tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post1104767645943971914..comments2023-10-30T09:03:07.163-07:00Comments on California High Speed Rail Blog: HSR to North ConcordRobert Cruickshankhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06906581839066570472noreply@blogger.comBlogger51125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-50202062697344632562009-09-05T21:44:51.555-07:002009-09-05T21:44:51.555-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-45098283671873018562009-09-05T17:35:45.521-07:002009-09-05T17:35:45.521-07:00although pittsburg antioch to connect in stockton...although pittsburg antioch to connect in stockton via upgraded conventional to say, 110, would be an ok compromise.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-63395527528785267582009-09-05T17:04:35.775-07:002009-09-05T17:04:35.775-07:00Still, there won't be any hsr to concord.
Th...<i>Still, there won't be any hsr to concord. </i><br /><br />That's probably true. But it doesn't necessarily mean that there <i>shouldn't</i> be. It really depends on how much it would cost to build it.mikenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-9893087814910951232009-09-05T11:00:30.704-07:002009-09-05T11:00:30.704-07:00Still, there won't be any hsr to concord. con...Still, there won't be any hsr to concord. concord/walnut creek/pleasant hill, will have to use sf or the high speed overlay, at either oakland or livermore valley.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-87663048074794274522009-09-05T01:16:29.821-07:002009-09-05T01:16:29.821-07:00@ jim -
your comedy routine is wearing thin. It m...@ jim -<br /><br />your comedy routine is wearing thin. It may come as a surprise to you but SF is not the navel of the universe.Rafaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05471957286484454765noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-77801062638169746422009-09-04T22:34:58.443-07:002009-09-04T22:34:58.443-07:00Where's concord? Never heard of it.Where's concord? Never heard of it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-32271551579793683932009-09-04T17:42:02.149-07:002009-09-04T17:42:02.149-07:00@ mike -
CoCo county is currently very much orien...@ mike -<br /><br />CoCo county is currently very much oriented toward the Bay Area, precisely because it has only minimal transportation links to the Central Valley (except Sacramento) and none at all to SoCal.<br /><br />HSR to (North) Concord would give central/east CoCo towns a chance to emerge from the long shadow of SF. I'm not sure Pittsburg or even Antioch are large enough to qualify as the end point of a phase 3 HSR spur. North Concord might be, depending on how the NWS is re-used. Downtown Concord would arguably be the most credible end point, but also involve the most disruption.<br /><br />Further study of the alternatives would be required, but the cost of re-gauging a few miles of existing BART track wouldn't be a deciding factor.Rafaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05471957286484454765noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-74478959338102730822009-09-04T09:34:54.483-07:002009-09-04T09:34:54.483-07:00tear down the bridge!tear down the bridge!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-19526885409761322922009-09-04T09:27:24.757-07:002009-09-04T09:27:24.757-07:00I'm not sure what you have in mind here.
Sorr...<i>I'm not sure what you have in mind here.</i><br /><br />Sorry, I wasn't clear. The idea is that you'd have trains running from Pittsburg to Fresno, LA, and points south to serve people living in east/north CoCo County. But I'm not sure there would be enough ridership potential to justify those runs.<br /><br /><i>Btw, CC county as a whole has about a million people.</i><br /><br />I'm aware of that. I grew up there!<br /><br /><i>all this concern over poor coco county... I told you, no one cares about the eastbay</i><br /><br />Last I checked CoCo had more people in it than SF County. Oh wait, it still does.<br /><br />Get over it Jim. Without the East Bay, Silicon Valley, and Peninsula, SF would be nothing more than a cute little tourist town with a disproportionate number of hipsters and homeless people. Which might suit you fine, but certainly would not give it enough significance to be under consideration as a HSR destination.mikenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-23202538712141818712009-09-03T23:29:14.196-07:002009-09-03T23:29:14.196-07:00sigh, concord schmoncord, all this concern over po...sigh, concord schmoncord, all this concern over poor coco county. I told you, no one cares about the eastbay, we aren't even sure where it is... we just know no one wants to go there. Thats why we closed the bridge today. really don't need it. 0 the next four days are gonna be dreamy in sf! we really need make this an annual event)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-80957597092558891912009-09-03T20:31:09.882-07:002009-09-03T20:31:09.882-07:00The locals didn't roll over and let the airpor...<em>The locals didn't roll over and let the airport wither away, they actively killed it</em>.<br /><br />Which implies there was great demand for it that rallied support for the airpor... oh....Adirondacker12800noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-55973829659224348982009-09-03T20:08:56.520-07:002009-09-03T20:08:56.520-07:00I'm not from the Bay Area but I'm wonderin...I'm not from the Bay Area but I'm wondering, if you're going to build completely new commuter rail/HSR in that area, why put it in a freeway median instead of on current rail ROW closer to the Downtowns of Pittsburg, Antioch, and the other towns along there?whiteguyfromtheprojectshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10547750507431578651noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-52131417858859129412009-09-03T19:22:40.848-07:002009-09-03T19:22:40.848-07:00@ adirondacker12800 -
commercial service at Conco...@ adirondacker12800 -<br /><br />commercial service at Concord's Buchanan Field was terminated due to a draconian noise ordinance to curb jet noise. The locals didn't roll over and let the airport wither away, they actively killed it.<br /><br />It's not that the ~800k residents who live in central CC (plus many more in Vallejo, Benicia, Pleasanton, Livermore etc.) don't want to fly. The just didn't want the noise.<br /><br />The trade-off is a long drive or BART ride to OAK or SFO.Rafaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05471957286484454765noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-43912118416649199102009-09-03T18:22:16.865-07:002009-09-03T18:22:16.865-07:00On this route, modal share would be very high.
