CAHSR: California High Speed Rail's Blended Caltrain Corridor has an Issue
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 12 дек 2023
- California High-Speed Rail is currently the only and first ultra-high-speed rail project in the United States. Even with it's many setbacks, it is somehow leading the way for high-speed rail in the United States. Caltrain and the CAHSRA have partnered to utilize the same corridor, but there are some problems with the way they are implementing it. Join us on this depressing journey of California High-Speed Rail.
If you like the video, make sure to LIKE and SUBSCRIBE!
This is the only way I know that people are really interested in the topic. Plus it would mean a lot.
It would also mean a lot if you became a patron on either Patreon or RUclips. I'm a struggling college student. It would definitely help ya boy out.
/ banksrail
Follow me on Instagram and TikTok at:
pCqZbfxVMp...
www.tiktok.com/@banks.rail?is...
Copyright Disclaimer: Section 107 of the Copyright Act provides the statutory framework for determining whether something is a fair use and identifies certain types of uses-such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, transformation, scholarship, and research-as examples of activities that may qualify as fair use
"Fair Use" guidelines: www.copyright.gov/fair-use/
As RUclips says, "Not all reuse is copyright infringement
A channel that transforms original content for commentary, criticism, or parody may be protected under the doctrine of fair use."
The content on this RUclips Channel, 'Banks Rail', is transformative in nature, therefore falls under fair use. Because of this, I ask you to NOT strike or claim this content. 
Наука
Please consider subscribing to Banks Rail for great passenger railway videos with superb content.
Question, David..will the FRA allow freight trains to utilize a rail line that 125 mph passenger trains operate over? Or is 110 mph the highest passenger train speed on shared trackage. I once knew the answer, but just can't remember (I'm 82 this day...Jan 18th.)
@@michaeljones7927Yes Class Six 110 mph is the highest for shared trackage. Congratulations! Got me beat by only a decade.
there needs to be a lot more grade separation - I'd prefer *all* of it. And it's weird to me that the people living on the Peninsula wouldn't want that; do they _like_ getting stuck behind/run over by trains?
No, we like things that work. To fully grade separate would take 100+ years. You people need to understabd that perfect is the enemy of good. A decent HSR today is worth way more than a perfect HSR in 20 years because if we strive for a perfect HSR it will never happen
@@Tennisfan4200Your attitude is a major reason why the USA still has no true HSR even though Japan introduced the technology 60 years ago!!! Enough of that short sighted thinking. It's time to move boldly forward.
@@Tennisfan4200No, you like not allowing things to be built.
@@Tennisfan4200 Agreed. Do not let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
The people want grade separation, but many want the grade separations to be rail ditches rather than embankments or crossing closures. All grade crossings in Santa Clara county should be easy because of the suburban nature. The issue is downtown San Mateo where the alignment is very narrow and has 5 consecutive crossings. Burlingame is also difficult
Hopefully we'll see planning on quad-tracking move forward again. It's definitely necessary.
I am hoping 3 tracks in certain sections. And that might be too much
@@jamesparson Well, four means both services can run independently and not have to worry about stepping on each other's feet at any point. That to me is the ideal solution.
Believe the ROW is mostly too congested for quad-tracking much. Even adding a passing track could be challenging. l laugh when some think the average speed on the peninsula will be 75-100 mph. Glad Rail Banks pointed this issue out.
@@davidjackson7281 Too congested, or too narrow? I’d think it being too congested would be an argument for quad tracking it, unless I’ve got that wrong somehow?
@@teuast I agree. But it may not be possible
One of my worries is that segment being like Brightline in Florida. I know they're supposed to be modifying the existing railway crossings with quad gates, but what about pedestrians? I hope they figure it out. Great video Banksrail.
What is needed for pedestrians at grade crossings in your opinion?
@@onetwothreeabcPerhaps crossing guards like at schools. Employ the homeless.
Thanks 🙏🏾 Yeah I think that this is truly going to be interesting. The amount of trains per day going through these crossings is insane.
nice video, but the service pattern shown in this video out of date. The one shown is the skip-stop proposal presented in the 2019 caltrain draft buisness plan on slide 17 (I can't put links, just look it up), which has bunches of 3 caltrain trains running every half hour (not hourly). This plan seems to have been abandoned.
The current plan is presented in the 2020 buisness plan, on pages 46-47, and would allow for 8 hourly caltrain services (4 local, 4 express), and 4 hourly HSR, assuming that the following segments can be quad tracked: Millbrae, Hillsdale+Hayward Park, Redwood City, and one station between Palo Alto and Mountain View.
