tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post8276971425764662165..comments2024-03-28T11:51:19.078-07:00Comments on Caltrain HSR Compatibility Blog: Now What?Clemhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01374282217135682245noreply@blogger.comBlogger43125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-82015282928311896392012-10-12T19:13:45.881-07:002012-10-12T19:13:45.881-07:00"Page 14 is the smoking gun: it shows US pass..."Page 14 is the smoking gun: it shows US passenger PTC is fourteen times cheaper than ERTMS. Ahhhh, so that explains it!"<br /><br />I'm pretty sure it's all the balises in the European system. The 'legacy' systems were using all the track-broadcasting spectrum already. In the US the track-broadcasting spectrum was still largely available (it's needed to distinguish between nearby tracks when using GPS). Or in Amtrak's case, the track broadcasting spectrum was already being used for a system which provided most of the benefits of PTC; number of balises necessary was therefore much lower. Also, balise-based systems have a discontinuous character and are therefore painfully harder to make failsafe.neroden@gmailhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07475686367097445497noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-30631850945349345732012-08-18T20:35:24.877-07:002012-08-18T20:35:24.877-07:00I'm not sure where you get your facts and figu...I'm not sure where you get your facts and figures, but I will venture a guess that you have mixed up the number of ERTMS track-miles with the number of vehicles equipped (roughly 5,000 today). The number of ERTMS track-miles under contract is already past 40,000 today, not 5,000 as you imply.Clemhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01374282217135682245noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-39425416755355866072012-08-18T19:55:46.641-07:002012-08-18T19:55:46.641-07:00Well to listen the proponents of ERTMS it's go...Well to listen the proponents of ERTMS it's going to have all sorts of off the shelf-ish oggly goodness with multiple vendors all in cut throat competition keeping prices down. Where's the competition going to be if there's 60,000 miles of whatever in North America and 15,000 miles of ERTMS in the rest of the world? ( ERTMS tripling between now and 2020 ) Adirondacker12800https://www.blogger.com/profile/17108712932656586797noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-46868703763394454482012-08-18T19:50:44.971-07:002012-08-18T19:50:44.971-07:00I like what you did there, comparing future plans ...I like what you did there, comparing future plans with proven track record, a sort of apples-and-seeds comparison. I wonder how the PTC deployed in 2012 in the US compares to the ERTMS that will be deployed in 2020, because that is just as fascinating as your comparison of PTC in 2020 with ERTMS in 2012.Clemhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01374282217135682245noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-79633271785032635592012-08-15T16:36:52.821-07:002012-08-15T16:36:52.821-07:00Another gem: " ERTMS deployed ... primarily o...Another gem: "<i> ERTMS deployed ... primarily on a passenger rail network compared to the more complex shared freight and passenger network in the United States.</i>".<br /><br />If there's one things that characterizes the European rail network, it's got to be "not complex" and "not shared with freight".<br /><br />And where on the face of the earth did they get those $137k/mile and $$1.9M/mile numbers from? Impolite answers suggest themselves, yes, but where are the references?<br /><br />I don't think a corporate IT department, let alone a vital safety developer, can fart for $137k, let alone deploy a mile or anything.<br /><br />Mile of plain track? Density and complexity of interlockings? Train speed? Traffic density? Replacement of or co-existnence with prior systems? Co-existence with prior PTC systems? Replacement of or co-existence with existing dispatching and scheduling systems? Apples? Oranges? Imaginary?<br /><br />The fact that the ERTMS number appears to be a translation from UK pounds and km is fascinating, given the rudimentary amount of test-only ETCS/ERTMS deployed on the "American aircraft carrier anchored off Europe."<br /><br />The fact that the US PTC number comes from a three year old sales pierce from a consultant and can't reflect actual deployment costs of I-ETMS or any other system is also fascinating.<br /><br />Strange strange stuff.<br /><br />It's hard not to think that FRA's authors have little experience, aren't in contact with any foreign organization that has deployed PTC, haven't yet worked out how to use teh Googles, and basically are making this stuff up as they go along. Somebody got paid to write that?<br /><br />Good use of clip art from equipment manufacturer catalogs to pad out the piece, though. Fills out the page count nicely.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-64311551493952114242012-08-14T22:41:22.723-07:002012-08-14T22:41:22.723-07:00There are other interesting little gems, right the...There are other interesting little gems, right there on page 14. ERTMS is deployed on 22,000 miles of track ( in round numbers ) US PTC will be installed on 60,000 miles. ERTMS is in 5700 vehicles. US PTC will be in 22,000. Hmmmmmmm. Adirondacker12800https://www.blogger.com/profile/17108712932656586797noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-71249608902543333562012-08-14T20:50:14.251-07:002012-08-14T20:50:14.251-07:00Another gem from the FRA report to Congress:
The ...Another gem from the <a href="http://www.fra.dot.gov/downloads/08.2012_FRA_Report_to%20Congress_on_Positive_Train_Control.pdf" rel="nofollow">FRA report to Congress</a>:<br /><br /><i>The scope, complexity, and difficulty of PTC interoperability exceed what was originally anticipated. Consequently, the adoption of these standards as railroad industry recommended practices and standards has not occurred. This has impacted the original ITC railroads and the industry as a whole. Without firm interoperability standards, preparation of contract documents to develop and implement PTC has been delayed. Therefore, the start of the acquisition process for many railroads has been delayed. In situations where the standards are available, they cannot be considered “final” as no interoperable PTC systems have previously been built. Therefore, the standards’ correctness and completeness cannot be evaluated.</i>Clemhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01374282217135682245noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-20416188334855113282012-08-14T20:44:34.128-07:002012-08-14T20:44:34.128-07:00Page 14 is the smoking gun: it shows US passenger ...Page 14 is the smoking gun: it shows US passenger PTC is fourteen times cheaper than ERTMS. Ahhhh, so that explains it!<br /><br />The part that I can't figure out is why at $138k/mile, CBOSS should cost any more than $138k x 50 miles = 6.9 million. The actual figure is $231 million, or thirty-three times higher.<br /><br />$231 million is the cost of US passenger PTC plus two ERTMS's thrown in for good measure.<br /><br />Clearly ERTMS is way too expensive, Q.E.D.Clemhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01374282217135682245noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-76674674586475553002012-08-14T07:52:59.515-07:002012-08-14T07:52:59.515-07:00The August 2012 FRA report to Congress on Positive...The August 2012 FRA report to Congress on <a href="http://images.politico.com/global/2012/08/fra_ptc.html" rel="nofollow">Positive Train Control <br />Implementation Status, Issues, and Impacts</a> mentions California.<br /><br />Two basic PTC systems have either been adopted, or are being adopted by the majority of <br />railroads in North America. Though they are functionally the same, they represent two <br />different technical approaches. ACSES relies on the use of track-embedded transponders as <br />the primary means of train position determination. I-ETMS relies on the use of GPS as the <br />primary means of train position determination. <br />Other PTC systems that are already in limited use, or are being considered for use, represent <br />variations of ACSES or I-ETMS. <br />1. ITCS is in operation on the Amtrak line between Chicago and Detroit, and is being <br />considered for use on the Caltrain Line between San Francisco and San Jose. ITCS <br />architecture is similar to the I-ETMS architecture. <br />2. The European Train Control System (ETCS) is under consideration by the California <br />High-Speed Rail Authority for high-speed operations between San Jose and Los <br />Angeles. ETCS is similar to the ACSES architecture. StevieBnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-33602301888102316482012-07-15T10:11:59.090-07:002012-07-15T10:11:59.090-07:00Quick reminder about a "Leg Counsel ruling / ...Quick reminder about a "Leg Counsel ruling / opinion": It is simply one lawyer's opinion on an issue, not binding on anyone. Just like an opinion by the AG is not binding on anyone, although it may have significant persuasive value. The Legislative Counsel cannot "rule" on anything.Peterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00326948451529910432noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-21014114755232915892012-07-13T22:03:14.421-07:002012-07-13T22:03:14.421-07:00By the way, here is Caltrain's road map for th...By the way, here is Caltrain's <a href="http://www.caltrain.com/Assets/Caltrain+Modernization+Program/Documents/Planning+Process++(Updated+March+2012).pdf" rel="nofollow">road map</a> for the blended program planning