tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post7941469006033810143..comments2024-03-17T12:42:36.234-07:00Comments on Caltrain HSR Compatibility Blog: Freight on the PeninsulaClemhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01374282217135682245noreply@blogger.comBlogger101125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-32754517043477011362012-09-27T02:54:55.811-07:002012-09-27T02:54:55.811-07:00you self proclaimed experts, have way too much tim...you self proclaimed experts, have way too much time on your hands, let the<br />real railroasd people get on with their business, and quit second guessingAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-18294368801434833252009-08-08T09:14:57.457-07:002009-08-08T09:14:57.457-07:00The CHSRA is a runaway mismanaged politcal money t...The CHSRA is a runaway mismanaged politcal money train. It is a needed system, but has been designed as a gold plated contract generation machine. it is ubelievably poorly managed, with no public accountability or real oversight. Until this is resolved, it will be difficult to work out any real solutions and build anything that will not be a boondoggle.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-76245632457788111702009-07-15T02:52:40.374-07:002009-07-15T02:52:40.374-07:00Hah! Found the best legal way to get UPRR to shut...Hah! Found the best legal way to get UPRR to shut up about their supposed passenger rights. <br /><br />1.15 in the UPRR trackage rights agreement. "Intercity passenger rail" for the purposes of the agreement only includes transport provided by (a) NRPC (Amtrak), or (b) a company contracted with UPRR to provide such transport.<br /><br />In other words, if Caltrain contracts with the High Speed Rail Authority, it isn't intercity passenger rail for the purposes of the agreement and UPRR has no exclusive rights over it.neroden@gmailhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07475686367097445497noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-55223556945694221462009-04-03T18:32:00.000-07:002009-04-03T18:32:00.000-07:00Is it in everyone's best interest to wipe the frie...Is it in everyone's best interest to wipe the frieght off the peninsula and onto the road? Is it in everyone's best interest to cut off the Port of San Francisco and the Port of Redwood City from rail service?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-74554539282637725342009-04-02T14:00:00.000-07:002009-04-02T14:00:00.000-07:00This is a very interesting agreement.I suspect cer...This is a very interesting agreement.<BR/><BR/>I suspect certain portions of it are illegal and unenforceable. UPRR does not have the right to prohibit Intercity Passenger Rail (2.7c) since it joined Amtrak, and even if it did it would be subject to eminent domain (for acting against the public interest to suppress intercity rail traffic on tracks it doesn't even own).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-35826964298640174052009-03-30T19:08:00.000-07:002009-03-30T19:08:00.000-07:00"If ridership [at 22nd St] increases from the 450 ..."If ridership [at 22nd St] increases from the 450 or so to 1500 roundtrips..."<BR/><BR/>He said 900 boardings per day, which presumably means about 900 roundtrips.Timnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-24758023280398724162009-03-27T17:34:00.000-07:002009-03-27T17:34:00.000-07:00Where does all the freight go?Where does all the freight go?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-65087713858414647882009-03-26T00:36:00.000-07:002009-03-26T00:36:00.000-07:00Thanks Clem. Type that in for certain NJ Transit s...Thanks Clem. Type that in for certain NJ Transit stations and you get ridership figures for Amtrak Stations on the Great Plains. Finally asked a NJ Transit board member why they aren't easily available and he had no answer other than to agree that it should be easy to find. Showed him how easy it to get at least annual ridership for Amtrak. So I've been trained to ferret this out by asking strange questions of Google to find the place where a newspaper or a blog mentions ridership. Not only for NJ Transit but almost all of the places I try. I didn't try the obvious because the only time that works for me is if I want to know annual ridership on Amtrak. <BR/><BR/>So I looked at the maps and noticed that the streetcar line doesn't stop on 22nd. And that the station is surrounded by things that look like they are warehouses. So unless they have been filling the warehouses with call centers there aren't a lot of people working there. And there aren't a lot of houses around. And