This new plan seems much better, and its not even that unrealistic. Redwood city is already planning to quad track their station, and Hillsdale already has an empty ROW to build the extra tracks, so these necessary projects could likely be completed with just 2-4bn at most.
edit: fixed the dates so yall could actually find the documents
Redwood City is the one to watch. They're planning to redevelop the entire strip mall attached to the station to make it denser and give it a much grander station house. They've also been one of the friendliest municipalities to HSR, to the point that they were the top candidate for a mid-peninsula HSR stop at one point.
This should be the pinned comment.
Great video! Nice to see the LIRR (my home railroad too) get a shoutout for getting good projects done. I've been taking the LIRR very frequently through most of my life, and I saw the 3rd track project (and subsequent station renovations) grow over the past few years. Also around this time was another massive program for the MTA to renovate about half of their stations, which to my understanding, were completed on time and on budget.
I'd love to ride the LIRR some day.
The LIRR is great railroad and it has sooo much potential! One of the rare cases in America where I can say a railroad is truly on par with its European counterparts.
Get/keep the trains running. Impatience makes us forget that the peninsula corridor has been going through continuous upgrades and repairs since 1990. This will continue. Every HSR I've ridden opened with some component of legacy track and operates with continuous maintenence & minor, incremental capital projects.
The legacy corridor isn’t really the problem here, it’s the fact that they’re lowering service frequencies because they aren’t upgrading the capacity of the corridor for their upfront.
Great video! Just one correction: Baby bullets won't exist once Caltrain electrifies. The EMUs accelerate and decelerate faster so the baby bullets are being replaced with more limiteds. Plus, many Baby Bullet riders who go from SJ-SF might be taking HSR trains anyway
Really? The but the Baby Bullet would be much cheaper than a CAHSR ticket.
Grade separations and more passing sidings are needed, but I’m in the camp of get it built and go from there. The HSR is so over budget already that they need to get it built and operational to show the benefits.
I agree with just get it built, but CAHSR won’t be on the peninsula until the late 2030s at best. That give Caltrain and the Authority a whole decade to upgrade the corridor with additional tracks, but they’re waiting until CAHSR is operating on the corridor first. That’s what I think is the mistake here.
So….there is an additional four-track section south of Redwood City, and both Caltrain and HSR want to operator at 110-125mph allowing for an easier time with time slots/scheduling. Other than that’s your analysis is spot on.
From what I read, Caltrain and CAHSR dropped “Alternative B”, which would’ve have the passing tracks in Redwood for “Alternative A” to keep the corridor as it is. Both Caltrain and CAHSR state that the initial operation will be at 79mph with future upgrades to 110mph to accommodate additional services. Basically what I was trying to say is that we should shoot for this first. It’s going to be over a decade before CAHSR gets there, so why not continue upgrade the corridor before it happens.
@@banksrail There's space for more passing tracks at the Redwood City Caltrain station. They're about to tear down the strip mall attached to the station in favor of a denser mixed-use development. A larger, grander station house is also in the cards, which would make room for quad tracks spanning almost the entire length of downtown.
Well it looks like they are going to need to dig out more of Harriman's ambitious plans from the 1910s back when the Southern Pacific was building that line better go ahead and Quad track it too
Harimann had Plans to Electrify the Southern Pacific Railroad way back in the 1910s around the Same time the Milwaukee and Pennsylvania Railroad's were electrifying
Quad tracking it south of San Carlos should be easy. It’s mostly at grade and the alignment is wide enough. The difficulties are the Bayshore Cut Off, downtown San Mateo, and the Belmont San Carlos embankment.
If Harriman hadn't died in 1909, perhaps the quad tracking would've been well into construction before the courts busted the UP ownership of the SP.
There is a third set of passing tracks in Redwood City.
They said they’d hold off on that until the HSR was up and running on the peninsula.
ok, so if we remove Palo Alto from existance, half these issue go away, you think i'm joking but i'm not, a horrible at grade crossing (that won't be eliminated because the community wants to build a frickin 'train trench' so they don't have to see the train) and pushback to building a passing track at or around Palo Alto Station is seriously a problem
Seems ironic that Palo Alto's Leland Stanford was an SP (CP) railroad robber baron.
@@davidjackson7281 hahahahhaha very very true. Palo Alto Station used to be a stop along long distance passenger trains till '71, which is so weird to me because assholes in that town (i'm from there, trust me I know) would never set foot on a train.
@@af8312Ain't Hypocritical Nimbyism Great?
The whole peninsula corridor situation is incredibly ironic and sad. My dad grew up in Palo Alto back when the Daylight plied the route, he and took trains to SF as a kid. Now his and the following couple generations are so carbrained, and King Street (formerly Townsend) Station is a shadow of its former self. And of course so many of them also moved out of the Bay Area, which has become a ludicrously valuable place to live.
