tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post1183864214512033413..comments2024-03-28T11:51:19.078-07:00Comments on Caltrain HSR Compatibility Blog: Regulatory VacuumClemhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01374282217135682245noreply@blogger.comBlogger59125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-25742903250130077272009-11-06T14:43:17.931-08:002009-11-06T14:43:17.931-08:00Another Option
Regarding a corridor for the prop...Another Option<br /><br /><br />Regarding a corridor for the proposed High Speed Rail System (CHSRA) between San Francisco and San Jose; perhaps this alternative plan would greatly improve traffic flow and congestion which is badly needed for Highway 101 with traffic becoming heavier as years pass. This overly used, antiquated road has not kept up with the increasing traffic needs of the Peninsula and the West Bay.<br /><br />This new proposal is to make Highway 101 a two level, updated freeway or toll road, with each level being one way, both north and south, adding more traffic lanes from San Francisco to San Jose.<br /><br />The HSR (from San Jose to San Francisco) would be part of this new structure. The rail roadway could be situated and operate on both sides or under a newly designed state of the art structure, below the vehicular level of the lower deck, out of sight from vehicular drivers. This also would allow the new rail line(s) to have choice stops on the Peninsula, SFO for example.<br /><br />An improved 101 corridor would also stimulate and regain interest for eastern expansion for businesses and residential developments in all of the Peninsula cities.<br /><br />A proper and carefully considered design would alleviate acquiring much more land for the CHSRA as well as displacing existing dwellers near the existing rail line. The rail roadbed, could also be a ground level trench rather than a tunnel and another consideration for the 101 project. Perhaps the construction could be undertaken without closing down the present highway.<br /><br />This vast project could employ international consultation from countries such as France, England, Germany, Russia, Japan, China and Korea.<br />(Especially the last three.)<br /><br />Their expertise in High Speed Rail could be something to tap into, including<br />their newest construction and engineering methods such as prefabrication of<br />sections which could lessen construction time. Perhaps companies from these countries could also vie in it's construction possibly participating in a a joint venture. Extraordinary Chinese helped to build our state's first railroads, why not our latest?<br /><br />Thank you,<br />Jerry Emanuel<br />912 Woodland Ave.<br />San Carlos, CA 94070Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-17829801373671137672009-05-13T21:44:00.000-07:002009-05-13T21:44:00.000-07:00SMART is rolling over and playing dead in the name...<I>SMART is rolling over and playing dead in the name of "full regulatory compliance".</I>SMART staff is made up of old-tyme railroader types. They are literally trying to reinvent the Skunk train. According to one person who interviewed with them (back when the agency was first starting), he asked staff whether they would be looking into European DMUs, and the response was a Homer Simpson "Huh?".<br /><br />There are enough counterexamples of non-compliant DMUs running on freight ROW in the USA, that regulatory "compliance" is not a showstopper. And that presumes SMART ever sees any freight traffic at all.<br /><br />Moreover, one would think, after the fiasco of the CRC order in Portland, that the SMART General Manager would have been pink slipped by now, given her past involvement in that project.<br /><br />It is really all quite depressing.bikeridernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-15202739136814867132009-05-13T17:00:00.000-07:002009-05-13T17:00:00.000-07:00I particularly enjoyed how they identified 8 diffe...I particularly enjoyed how they identified 8 different off-the-shelf, immediately available "non-compliant" DMU train models, and ZERO compliant DMU designs currently in production... and nevertheless selected the compliant DMU "option", availability be damned!<br /><br />SMART is rolling over and playing dead in the name of "full regulatory compliance".<br /><br />What's cheaper, obtaining a regulatory waiver, or procuring non-existent, one-of-a-kind trains and eating <I>all</I> the non-recurring engineering costs for a product that is proven not to have a sustainable market? (Colorado Railcar anyone?)<br /><br />Caltrain seems to be smarter than SMART, although some of their waiver efforts could become less relevant with the prospect of 100% grade separation. For example, the basis for a "non-compliant" level crossing safety case seems to be evaporating... regulators could just say "leave us alone and let's wait until HSR".Clemhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01374282217135682245noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-33209131561860347862009-05-13T12:55:00.000-07:002009-05-13T12:55:00.000-07:00Naked consultant rent seeking in Santa Rosa today ...Naked consultant <A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent-seeking" REL="nofollow">rent seeking</A> in Santa Rosa today as SMART steams into the <A HREF="http://www.sonomamarintrain.org/userfiles/file/Operations%20Committee%20Packet%20for%205%2013%2009.pdf" REL="nofollow">19th Century.