Caltrain says there is no parking there. The amenities are a ticket machine and a public phone. Just like a bus shelter might have. Checked Muni there's a community bus serving 22nd which means there isn't a whole lot of bus service and the the only place it connects to is the streetcar. I looked at the schedule and saw someone scheduling rush hour to go a minute or two faster by skipping an underused station. .... <BR/><BR/>I went back and read the blogs. Apparently the main station amenity is the taco lady. That sometimes the walk from the on street parking can be from blocks away. That there is no mass transit that gets you there in reasonable amounts of time. That the station has many Eastern European qualities that aren't charming. <BR/><BR/>So it's mostly reverse commuters who are using it because there are no better alternatives. Electrification is going to attract more as will 5 dollar a gallon gas or another boom in Silicon Valley. If ridership increases from the 450 or so to 1500 roundtrips you wouldn't want to close it. Or even at current levels. Keeping it open and digging a billion dollar tunnel so that HSR can get around the train stopped there... 20, 25 years from now wouldn't make sense, not if you are digging the tunnel only because of those 1500 round trips. 1000 or 1500 roundtrips at the station and the only person who is happy with it is the taco lady. <BR/> <BR/>If ridership increases that much there are going to parking problems before stopping a train there causes problems. I can see people who live and work in the neighborhood banding together and getting the city to change parking regs during the day, two hour parking or four hour parking lets say with permits for residents and employees - like they do in other parts of the city forcing the reverse commuters out. <BR/><BR/>So even if ridership on HSR and Caltrain never get to the point where the station needs to be closed for operational reasons, people might want to consider alternatives.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-33389461494301877852009-03-25T19:05:00.000-07:002009-03-25T19:05:00.000-07:00If you type "Caltrain" and "ridership" into Google...If you type "Caltrain" and "ridership" into Google, you will find what you're looking for. 22nd street boards roughly 900 passengers per weekday.Clemhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01374282217135682245noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-70103672045704451252009-03-25T18:47:00.000-07:002009-03-25T18:47:00.000-07:00"I can't find ridership figures for 22nd Street. I..."I can't find ridership figures for 22nd Street. I'm shocked that it's even there."<BR/><BR/>You noticed in the morning all the southbound expresses stop there, no northbounds, and the other way around in the afternoon. When I ride a northbound express in the afternoon a good 100 people get off at 22nd St-- maybe 150. No idea whether they're walking home or getting in their cars to drive home-- maybe there's plenty of street parking there?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-78182925777901388672009-03-25T14:22:00.000-07:002009-03-25T14:22:00.000-07:00Adirondacker - Wow you are super smart I am glad y...Adirondacker - Wow you are super smart I am glad you have it all figured out!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-34460855919978510042009-03-24T16:14:00.000-07:002009-03-24T16:14:00.000-07:00They do need at least three tracks out on the line...<EM>They do need at least three tracks out on the line to run service when HSR starts. [...]<BR/><BR/>Perhaps they do ... if you're the one being paid to design and build tunnels.</EM><BR/><BR/>Out on the line meaning someplace south of the two tracks that run through tunnels. Not more than two in the few miles between the southernmost tunnel and the terminal in San Francisco not until sometime in the future, far in the future. It's hard to get the HSR train that's at San Jose to SF in a half an hour, on a two track system if there are three Caltrain locals ahead of you dwelling for five minutes at every little suburban station because people aren't bright enough to leave their bike at the station and use Muni when they get to San Francisco. Stations where Caltrain didn't install level boarding because that would make it faster. And is still running four car trains instead of eight. Which is the scenario some people here paint. 