🎉@@davidjackson7281Common David... Leland Stanford was both Governor of and later U.S. Senator from California and one of the Big Four whose vision and capital made the Transcontinental Railroad a reality, as well as founder of Stanford University The Big Four set the stage for California eventually becoming the great state that it is today. Robber Baron is a pejorative term that does an injustice to Huntington, Hopkins, Stanford, and Crocker. And that assertion is coming from a proud Texan,, who is supposed to detest California (but obviously doesn't).
This is a really interesting vid since I've been curious to see how CAHSR and Caltrain would operate in a shared corridor (I think there are some single track sections on Caltrain though they may have upgraded them). As someone who lives in Massachusetts, I know all too well of the lack of enough passing loops on the Providence Line (though I never knew it was that bad) though I've been lucky with Amtrak and most do reach at least 100-125 mph on that line. Great video as always Banks Rail!
Thanks! Yeah, Gilroy to San Jose will be double tracked, which is okay since there isn’t that much service on that corridor anyway, but San Jose to San Francisco is going to get weird. Especially because CAHSR wants to operate at higher/similar frequencies to the NEC in Massachusetts.
Yes another video. Let's see how you break this down.
In London we're fortunate that all our major intercity main lines into the city are 4-6 tracked (and they're still suffering from capcity issues), but other UK cities aren't that fortunate. Birmingham for example is 2 tracked on the West Coast, Chiltern and Cross Country Main Lines. All suburban stations along the route suffer from lower frequencies as a result. If you can't get 4 tracking done before opening, deffo be loud about campaigning!
☝🏾Definitely this!
Great video, but a couple points to clarify
-both CAHSR and Caltrain are in litigation with milbrae regarding the land to the west of the station, which would be required for CAHSR construction. And CAHSR is in eminent domain proceedings with Brisbane for the bayshore land, so they are doing something at least..
- Redwood City station rebuild, Caltrain led project to elevate Redwood City station with quad tracks, removing 3 grade crossings. there’s an existing 1.2 miles of quad tracks further south that is occasionally to bypass the rock train to the port or the mission bay hauler that could be tied into the station rebuilt and to future proof for dumbarton service
-Caltrain’s long term business plan calls for additional quad tracking segments either in Palo Alto around cal ave, or in southern San Mateo county
-grade separating the entire corridor is infeasible, but the major pain points are being grade separated, broadway in bgame, Redwood City at the future sequoia station, Castro street and rengsdorff in MV, and in Palo Alto around Churchill
Thanks for the great information. When CAHSR is eventually running, about how long would you suppose a ride from SFTC to San Jose and Gilroy be about?
Why is grade seperating the entire corridor infeasible?
@@TheMiddlest 41 grade crossings between sf and sj, 28 more from sj to gilroy.
Past grade seps have proven to be expensive and costs are further increasing. Full grade sep isn’t necessary for either Caltrain or CAHSR to operate. I illustrated major ones like Broadway, but aiming for all 69 grade crossings when the money is better used elsewhere in the system is better IMO
@@davidjackson7281 ~30 min full express sf to sj, another 15-20 for gilroy
@@jfletch09Sorry, but l find it extremely hard to fathom how CAHSR can average 100 mph to SJ and Gilroy. At best an average speed of 70 mph for a 1:06 78 mile ride from SFTC to Gilroy is my opinion. We'll know sometime around 2040 if we are lucky, unless CAHSR wisely runs a demo/pr daily train when the valley segment starts testing.
The SFO connection isn't optimal. Caltrain and HSR users have to transfer to BART for one stop and then transfer to the people mover to get to the terminals.
I take BART to SFO pretty often and frankly, I always felt that BART should have skipped SFO and the people mover could've been extended to Millbrae. That would've eliminated one transfer, making the connection more streamlined, and eliminated the SFO BART station saving BART a lot of money! The people mover arrives pretty frequently but BART frequencies can be 20 min off peak and 30 at night. Which makes that connection even more frustrating.
They really should have built an infill station directly adjacent to the SFO 101 interchange. Than had both air train loops extend to it. It would add less than a minute on to every possible Bart to terminal connection other than G. And a new station could have cross platform timed Bart-Caltrain transfers.
Overall the SFO-Milbrae extension seems like it was very poorly executed. The split terminal design means that the only 2 stations with riders have to split them. South SF and San Bruno stations are a joke. They have less riders than E-Bart. Also the Caltrain connection has been so badly designed due to the need to use multiple escalators to connect.
