daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Railways

Railways (Inter)national commuter and freight trains



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


View Poll Results: Should the US build or improve it's HSR network?
Yes 249 89.57%
No 29 10.43%
Voters: 278. You may not vote on this poll

Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old March 25th, 2013, 06:12 AM   #4081
Silver Swordsman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 371
Likes (Received): 101

What is the designated speed limit on the blended sections of CHSR?

I was thinking, if they plan on modifying Caltrain anyways, they should upgrade the Caltrain corridor to semi-HSR speeds (250-270kmh), and widen the station with pass lanes for through traffic. So, instead of having a 4-track system through the entire peninsula, only the areas around the stations will have four tracks. Caltrain stopovers also allow faster HSR services to overtake them, thus freeing capacity. So instead of having the HSR run on Caltrain tracks; one is essentially putting Caltrain on HSR tracks. Of course, running trains at different speeds naturally impedes frequency to a certain extent, but it's better than having a 2-track layout the whole way through.

What does everyone else think?
__________________
My Virtual-Model Railroad: High Speed Rail in RCT3
Project Anniversary: Click Here
Silver Swordsman no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old March 25th, 2013, 04:21 PM   #4082
XAN_
Registered User
 
XAN_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,034
Likes (Received): 760

Quote:
Originally Posted by Silver Swordsman View Post
What is the designated speed limit on the blended sections of CHSR?

I was thinking, if they plan on modifying Caltrain anyways, they should upgrade the Caltrain corridor to semi-HSR speeds (250-270kmh), and widen the station with pass lanes for through traffic. So, instead of having a 4-track system through the entire peninsula, only the areas around the stations will have four tracks. Caltrain stopovers also allow faster HSR services to overtake them, thus freeing capacity. So instead of having the HSR run on Caltrain tracks; one is essentially putting Caltrain on HSR tracks. Of course, running trains at different speeds naturally impedes frequency to a certain extent, but it's better than having a 2-track layout the whole way through.

What does everyone else think?
http://caltrain-hsr.blogspot.com/201...wo-tracks.html
__________________
"I'm lost but still I know//There is another world"
-H. Kürsch, 1995
"Well, we all know there's no other side"
-H. Kürsch, 2002
XAN_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 25th, 2013, 06:52 PM   #4083
FM 2258
Registered User
 
FM 2258's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Austin
Posts: 5,438
Likes (Received): 612

I saw a billboard driving through Austin yesterday promoting this website: http://www.texasbytrain.org/ . I hope this campaign somehow pushes things forward with respect to HSR in Texas.
FM 2258 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 29th, 2013, 08:34 AM   #4084
desertpunk
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot
 
desertpunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: ELP ~ ABQ
Posts: 55,643
Likes (Received): 53484

Cali Bullet Train Breaking the Rules, Losing Big Supporters



Quote:
All is not well in California high-speed rail land--some of the project's earliest backers have turned against the project, saying that concessions that have been made not only violate voter-imposed requirements on the project's funding, but have meanwhile taken the "high speed" out of high-speed rail. For instance, Quentin Kopp--who cowrote the legislation that launched HSR in California--says that the law requires that the project be built in "usable segments," and that each segment be fully funded before work begins, but "he says the current plan to build 130 miles of rail in the Central Valley for $6 billion, starting this summer, will not produce a usable segment,"reports the LA Times. According to Kopp, the first feasible usable segment would connect the San Fernando Valley to Merced, at a cost of $31 billion--way more money than the state has on hand. He also says that agreements that would allow slower trains to share the new track violate the requirement that at least some LA-San Francisco trips take no longer than two hours and 40 minutes. Kopp is apparently so disillusioned with the project that he's supporting a civil suit by Central Valley agricultural interests that's trying to bring it to a halt.

Lynn Schenk, another longtime supporter and current member of California's rail authority, voted against a track-sharing agreement with Bay Area transit agencies that she said came "at the expense of the ultimate goal of high-speed rail." But Dan Richard, chairman of the California High Speed Rail Authority, says that "tremendous progress" has been made, and the critics are wrong, noting that it's common for HSR to share tracks with slower trains and run at slower speeds in urban areas.

