tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post9125966172161909577..comments2024-03-28T11:51:19.078-07:00Comments on Caltrain HSR Compatibility Blog: The Bookend ApproachClemhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01374282217135682245noreply@blogger.comBlogger112125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-13500049022428919942012-11-17T05:21:50.887-08:002012-11-17T05:21:50.887-08:00Very well said. If blended operation is to happen,...Very well said. If blended operation is to happen, the 2 systems really need to share a common control system too. As new electric train fleets will be required for both services, they both must be specified to share many common standards, from power systems, through platform heights to control system interfaces. ERTMS/ETCS is the way to go, being adopted in many parts of the world not just in Europe. There's no reason why American organisations can't make or market compatible equipment, or supply system engineering and local customisation and certification services either, as all the core performance and interface standards are openly available and not the proprietary property of particular companies, unlike SELTRAC for instance.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07628390342800971231noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-67764280996481003062012-02-23T13:38:26.468-08:002012-02-23T13:38:26.468-08:00The stupid FAA allows passenger transports that di...The stupid FAA allows passenger transports that disintegrate upon perfectly controlled flights into terrain.<br /><br />They obviously to learn a thing or two from The World's Finest Transportation Professionals, who, amazingly enough, all just happen to work in the US rail and urban transportation sectors.<br /><br />PS You forgot the "regulations written in blood" line. As well as the "unique local conditions" one. Must Try Harder.Richard Mlynarikhttp://www.pobox.com/users/mly/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-57703915793014719072012-02-23T13:25:03.126-08:002012-02-23T13:25:03.126-08:00Passenger trains crashing into solid objects has r...Passenger trains crashing into solid objects has relatively uniform results regardless of rated "buff strength" (perhaps the word Chatsworth rings a bell...). Until more data is available on that particular incident, it is impossible to comment on what specifically went wrong (though evidence points to break issues), but really the only way to prevent disasters is to prevent crashes altogether.Joeyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16406340564037825796noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-92182625460406608662012-02-23T08:48:08.892-08:002012-02-23T08:48:08.892-08:00Such as shame that the evil FRA won't let us u...Such as shame that the evil FRA won't let us use lighter rail cars found in all the enlightened countries of the world, like say, uh, Argentina...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-55510203857031735812012-02-22T16:03:31.681-08:002012-02-22T16:03:31.681-08:00But will the never-built, proposed in 1990 maglev ...But will the never-built, proposed in 1990 maglev <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SkyTran" rel="nofollow">SkyTran</a> turn out to be as fantastic as those top secret 100 MPG carburetors Detroit and/or big oil were suppressing?<br /><br />I mean, what's not to love that these AirTran pods scoot around at 150 mph on a cushion of air <a href="http://www.skytran.net/phpsite/home/home.html" rel="nofollow">using only the energy equivalent of only 2 hand-held hairdryers</a>! What a great unit of power! How many hairdryer-equivalent is Caltrain, or a TGV? I'll bet SkyTran theory will totally put them both to shame!!!Reality Checknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-30732114028271344882012-02-21T14:29:33.829-08:002012-02-21T14:29:33.829-08:00ah I didn't catch the missing "I". P...ah I didn't catch the missing "I". PRT has been just around the corner for at least 30 years if not longer.Adirondacker12800noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-90991241775371637032012-02-21T11:32:04.775-08:002012-02-21T11:32:04.775-08:00Uh huh, right.