</A><BR>Read it and weep. There's no hope in this country, it's quite clear.<br /><br /><BR><I>Based on the foregoing, it is concluded that the gauntlet track option better represents proven technology suitable for use on a rail line that, either initially or eventually, is likely to host simultaneous passenger and freight train operations. Pending further analysis as the vehicle identification and selection process proceeds, it is tentatively recommended that SMART design proceed on the basis that gauntlet tracks be installed at each station platform located on a track that will be shared by passenger and freight trains.<br /></I><BR><BR>...<br /><BR><BR><I>Although selecting FRA-compliant technology means sacrificing some efficiencies, it untangles many regulatory knots and would allow SMART to provide the voter-mandated commuter rail service on schedule. All things considered, and based on the best information available to date, the recommended technology selection can only be for FRA-compliant DMUs.<br /></I><BR><BR>Amurrrrican Know-How!<br /><BR>U-S-A! U-S-A! F-R-A! L-T-K!Richard Mlynarikhttp://www.pobox.com/users/mly/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-69231113796912784052009-05-08T11:03:00.000-07:002009-05-08T11:03:00.000-07:00Aha, Haussmann was the 19th century French Baron t...<I>Aha, Haussmann was the 19th century French Baron that oversaw the wholesale destruction and reconstruction of Paris and the eviction of the working class to the suburbs.</I><BR><BR>Corrected.Alon Levyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12195377309045184452noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-46868641505584198542009-05-07T10:32:00.000-07:002009-05-07T10:32:00.000-07:00Aha, Haussmann was the 19th century French Baron t...Aha, Haussmann was the 19th century French Baron that oversaw the establishment of boulevards, ground floor faces and shops, and the architecture of facades and balcony lines continuing from one building to the next along a street.<br /><br />So the Haussmann in the station name refers to Haussmann Blvd in Paris, even if it lodged in my mind as a German name.BruceMcFhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08502035881761277885noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-66562720191784008262009-05-05T09:47:00.000-07:002009-05-05T09:47:00.000-07:00Richard Mlynarik said...
"Getting off topic, but t...Richard Mlynarik said...<br />"<I>Getting off topic, but there are no German dostos with more than two doors per side. The only such vehicles in the world are the MI2N used on a subset of the Parisian RER lines.</I>"<br /><br />I may have misread a caption, or saw a misplaced caption.<br /><br />For the RER, it addresses the task at hand, to operate with low station dwells when running through the subway system at the center while offering substantial seated capacity, for the passengers originating in the suburban stations in the outer network at grade.<br /><br />"<I>Anybody who believes Caltrain needs double deck trains for "capacity" in a way that München S-Bahn doesn't just isn't thinking too clearly.</I>"<br /><br />The easiest way to add crush capacity to a given train is to allocate a larger portion of each car to metro style seating. Of course, that removes seated capacity, so its preferable when the crush involves a substantial number of trips under 15 minutes.<br /><br />From a system perspective, however, at the present Caltrain service frequencies, the additional capacity that delivers the best ridership gains would be increasing service frequency. And wrt crush capacity, even when there is a strong demand peak, given sufficient frequency the peak demand will spread itself out as those with more travel time flexibility shift toward either shoulder to avoid the crush.<br /><br />If frequency is the first recourse, single deck EMU sets in pairs, either with driver or without, can be formed into six or eight car sets (or four car sets if the driver-car pairs are coupled back to back). Down the track, if still more seated capacity is need, double deck cars can be added at that point.BruceMcFhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08502035881761277885noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-73170956407981485062009-05-03T14:11:00.000-07:002009-05-03T14:11:00.000-07:00Hey, I'm not disagreeing with you that TBT is desi...Hey, I'm not disagreeing with you that TBT is designed really badly - almost as badly as Moynihan Station and the ARC tunnel in New York. I'm disagreeing with you about the idea that Caltrain should mindlessly copy the standard of whichever European country has the best marketing department.<br /><br />I mean, yeah, Europe's way better at it than the US. So what? Japan's way better at it than Europe. The RER gets a billion riders a year, which is closer to the commuter rail ridership in the New York area (250 million for the LIRR, MNRR, and NJT) than to just JR-East's commuter lines (5.3 billion), to say nothing of the many other operators in Greater Tokyo. Should we declare that Paris's rail system is primitive and only concentrate on copying features from Tokyo?Alon Levyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12195377309045184452noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-85727304160266954512009-05-02T15:46:00.000-07:002009-05-02T15:46:00.000-07:00Re: double deckers