10...<em>On this route, modal share would be very high</em>.<br /><br />100% of nothing is still nothing. <br />How many Greyhound stations are there in the area this will be serving. If Greyhound can't scare up a few dozen people how many train passengers are there going to be? The airport lost commercial service, if there was a lot of traffic they wouldn't have rolled over and let it be abandoned. <br /><br /><em>Bombardier has light rail vehicles based on this propulsion system, because some cities want electric trans but not the visual impact of catenaries. IOW, it's already been developed</em><br /><br />And how many miles of it are in actual use? Ten? Twenty? More than 100? <br /><br />Bombardier's catenaryless system doesn't use linear induction motors. The system is more or less a long series of primary coils of a transformer. It's used in sensitive historic districts and they switch over to regular catenary as soon as they can. <br /><br />Their linear induction system, I'm familiar with the one in Queens, uses third rail for power conduction. Bombardier has a design build operate contract on that, who know how much money they are .... pissing away... so they can point at a system. It's built at standard gauge, if this goes seriously wrong they can thoow some LRTs on it. Bombardier and it's stockholders can have a nice chat, while conventional third rail streetcars run on the tracks.<br /><br />There's railroad tracks all over out there, that implies trains. If they got out there with steam they can get out there with electricity. If they don't have enough passengers to justify conventional catenary they don't have enough passengers to justify a more expensive system.Adirondacker12800noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-48954009390976328802009-09-03T17:35:54.463-07:002009-09-03T17:35:54.463-07:00@ mike -
"You could also potentially run tra...@ mike -<br /><br />"You could also potentially run trains south from Pittsburg"<br /><br />I'm not sure what you have in mind here. As discussed above, there standard gauge head-end station could be moved from North Concord to downtown Concord, but there is limited room there. BART would need to retain access to its yard just south of that station to park trains overnight.<br /><br />Considering that the NWS is still undeveloped, I figured North Concord would be good enough. A connector road up from Willow Pass Rd. along the edge of the NWS might be useful for distributing vehicle traffic to any intermodal BART/eBART/HSR station there.<br /><br />Btw, CC county as a whole has about a million people. Richmond (pop 100k) is the only larger town on the bay side, see <a href="http://www.cchealth.org/img/ccc_map.gif" rel="nofollow">map</a>. The catchment area would also include parts of Vallejo/Benicia, Hercules/Pinole, Dublin/Pleasanton/Livermore.<br /><br />The biggest issues would be additional vehicle traffic, parking and NIMBYs living near the station. What else is new.Rafaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05471957286484454765noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-92214949066928020102009-09-03T16:56:23.331-07:002009-09-03T16:56:23.331-07:00@ wu-ming -
the problem is that UPRR owns the ent...@ wu-ming -<br /><br />the problem is that UPRR owns the entire ROW from SJ to Sacramento, north of Oakland it's a busy freight corridor.<br /><br />There's zero room for additional tracks in most locations and, UPRR isn't volunteering to upgrade tracks and signaling to 90 or 110mph because it introduces a speed mismatch: freight trains wouldn't ever run that fast.<br /><br />Adding bypass tracks resolves the speed conflict, but someone has to pay for laying them. <br /><br />Higher speeds are only safe if the track geometry is within tighter tolerances. Track geometry degradation rate is roughly proportional to the fourth power of axle load. FRA-compliant diesel-electric locomotives weigh in at over 30 tonnes/axle.<br /><br />For reference, non-compliant HSR trains: 17 tonnes. As a first order approximation, that's a factor 10 difference.<br /><br />Ergo: if you want high speed but not spend every free minute of your day maintaining track geometry, you need to use lightweight trains and keep heavy freight off your tracks as much as possible. Mixed traffic requires a waiver from FRA (cp. Caltrain EMUs)<br /><br />There may well be sections of the Capitol in which new passenger-only track can be laid next to existing freight tracks, possibly on newly acquired land. UPRR might be ok with hosting passenger trains to run past its own trains at 90-110mph, provided they slow down to 79mph max whenever the cut back over to the freight tracks.<br /><br />However, there are large sections of the Capitol Corridor in which laying new track would be impossible: Benecia bridge and approaches, Martinez-Oakland Coliseum, Niles-San Jose. The Oakland Coliseum-Niles section of the Mulford line is currently single-track and could be double-tracked.<br /><br />The Newark-Alviso section probably could not, for environmental reasons. Making the Alviso line one-way southbound and the Milpitas line one-way northbound would increase capacity, but require track work at Niles. Another big issue is that such an arrangement would have to apply to all users, including UPRR itself. San Jose residents in the Ryland Park area would have a massive hissy fit at the whole idea.<br /><br />Running passenger-only tracks in the I-80 corridor would be difficult and expensive where there is no available median. Also, the bridges across the Carquinez bridge weren't designed to take the load of heavy rail trains.<br /><br />Ergo, running HSR out to the Concord area is probably as good as its going to get.<br /><br />Note that it is possible to implement express bypass tracks in freeway medians via track stacking: on half-buried, the other half-elevated (minimizes required run length for elevation transitions back to grade).<br /><br />In a wide median, you can have the eastbound tracks and island platform above the westbound ones. Pedestrian access via bridge from above or tunnel from below. If you have to use side platforms, enabling access to both from either side is more difficult.Rafaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05471957286484454765noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-81703124142643793542009-09-03T15:57:12.429-07:002009-09-03T15:57:12.429-07:00I think this is one of the better drawing-board pr...I think this is one of the better drawing-board proposals you've come up with, Rafael.<br /><br />The biggest loss from choosing Pacheco over Altamont is that it basically eliminates Sacto-SF and Sacto-Oakland service.<br /><br />But if you built a relatively cheap connection from Stockton to Pittsburg BART, you could have city center-to-city center travel times of 90 minutes for Sacto-SF (30 min HSR + 8 min transfer + 52 min BART) and 77 minutes for Sacto-Oakland (30 min HSR + 8 min transfer + 39 min BART).<br /><br />That's a pretty decent improvement over the Capitols (130 min Sacto-SF and 115 min Sacto-Oakland). You could also potentially run trains south from Pittsburg, primarily serving residents of CoCo County living east of Orinda and north of Danville. It's not clear that there would be enough demand in that relatively small catchment area, however.mikenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-75218462062940871052009-09-03T15:37:31.906-07:002009-09-03T15:37:31.906-07:00following the capitol corridor route for the HSR p...following the capitol corridor route for the HSR phase II extension from the bay area to sac would be great for the I-80 corridor (and me, personally).無名 - wu minghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01078479850722724885noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-48030715856949668032009-09-03T14:36:35.475-07:002009-09-03T14:36:35.475-07:00@ adirondacker12800 -
"I suspect that linear...@ adirondacker12800 -<br /><br />"I suspect that linear induction motors cost a tad more than stringing catenary."<br /><br />Per-mile, you're absolutely correct. Bombardier has light rail vehicles based on this propulsion system, because some cities want electric trans but not the visual impact of catenaries. IOW, it's already been developed.<br /><br />What I was thinking of is applying this expensive technology only in short stretches and only if it makes the difference between tunneling and continuing at grade.<br /><br />Stockton-SanJose is over 70 miles and there are sections such as the Don Edwards National Wildlife Refuge where it would be hard to get approval to construct an OCS at all.Rafaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05471957286484454765noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-30681512146943795222009-09-03T14:28:18.534-07:002009-09-03T14:28:18.534-07:00@ adirdondacker12800 -
"Only after they outl...@ adirdondacker12800 -<br /><br />"Only after they outlaw cars."<br /><br />For central CC-Sacramento, you might have a point. Driving up 680/80 is a direct and usually painless experience. HSR's modal share would be modest, as long as gas prices are low. Last summer, when they reached $4.50 in California, train ridership shot up.<br /><br />For central CC-SoCal, I think you underestimate just how long a drive that is. OAK and SFO are both pretty far away. On this route, modal share would be very high.Rafaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05471957286484454765noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-55823589797064364242009-09-03T14:15:13.102-07:002009-09-03T14:15:13.102-07:00@ Adirondacker12800 -