By the way, SkyTrain provides serv...Uh huh, right.<br /><br />By the way, SkyTrain <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SkyTrain_%28Vancouver%29#Frequency" rel="nofollow">provides service every 2 to 7 minutes to all stations at peak</a>. Not 15-30.Peterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00326948451529910432noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-10959374474804370262012-02-21T10:26:00.696-08:002012-02-21T10:26:00.696-08:00SkyTran along the Caltrain corridor would have ave...SkyTran along the Caltrain corridor would have average wait time of less than one minute (compared with 15-30 minutes for SkyTrain or traditional rail). Even if SkyTran travelled at 80 mph top speed, the average speed would be more than double the average speed of any ATO train system. The average speed of Caltrain is currently 30 mph. People will continue to drive unless a transit system can deliver average speeds of at least 50 mph. Cars have been providing "on-demand" travel for 100 years. A elevated PRT system could match that performance and provide a path to profitable transit systems. It would improve property values along the corridor by eliminating the horns, at-grade crossings and even allow repurposing of one of the rails for a trans-peninsula high speed bike lane (the other track would be kept for freight). Silicon Valley is the world center for innovation, it is time to try an innovative transportation system instead of pouring billions into a system that will increase ridership from 40,000 to perhaps 60,000 per day. Meanwhile 101 carries 400,000 rising to 600,000 per day. Add 280 traffic and riderhip exceeds 1,000,000 per day. Caltrain might be proven but it is a very expensive way to move a tiny fraction of Bay Area commuters.Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11043549190964171008noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-12084325827756679092012-02-21T00:36:39.294-08:002012-02-21T00:36:39.294-08:00Warning, Adiron, the OP is pushing a pod people sc...Warning, Adiron, the OP is pushing a pod people scheme (PRT), not a legitimate system like Skytrain, which is an ATO rapid transit system.swing hangernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-31458694998429785062012-02-21T00:13:42.903-08:002012-02-21T00:13:42.903-08:00According to Wikipedia Skytrain's maximum spee...According to Wikipedia Skytrain's maximum speed is 56 MPH. In local suburban service - station spacing of 1 or 2 miles - acceleration is more important than top speed. Top speed of 70 with good acceleration gets you there faster than 90 with slower acceleration. You don't want to have an average speed of 95 in local service, the passengers wouldn't like it.Adirondacker12800noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-24497787228856586462012-02-20T16:21:55.806-08:002012-02-20T16:21:55.806-08:00Clem,
Have you looked at SkyTran? It could replace...Clem,<br />Have you looked at SkyTran? It could replace the entire Caltrain line for $800-900m. I just did a simulator of the 40,000 ridership and came up with an average trip time of 12min:10sec with an average speed of 95 mph. Average wait time is 16 seconds during the peak and shorter off peak. Fare would be the same as Caltrain and the system would pay off in 5 years if ridership increased to 80,000 per day. Mountain View is considering a small starter system to connect downtown to North Bayshore and the office park. Each town along the line could elect to have a feeder system to help increase ridership. The best part is that it would save taxpayers $100m per year. More funding for teachers and police. Let me know if you would like to audit the simulation. I'd like to get your thoughts.Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11043549190964171008noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-87549126908649701932012-02-20T10:16:21.894-08:002012-02-20T10:16:21.894-08:00But "Honest Carl" Guardino told us it wa...But "Honest Carl" Guardino told us it was so!<br /><br />We <3 Honest Carl. Lots and lots. xoxo!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-35118818868645024362012-02-16T22:56:12.384-08:002012-02-16T22:56:12.384-08:00Adina,
MTC consultants are world-class experts at ...Adina,<br />MTC consultants are world-class experts at gaming models. If DTX ranked low then it is because that was the political outcome desired.<br /><br />Note that freeway expansion projects ranked at the top for cost/benefit, while the Bike Plan ranked dead last in the study, with negative(!!) cost benefit. This for a model that was supposed to prioritize projects based on emission reductions.Drunk Engineerhttp://systemicfailure.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-21711000455586827962012-02-16T19:30:33.007-08:002012-02-16T19:30:33.007-08:00Re: DTX - I looked into this, and found out that t...Re: DTX - I looked into this, and found out that the reason it scored so abysmally in the MTC's draft Transit Sustainability Program analysis is that the "benefit" didn't take into account increase in ridership resulting from running the train to Downtown San Francisco. Oops, only the main point of the project. I'm told that the analysis is being updated to take this into account, but I haven's seen the new report yet.<br /><br />The reason to keep DTX in (in addition to the benefit of getting to where more travellers want to go), is San Francisco's political leverage. I'd rather have Feinstein & co on the side of getting more money to the Bay Area sooner. Even if the cost-benefit math comes out worse, the political math comes out better.Adinahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10279781785237731478noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-30108100359766721132012-02-13T06:31:44.041-08:002012-02-13T06:31:44.041-08:00The Chronicle has learned that officials with Bay ...The Chronicle has learned that officials with Bay Area transportation agencies are in negotiations with each other, and with the California High-Speed Rail Authority, to craft an agreement that would fund an advanced train-control system, electrify the rails on the Peninsula and eliminate some of the rail crossings - perhaps as soon as 2016, five to 10 years earlier than previous estimates.<br /><br />http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/02/13/MNQJ1N64G0.DTLAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-35619526109847147172012-02-03T05:11:15.891-08:002012-02-03T05:11:15.891-08:00Wow, just wow. I nearly choked on my drink.