At least one plan had BART tunnel under SFO and have it as the second to last stop to Milbrie, instead of the current spur line.
Apparently, the funding wasn’t there to do that.
@@G-546 yeah the SSF and San Bruno stations seem to be poorly located. I think the SSF and San Bruno stations should have been consolidated into one station at Westborough/Chestnut/El Camino Real.
Frankly the BART SFO station only gets about 5000 riders/day which puts it in the same league as Bayfair or Ashby. I was surprised by that low number.
@@CSXIV yeah if it were under the central parking structure in between all 4 terminals w corridors to each (kind of like Chgo O'Hare station), it would probably be better used. As it is, I bet most people arriving at SFO have no idea BART is there. It is a little hard to find.
i luv your videos
💙
Great video! There’s already a third track at millbrae with its own bit of platform that was built for the 2003 launch of baby bullet service though it never gets used - could this be used as a passing siding?
Thanks 🙏🏾
When CAHSR eventually comes, the platform will be extended over that third track for a wider/longer platform.
Not very familiar with this area that will affect CAHSR so I appreciate the educational lesson. Thanks.
Glad it was helpful!😁
Not mentioned in the video, Union Pacific railroad company holds, exclusive easements for common carrier freight operations. In the corridor.
SP never granted trackage rights in the Peninsula corridor.
Santa Fe and Western Pacific had to use train ferries to get their (freight only) trains into San Francisco.
For their passenger trains, Santa Fe and WP would drop their passengers off in Oakland where they had to use ferries to get to San Francisco.
The North River/Hudson tunnels exist because Pennsylvania RR president Cassatt was furious that PRR trains had to drop their passengers off in New Jersey while the New York Central was taking their passengers straight into Midtown Manhattan.
Also thanks for the shoutout :)
Of course💪🏾
I feel that until passing tracks are added, it would unfortunately make the most sense to end a decent chunk of HSR trains at SJ and have a cross platform transfer to Caltrain. As annoyong as that would be, there just arent many good options.
100% agree.
4th and King still gonna be poppin for giants games
True, but there’s also the 4th and Townsend station that will be built directly underneath 4th and King, so while 4th and King would serve as extra capacity during games, it’ll be rendered pretty much redundant.
When you go on google earth, you can see that there is actually plenty of room next to the existing tracks to fit a 3rd or even 4th track in the existing row. They only need to widen some bridges and lay down the tracks and then they are set.
For quad tracks there definitely needs to be some eminent domain used, but the triple track seems very reasonable in a lot of places.
Do you think there will be more community support for additional passing tracks once the blended corridor is up and running? Or will the awkward schedule just create more negativity? Great video as always!
Given that there's a 1-2 decade lead time (or worse) between planning a project and just kicking off construction, not even finishing the project, we pretty much have to get the ball rolling long before it's needed. Otherwise it'll be 2050 before we ever see it.
It's also more disruptive to do track construction when the corridor is busier.
Thanks 🙏🏾 When it’s up and running I can see a them adding more tracks. I think the negative scheduling will prove to be the catalyst for community support.
I think that passing tracks need to be tied with grade separations/station rebuilds. I think that if we plan effectively the Redwood City, Mountain View, and Hayward Park overtakes could be built quickly as 2 of them are directly involved with future needed rebuilds and grade separations. It’s a shame they didn’t do the Hillsborugh grade separation with additional tracks.
realistically all you need to do is fit in a track down the middle in a couple of the stations similar to BWI airport. that way cahsr trains can overtake caltrain. compared to a new row this is still a bargain and we get the added benefit of calmod!
Agreed. A third track all the way through would be great.
You could do a Video on the Chicagoland Area
Yeah, I’ll talk about the Chicago area when talking about Amtrak Midwest and will probably talk about it in the Abandoned series eventually.
4:52 - Minor quibble: "Sunnyvale" - it has two 'n's. Everything else is correct. I live in the area, and this gets my stamp of approval: Triple track the whole thing.
😂 yeah noticed when processing.
Definitely Triple track
imo grade separations are more important than additional tracks. I’ve been delayed by two hours in the past because our Caltrain fatally struck a person.
Typically both projects are done hand in hand. Ideally when projects add a third or fourth track, they eliminate grade crossings along the way, simply because the amount of trains per hour going over the crossing would make it nearly impossible to use for pedestrians and automobile users.
The main reason Amtrak is so slow is because most track they run on are track they dont own, when other trains run through they are prioritized
I’m talking about the Acela and the NEC. They own the majority of that, yet still have priority issues.
The San Jose to SF section should be HSR only and local service should be provided by finishing BART around the Bay.