22 trains an hour, which is projected for sometime far in the future and which I think is overly optimistic, especially the part about there being ten trains per hour on Caltrain.... it's less than what goes through the North River tunnels today. They would probably be adequate for more years if NJ Transit hadn't added Midtown Direct service which is busier than all of Caltrain. South of Market is never going to become Midtown Manhattan, two tracks is probably more than adequate for a very long time. <BR/><BR/><BR/>NJ Transit and Amtrak manage to do it on what is essentially two tracks between New York and Newark everyday. With a phase change on the Morris and Essex trains and diesels meandering between Newark and Hoboken. With Seacacus Transfer in the middle. With an active yard in Kearny. I'm sure there are other places that are equally active that get by on two tracks,People will say "But Caltrain is so very extra special and different from railroads all over the world we need to do things differently" If I use the Northeast Corridor as an example, they can relate to it. Well some of them because others say things that tell me they have never been on a train except for the steam excursion they took when they were eight. <BR/><BR/><BR/>Apparently the current tunnels while old, are in a state of good repair. Not in the kind of shape you would want for HSR service in 2275 but good enough for a while. And if the big one hits in 2023 before the first replacement is finished they build temporary track and platforms at Bayshore and borrow buses from LA and Seattle and bus people to Transbay where there are suprise, surprise, bus platforms. It will be crowded and slow but still better than the bus from the airport. The taxis that normally pick up fares at 4th and Townsend will be at Bayshore because nobody is getting off at 4th while the replacement tunnel is built. Or they terminate at SFO for a few years where everybody changes to BART. BART runs enough trains that the overcrowding isn't too bad. <BR/><BR/>I can't find ridership figures for 22nd Street. I'm shocked that it's even there. It would be like having a station on the LIRR at the East River .... that served Penn Station. Or having Metro North stop at 86th street. They don't. People that close to the city take city transit. One solution is to explain to the 37 riders who use 22nd that the nice streetcar two blocks away gets them to the Embarcadero two minutes faster than taking Caltrain and in about the same time to Montgomery Street. ... and close the station, <BR/><BR/>Look at the satellite view of 22nd on Google there's enough room to put in two sidings so the local can dwell while people with bicycles board and twice a year the crew uses the wheelchair lift because that's the only place where there are low platforms. Whether or not there's enough distance between the tunnels to put in the switches and still have a siding that is usable isn't something I've looked at. Which I'm not going to pursue because looking at the street view on Google there's a forest of support columns for I280 there that prevents it. It's too much to hope that when they built I280 they spent an extra million dollars to make it easy to put four tracks of railroad through there. Because they looked at it and decided that before they need a four track railroad through there South of Market has to become the Loop and San Mateo county has to become Hudson County New Jersey. And before that happens I280 will be so old it needs to be replaced anyway. <BR/><BR/>Looking at pictures on Google it already widens out to four tracks south of the southernmost tunnel and is four track through Bayshore. All they have to do is raise the platforms before the first Caltrain car that can't use low platforms, arrives. Not something they have to do for years and something that will be a trivial amount in the overall budget for the upgrade of the whole line. The platforms will be the same height as HSR so when something closes down 4th and Townsend for a few hours once a decade they can call Muni and Sam Trans who sends over 40 buses to get the passengers off HSR and to Transbay. In the meanwhile BART runs rush hour levels of service to SFO. Everybody else farther down the line gets off there and takes BART. <BR/><BR/><BR/> Right now, while a northbound Caltrain is slowing south of Bayshore, the express whether it's Caltrain or HSR can pass it enter the tunnel and be at Fourth and Townsend before the local moves into the tunnel. Three minute headways gives them 20 trains an hour in each direction. Their problem is going to the commuter who can't figure out Muni so he dragged his bicycle along, trying to get off first, slowing things down. Or scheduling conflicts across the interlocking. Which shouldn't be a problem since Amtrak, NJ Transit and the LIRR manage it. As do other railroads all over the world. . the problem is going to be platforms at Transbay and idiot commuters before they need 3 tracks. <BR/><BR/>As for freight north of Bayshore. There's never going to be significant amounts of it from the port. There's not enough land to support it. Not unless they start buying $500,000 houses on 1/8 acre lots in a big way. Before that happens it's cheaper to build a port in Oregon and ship the stuff to and from Nebraska from there. Same thing for the rest of the peninsula. The land around the tracks is too expensive to support large amounts of bulk freight. And they aren't going to be opening a coal mine under Golden Gate park so freight, other than garbage, isn't going to originating on the Peninsula. All of the garbage on the Peninsula could all be shipped out by rail and that could be accommodated on one track late at night. And if San Francisco wants to use double height garbage cars to do that they build the transfer station south of the tunnels. <BR/><BR/><EM>Now perhaps there is an unmitigable seismic engineering issue with one or more of the tunnels </EM><BR/><BR/>I doubt it, I suspect you do too. They wouldn't have spent millions on shotcrete and steel if there was, they would have closed them. And they spec'd high strength shotcrete and over spec'd the steel a bit. I don't know if they did that to get 5 more years out of them, which I doubt, they would have closed them, or 75 more years out of them. If they weren't safe they would be running around like their hair was on fire, screaming to replace the tunnels for Caltrain even if HSR was a pipe dream. <BR/><BR/><EM>What is the plan with the 100+ year old tunnels?</EM><BR/><BR/>Use them until they are replaced? Sometime far in future? <BR/><BR/><EM>I am sure if it was feasable that two tracks would be built to accomadate their needs for North and South moves.<BR/><BR/>Especially since the windows will be so small (midnight to 5 am).</EM><BR/><BR/>More like 9 PM to 6 AM. The commuter traffic will die down to one local once an hour or half hour. That leaves lots of time on three tracks for HSR to be running every ten minutes in each direction, which they probably won't do because who wants to get to LA at 2 in the morning? Two or three HSRs an hour in each direction and you schedule them around the Calrain local. You could probably do passenger service with one track and passing sidings. <BR/><BR/>If there wasn't passenger traffic on the line UP would be doing it with one track. There isn't enough traffic to justify two. If UP owned the tracks they would be looking at abandoning it because the property taxes on it would be more than they make on it. <BR/><BR/>Whether or not the trains run through one big tunnel four tracks wide deep under everything ( which they won't do ) or in 16 single track tunnels under the four hills on the existing right of way, isn't what's important to the operation of the railroad. It's the number of tracks you have. Two should be enough for the next ... decade or two at least. If they ever need more than two.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-2662185915526502842009-03-24T13:46:00.000-07:002009-03-24T13:46:00.000-07:00Regarding Dumbarton Rail Bridge ... I don't think ...Regarding Dumbarton Rail Bridge ... I don't think anyone has noted that San Jose interests and ferry fans are pushing the feds to study a passenger ferry terminal in Alviso. They're in for lots of really costly dredging to make that deam come true ... either that or they're going to let sea level rise to take care it :-)<BR/><BR/>Here's the story from BATN:<BR/><BR/>Ferry fanatics ask feds to fund SJ (Alviso) ferry terminal study <BR/>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BATN/message/40742Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-5503385854742941422009-03-24T11:57:00.000-07:002009-03-24T11:57:00.000-07:00Adirondacker - Yes one side of two tunnels would b...Adirondacker - Yes one side of two tunnels would be adequate for the Ports needs (tunnels 3 & 4) and yes I am talking about a parallel tunnel with two tracks in each tunnel. I know that next to Tunnel 2 is a second portal. The right of way is there for a new tunnel next to 1, 3 & 4. The Port of SF would only need one track to accomodate its freight needs from SF to San Jose and they would run at night when no passenger trains are running. I am sure if it was feasable that two tracks would be built to accomadate their needs for North and South moves. Especially since the windows will be so small (midnight to 5 am).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-40886083298614644622009-03-24T11:44:00.000-07:002009-03-24T11:44:00.000-07:00Sorry Clem I did mean Richard or anyone for that m...Sorry Clem I did mean Richard or anyone for that matter. What is the plan with the 100+ year old tunnels?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-90918010088221101682009-03-24T11:30:00.000-07:002009-03-24T11:30:00.000-07:00@anon, did you intend to address Richard?@anon, did you intend to address Richard?Clemhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01374282217135682245noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-11587513707356751532009-03-24T11:11:00.000-07:002009-03-24T11:11:00.000-07:00Clem - I know your really smart, how come you didn...Clem - I know your really smart, how come you didn't address the tunnels and earthquakes?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-11862941291053874862009-03-24T10:58:00.000-07:002009-03-24T10:58:00.000-07:00Clem - When has Caltrain ever made a profit? The ...Clem - When has Caltrain ever made a profit? The only one making any money on the Peninsula is the Union Pacific. If your talking environmental benefits. Passenger trains and freight trains both benefit the environment and the economy. Since what year has a passenger train ever made any money in the United States? Now I know that has everything to do with the wonderful federally subsidized automobile. HSR plans to operate with out subsidy once built? No way not as long as the feds keep funding the auto and trucking. "Die Die Die!" You really want the freight train to die? Wow!? Get all the freight on the highways! That is a great idea!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-47055165128759687522009-03-23T20:45:00.000-07:002009-03-23T20:45:00.000-07:00[...] They do need at least three tracks out on th...<I>[...] They do need at least three tracks out on the line to run service when HSR starts. [...]</I><BR/><BR/>Perhaps they do ... if you're the one being paid to design and build tunnels.<BR/><BR/>But neither Caltrain, HSR, nor Caltrain+HSR requires passing tracks between Mission Bay and Bayshore.<BR/><BR/>Just <I>think about it</I> for an instant: there's only one stop (22nd Street -- and no, don't set up the nutty SFCTA-aggrandizing Oakdale Sewage Plant/Greenhouse/Junk Yard station strawman), most trains aren't going to stop there, and it is a <I>trivial</I> timetabling/dispatching matter (at least for a competent operator) to ensure that a stopping train isn't running less than 3 minutes ahead of a non-stopper. (Hint: if it is, and <I>if</I> it would cause an unacceptable delay by proceeding, it waits and is passed at Bayshore or Mission Bay <I>before</I> causing a delay.)<BR/><BR/>The only possible justification for a new tunnel or tunnels is life safety ... and we know that is an issue that is ripe for open season rent-seeking by the engineering profession. (The fire/earthquake equivalent of "throw infinite money at us or we'll kill this puppy" and "a noun, a verb, and 9/11".)<BR/><BR/>Now perhaps there is an unmitigable seismic engineering issue with one or more of the tunnels -- I don't know, I've not see anything technical on the matter, and I'm not qualified to judge.<BR/><BR/>And perhaps if could be argued by some -- and it is just an argument about <I>comparative</I> risks and costs -- that there is a life safety (emergency evacuation) issue with the longest tunnel, Tunnel 4 (1081m). (It's a harder argument to make for Tunnel 3 718m, and a ridiculous one for Tunnel 2 331m or Tunnel 1 547m.) Certainly none of these structures would be built with the same side clearances today, but just as assuredly tens or hundreds of thousands of vehicles daily and safely pass through much riskier structures.<BR/><BR/>I can <I>remotely</I> imagine a new double-track tunnel parallel to and west of Tunnel 4, with the existing tunnel single-tracked for safety and aerodynamic reasons, but that ought to be a really hard sell, and anything beyond that ought to require an extaordinarily high and rigorous level of technical and economic justification.<BR/><BR/>But to claim that the astronomical expense of redundant parallel tracks in tunnels is required <I>for rail operations</I> is to completely fail to understand how rail systems are managed and designed in advanced first world industrialized democracies.<BR/><BR/>Unless your goal is to <I>maximize expense</I> this just doesn't pass the laugh test. (Expect to see it listed by the world-class CHSRA consultants as operationally required.)<BR/><BR/>And what does this have to do with freight on the Peninsula? Answer: freight is economically and environmentally irrelevant to this, as it is to anything else. It's all downside and no upside. It's all expense and no revenue. It's all empty promises and no delivery. It's all institutional posturing and with no meaningful constituency. It's all foam and no beef.<BR/><BR/>Come back with some plausible and quantified and justified story about how revenues (and even quantified externalities) can possibly justify the incremental capital and maintenance and operating costs, and then we can talk. (After all, this is what the pure as the driven snow freight railroads require of Amtrak.) But until then: die die die, dinosaurs!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-43270604223909422652009-03-23T19:36:00.000-07:002009-03-23T19:36:00.000-07:00I have not heard the Port ask for any subsidy. But...<EM>I have not heard the Port ask for any subsidy. </EM><BR/><BR/>But increasing the height and the width of the tunnel does cost money. And if the only reason you are doing that is to accommodate freight from the port either the port should pay for it or it's a subsidy to the port. The port isn't going to volunteer to pay for it... Since they will only need one track to handle all the freight they don't need to make all the tunnels high and wide. Two might be nice to have for redundancy and to ease operations and maintenance. . . we are talking about have four parallel tunnels aren't we? Not two tunnels in series going north and two in series going south.... <BR/><BR/>They do need at least three tracks out on the line to run service when HSR starts. So that the expresses whether they are Caltrain expresses or HSR, can pass the Caltrain local. Since none of the trains will be stopping in the tunnel, they don't need four tunnels to begin service. Two will probably be adequate for years if not decades. They can get service started, build the third tunnel, take one of the old tunnels out of service to replace it and when the second new tunnel comes into service replace the remaining old tunnel. But that can be completed when HSR has been running for ten years. And when they project they need four tunnels in ten years start building the fourth tunnel. Fourth tunnel doesn't need to be started until 2020 or later. If they ever need a fourth tunnel. NJ Transit and Amtrak share two into Manhattan and can move 23 or 24 an hour. Three into SF might be overkill. And when it becomes wildly popular and they project they need another tunnel in ten years they can start that project ten years ahead of the need.. in 2075 with completion in 2086.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-70417907888257619432009-03-23T11:41:00.000-07:002009-03-23T11:41:00.000-07:00Clem - I have not heard the Port ask for any subsi...Clem - I have not heard the Port ask for any subsidy. They are only asking for the right to upgrade the tunnels. The only thing that is holding the autos from running on the Peninsula is the tunnels. There are no bridges or any other ubstructions that effect the movement of autos. The bridge in Palo Alto is being replaced anyway. "30+ ton axle loads" auto trains are lighter than traditional freight trains so auto trains would run on the existing Caltrain right of way with out a hitch. Los Angeles and Long Beach are discussing moving the autos out of their ports and looking to San Diego and San Francisco to take up the slack. Richmond and Benicia are at capacity and have no more room to add any more auto facilities. Honda was the latest to move in and took up all remaining real estate.<BR/><BR/>How about those tunnels!? Built in 1906 and sprayed with shotcrete in the 90’s. Does the shotcrete make everybody feel all warm and fuzzy? Everybody is expecting those 1906 tunnels to accommodate 100 commuter trains a day high speed rail and freight trains. Did everybody forget about earthquakes? This is what needs to be done to make everybody happy and keep everybody safe. Undercut the tunnels to get the port the height they need now. This can be done on the weekends at night over several months with out affecting Caltrain service. Build 4 new tunnels next to the original ones that will accommodate 2 main lines. Run all trains on the new tracks and through the new tunnels that are able to handle an earthquake of 8.0 or larger (Japan does this now). Make them tall enough and wide enough to handle any type of rail car. Rebuild the old tunnels to handle an 8.0 earthquake and accommodate all types of rail cars. I know everyone is going to say it is easier said than done but it is the right thing to do. The California High Speed Rail plans call for 4 main lines anyway between San Francisco and San Jose.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-88357420033541238932009-03-22T18:57:00.000-07:002009-03-22T18:57:00.000-07:00Perhaps FRA would allow it I've never looked at i...<EM> Perhaps FRA would allow it </EM> <BR/><BR/>I've never looked at it closely. The way I understand it either the track exclusively runs non FRA compliant equipment and the FRA doesn't care what you run. Or there is temporal separation. Either the tracks are running non compliant equipment or the non compliant equipment is off the track so freight can move through. They never get on the same piece of track at the same time. HSR is going to want to run on the local tracks so that when the express tracks are out of service they still can get to SF. All the non compliant equipment will run on all the tracks. <BR/><BR/>Running freight over tracks beats them up. I suspect freight will be limited to one track except under extraordinary circumstances. And, this may take a special waiver from the FRA, that late at night freight will be on one track, the east most lets say. And the last Caltrain train of the night will pass through on the westmost. With a few HSR trains running for people who want to be in LA at 6 in the morning and the people from Fresno who have a 7 am flight at SFO. If the CPUC doesn't change regulations they'll design the ROW so the only obstructions are platforms at SFO and the Mid Peninsula station. There will be a gauntlet track there so the freight is away from the platforms. <BR/><BR/><EM>Getting that implemented interoperably will be painful.</EM><BR/><BR/>Thanks I needed a laugh. I remember that the negotiations between the LIRR and Amtrak and NJ Transit took a very long time when they changed signaling. But whatever they picked they agreed on something... Amtrak operates in MBTA territory, SLE, Metro North, LIRR, NJ Transit, Septa, MARC and VRE territory. If they could pull it off I'm sure Caltrain and HSR can. And that they will get together with the commuter rail in Los Angeles and pick a system. And that anybody else who decides to operate in their territory will use their system, Or they won't operate in their territory. UP is going to have to have a few locomotives that meander up and down the track late at night. I don't know if they will even have to use Caltrain/HSR signalling. At a train an hour they could probably use a dispatcher and line side telephones. Or teach everybody morse code. <BR/><BR/><EM>If HSR is given the outside tracks, Caltrain will need new island platforms at all of its stations on the peninsula - a perfect opportunity to increase their length.</EM><BR/><BR/>HSR will have the innermost tracks. It keeps all of the tracks as straight as can be. The ROW isn't wide enough to put island platforms all up and down it. Almost none of the current Caltrain platforms will around for the day the first revenue HSR passes them by because most of them are where the new track will be laid. Since they are rebuilding all of them they will make them long enough. They will do it instead of building a short platform now and ripping out in 15 years. Or having the front half of the train serve some stations and the back half of the train serve others and everybody grumbles about it over the 25 years it takes them to fix it. Even though level boarding platforms are more expensive than track level platforms they will be at most if not all stations. It speeds up the commute and then you aren't delayed when they use the wheelchair lift. Since level boarding makes the platform and not the train ADA compliant I'm willing to go out on a limb and say all the new platforms will be level boarding with long platforms because over the years it's cheaper. They are going to select the same platform height as HSR so that when there are operational problems HSR can use Caltrain platforms or Caltrain can use HSR platforms. <BR/><BR/><BR/><EM> with workers hanging off the side. </EM><BR/><BR/>I don't know why workers hang off the side, outside of a siding or a yard. Or why the railroad lets them do it. It's just seems bizarre to me. Change the regulations before you go and spend hundreds of millions of dollars so a flagman doesn't have to get to a safe place on the three car freight train that passes through once a week. <BR/><BR/><EM> two platforms at the Transbay Terminal limits tph count into that station for Caltrain </EM> <BR/><BR/>But that is higher than 10 an hour. Not that they are ever going to have ten an hour if they have reasonably full seats