16:49:19.178-08:002014-12-06T16:49:19.178-08:00Richard M: even at this late hour I am trying to a...Richard M: even at this late hour I am trying to accomplish more or less what you advocate, i.e. the "core" N L.A. County to South Orange County HSR/Electrified regional rail trunk line. As you see from the correspondence the idea is not on SCRRA's radar at all, which perhaps makes it easier than if they had a "modernization" plan that was as bad as Caltrain's. What else do I have to do with my time?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-36891577547822927272014-12-05T23:46:52.875-08:002014-12-05T23:46:52.875-08:00Especially since Denver's system isn't goi...Especially since Denver's system isn't going anywhere any other passenger systems with a preexisting platform height, with the exception of Amtrak LD trains, which barely count anyway and are also low-floor.<br /><br />The FRA thing IIRC was to appease UPRR - definitely not good decision making but probably not inherently malevolent. I'm sure they could have won if they staged a fight with UP over the issue. At the very least FRA compliance can be changed in future train orders, whereas the high platforms are probably baked in for the next century...Joeyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16406340564037825796noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-84995040662807273282014-12-05T22:12:26.050-08:002014-12-05T22:12:26.050-08:00into UIC/HSR/ETCS/low-floor-level-boarding/25kVAC ...<i>into UIC/HSR/ETCS/low-floor-level-boarding/25kVAC land</i><br /><br />And a utopia that must be! Here in California, HSR land = FRA land.<br /><br />It's not about good or bad technical decisions: it's all about a Transportation Industrial Complex that is inescapable, a logical byproduct of our system of government and our societal values (the things we value and especially those we do not). It's an entrenched system where stakeholders such as the taxpaying public and the transit riding public are not at the top of the totem pole as they would be in Switzerland or Germany or France or Spain or Japan. "Negative" cost is negative indeed to the stakeholders whose interests are being served here.Clemhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01374282217135682245noreply@blogger.com