Soun...Wow, just wow. I nearly choked on my drink. <br /><br />Sounds like these be some of the most self-serving presentations in, well, the entire history of presentations.Peterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00326948451529910432noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-58370425050938756702012-02-02T17:16:01.701-08:002012-02-02T17:16:01.701-08:00Drunk Engineer,
That's simply amazing. Amazi...Drunk Engineer,<br /><br />That's simply amazing. Amazing.<br /><br />This "PTC World", that would be the same "World" as in the "World Series" of the noted global activity of baseball, yes?<br /><br />And is there be any field of endeavor in which Rod Diridon isn't the least qualified human?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-10637708525396174262012-02-01T23:02:22.426-08:002012-02-01T23:02:22.426-08:00My guess is they never even thought of asking abou...My guess is they never even thought of asking about it. Remember that Caltrain doesn't actually operate any trains, Amtrak does that, and at various points in the respective agencies history, Amtrak has been responsible for both Caltrain and Metrolink operations. One key difference is that I'm pretty sure Metrolink was a POP system from the beginning, and probably a one-conductor system, while Caltrain needed two conductors in order to sell tickets on board, which they no longer need due to PoP. But if Caltrain wanted, they could specify one conductor in their contract instead of two, and Amtrak would reassign the now-redudant assistant conductors elsewhere.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-65107966403686492812012-02-01T20:25:26.935-08:002012-02-01T20:25:26.935-08:00Well, you can attend the PTC World Congress and as...Well, you can attend the <a href="http://www.ptcworldcongress.com/agenda/" rel="nofollow">PTC World Congress</a> and ask Caltrain staff yourself. They will give a presentation called (I swear I'm not making this up) <i>Operator Insight: Effectively managing cost during PTC projects and maximising long-term return</i>.<br /><br />And worldwide signaling expert Rod Diridon Sr will give a talk (I swear I'm not making this up) called <i>Leading Association Insight: Balancing PTC investment in the current economic climate and the impact of high-speed lines of PTC funding</i>.Drunk Engineerhttp://systemicfailure.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-14345008717945184482012-02-01T16:41:44.652-08:002012-02-01T16:41:44.652-08:00Clem, may I offer a suggestion on how you can acco...Clem, may I offer a suggestion on how you can accomplish #1 on your list (ERTMS instead of CBOSS)? This is the most difficult (and unlikely) of your four points, because so few people understand rail operations, much less PTC systems, and everyone just rolls over when Caltrain asserts that its unique operating conditions require a unique solution. What I'd encourage (and plead with) you to do is:<br /><br />1. Take Caltrain's list of PTC requirements and check off each and every one. Either as a function of ERTMS, a change in operating practices, or something else.<br />2. Estimate how much money and time would be saved by ditching CBOSS.<br />3. Get this document to Dan Richard (no doubt you know people who can manage that).<br /><br />Whatever you (or Richard M) think of Dan and his history at BART, he's currently on a mission from god (aka Jerry Brown) to turn the CHSRA stinkpile into something that Brown be proud of and take credit for. Part of that game plan is to find savings that can be used to do additional stuff. (Yes, of course, there's huge piles of potential savings that Dan isn't going to dig into, but here's one that you obviously care about, know a lot about, and can make happen)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-36581625230049102182012-02-01T12:15:46.381-08:002012-02-01T12:15:46.381-08:00Why Metrolink can operate single conductor but Cal...Why Metrolink can operate single conductor but Caltrain cannot? Is this because of stronger Labor union, or less nagotiation power with Caltrain management?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-88134695747689664232012-01-31T23:02:21.906-08:002012-01-31T23:02:21.906-08:00I wouldn't really call Metrolink/Surfliner a b...I wouldn't really call Metrolink/Surfliner a black hole of pointlessness, and there are still many very cost-effective investments to be made there. Regardless of whether your trains are Olde Tyme FRA trains or fancy new Swiss trains, there are going to be bottlenecks caused by the single-track sections of your lines, and that's what Metrolink is looking to address here, in order to be able to increase service. It's actually a somewhat timetable-driven approach, and unlike Caltrain, most of the recent Metrolink improvements have had a direct impact on service levels, running times, or reliability. And as far as operations go, Metrolink has the smallest train crews of any US commuter railroad: just the engineer and conductor. Also, unlike Caltrain, Metrolink can't just secede from FRA-land, because many more of its trains run on heavily-trafficked freight lines. The only line it can really separate from the FRA network is the San Bernardino Line, and even there, there's probably more local freight traffic than on the Caltrain line, and not much more of a night window for freight.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-16960747742335071362012-01-31T11:30:30.504-08:002012-01-31T11:30:30.504-08:00I got yer "bookend approach" right here,...I got yer "bookend approach" <a href="http://www.metro.net/board/Items/2012/01_January/20120118P&PItem15.pdf" rel="nofollow">right here</a>, in glowing 1982-style fax resolution pixel-vision!<br /><br />Without doubt the same shovelling of a billion tax dollars into an FRA freight-based Olde Tyme Commuter Railroading black hole of pointlessness will be coming within a month or two to a criminally incompetent agency in Northern California, another tasty nine-digit reward for the people who brought you such hits as <a href="http://caltrain-hsr.blogspot.com/search/label/San%20Bruno" rel="nofollow">San Bruno</a> and <a href="http://caltrain-hsr.blogspot.com/search/label/CBOSS" rel="nofollow">CBOSS</a>.<br /><br />Perhaps they can use it to strategically fund <i>half</i> their far-worse-than-useless <a href="http://caltrain-hsr.blogspot.com/2011/11/business-plan-impressions.html" rel="nofollow">$1.9 billion tunnel</a> under Millbrae? Or compensate their very very very very very special contractor friends to cover the first several rounds of "unexpected" problems with CBOSS? How about 15% preliminary engineering for a <i>six</i> level terminal in San Jose? -- a billion might just about cover that work. The sky's not the limit: it's just the beginning!<br /><br />Politically balanced fiscal and technical black holes for both halves of the state.Richard Mlynarikhttp://www.pobox.com/users/mly/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-63797320662125037332012-01-28T21:54:34.596-08:002012-01-28T21:54:34.596-08:00#anonymous:
To turn it around: It's not so m...#anonymous:<br /><br />To turn it around: It's not so much solving a problem. t's underscoring the magnitude of issues which Clem's blog tends to minimize.<br /><br />In Unix ed-speak: 1,$:s/BART/Caltrain/g -- if you are the Anonymous I suspect you to be.<br /><br />Dammit, at this rate I'm going to have to start my own blog.kiwi.jonathanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18215458981556481196noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-61710199209895422792012-01-28T21:53:13.485-08:002012-01-28T21:53:13.485-08:00Riiight. But no-one has told California Public Ut...Riiight. But no-one has told California Public Utilities Commision that, so they haven't updated their rules since 1948.<br /><br />Point remains: <b>given</b> the current regulatory enviroment, CSHRA;s otherwise-inscrutable requirement for "separate and-non-equal" HSR tracks acutually makes sense.<br /><br />To you, and me, and Clem, and anyone with a clue, there's a huge failure of imagination there. As I've said elsewhere: why on earth is Caltrain, and CHSRA, blindly following the 1948 special-rule-for-gantries-to-dump-ice-into-wooden-"refrigerator"-car rulebook?kiwi.jonathanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18215458981556481196noreply@blogger.com