Getting off topic, but there a...Re: double deckers<br /><br />Getting off topic, but there are no German dostos with more than two doors per side. The only such vehicles in the world are the <A HREF="http://www.google.com/search?q=mi2n+ratp+sncf" REL="nofollow">MI2N</A> used on a subset of the Parisian RER lines. An new order for a follow on model (Bombardier-Alstom consortium, EUR917m for 60 110m trains for RER line A, crush capacity 1725!) was placed just last month.<br /><br />Anybody who believes Caltrain needs double deck trains for "capacity" in a way that <A HREF="http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:S-bahn-muenchen.jpg" REL="nofollow">München S-Bahn</A> doesn't just isn't thinking too clearly. (There may be other reasons involving mechanical capital and operating costs per seat, but I'm very dubious. What do we know here in this global centre of passenger rail enginering expertise that they haven't yet cottoned on to?)<br /><br />As for turning trains rapidly and efficiently by taking advantage of high door throughput: it's clear there's no understanding about just how shockingly <A HREF="http://www.pobox.com/users/mly/caltrain-hsr.blogspot.com/TJPA%20professionally%20designed%20platform%20cross%20section.jpg" REL="nofollow">catastrophically bad and unworkable and dangerous</A> the train passenger "design" of the TJPA's Transbay Terminal is -- and that's altogether leaving aside the mind-blowing incompetence, slowness, low capacity and unworkability of the rail alignment getting the trains to the station.<br /><br />Oh man.<br /><br />PS <A HREF="http://www.railwaygazette.com/news_view/article/2009/04//londons_cross_city_line_follows_the_rer_mode.html" REL="nofollow">Here's</A> some RER reading for the Anglophone (that's me!) audience. "Providing capacity to accommodate waiting passengers and giving space to those unable to board during periods of disruption becomes a significant design objective" ... dude, like, WTF?! Strange yurrupeen socialist concepts! We didn't learn that in our AREMA Coal Loader Siding Rail Design course.Richard Mlynarikhttp://www.pobox.com/users/mly/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-81700996800268151042009-05-02T13:52:00.000-07:002009-05-02T13:52:00.000-07:00@Bruce: the Parisian RER E is similar. Here's a p...@Bruce: the Parisian RER E is similar. Here's a <A HREF="http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fichier:Mi2n_neuvilleU.jpg" REL="nofollow">photo</A> (avert your eyes: there's an operationally unthinkable curved platform). Richard's point is that it will be a looooong time before Caltrain ridership ever grows enough to require such stock. The RER E has about four times Caltrain's ridership.Clemhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01374282217135682245noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-84669707116543318672009-05-02T13:17:00.000-07:002009-05-02T13:17:00.000-07:00"Alon Levy said...
Arcady: depending on the r..."<I>Alon Levy said...<br /><br /> Arcady: depending on the railroad, sometimes double-decking creates more capacity problems than it solved. When you need to detrain large numbers of people simultaneously - for instance, if you're a commuter rail that needs to stop at TBT, dump an entire trainload of people, reverse direction, and be out of the station in five minutes - having a lot of doors is a bigger asset than having two floors. In Japan they go for the doors on most commuter lines, I think.</I>"<br /><br />I have seen photos of German double deckers that are three doors per car per side ... put 4 across seating on the top decks and metro style seating on the bottom decks and you have something with the seated capacity of an all-seated 4-across single deck commuter and the crush capacity of a single deck metro.BruceMcFhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08502035881761277885noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-43855837071054028122009-05-01T14:54:00.000-07:002009-05-01T14:54:00.000-07:00Re escalators (Alon's comment):
Yes, of course th...Re escalators (<A HREF="http://caltrain-hsr.blogspot.com/2009/04/regulatory-vacuum.html?showComment=1241209860000#c8429219004022551335" REL="nofollow">Alon's comment</A>):<br /><br />Yes, of course they can be made to work. The beatings will continue until morale improves and all that.<br /><br />But the reality is that there are ongoing costs and an unchanging social context. And, as I've asked a couple times, <I>why borrow trouble?</I>I think you'll find the same sorts of problems at suburban stations in the Netherlands or Italy or whereever: nobody could pretend that sociopathic human behaviour (unlike inept rail engineering) has any particular relation to the USA.<br /><br />You're also papering over the difference between heavily trafficked facilities in dense urban centres with, well, San Bruno. A few hundred boardings and alightings per day aren't going to do it. The same goes for nearly every other station on the line.<br /><br />Install a <A HREF="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q4x-B8vyu28" REL="nofollow">funicular</A> at every one if you like: signature architecture for everyone!Richard Mlynarikhttp://www.pobox.com/users/mly/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-53412628646794335132009-05-01T14:53:00.000-07:002009-05-01T14:53:00.000-07:00Alon: in Japan they have a VERY restricted loading...Alon: in Japan they have a VERY restricted loading gauge, and even despite that, they manage to fit some double-deckers in there. Note also that japanese mainline trains can be as long as 16 cars. Caltrain already has a fairly generous (by world standards) loading gauge, they might as well take advantage of it. I suspect that the tradeoff are such that just running double deckers is cheaper than lengthening platforms, but upgrading clearances for double deckers is more expensive. And by the way, if the chokepoint at TBT is the station throat, then the way to go is to minimize the number of trains passing through there.crzwdjkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06394805356595604336noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-533757091862632122009-05-01T13:43:00.000-07:002009-05-01T13:43:00.000-07:00Arcady: depending on the railroad, sometimes doubl...Arcady: depending on the railroad, sometimes double-decking creates more capacity problems than it solved. When you need to detrain large numbers of people simultaneously - for instance, if you're a commuter rail that needs to stop at TBT, dump an entire trainload of people, reverse direction, and be out of the station in five minutes - having a lot of doors is a bigger asset than having two floors. In Japan they go for the doors on most commuter lines, I think.Alon Levyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12195377309045184452noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-84292190040225513352009-05-01T13:31:00.000-07:002009-05-01T13:31:00.000-07:00Richard: while we're on the subject of American in...Richard: while we're on the subject of American incompetence, you should note that in more advanced countries, elevators and escalators don't break down. In Singapore, the MRT has a few wide turnstiles that accommodate wheelchairs. The elevators work. The escalators work, too, as intended - unlike in New York, where they sometimes turn into really inconvenient stairs. And that's a country where no lobby matters except that of the Prime Minister, and the only frivolous lawsuits that succeed are those the Prime Minister uses to silence the opposition.Alon Levyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12195377309045184452noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-4153615499078323802009-05-01T10:27:00.000-07:002009-05-01T10:27:00.000-07:00@arcady: some industry insiders seem to feel ETCS ...@arcady: some industry insiders seem to feel ETCS is on its way to becoming a de-facto global standard. If you haven't already, read this <A HREF="http://www.railwaygazette.com/news_view/article/2009/04/9450/a_vision_of_the_intelligent_railway.html" REL="nofollow">Railway Gazette article</A>. No matter what the standard's shortcomings may be, the point is that it's a standard and numerous vendors can build off-the-shelf systems against it. Nobody is mandating the implementation of ETCS outside of Europe, and yet it's happening; that can't be a coincidence.<br /><br />Besides, the peninsula corridor won't need a 100% resignaling for another few years (2015 ?), which bodes well for further stabilization and consolidation of reliable ETCS solutions. There are billions of dollars being spent (elsewhere! by other people!) to make sure it happens. <br /><br />What's not to leverage?Clemhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01374282217135682245noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-56593827465993512522009-05-01T00:03:00.000-07:002009-05-01T00:03:00.000-07:00Richard: just because it's a standard doesn't mean...Richard: just because it's a standard doesn't mean it's good. Or that it can even be made to work reliably. After all, there are international standards for computer networking set by the ISO, yet everyone uses TCP/IP instead. Also note that Auckland is using ETCS Level 1, which doesn't even need GSM-R, rather than any of the more advanced levels which might actually result in a capacity improvement, which is after all what Caltrain is looking for. Level 2 is still not fully debugged yet, especially in terms of interoperability, although signs are that it's getting there. ETCS is definitely a case of writing the standard first, and then mandating implementation because it's a standard, rather than taking the best of the currently working systems and making that the standard.crzwdjkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06394805356595604336noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-17289652272298450292009-04-30T23:11:00.000-07:002009-04-30T23:11:00.000-07:00Re ETCS and interoperability.
The point is that i...Re ETCS and interoperability.<br /><br />The point is that it's a <I>multi-vendor</I> and <I>debugged</I> and a <I>standard</I>.<br /><br />Auckland's tiny (Caltrain-scale) suburban network in the middle of the southern Pacific ocean isn't <A HREF="http://www.railwaygazette.com/news_view/article/2009/04/9554/auckland_to_install_etcs_level_1.html" REL="nofollow">adopting ETCS</A> because those forward-thinking New Zealanders want to operate freight trains from Italy or Slovenia or Old Zeeland, after all.<br /><br />There must be something else going on, wouldn't you say?Richard Mlynarikhttp://www.pobox.com/users/mly/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-39996532655453768492009-04-30T23:04:00.000-07:002009-04-30T23:04:00.000-07:00Re: "do you happen to know what the floor height i...Re: "do you happen to know what the floor height is specifically for low-level-entry double-deckers?"<br /><br />The Swiss IC2000 inter-city unpowered double deckers are level boarding at 550mm. The existing <A HREF="http://www.google.com/search?q=siemens+sbb+514" REL="nofollow">Siemens double-deck EMUs for the Zürich S-Bahn</A> likewise, as are the coming <A HREF="http://www.stadlerrail.com/index.php?page=487" REL="nofollow">Stadler double-deck EMUs</A> for Zürich (nominally 570mm, but you get the idea), as will be the 59+ inter-city and inter-regio double-deck EMU trains ordered in response to the SBB tender issued just a couple weeks ago. As I said, CH-land is going 550mm, and everything else being equal, I'd always follow that leader.<br /><br />The generic Bombardier (né DWA) double-decker unpowered cars in Germany have a floor level 800mm ATOR, which in practice means level boarding for 760mm platforms.<br /><br />The generic older Alstom double-decker EMUs (TER-2N Z235000 in France) have doors at 970mm ATOR -- but note these have doors above the bogies (trucks), at the intermediate level, not at the lower level.<br /><br />Alstom's more recent "Coradia Duplex" derivatives (eg the X.40 double deck EMUs operating in Sweden) have doors into the lower level at 645mm ATOR (so many standards!) while other derivatives (TER2N-NG, eg for Luembourg) advertise 600mm (ie level enough for 550mm platforms.)<br /><br /><I>The FLIRT, while an excellent train with many applications, is not really what the Caltrain corridor needs.</I>Caltrain, a low ridership, marginal suburban rail operation with modest growth, is a decade or two (and a rolling stock procurement cycle or two) away from justifying high-density or double-deck vehicles -- and it's unclear it ever would. (Stockholm's large suburban train order? Single deckers. Most German S-Bahnen? Single deck EMUs.)<br /><br />Having grown up with double-deck EMUs I once made the unexamined prejudiced assumption that double deckers are the only possible solution to suburban rail transportation, but more dispassionate analysis and wider experience shows that's simply not the case.<br /><br />FLIRTs are, like, totally bitching trains.<br /><br />PS Somebody ought to tell the Algiers RER people that they've ordered the wrong trains: FLIRTs can't possibly be applicable to their high density operation (like, uh, ... umm... Mountain View to Tamien!)Richard Mlynarikhttp://www.pobox.com/users/mly/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-45030505421875662662009-04-30T22:42:00.000-07:002009-04-30T22:42:00.000-07:00Richard: GSM-R is not the troublesome part of ETCS...Richard: GSM-R is not the troublesome part of ETCS, I'm just saying that it might not be as straightforward as you think to bring it to the US. Just look at the kerfuffle with plain old GSM and tri-band and quad-band phones. And yeah, you're right that ETCS L2 isn't truly communications based, but it's about half of a CBTC system, in the sense that movement authority is automatically communicated by radio to the train. For the full package you also want to communicate train location by radio as well, which is the eventual goal of ETCS (with the as yet undefined Level 3).<br /><br />And if you want to compare European and US systems, one key difference is that the US has major heavy haul freight, which is something that is unlikely to change unless you can find a way of shipping things by barge to Denver. In the US, PTC development has been much more focused on train handling for hevy freights. I don't think that whatever BNSF came up with is going to be at all a good idea either for HSR or for Caltrain. I just think that we need to be cautious about using a system that's still very much in the development phase, and that does not provide any appreciable benefit over a system that is already used in Europe (such as TVM or LZB) or the US (such as ACSES). The main point of ETCS is to solve the interoperation problem, which simply doesn't exist in the US, and it's incredibly unlikely that Californian trains will ever be operating across European borders.crzwdjkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06394805356595604336noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-9746593267562507122009-04-30T21:46:00.000-07:002009-04-30T21:46:00.000-07:00Re: "Communcations Based Train Control."