Depending on the demand, I feel like in 2050, that’ll be generally considered.
As someone from the UK, this all sounds a bit _too_ familiar. Mixing long-distance express trains with slower regional/freight trains is a horribly inefficient use of capcacity that can be blamed for a hefty majority of the problems on our rail network. Luckily, a solution was planned called High Speed 2 but we all know how that went...
Oh, you must be one of those people from.. the NORTH.. I jest. 🤣
@@Ven100 actually I'm about as southern as they come, I just have an interest in the overall strategic network working as well as it can so that everyone can experience a decent rail system, not just those within the M25!
High Speed 2 is… 😔
I like the simulation, much easier to understand what’s going on.
There are no 125mph grade crossings in the USA. Last I looked FRA regulations require crossing barriers that can stop a dump truck moving at 60mph, so yeah, 110mph is the speed limit for lines with level crossings. And for SF-SJ, 110mph will be fine, as you pointed out, its passing loops that are important so trains don't have to slow down or stop due to intercity-regional train conflicts, HSR trains can overtake Caltrains trains at speed.
There used to be on the NEC, but they were removed decades ago. The rule still stands (as shown in the video) 125mph over crossings are permitted, just difficulty get passed.
I've always wondered how this is going to work out. With that said, Caltrain by itself is a great system that would benefit from a lot of investment. Its unfortunate that for a lot of the time, all the bay area transit money gets dumped into BART. I used to live in San Bruno and they made the station there really nice, compared to what it was before. Same near San Mateo, the new tracks and station over there look fancy. The one thing I wish could happen ASAP would be for Caltrain to go to Transbay Depot, at Salesforce Park in SF. That was supposed to be finished already and it hasn't even begun construction. Anyways, hope California will figure this all out--the state has swung from a surplus to a deep deficit so we could be in for a rough few years before the state balances its books again.
There's a more insidious reason why BART extensions are brought up when Caltrain needs improvements: it's a convenient excuse to not fund Caltrain improvements. And then BART doesn't get funded.
If they really cared about BART funding, they would have run BART underneath SFO and made SFO a stop on the way to Milbrie, instead of the current spur wye that only makes sense when you look at funding.
This is what people have been saying for years. They're not delivering what they promised, and if it winds up sucking too much, it will actually hurt the prospects of more projects like this.
Yeah they’re putting off too much work for the “future” and simply need to get it done ASAP.
i'm confused, that animation makes it look like a quad track system, none of the Cal Trains are delaying the HSR, none of the HSRs are delaying the Cal Trains... the schedule is inconsistent, but usable
I mean, Caltrain's corridor already has a few quad-track segments and passing tracks elsewhere. But the level of service that Caltrain wants to have in a few years is at regional metro/S-bahn service. Caltrain is basically becoming a second BART. They will need a ton more passing tracks and quad-tracking to pull this off and accommodate CAHSR.
@@TohaBgood2You're absolutely right about the necessity for Caltrain track capacity expansion. New York Central was a four track mainline and so was the Pennsylvania. If Caltrain is going to be able to accommodate both CAHSR trains and its own fleet of commuter/regional trains, it too will have to build a four track mainline.
@@michaeljones7927 In all fairness, they already do have a ton of quad-track and passing tracks. I don't know that they need to quad-track the whole thing. It would be beneficial, but wildly expensive in some of the gnarlier choke points. We're talking thousands of single family NIMBY homes at $2-3 million a pop. Plus all the lawsuits that they will file probably costing about as much.
I do believe they need to add just enough quad-tracking and passing tracks, but striving for a full quad-track right of way is very likely overkill.
The problem is the animation shows a perfect world where no services had slight delays. Slight delays start causing a domino effect.
Yeah, it's a bit disheartening to hear that the Peninsula isn't getting any new passing tracks. Caltrain promised 15-20 minute frequency between trains post-electrification, and CAHSR will very likely end up disrupting that if they run too many trains to SF. I guess this is another "we'll cross that bridge when we get there" problem that they'll shelve for after the project is done and CAHSR's bargaining position strengthens after a few years of successful operations.
Exactly what I see happening. The worst part is that you can tell CAHSR already had a lot of bargaining power since they were the largest investor into Caltrain’s Electrification. But this symbiotic relationship that they have is pulling down both of their projects. They’re both thinking about what’s best for their pockets and not what’s best for the long term fruition of the project.
@@banksrail You can say that again. There are plenty of places where they can add more passing tracks if they had the resources and political capital to fight for them.
They also really need to prioritize grade separating the whole ROW. Problem is, there are so many grade crossings right next to intersections that the only way to separate them is to eliminate those intersections outright, which would be very disruptive to drivers.