But despite the opposition, HSR is unlikely to be stopped by the Central Valley law suit. Much of the state's political establishment is still behind the project, and "legal observers doubt a trial judge would block a voter-approved project supported by the political establishment."

[...]
__________________
We are floating in space...
desertpunk no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 29th, 2013, 09:03 AM   #4085
SamuraiBlue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,232
Likes (Received): 195

Quote:
chairman of the California High Speed Rail Authority, says that "tremendous progress" has been made, and the critics are wrong, noting that it's common for HSR to share tracks with slower trains and run at slower speeds in urban areas.
Does this guy even know what HIGH SPEED means???
SamuraiBlue no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 29th, 2013, 11:45 AM   #4086
Nexis
Dark Wolf
 
Nexis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Along the Rails of North Jersey..
Posts: 15,684
Likes (Received): 17034

I think its time to can this project and hand all the money to the Northeastern US.
__________________
My FLICKR Page < 54,100+ Photos of Urban Renewal , Infrastructure , Food and Nature in the Northeastern US
Visit the Reorganized New York City Section
My Photography Website
Visit the New Jersey Section
Nexis no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 29th, 2013, 12:32 PM   #4087
Suburbanist
on the road
 
Suburbanist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the rain capital of Europe
Posts: 27,532
Likes (Received): 21237

85% of the money spent there are CA-backed bonds. Why would they use bonds from California to fund trains on the other side of the country ?
__________________
YIMBY - Yes, in my backyard!
Suburbanist está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old March 29th, 2013, 11:13 PM   #4088
Spam King
Make America Great Again!
 
Spam King's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Polanco, Distrito Federal
Posts: 879
Likes (Received): 569

Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuraiBlue View Post
Does this guy even know what HIGH SPEED means???
If the segment has 4 tracks then there would be absolutely no problem with slower trains using it.
__________________
In the heart of a busy metropolis skyscrapers are a vivid reminder of the constant yearning of the human spirit to rise to God


MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!
Spam King no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 29th, 2013, 11:32 PM   #4089
Sunfuns
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Basel
Posts: 2,426
Likes (Received): 361

I have a growing feeling that the Californian project will be killed (in the current incarnation at least) and the line not built. And as much as I like rail it might be for the best. The project has become such a monstrosity...

I'd say that the most likely HSR to succeed in US now is the privately funded line from Dallas to Houston.
Sunfuns no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 30th, 2013, 04:37 AM   #4090
Suburbanist
on the road
 
Suburbanist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the rain capital of Europe
Posts: 27,532
Likes (Received): 21237

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spam King View Post
If the segment has 4 tracks then there would be absolutely no problem with slower trains using it.
The problem is that the curve radii and other specifications wouldn't allow speeds above 220km/h until San Jose, even is the additional tracks were top-notch.
__________________
YIMBY - Yes, in my backyard!

Lithert65 liked this post
Suburbanist está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old March 30th, 2013, 05:24 AM   #4091
Lithert65
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 9
Likes (Received): 2

Lithert65 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 30th, 2013, 09:26 AM   #4092
Silver Swordsman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 371
Likes (Received): 101

Quote:
Originally Posted by Suburbanist View Post
The problem is that the curve radii and other specifications wouldn't allow speeds above 220km/h until San Jose, even is the additional tracks were top-notch.
Aside from curve radii and grade crossings, what else would limit train speeds on the peninsula?
__________________
My Virtual-Model Railroad: High Speed Rail in RCT3
Project Anniversary: Click Here
Silver Swordsman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 30th, 2013, 11:13 AM   #4093
XAN_
Registered User
 
XAN_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,034
Likes (Received): 760

Quote:
Originally Posted by Silver Swordsman View Post
Aside from curve radii and grade crossings, what else would limit train speeds on the peninsula?
Sharing tracks with Caltrain. The greater is the speed difference, the lower is track capacity
__________________
"I'm lost but still I know//There is another world"
-H. Kürsch, 1995
"Well, we all know there's no other side"
-H. Kürsch, 2002
XAN_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 30th, 2013, 11:17 AM   #4094
SamuraiBlue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,232
Likes (Received): 195