"How well though out i...@ Adirondacker12800 -<br /><br />"How well though out is it to ADD passengers to the system?"<br /><br />BART projects are driven by the political interests of the counties that pay its bills. Contra Costa county wants service extended to its eastern end, just like Alameda wants it out to Livermore and down to Fremont Warm Springs.<br /><br />Santa Clara, not formally a member of the BART consortium but still one of the paymasters, wants it extended all the way to Santa Clara.<br /><br />SF politicians and BART's own operators want these expansion plans reined in and money spent on increasing pedestrian flow capacity in the system core.<br /><br />Oakland wants BART to build a people mover to its airport.<br /><br />Etc.Rafaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05471957286484454765noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-40399700938228015302009-09-03T14:04:11.631-07:002009-09-03T14:04:11.631-07:00@ jim -
first off, this idea for taking HSR into ...@ jim -<br /><br />first off, this idea for taking HSR into North Concord was my idea, not CHSRA's.<br /><br />Second, as I tried to explain:<br />- eBART + BART = commuter rail<br />- Amtrak California = intercity rail, slow but serves many secondary towns<br />- HSR = intercity rail, fast but serves few stops.<br /><br />Third, CHSRA actually sited the stations in consulation with city officials. At the time, those in Stockton apparently wanted a station that was intermodal with ACE and Amtrak SJ out of Sacramento.<br /><br />Keep in mind that whatever UPRR has said, CHSRA's official plans still call for the alignment to hew close to UPRR/hwy99 through Fresno and points north. They traded off proximity to downtown areas against intermodal stations with Amtrak SJ in Merced and Modesto.<br /><br />If UPRR forces CHSRA to cut a deal with BNSF all the way from Bakersfield to south Stockton, <i>then</i> the city of Stockton could ask for its one and only HSR station to be moved. Any such change would need to go through a review process with all the stakeholders, the mayor can't just make that decision single-handedly.<br /><br />Amtrak is tied to making the most of certain freight rail corridors it has trackage rights on. Turning lemons into lemonade. CHSRA has the luxury of building brand-new tracks, so stakeholders have a chance to say what they really want as opposed to accepting the best Amtrak can do within the constraints it has to plan, invest operate under.Rafaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05471957286484454765noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-27130576048585229982009-09-03T13:46:15.949-07:002009-09-03T13:46:15.949-07:00multiple lines share many parts of the system
Lik...<em>multiple lines share many parts of the system</em><br /><br />Like subway systems all over the world.... <br /><br /><em>which is running at or even above design capacity in downtown SF</em>.<br /><br />How well though out is it to ADD passengers to the system? <br /><br /><em>At one time bart had its eyes on extending out to stockton</em>.<br /><br />Then rational people asked how many hours a 90 mile subway trip would take on a system that runs all local all the time. <br /><br /><em>HSR to North Concord (or downtown Concord, if preferred) would permit several trains per hour to SoCal and several more to Sacramento</em><br /><br />Only after they outlaw cars. More like several a day. <br /><br /><em>If that's still not enough to get across Altamont Pass, there might even need to be track-embedded linear electric motors to assist the diesels in getting the train across the hump at a useful speed.</em><br /><br />I suspect that linear induction motors cost a tad more than stringing catenary. If you have enough traffic to justify the cost of development of this diesel/linear induction fantasy then there's enough traffic to justify conventional cheap catenary, probably all the way from Stockton to San Jose.Adirondacker12800noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-66966618624480415542009-09-03T12:35:09.494-07:002009-09-03T12:35:09.494-07:00Rafael said...
@ jim -
"no one cares about t...Rafael said...<br />@ jim -<br /><br />"no one cares about the eastbay anyway."<br /><br />Where did that come from?<br /><br /><br />lol just a sudden morning fit of san francisco centric hyperbole.<br /><br />So, basically they are planning hsr with without bothering to work with existing rail up and down the valley for tranfers and multi modal stations.<br /><br />even though the long range san joaquin plan calls for upgrades to speed and frequency designed to feed intermediate valley passengers into the hsr line.<br /><br />now I see why people get so cynical.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-57714353477332345772009-09-03T12:29:06.798-07:002009-09-03T12:29:06.798-07:00@ jim -
"no one cares about the eastbay anyw...@ jim -<br /><br />"no one cares about the eastbay anyway."<br /><br />Where did that come from?Rafaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05471957286484454765noreply@blogger.com