One shorter rail from Burbank to Bakersfield to reduce cost and one rail the long way
The 4th and King station is temporary in name only.
It’s worse from fredricksburg to DC trains Vre Buches up Amtrak trains heading down to Richmond on weekdays
Yeah, I’m still waiting for VRE to realize that they need to start operating more like regional rail than commuter rail.
Way back when the ballot initiative that funded CHSR was passed, there was a proposal have an elevated rail line run through portions of the Peninsula Corridor. Gets four lines without having to expand the corridor, better service for Caltrain (because as it stands right now, local trains have to hold at those two passing lines to allow Baby Bullet trains to pass), and CHSR gets dedicated lines.
This got as far as a proposal before the whining started. The end result was the current blended rail plain.
I'd rather this get done now, even if it's not ideal. With how difficult it is to even get this off the ground (between funding, delays, and the City of Atherton trying to sue all rail travel out of existence), a non-ideal HSR is still a HSR that exists.
Yeah I saw, I think I may have even used some of the animations of that proposed elevated ROW. To be fair, there still are plans for that, but that’s all they are right now “plans.” These plans are as existent as a CAHSR phase 2. It’s exist, but will it be built… 🤔
0:34 Can I just say I know the dings for those ticket booths are for the disabled but they are insanely annoying and the seating is awful as well. The station feels very outdated.
Nice sim. But, this may be what needs to happen intially, and CA HSR may have resigned themselves to this fate. The most important thing initially will be to get the trains rolling. Then, when people get addicted to the service, try to start expanding it. It will just have to be understood that when CAL Train and HSR get to that cooridore they will be moving in sync with one another. Its not a good thing, but it will get the train in service far sooner.
I don’t mind the blended corridor, but the fact that they aren’t adding extra passing tracks from the jump is the problem.
nice masusus in subtitles XD (1:58)
😂
Given Salesforce Transit Center is half the capacity of 4th & King, my expectation is most Caltrain services will continue to use 4th & King while most likely Baby Bullets will travel to STC along with all the CAHSR trains.
As for CAHSR using 4th & King as an interim station, ideally the Downtown Rail Extension, aka The Portal, will be completed and trains able to reach STC by the time CAHSR arrives in SF. TJPA, who is responsible for The Portal, says if 100% funded by 2025 it would open in 2032.
Chances are HSR construction over Pacheco Pass won’t start until the end of the 2020s at the earliest, and CAHSR estimates the longer of the two tunnels will take up to six years to construct, meaning HSR trains wouldn’t reach SF until 2036 at the earliest. Their focus is on reaching SF first, then heading to LA and Anaheim, if funding only allows either the SF or LA extension to happen first.
Only CAHSR’s nonstop express trains will need to make the 2 hour 39 minute run time between SF and LA, and CAHSR’s planned operating scenario calls for six in each direction per day, I presume three in the morning three in the evening, during peak hours. So trains heading south of SF, and north of LA, would be going against the flow of the commuter rush, and arrive in the opposite city by the end of it, so that shouldn’t be a problem. Evening is another story since they’d be going with the flow.
this could be solved long term by extending the tracks from the salesforce Transit center under the bay. this way it becomes a through station with a lot more capacity, still with 6 tracks
@@nicolasblume1046 but that opens up another challenge with adding in an additional service, most likely Capitol Corridor, which would need to be electrified at least into STC since I’m confident diesels would not be allowed under the Bay or inside STC. A return loop could be just as effective at reducing congestion since trains would leave the same direction they entered in, rather than have to go back out the same way which is the current issue with LAUS.
@@ChrisJones-gx7fcDo you think there could be full non-stop trains from SF-LA? Seems like a lot of riders from just one station. CAHSR at best may have express trains stopping in atleast San Jose and Fresno.
@@davidjackson7281 CAHSR’s plan is six nonstop trains in each direction per day, run during peak hours (I’m presuming three morning three evening). All except nonstop trains will stop in at least San Jose and Burbank Airport. hsr.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/docs/about/business_plans/2020_Business_Plan_Service_Planning_Methodology.pdf
Idk maybe they should put in a high speed bus system to even things out
“Onion” made a video joking about a High-Speed Bus System.
It’s tight but there is enough room for a new set of tracks around Mountain View. They will just have to cut down a lot of big trees. I am sure the locals will love that.
😂 I remember people were going *insane* about the idea of trimming the trees for the catenary.
Ah yes, the reason why ICE-T, while being a great unit, ended up completely useless, and why Moscow to Saint Petersburg Sapsans ended up breaking so many schedules. Mixing high speed and commuter traffic inevitable slows down either one or another, glad California is staying to true to its pattern of not learning on anyone else's mistakes.
lol
😂 yeah. I don’t mind the mixing, but they need to make sure the capacity of the line matches with the service frequency both railroads are going for.
@@banksrail Personally, I think that passenger HSR is best being a completely separate system, like Shinkansen, which is conceptually closer to rapid transit/metro than to normal rail.
So why run High speed rail in to San Fran at all to start with. Run high speed rail to San Jose with connecting Caltrain to San Francisco. Then once the CAHSR is operating they can build this last part of there line out while being operational and trying to make money. Obviously with grade separation which won't take 100 years to build as some below think.
CAHSR already spent the money to electrify the corridor. Without their money, Caltrain wouldn’t be able to provide the service levels needed to handle the role of ferrying people from SF to CAHSR
I always want California High-Speed Rail in California and I always love California High-Speed Rail in California.😮
Yeah it's true, I'm one of those advocates that wish they would've done an entirely new route into SF. But once CAHSR is running in the corridor I think it will be way more politically possible to find the money to do the work.
How would you route the train to the SF transit center?
@@davidjackson7281 It's kinda a raw wish for me. 😅 I like speed, and just kinda wish there was a magical way to get the train downtown still going at 220mph. I never really thought about it in a practical, or in a real right of way. 😅 Not using the Caltrain corridor is a silly thought, and that's why the authority never really looked into it. A raw thought for instance was running up the middle of the 101, but even then the train wouldn't necessarily be able to get to top speed, in the middle of highway curves. Maybe I've played to much Simcity and wish for infinite political power to do whatever! lol
@@P0w2youSome say don't let perfect be the enemy of good. Though, there is no harm in wishful thinking outside of the box either. Those are good thoughts that you have. Unfortunately it seems for most metro areas in the world it is not practically possible to have HSR near the urban cores. Personally l look at the overall average speed of a train vs what its top speed may be.
Yes and yeah of course California High-Speed Rail in California.😮
It’s okay, you can call them Cal-Trains
Lol okay 😅
First get the dam service start. We are talking about something that may happen in 2050 or never.
i dont think grade crossings even south of san jose will be a good idea because suicides are such a big problem on caltrain and suicidal people will probably target high speed trains. they average more than 12 suicides a year and that means a 3 hour delay more than once a month on average. sadly I use bart or my car to get to the south bay if I can't be late.
Suicides will still happen even with grade separation as it's not like said pedestrian needs to target the tracks at the crossing. Look no further than Japan.
Having grade crossings South of San Jose is pretty avoidable. I prefer if they remove some of them and fence off the corridor as much as possible.
At this point, you need to ask, do you really need CAHSR all the way to SF? It will save a lot of headaches and money if you stopped it at San Jose Diridon. With the money saved you can improve service and speed on Caltrain.
We drive into SFO, sometimes SJC and OAK. It’s not a stretch to imagine people will come to San Jose Diridon to catch a HSR train.
Agreed. The political, economic, and cultural center of gravity of the Bay is closer to San Jose than San Francisco. There should still be HSR service to SF, but maybe drop it to one train per hour instead of two, at least until the Peninsula Corridor is completely grade separated and quad tracked.
@@seanj4119I’d upgrade Caltrain to run 150 mph service with passing track at every station.
Far more Bay Area residents live and work in and around SF (and Oakland), than in and around SJ. It's also the city that most tourists want to visit, unlike SJ. Terminating HSR in SJ is a bad idea, which is why it's not the plan.
As one of the other commenters said, the whole point is to make it the HSR more accessible to everyone so that more people get a one seat ride. It’s the only way HSR can be competitive with flying. HSR needs to get people to the downtowns.
@@banksrailextending it to SF only provides marginal Benefits. You can still have a one ticket ride thru codeshare without building it out to SF. You'd get far more bang for buck by simply making Caltrain and ACE operate faster.
Don’t need need two rails at the time concentrate on ONE rail ONE tunnel get us service tops Angeles to the Bay Area the fastest way possible
Are you suggesting that a single track route be built through the Grapevine directly to Burbank from Bakersfield?
To expand on someone else's comment, making San Jose the terminus makes a lot of sense. Integrate the CalTrain Bullet schedule with HSR and you have the peninsula covered. BART is also coming to San Jose Diridon, you just need to accelerate construction so it's completed at the same time as HSR.
SF is in the center of the Bay Area, and is by far the largest Bay Area city in terms of tourism and downtown jobs (yes even now, in the midst of the so-called downtown "doom loop", downtown SF dwarfs downtown SJ in terms of both occupied and total office space, as well as residents). Making SJ (which is at the southern end of the Bay Area) the terminus is not a good idea, as it would remove one of the system's and state's largest, and most visited cities, from direct HSR access, and force the majority of Bay Area residents who want to use HSR, to take an extra long trip all the way to SJ. The SJ chamber of commerce would probably like that though lol
Thumbs up?
Really wish they went with the Altamont/East Bay alignment instead of this.
Hello? Yes.
This was studied. It was wildly expensive. And would need to include another Bay crossing. It was a nonstarter.
Maybe that could happen in the long-term, with the current arrangement working purely as an interim solution?
What is this? The new version of "why didn't they follow the I-5 corridor??". There are multiple good reasons why it's going up the peninsula instead.
@@punchnazis3498No, not the l-5 corridor. The much better proposed Altamont Pass alignment would connect to the San Joaquins route (hwy 99) at Lathrop/Manteca to then head south to Modesto and Fresno. Funds once designated for a new Dumbarton Rail Bridge were reallocated elsewhere. Originally estimated to cost $400 M then $800 M it would be a $1 B bargain for a short one mile span across the southern narrow area of the bay like SP did a century ago.
yes wee need fomr sf to la to sd to tijuaan and then to las vegas................................
What about our state capitol Sacramento?
As an east bay resident, i can just take bart to diridon and skip all this b.s.
Does Bart connect to Diridon? l thought the last two mile segment from Warm Springs may be completed for about $12 B and a decade from now. What am l missing?
@@davidjackson7281 it will be done by the time hsr is up and running
... beginning in 2040.
BART doesn't go to Diridon yet, and who knows when it finally will. Meanwhile, the tracks CA HSR will use, are already there, and are already being upgraded/electrified, specifically so CA HSR can use them to get to the actual center of the Bay Area (SF). You really think what CA HSR needs, is a bunch of people suddenly questioning plans that took decades to set in motion? Seems like bad idea to me, and plays right into the right wing propaganda against the system.
@@punchnazis3498CAHSR needs the 3rd trainset built by Siemens to use on the peninsula for demonstration, pr, and revenue service purposes.
The Caltrain corridor diagram with the bunched trains shows a proposed system where Caltrain runs 6 skip stop trains per hour in 2 bunches. The obvious issues are that no Express Service and no local services would exist. A large amount of Caltrain riders board in Mountain View, Sunnyvale, and Palo Alto and get off at Millbrae or SF. The lack of express service hurts that group. And a lack of local service hurts basically everyone else. Skip stop only “works” for commuters to Palo Alto, SJ, and SF. Also 5tph was inadequate in 2019 so 6 won’t be enough. The Caltrain local, Caltrain express, HSR every 15 minutes is needed and requires little passing tracks.
Yeah it’s strange. CAHSR is bringing great service to the peninsula while also taking it away.
It was all stupid. Hsr should be east bay to oakland and a 5 min bart trip to SF downtown
Could use an upgraded Altamont Pass ROW and build a new very short Dumbarton Rail Bridge to East Palo Alto for one seat SF service.
@@davidjackson7281 yes another good idea. Or even build the 2nd tubes and have them available to both HSR and eastern shore equivalent of Caltrain commuter rail. Even have direct one seat SF Sacramento train which doesn't have to be HSR
@@radicallyrethinkingrailwaysinaThat would probably prohibitably cost over $20 Billion and take atleast a decade to build. Just the 1.7 mile downtown extention is now estimated at $8.2 Billion.
It appears from Google Earth that most of SP's Dumbarton Bay bridge is still there? Do you know if that's true and could it be rebuilt for HSR?
@@davidjackson7281 isn't that a ridiculous cost
CAHSR has issues? 😱
Give it a rest, bud.
California government should sign contracts with Chinese government and we'll have high speed rail everywhere in two weeks time.
That's a national security risk and won't be allowed by the feds
I'd like to believe this comment is borne of ignorance and not just trolling. CA initially contracted with European companies which have already done HSR, but the problems were in funding, CEQA, and NIMBYs. The actual construction and trainsets are not what's driving the problems.
I've been thinking the same thing. Throw federal funding out the window, ignore the Buy America Act, and hire Chinese or Indian railway engineers to build the whole damn thing. Accompany it with CEQA reform (proposed legislation would remove the private right of action, seriously limiting NIMBYs' ability to stop the project) and you'll get your trains built in record time with a lower cost out of the state budget than they would've otherwise paid with federal assistance.
Atleast have Chinese dig the 55 miles of tunnels like they did so well for the Transcontinental Railroad of 1869.
California officials literally just need to go Japan and see what's possible. Then hire those engineers to come work over here
They just need to fully fund it already