Dear Arc...Re: "Communcations Based Train Control."<br /><br />Dear Arcady,<br /><br />You appear to be using CBTC in a sense different from most other people.<br /><br />"Communications based" doesn't just mean there's a radio involved. I've never heard radio communicated train orders described as "CBTC", but I may have been hiding under a rock.<br /><br />Also, despite what you appear to be trying to imply, the radio substrate (GSM-R) of the ETCS/ERTMS system is far from troublesome -- in fact several infrastructure authorities have moved their train to ground communications to GSM-R before adopting ETCS, as it provides a standard, <I>multi-vendor</I> solution to a real world operational need. (It isn't perfect, but then I'm sure you've heard it said somewhere that, in engineering as in much of human endevour, "the perfect is the enemy of the good." Certainly for a trivial system like Caltrain's or CHSRA's "network" GSM-R's known data rate limitations are simply not an issue.)<br /><br />Though it is true that there have been significant development and interoperability problems with ETCS, at this point somebody else, a somebody else with an immense amount of skill and severe operating requirements (SBB-CFF-FFS) has dealt with them, and the most critical parts of the most intensively used rail network on the planet (Switzerland's) simply would not work if ETCS were unreliable.<br /><br />As for HSL-Zuid: the problems with this project extend far, far beyond their ability to implement a signalling system. Check our their rolling stock procurement ("Albatross." Albatross!!) for example. I'd take <A HREF="www.railxperts.ch" REL="nofollow">these guys</A> over theirs any day. (BTW fun fact to know and tell: local BART-Amtrak foamer hero Gene <A HREF="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BATN/message/36525" REL="nofollow">"perjury in the service of BART contractors' profitability is no vice"</A> Skoropowski likes to tout his Fluor experience in HSL-Zuid impleementation.)<br /><br />So, sure, believe that Wabtec will ome up with the perfect solution and that it will work the first time. At least they're not yurrupeen. Or believe that an unspecified, newly-developed signalling system (which is the issue here) communicated over a non-radio communications system (which isn't) will solve everything, because, hey the Pennsylvania Railroad did it all and did it right.<br /><br />PS "Danish bureaucrats"? Paging Rush Limbaugh! (GSM-R has a special local reserved national annex that can be used to implement the Paging Rush Limbaugh call group.)Richard Mlynarikhttp://www.pobox.com/users/mly/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-60794663303194001152009-04-30T21:21:00.000-07:002009-04-30T21:21:00.000-07:00Re: ADA and ramps.
Ramps are never our of service...Re: ADA and ramps.<br /><br /><I>Ramps are never our of service.</I>Elevators are maintenance and sanitation nightmares outside the most heavily-used, constantly-serveilled stations. (Think: Transbay, and, uh, Transbay. Maybe Mission Bay.)<br /><br />Plus they're litigation attractors when they don't work, which is inevitable.<br /><br /><I>Keep it simple!</I>Hint: compare the fairly pleasant ramps at Lawrence or the (new) Palo Alto with the disaster of Bayshore's elevators. Belmont's elevator is OK, but why borrow trouble?Richard Mlynarikhttp://www.pobox.com/users/mly/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-11908911189310793422009-04-30T21:14:00.000-07:002009-04-30T21:14:00.000-07:00Elevators are maintenance and sanitary nightmares....Elevators are maintenance and sanitary nightmares. It's not a question of whether they get urinated in; only a question of how quickly it gets cleaned up.Clemhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01374282217135682245noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-91976449157147718672009-04-30T20:57:00.000-07:002009-04-30T20:57:00.000-07:00I don't understand Richard's rant against ADA ramp...I don't understand Richard's rant against ADA ramps. <br /><br />Just do like BART and install elevators instead.bikeridernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-79246420117692061942009-04-30T20:36:00.000-07:002009-04-30T20:36:00.000-07:00Richard: do you happen to know what the floor heig...Richard: do you happen to know what the floor height is specifically for low-level-entry double-deckers? Something roughly with the layout of the Bombardier cars, but European and EMU. I think the double-decker intercity cars in Switzerland were level boarding from 550 mm, but I might be wrong on that. The FLIRT, while an excellent train with many applications, is not really what the Caltrain corridor needs.crzwdjkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06394805356595604336noreply@blogger.com