Some good news: Caltrain is working on a level boarding plan, as documents requested under the Public Records Act attest. Their "Level Boarding Roadmap: Technical Task Force Platform Report" dated April 2024 is a reasonably well-written document that discusses how the system might be converted to level boarding using the European 550 mm platform standard. After reading it, three questions arise:
- Why are 48" level boarding platforms never discussed? The roadmap takes for granted that Caltrain's solution is 550 mm (22") platforms. It mentions "Caltrain EMUs have doors (...) at the mid-level (currently these doors are plugged)" and never again mentions how these doors got there, what else might be done with them, or why it shouldn't. While every solution has pros and cons, how is such a fundamental decision of system architecture presented with no context as a done deal, without the slightest technical rationale or public discussion?
- Why is the preferred solution allowed to violate HSR specifications? 22" platforms are discussed with two lateral offset alternatives: 64" (preserving today's platform offsets) and 68". The safety argument presented in favor of a 64" offset does not contemplate that such platforms would encroach into the high-speed rail vehicle body dynamic envelope, and that wide-body HSR cars would extend over the platform. These issues are shown in the precisely scaled graphic at right, using dimensions from the HSR vehicle RFP. Neither of these conditions seems safe and neither is addressed in the hazard analysis, unless an unstated assumption is being made that the high-speed rail project should fix Caltrain platform design errors at the public's expense.
- Why was this work not done ten years ago, before EMU procurement? There is no value added by testing platform mockups with a real EMU as done in the report, versus testing with a plywood vehicle mockup. Everything discussed in Caltrain's report was known ten years ago and the Stadler EMU fleet could have been delivered with a platform interface solution for level boarding at 22" had Caltrain specified one. Now, we're stuck with a retrofit situation, but better late than never.
The next steps discussed in Caltrain's report are good ones, and should be expedited. Specifically, developing a technical solution for an automatic step arrangement compatible with both 8" and 22" platforms is of the highest urgency. ("Funding a prototype for an estimated $3M lowers technical risk and also shortens the timeframe to begin fleet implementation should funding become available.") This small investment is among the most important and valuable projects that Caltrain should undertake immediately.
A bit over a month of electric service has made it abundantly clear that dwell times are long and on-time performance is systematically poor due to the rosy performance assumptions baked into Caltrain's timetable. The trains are fast, but much of their performance is wasted on long dwells. Level boarding can't come soon enough.
I heard the reason why they can't go 48" platform is because FRA banned Caltrain from using onboard lifts while the train is in motion, and Caltrain is concerned about on-time performance under this rule, like what would happen when someone on the wheelchair catching a train in last minute.
ReplyDeleteI’m not sure they pursued this formally, as a record of the waiver process would exist on a regulations.gov docket.
DeleteIn any case, there are viable alternatives that do not require internal lifts for 48” platforms.
Thank you! Now I understand why we have these janky screaming drop steps on the EMUs: as we raise the station platforms over time, stations with 22" platforms won't need the janky screaming step. The doors will open and shut quicker. Life will keep getting better!
ReplyDeleteBut yeah better figure out the correct offset to allow HSR to run through stations! -danny
To be clear, there was no pressing requirement for a drop step; it could have been engineered as a fixed step with the same dimensions as the Bombardier cars, which have a 25” floor.
DeleteNote that 22” platforms will still require a gap filler to deploy as noted in the Caltrain document.