I'll make the same argument against the 5 or the 101.

HSR will move more people between LA and SF faster than any freeway ever could. Travel time between LA and San Francisco if you use LAX and SFO is still over three hours if everything goes right at both ends. HSR will compete with that travel time, even figuring in the time it takes to get to Union Station from the westside of LA.

By every measure, HSR is, as it has been in the east coast corridor for decades, a vital third alternate mode for those who, like me, loathe flying and loathe LAX even worse and who don't always want to make the drive (which is the only way I will make the trip now).

What kind of soil is the terminal being built on?

^Yeah, it does look like an awful lot of cave in prevention going on there. Must be sandy?

Can a Bullet Train Shrink California’s Carbon Footprint?


July 27, 2012

By Roger Rudick

Read More: http://blogs.kqed.org/climatewatch/2...bon-footprint/

That wouldn't be so good during an Earthquake...

^Seismic engineering takes soil conditions into account.

Most of the soil in downtown is historic fill which is all kinds of crap, and young bay mud. It's tough to build on. They probably put pilings down to old bay mud or sandstone bedrock.

High-speed rail will shift Highway 99 through Fresno (Fresno Bee)
 

High-speed rail will shift Highway 99 through Fresno

By Tim Sheehan
Fresno Bee
Jul. 31, 2012

"Caltrans estimates that it will cost about $226 million and take up to three years to relocate a stretch of Highway 99 through Fresno to make way for high-speed train tracks.

The estimate by the state's transportation department includes acquiring the private property needed to shove the freeway west by about 100 feet between Ashlan and Clinton avenues in central Fresno, as well as building new traffic lanes and demolition of the old highway, according to a report to the California High-Speed Rail Authority.

The authority, meeting Thursday in Sacramento, will consider approving an agreement with Caltrans to handle the 2.5-mile construction project. No time frame has been set for when the freeway work would begin..."

http://www.fresnobee.com/2012/07/31/...e-highway.html

On the question of soil conditions at the Transbay site, a local article touched on that last week:

It's not ideal soil to build on but obviously very possible given everything that's already been built in the area. The article also mentions that about half the total schedule is excavating and then building back up to the surface.

Great news! I love project details. I want to discuss station architecture, special track work, operating patterns, etc.


I've moved on from the mind-numbingly ignorant talk about econmic apocalypse or nimbys type talk because a single person should have more influence than the 'will' of the people, which is almost 40 million strong.

U.S. approves California bullet train construction (LA Times)
 

U.S. approves California bullet train construction

The action allows the state rail authority to begin acquiring the land that will be needed between Merced and Bakersfield to construct about 130 miles of rail by 2017.


By Ralph Vartabedian
Los Angeles Times
September 20, 2012

"The Obama administration Wednesday gave the first formal regulatory approval to the California High-Speed Rail Authority's plan to construct a bullet train between Los Angeles and San Francisco, clearing a major legal hurdle to starting the project in the Central Valley.

The action allows the rail authority to begin acquiring the first of nearly 1,000 parcels of land that will be needed between Merced and Bakersfield to construct about 130 miles of rail by 2017, rail officials said. The deadline is a requirement of federal stimulus funding that the state has received.

"It is a very big step and a very important milestone," said Jeff Morales, chief executive of the rail authority. "It allows us to move forward in earnest..."

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la...,6307619.story

I was watching the House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee field hearing yesterday about the ownership and management of Ontario Airport. Lucy Dunn, the CEO of the Orange County Business Council noted that there was a ground breaking about two weeks ago for the Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center (ARTIC), which will eventually serve high speed rail.

ARTIC Groundbreaking Signals Orange County’s Transportation Gateway is Underway

"ANAHEIM, CA - (September 18, 2012) - It’s official. The Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center will connect Anaheim, Orange County and the entire Southern California region.

With shovels in the ground and elected officials, city leaders past and present, and travel enthusiasts under sunny skies, the symbolic turning of the dirt signaled the start of construction on a $184 million multimodal transportation facility to serve the entire Southern California region.

The Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center – known as ARTIC - became a reality today.."

http://www.anaheim.net/administratio...ws.asp?id=1484

Heres something that should go a long ways:

California Transportation Commission releases CBOSS PTC funding
Written by William C. Vantuono, Editor-in-Chief
Share on facebook Share on twitter Share on email Share on print More Sharing Services
0

The California Transportation Commission has voted to release $39.8 million in allocations toward work to advance the Caltrain Modernization Program and prepare the rail corridor, which connects San Francisco with San Jose and Gilroy, for a future “blended” system with California High Speed Rail.

The funding will be used to advance design work for Caltrain’s CBOSS PTC Communications Based Overlay Signal System with Positive Train Control) signal system project. Caltrain calls the CTC’s allocation “the first major funding milestone to advance Caltrain electrification from the High Speed Rail ‘early investment’ program.”
“Improved safety is one of the key features of the new signal system,” Caltrain said. “The project includes PTC, which prevents train to train collisions, enforces speed restrictions, and provides protection to workers on the right-of-way throughout the Caltrain system. The project is an essential component of electrification of the corridor and is necessary to achieve the performance advantages available in an electrified system. The advanced signal system will allow for increases in the number of trains per hour operating on the corridor and will help Caltrain meet growing ridership demands. It also potentially has the capability to reduce gate downtime per train, which is important in communities where there are multiple grade crossings in high traffic areas.”

“With today’s vote by the CTC, Caltrain can continue on track to meeting its commitment to bring a cleaner, quieter, faster and/or more frequent service to the corridor by 2019 and take more cars off the region’s roads and highways,” said Adrienne J. Tissier, chair of Caltrain’s Joint Powers Board. “The advanced signal system will play a key role in improving the efficiency of the trains and will allow Caltrain to safely provide more service to more stations.”

The $231 million CBOSS PTC system “will be fully interoperable with freight traffic using the Caltrain corridor and future California High Speed Rail trains,” Caltrain said. “It also meets the Federal Railroad Administration’s requirements to install PTC by 2015, which is why it is essential that the funds be allocated now. The advanced signal system will also provide some important advantages during the installation of electrification that will enable Caltrain to maintain rail operations and support faster, more efficient service in a safe work environment.”

CBOSS PTC is one of three key components of the modernization program, which also includes the implementation of electrification and the purchase of electric-multiple-unit rail vehicles. Caltrain says modernizing the corridor “will reduce emissions by up to 90%, provide faster and/or more frequent service, and will prepare the system for shared use with California High Speed Rail in the future. Electrification of the system is also expected to substantially reduce Caltrain’s operating cost, but will not eliminate the need for a dedicated funding source. “

The total cost of the Caltrain Modernization Program is $1.5 billion. State legislators voted to include $706 million in funding for the modernization project in the California High Speed Rail budget earlier this year. That money, combined with other local, regional and federal funding sources, provides full funding for the program.

Bullet-train planners face huge engineering challenge (LA Times)
 

Bullet-train planners face huge engineering challenge
The 141-mile section from Bakersfield to L.A. will travel over two mountain ranges and more than half a dozen earthquake faults. Experts see it as the project of the century.

http://www.trbimg.com/img-50a1b703/t...1113-photo/600
Vehicles travel westbound on California 58 near White Wolf fault in Kern County after descending through the Tehachapi Pass crossing the Tehachapi Mountains. (Al Seib / Los Angeles Times / November 12, 2012)

By Ralph Vartabedian
Los Angeles Times
November 12, 2012

"Civil War veteran William Hood arrived at the mosquito-infested swamps near Bakersfield in 1874 to build a rail line that would soar through the Tehachapi Mountains, linking the Bay Area and Southern California for the first time.

Hood, Southern Pacific Railroad's chief assistant engineer, assembled 3,000 Chinese immigrants with picks, shovels and dynamite. They snaked the track up treacherous mountain ridges, twisted it back and forth around canyons and punched it through sheer rock in a series of 18 tunnels — climbing 4,025 vertical feet along the way.

It's a feat no one has attempted to duplicate. Until now..."