process. They're shooting for completing all of this analysis as well as the preliminary design and environmental clearance by summer 2013. That seems like a really aggressive schedule given the glacial pace of these things, and I would not at all be surprised to see it slip into 2014.Clemhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01374282217135682245noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-21056917072747469912012-07-13T21:59:59.355-07:002012-07-13T21:59:59.355-07:00Thanks for clarifying that, interesting.Thanks for clarifying that, interesting.Clemhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01374282217135682245noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-48916051599508268622012-07-13T18:16:37.161-07:002012-07-13T18:16:37.161-07:00@ Clem
Regarding the Poison Pill possibility. ...@ Clem <br /><br />Regarding the Poison Pill possibility. <br /><br />There apparently will not a possibility of "bookend funding" being moved away for other purposes.<br /><br />A review of the Leno Committee hearing of July 5, has this excerpt which can be viewed at:<br /><br />http://youtu.be/pt1rFobBmL4 (4 minutes) <br /><br />The committee did look at that possibility and if you believe Leno and his explanation as well as his being willing to enter into the Journal such an understanding, it would seem this is not an active issue. <br /><br />morrisMorris Brownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-10911691646099094202012-07-12T21:48:54.181-07:002012-07-12T21:48:54.181-07:00That is correct. It may also make good technical ...That is correct. It may also make good technical sense.Clemhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01374282217135682245noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-69133665141353752982012-07-12T17:54:11.840-07:002012-07-12T17:54:11.840-07:00Morris:
Hypothetically speaking, the Authority co...Morris: <br />Hypothetically speaking, the Authority could always remain in compliance by choosing to go with another RoW into SF if it suddenly becomes more convenient. If they were forced to do that, I should think they would likely yank any funding they have control over for Caltrain and the blended system and put it elsewhere. Taking it one step further, what might happen to Caltrain under such a scenario? Do they go bankrupt as they claim they will and (dun-dun-dun) BART moves in to close the loop - something a lot of powerful people would like to see (not me, I prefer Caltrain)?HSR-PREPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01135035744570708308noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-55603262318569131252012-07-12T14:27:05.783-07:002012-07-12T14:27:05.783-07:00@ Unknown
I agree they could indeed move about th...@ Unknown<br /><br />I agree they could indeed move about that amount to the Central Valley without matching. <br /><br />Thinking even more about this, what about the $400 million grabbed by Feinstein and company for the "train box" at the TBT. They could also say this was Fed funds for which to date Prop 1A funds have not been matched. Yep plenty of options.morris brownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-88033317383437639572012-07-12T14:19:47.702-07:002012-07-12T14:19:47.702-07:00Clem:
It is extremely doubtful that the Authority...Clem:<br /><br />It is extremely doubtful that the Authority will give up and eliminate any possibility of a 4 track option on the Peninsula.<br /><br />If you have read the Leg Counsel ruling / opinion on legality of the business plan, you will note that they clearly state, ".. to the extent the business plan continues to retain a "full-build" option for the San Francisco-San Jose segment... it is reasonable to to conclude that the revised business plan complies with the bond act's design characteristics."<br /><br />Thus, remove the 4 track option, the plan doesn't comply and is not legal under Prop 1A. <br /><br />The ruling is not law for sure and only in the courts will what they have stated be finally proven correct or not. Their assertion that "usable segment" means "usable" by either HSR or regular passenger or freight trains is most highly suspect. <br /><br />That opinion is clearly not why building in "usable segments" is mandated in Prop 1A. It was meant to enforce that there would be built a HSR project, not an ordinary AMTRAK low speed set of tracks.<br /><br />Quite clearly now, CHSRA has changed horses. Richard now describes their mission as being one of "rail modernization". HSR building is no longer their prime mission. After spending the total of the $8 billion now appropriated plus a needed $2 billion to match from local sources, not a single foot of HSR ready track will have been built.morris brownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-20106563215396598872012-07-12T10:51:40.065-07:002012-07-12T10:51:40.065-07:00This is less of a barrier than you think. Because...This is less of a barrier than you think. Because California didn't match 50% on all the fed funds, under Prop 1a, they could spend an additional amount of bond funds in the CV up to the point at which state spending matches federal #. I think this amount is about $700 million, which is coincidentally about the amount of rumored cost over runs.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05468739359543614826noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-43972582358065365562012-07-12T10:11:28.168-07:002012-07-12T10:11:28.168-07:00Clem:
You really should note that the appropriati...Clem:<br /><br />You really should note that the appropriation of $8 Billions passed by the legislature really means that $10 billion is the total package.<br /><br />Two billion dollars of the appropration is supposedly directed at the "bookends" but will need matching funds from local sources. So the "bookends will get a total of $4 billion to spend, if they can raise the necessary matching funds.<br /><br />The total then rises to $10 billion. As planed, the $10 bilion expenditure will not result in one foot of HSR track; upgrading to HSR usable track can only come later when more funds are obtained.morris brownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-43611587599717740402012-07-11T22:14:14.538-07:002012-07-11T22:14:14.538-07:00On the Poison Pill. Probably none of the Senator&...On the Poison Pill. Probably none of the Senator's knew anything like this was possible.<br /><br />However, the "bookend" funding, requires matching funds. The match is to come from Local funds. So having the department of finance take bookend funds and move them elsewhere, they would have to have a matching fund source; probably makes moving the funds very difficult.<br /><br />Nevertheless, how many who voted for the bill because of bookend funding realized it was possible they wouldn't get the funds.<br /><br />Actually down south, the Leg Counsel ruling / opinion stated none of the proposed projects there qualified for funding.morris brownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-47652233635437860922012-07-11T08:57:47.816-07:002012-07-11T08:57:47.816-07:00On the contrary, Transbay Terminal did NT study th...On the contrary, Transbay Terminal did NT study the impacts of HSR, and the San Bruno grade separation project does NOT allow for HSR.<br /><br />Andy, are you paid by Caltrain? Serious question.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-69299638673650686352012-07-11T00:10:28.598-07:002012-07-11T00:10:28.598-07:00OT: Clem, will you do more of the Caltrain station...OT: Clem, will you do more of the Caltrain station design analysis? I would like to know what's your take on the San Jose station, Sunnyvale, Santa Clara, etc.<br /><br />Thanks,<br />WilliamWilliamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14234802218858306443noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-70414479622169293102012-07-11T00:04:21.963-07:002012-07-11T00:04:21.963-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Williamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14234802218858306443noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-29079291784012258982012-07-10T23:27:16.344-07:002012-07-10T23:27:16.344-07:00It is normal to segment project EIRs. For example,...It is normal to segment project EIRs. For example, rail systems often have an EIR done for a particular segment, even though there are plans and documentations that the rail system could be expanded further beyond the current project limit. If we don't place a reasonable limit, someone could argue that the Transbay Terminal EIR is not valid because it didn't study the impacts of a transbay rail tunnel, and we wouldn't be able to proceed with the San Bruno grade separation because it could help facilitate HSR.<br /><br />The electrification EIR should include all elements of electrification, and the impacts caused by changes in operation because of electrification. Electrification alone isn't going to make Caltrain and HSR corridor. It will require additional studies and actions that are independent of electrification.Andy Chownoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-71706551976835015082012-07-09T16:49:17.620-07:002012-07-09T16:49:17.620-07:00Good question.
It appears to be the budget item f...Good question.<br /><br />It appears to be the budget item for CHSRA administration and was part of general budget bill<br />http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201120120AB1497&search_keywords=<br /><br />It is about $24 million this year and includes $5 million for TY Lin and money for other consultants as well as staff.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05468739359543614826noreply@blogger.com