on reasonably long trains. They will have moderately long trains with full seats because it costs more money to run short trains or empty seats or both. <BR/><BR/><EM>6 trains would go to TBT, 4 would go the 4th /King. Those going to TBT would bypass 4th/King (i.e. Y before 4th/King)</EM><BR/><BR/>I can't imagine a service pattern where that makes sense, not from the passenger's perspective. Unless they are doing that to keep the number of trains down at Transbay. Which if I was a commuter watching the train that only stops at Transbay fill up while I have to wait 15 minutes for the one that stops at 4th... I'd want to know why they don't both go to both stations. Because you can move ten trains an hour. <BR/><BR/><EM>They are NOT thinking of going faster than 70 MPH. </EM> <BR/><BR/>70 average over a trip or top speed of 70? To get from San Jose to San Francisco in an hour and make a few stops means you have to go faster than 70 to get an average around somewhere near 60. <BR/><BR/>Top speed of 70 then they are not going to be able to use the express tracks. There's no room in the ROW for five tracks so they won't have passing sidings. Good bye Baby Bullet and probably Limiteds too. That has to be an average speed during a trip with stops . <BR/><BR/>I can't find anything on Caltrain's site about it. I can find a presentation about electrification where they talk about 90 MPH speeds with the possibility of upgrading to 125 MPH speeds. . . The limit on the NEC between New Haven and DC is that the antique catanery is not constant-tension. It has a speed limit of 135. The constant-tension newer infrasturcture east of New Haven can do 150. I wonder why they are saying 90. or 125.. <BR/><BR/><BR/>Thanks Jathnael, I've seen other ones, I haven't gone searching for TGV or ICE videos. The US railfans like Kingston RI. Here's one that shows the radar gun checking the speed. <BR/><BR/>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=biCs3OM5-ns&NR=1<BR/><BR/>If it's a problem with trucks near the tracks you grow some very tall bushes around the guardrail that breaks up the bow wave.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-90550703932250430092009-03-22T15:57:00.000-07:002009-03-22T15:57:00.000-07:00@Anon.Containerization has revolutionized cargo sh...@Anon.<BR/>Containerization has revolutionized cargo shipping. Today, approximately 90% of non-bulk cargo worldwide moves by containers stacked on transport ships [8]; 26% of all containers originate from China.[citation needed] As of 2005, some 18 million total containers make over 200 million trips per year. There are ships that can carry over 14,500 twenty-foot equivalent units (TEU), for example the Emma Mærsk, 396 m long, launched August 2006. It has even been predicted that, at some point, container ships will be constrained in size only by the depth of the Straits of Malacca—one of the world's busiest shipping lanes—linking the Indian Ocean to the Pacific Ocean. <BR/><BR/>WikipediaMartin Engelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10945359524195169103noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-30149732942514451632009-03-22T15:25:00.000-07:002009-03-22T15:25:00.000-07:00Containerized shipping: a "nitch" market for nitch...Containerized shipping: a "nitch" market for nitch ports, nitch shippers and nitch logistics. It will never catch on!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-83765182536392127212009-03-21T15:00:00.000-07:002009-03-21T15:00:00.000-07:00@ClemThis web site is the one most focused the ong...@Clem<BR/>This web site is the one most focused the ongoing saga of Caltrain/HSR and all of us on the Peninsula who will be affected by them. (Thank you for that.) Therefore, although all the technical discussions are valuable parts of my course in Railroads 101, I encourage you to raise a number of other issues germane to this topic. For example, the substance and merits (or lack thereof) of the current lawsuit, the draft MOU between Caltrain and the rail authority, and the development impact differential among the three counties, all the cities on the corridor, and various natural groupings thereof. <BR/><BR/>Another issue of concern, and usually neglected, is the construction process itself, its duration, the impact on each city outside of the rail-corridor, with eminent domain takings, construction easements, and especially with shoofly tracks and “temporary” train operations. All of which is to say, I’d appreciate your casting a wider net.Martin Engelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10945359524195169103noreply@blogger.com