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la...tory?track=rss

California bullet train moves forward, judge denies farmers' plea to halt project
 

California bullet train moves forward, judge denies farmers' plea to halt project

By Mike Rosenberg
San Jose Mercury
11/16/2012

"SACRAMENTO -- California's $69 billion bullet train will continue zooming toward a groundbreaking next year after a judge on Friday denied a last-ditch request from Central Valley opponents to halt all work on the state's high speed rail project.

Sacramento Superior Court Judge Tim Frawley said at the end of a closely watched three-hour hearing that the 520-mile rail line was so unprecedented in size that he alone could not stop it now.

"This keeps us on track," Jeff Morales, CEO of the California High-Speed Rail Authority, said inside the courthouse after the hearing. "It's not a surprise, but obviously you don't know until you get the ruling..."

http://www.mercurynews.com/californi...ers?source=rss

Bullet train segment's completion date pushed back (LA Times)
 

Bullet train segment's completion date pushed back
The high-speed rail authority adds 12 months to the schedule for 130 miles of Central Valley track, meaning it would be finished by December 2017 rather than a year earlier.

By Ralph Vartabedian
Los Angeles Times
November 16, 2012

"The California High-Speed Rail Authority said Thursday that it was adding 12 months to the construction schedule for 130 miles of track in the Central Valley, easing what some outside experts have contended was an overly aggressive and risky timeline.

Jeff Morales, chief executive of the authority, said the revised schedule would have the track completed by December 2017 rather than a year earlier as set under the agency's contracting documents. The new timetable will allow contractors to use less overtime and other practices that were expected under the accelerated plan in place earlier, Morales said.

"We are going to get lower bids, save some money and still meet all of our deadlines," he said. "It is a good business move..."

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la...,1073915.story

I realize this is "slightly" off track, but for anyone interested, there's a GREAT photo update on the construction of the new 500km/h Chuo shinkansen Maglev in Japan.

Wouldn't it be nice to see something like this in California... or for that matter, ANYWHERE in North America.
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8478/8...80e128a9_b.jpg
P1010463 by castermaild, on Flickr

yeah , high speed rail from LA to San Fran is great
if 30 to 40 years ago they started this
it would be great
We need to be happy with what we are now geting slowly
small better improvments in rail travel is the only way the USA
is going to do it better.
DONT trust any republicans with planing of anything.

Japan with its density and unique geography is a special case. HSR is fine for the USA, just as it is in Europe and most other countries.

Cool! What is that?

People who want to blather on about right-wing ideology and/or foreign rail projects should go to a thread about such things. This isn't that thread.

Is the Altamont Corridor Rail project still being planned as a part of the California High speed Rail project?

Yes, but the main priority now is connecting SF with LA. I believe the Altamont Corridor is a ways off at this point.

It's not technically part of the CAHSR project, but according to the project's website, Altamont Corridor would, if completed, transform the existing Altamont Commuter Express (ACE) into a "modernized streamlined system" and serve "as a feeder to the California High-Speed Train system." CAHSR itself will run through Pacheco Pass, south of San Jose.

Currently, ACE runs basic commuter rail service through the Altamont Pass between the Bay Area and Central Valley. APTA reports weekday ridership at 3,300 passengers.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...amont_Pass.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:ACE_Altamont_Pass.jpg

^^^ Interesting, I didn't realize that there would be improvements to the Altamont Pass. That may make a stronger case for the Dumbarton Rail Corridor, which I thought had died back when the MTC rerouted their funding to SJ BART (the failure of B1 in Alameda County doesn't help either). From what I understand, though, it's still alive and going through environmental review, which should be out later this year or early next year. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out.

Does anyone know anything about the breakdown of power consumption in these trains?
In other words, it takes x amount of power to move the train as the desired speed increases by y (not the exact equation, obviously). This is the same phenomenon with airplanes (i.e. why they tend not to fly over a certain speed - not cost effective).
Seems to me, the biggest pay off will be figuring out how to drastically cut the cost of operations.

I've been searching for stuff about this, but have had little luck.

I believe you'll find your answer at http://alttransport.com/2011/04/chin...gh-speed-rail/
All trains under the new law will travel at a maximum speed 186 mph from July 1, 2011, compared to 217 mph that they were originally set up to go.
The new speeds will also cut energy usage by almost half since trains going 217 mph need twice as much energy as those operating at 124 mph.

Some simple math.....
217/124 = 1.75
and taking that slightly further...
if going 1.75 times faster consumes twice the energy,
the fuel consumption ratio is 2/1.75 = 1.143

This study is a good place to start.

High-speed rail with emerging automobiles and aircraft can reduce environmental impacts in California’s future
http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/...7_3_034012.pdf

So, what is holding this project up now? Lawsuits? Finance?

Will we ever see a groundbreaking on this project?:rolleyes:

The House Transportation & Infrastrucutre Committee is holding a hearing this morning on high speed rail. The hearing can be seen here:

An Update on the High Speed and Intercity Passenger Rail Program: Mistakes Made and Lessons Learned
http://transportation.house.gov/hear...px?NewsID=1761

Additionally, the U.S. Government Accountability Office published a report on California's study today.

Preliminary Assessment of California's Cost Estimates and Other Challenges

"What GAO Found
Based on an initial evaluation of the California High Speed Rail Authority's (Authority) cost estimates, GAO found that they exhibit certain strengths and weaknesses when compared to best practices in GAO's Cost Guide. Adherence with the Cost Guide reduces the risk of cost overruns and missed deadlines. GAO's preliminary evaluation indicates that the cost estimates are comprehensive in that they include major components of construction and operating costs. However, they are not based on a complete set of assumptions, such as how the Authority expects to adapt existing high-speed rail technology to the project in California. The cost estimates are accurate in that they are based on the most recent project scope, include an inflation adjustment, and contain few mathematical errors. And while the cost estimates' methodologies are generally documented, in some cases GAO was unable to trace the final cost estimate back to its source documentation and could not verify how certain cost components, such as stations and trains, were calculated. Finally, the Authority evaluated the credibility of its estimates by performing both a sensitivity analysis (assessing changes in key cost inputs) and an independent cost estimate, but these tests did not encompass the entire cost estimate for the project. For example, the sensitivity analysis of the construction cost estimate was limited to 30 miles of the first construction segment. The Authority also did not conduct a risk and uncertainty analysis to determine the likelihood that the estimates would be met. The Authority is currently taking some steps to improve its cost estimates.

The California high-speed rail project faces many challenges. Chief among these is obtaining project funding beyond the first 130-mile construction segment. While the Authority has secured $11.5 billion from federal and state sources, it needs almost $57 billion more. Moreover, the HSIPR grant program has not received federal funding for the last 2 fiscal years, and future federal funding is uncertain. The Authority is also challenged to improve its ridership and revenue forecasts. Factors, such as limited data and information, make developing such forecasts difficult. Finally, the environmental review process and acquisition of necessary rights-of-way for construction could increase the risk of the project's falling behind schedule and increasing costs..."

The full report can be seen here:
http://gao.gov/assets/660/650608.pdf

Rep. Denham: Not 'one more penny' for Calif. high-speed railway

Read More: http://thehill.com/blogs/transportat...d-rail-funding

this guy is a monster.

Amtrak Joins California to Help Buy High-Speed Rail Gear
 

Amtrak Joins California to Help Buy High-Speed Rail Gear

By Angela Greiling Keane
Jan 17, 2013
Bloomberg

"Amtrak agreed to work with California, the only U.S. state planning to begin construction on a high-speed rail project this year, to buy passenger-rail equipment.

Amtrak, the U.S. long-distance passenger railroad, will ask companies starting today for information on building as many as 60 trains, which will add units on the Northeast Corridor, replace Acela trains and provide equipment for California, Chief Executive Officer Joseph Boardman said.

New trains might cost $35 million to $55 million each, Boardman said in Washington, declining to estimate the value of a contract. Amtrak and California, which plans to begin fast- train rail operations in 2022, will seek bids from companies by September, Boardman said..."

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...rail-gear.html

I don't see anything unreasonable about this^.

CaHSR was approved in 2008, the same election Obama won his first term. It's been more than four years and still no ground breaking.

Is it normal for projects like this to be delayed so many years?

Yes, especially when the EIS hasn't been completed. Environmental Impacts can take years to clear and have to reaccessed when changes are made. Every time a significant change is made, it delays progress 6 months to a year. It's not like the CHSR project was set in stone 4 years ago. Changes have been made, and more changes will be made in the future because the total amount of money needed to complete the project hasn't been allocated. So expect more delays as changes are made to build the project cheaper.

Well that was really just the approval by voters to set up a funding mechanism. The project still had a lot of planning ahead of it, including all the necessary environmental documents which take a lot of time for a project this size. But ground breaking will begin this year.

http://www.cyclelicio.us/2013/govern...ransportation/


California Governor Jerry Brown gave his State of the State speech tonight. He hinted at changes coming in how we fund transportation and indicated his continuing support for high speed rail and mitigating the effects of climate change.




• Video Link

the changes in transportation funding run along two lines:

1) pedestrian and cycling initiatives into a single file, streamlining funding and that;
2) lowering the electoral threshold for bond measures/taxation initiatives related to transportation funding, down from 2/3 to 55%.

this wouldn't touch on hsr directly, but it would definitely help along a lot of projects in the pipeline. over the past decade, we've seen losing majority-backed transit initiatives in many counties, including notable ones in los angeles and marin, where there was almost 66% support, but not quite.

Hmmmm, not affect HSR directly?????
Where does CHSR Authority plan to find the remaining $40 to $50 Billion to finish just the L.A. to S.F. HSR line, and both future extensions? So far, around $4 Billion from the US and $9 Billion from the California treasuries have been allocated. Less than $15 Billion will never build something that costs over $60 Billion.
Yes, CHSR will come back and ask for more funds from California voters in the near future, and that my friend directly affects CHSR!

The initial bonds were part of Prop 1A that passed in 2008 with just a simple majority. It got 52.62%.

California still hasn't bought land for bullet train route (LA Times)
 

California still hasn't bought land for bullet train route

Construction is supposed to start in July. High-speed rail officials say they can do it. But they face resistance from landowners, and if the schedule slips, costs could grow too high.

By Ralph Vartabedian
Los Angeles Times
January 27, 2013

"Construction of California's high-speed rail network is supposed to start in just six months, but the state hasn't acquired a single acre along the route and faces what officials are calling a challenging schedule to assemble hundreds of parcels needed in the Central Valley.

The complexity of getting federal, state and local regulatory approvals for the massive $68-billion project has already pushed back the start of construction to July from late last year. Even with that additional time, however, the state is facing a risk of not having the property to start major construction work near Fresno as now planned.

It hopes to begin making purchase offers for land in the next several weeks. But that's only the first step in a convoluted legal process that will give farmers, businesses and homeowners leverage to delay the project by weeks, if not months, and drive up sales prices, legal experts say..."

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la...tory?track=rss

yeah, i should have written that it's local measures/initiatives that will see a reduced electoral threshold, and why i say bond/tax is because the specific way that it works in california is that these transportation projects are funded by issuing bonds backed by sales taxes, which require 2/3 majority to pass.

so, no, not directly related to hsr, but very good for rail projects. i'd love to see a geary street line here in sf, and unlikely as that is, a 55% threshold makes that one a lot more feasible than 66%.

anybody see the Anderson Cooper tv show about High Speed Rail?

was it an entire episode or just that segment in Vermont?
I was hoping they at least presented a full picture. Doubt it though.

just the Vermont portion. though they seemed to insinuate that they will be doing a continuing series on it, so hopefully they feature the true 100mph trains like chicago - St. Louis.

plus they must realize that $10 billion isn't going to get you anywhere with HSR. HSR is insanely expensive.

not just HSR maybe only better rail & higher speed rail
plus Higher Speed rail and better tracks and new trains
is not easy or fast

The segment just seemed a bit too...
They seemed to have already made up their mind that it's a waste of money.

It really just showed a lack of expertise in what its like to build an actual high speed rail line. They complained that California has yet to start its project (even though planning it is just as much part of it as building it) but neglect that it was only recently approved for a release of funding is out to big as we speak. They acted like a 60 billion dollar project can just start up overnight or that there are no obstacles in the way its all the planners faults.