Quote:
Originally Posted by Silver Swordsman View Post
Aside from curve radii and grade crossings, what else would limit train speeds on the peninsula?
Maintaining head space with different speed trains, delay in traffic, communication delays between two different operating bodies, etc.
SamuraiBlue no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 30th, 2013, 12:59 PM   #4095
Silver Swordsman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 371
Likes (Received): 101

That was my point--regarding head space and different operating speeds. Could they upgrade Caltrain to go nearly as fast as med-speed HSR on the Peninsula segment? It isn't too hard for an electrified trainset to hit 200kmh, is it? If you can run Caltrain services as fast as the line's curvature would permit, then there would be no head space issues on the Peninsula segment.
__________________
My Virtual-Model Railroad: High Speed Rail in RCT3
Project Anniversary: Click Here
Silver Swordsman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 30th, 2013, 01:12 PM   #4096
XAN_
Registered User
 
XAN_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,034
Likes (Received): 760

That would help, but some Caltrain services should be all-stop anyway.
__________________
"I'm lost but still I know//There is another world"
-H. Kürsch, 1995
"Well, we all know there's no other side"
-H. Kürsch, 2002
XAN_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 30th, 2013, 01:23 PM   #4097
K_
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,744
Likes (Received): 243

Quote:
Originally Posted by XAN_ View Post
Sharing tracks with Caltrain. The greater is the speed difference, the lower is track capacity
But isn't the Caltrain corridor wide enough to just have four tracks all the way?
And how many trains are planned anyway? You can actually quite efficiently run different classes of trains on the same route if you bundle them.
K_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 30th, 2013, 01:33 PM   #4098
Sunfuns
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Basel
Posts: 2,426
Likes (Received): 361

Quote:
Originally Posted by K_ View Post
But isn't the Caltrain corridor wide enough to just have four tracks all the way?
Lawsuits by neighbouring communities pretty much rules out any new construction. Electrification is all they can hope for.
Sunfuns no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 30th, 2013, 01:38 PM   #4099
fskobic
jarunac
 
fskobic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Amsterdam/Zagreb
Posts: 733
Likes (Received): 213

Quote:
Originally Posted by Suburbanist View Post
The problem is that the curve radii and other specifications wouldn't allow speeds above 220km/h until San Jose, even is the additional tracks were top-notch.
How realistic is it to expect that the train would even achieve top speeds (even if the tracks were almost perfectly straight) until San Jose, seeing as how it's only 40 miles roughly, and there are four stations planned on that section (SF, SFO, Palo Alto, and San Jose). Even on express lines that would start in SF and only stop in San Jose, would it even need to go above 220km/h? It would take it a while to accelerate when leaving the SF station, and it would take it a while to slow down when approaching the station in San Jose. That small section in between when it's at cruising speed doesn't make a big difference when traveled at 220km/h or at 300kmh (since it would eat up even more of travel time to get up to 300).

I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just asking.
fskobic no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 30th, 2013, 01:43 PM   #4100
Suburbanist
on the road
 
Suburbanist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the rain capital of Europe
Posts: 27,532
Likes (Received): 21237

capping the maximum speed between SF and Gilroy at 220km/h (instead of the maximum 360km/h planned for line) would likely add 4 extra minutes for every single trip between points beyond Gilroy and SF on express trains (calling only at SJ). Might appear "peanuts", but by law the high-speed project MUST deliver express travel times below 2h40 between SF and Los Angeles (160 minutes), IIRC (I might be wrong on the exact minute count), which means these 4 minutes add 2,5% to the total travel time. Considering the long tunnels and curves to/from the Central Valley will also have some restrictions, that might put the strain to gain time on other segments at great expense, both capital and operational.
__________________
YIMBY - Yes, in my backyard!
Suburbanist está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
amtrak, desertxpress, fly california, high speed rail, northeast corridor, texas triangle, united states

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 04:47 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium