SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA: Transit/Transportation News

[homebucket]

Was down in SJ and got a good look at the new Caltrain Stadler KISSes

[homebucket]

Took Caltrain down to SJ again to check out Caltrain's first public tour of their new Stadler trains. It was nice to see the train fill up on the ride down. The event had an excellent turn out and was well run with lots of free swag and timed group entry so you could take your time exploring the train. Didn't realize there were so many transit nerds and fans out there, but also nice to see folks bring their kids. Hopefully we can spawn a whole new generation of transit riders and advocates. The new trains themselves are *chef's kiss*.

[TWAK]

Good stuff homebucket! I kind of wish that the High-Speed Rail Authority would use this against the haters and include it in the CAHSR PR, since the trains are gonna be using the same tracks. It would certainly ruin the "train to nowhere" garbage.

[electricron]

Originally Posted by TWAK

Good stuff homebucket! I kind of wish that the High-Speed Rail Authority would use this against the haters and include it in the CAHSR PR, since the trains are gonna be using the same tracks. It would certainly ruin the "train to nowhere" garbage.

CHSR may have help fund the electrification upgrade, but I do not think they want to take credit for a train that goes no faster than the diesel powered Caltrain trains.
80 mph max speed trains is not anywhere close to 200+ mph trains. Instead of a fast train to nowhere, we would have the slow train to somewhere.

[homebucket]

Originally Posted by electricron

CHSR may have help fund the electrification upgrade, but I do not think they want to take credit for a train that goes no faster than the diesel powered Caltrain trains.
80 mph max speed trains is not anywhere close to 200+ mph trains. Instead of a fast train to nowhere, we would have the slow train to somewhere.

The top speed will actually eventually be 110 mph once track upgrades (widening of some curves) are complete. Until then, even at a top speed of 80 mph, it’ll still have much faster acceleration than the diesel powered trains. For example it’ll take 45 minutes on the new trains to get from SJ to SF vs 60 minutes currently, enabling more trains per hour and higher capacity.

Not to mention the other benefits of electrification being less noise and zero emissions.

[TWAK]

Originally Posted by electricron

CHSR may have help fund the electrification upgrade, but I do not think they want to take credit for a train that goes no faster than the diesel powered Caltrain trains.
80 mph max speed trains is not anywhere close to 200+ mph trains. Instead of a fast train to nowhere, we would have the slow train to somewhere.

They are faster than 80mph.
I don't know if it's because that whole area is dense so the speed has to be lower (like freeway speeds being 55 in dense areas) due to federal regulations or if it was the bums on the peninsula trying to derail the project. People that don't want the project in the first place I get, but for people on the fence it would help buck the narrative that work is only being done in the CV.

Originally Posted by homebucket

The top speed will actually eventually be 110 mph once track upgrades (widening of some curves) are complete. Until then, even at a top speed of 80 mph, it’ll still have much faster acceleration than the diesel powered trains. For example it’ll take 45 minutes on the new trains to get from SJ to SF vs 60 minutes currently, enabling more trains per hour and higher capacity.

Not to mention the other benefits of electrification being less noise and zero emissions.

Cal train will now "run like BART" because of it, instead of running like a regular ole train.

[craigs]

There is a critical difference between the Stadlers' "top speed" and the federally-mandated 80 mph speed limit currently in effect on Caltrain's route.

[homebucket]

Originally Posted by TWAK

Cal train will now "run like BART" because of it, instead of running like a regular ole train.

Originally Posted by craigs

There is a critical difference between the Stadlers' "top speed" and the federally-mandated 80 mph speed limit currently in effect on Caltrain's route.

Yep. And I would argue that average speed is a much more important metric than top speed for urban commuter rail with frequent stops and relatively close station spacing. On the actual HSR rural sections of the line where you have long distances in between stations to quickly cover ground, yes it'll be more impactful to be able to reach and maintain top speeds. In the urban areas, the impact of electrification in of itself will be greater than being able to achieve top speeds of 110 mph vs the current standard of 80 mph.

[electricron]

Originally Posted by homebucket

Yep. And I would argue that average speed is a much more important metric than top speed for urban commuter rail with frequent stops and relatively close station spacing. On the actual HSR rural sections of the line where you have long distances in between stations to quickly cover ground, yes it'll be more impactful to be able to reach and maintain top speeds. In the urban areas, the impact of electrification in of itself will be greater than being able to achieve top speeds of 110 mph vs the current standard of 80 mph.

From Wiki's Caltrain article:
"New trains will be double-decked, 515 feet 3 inches (157.05 m) long and equipped for both 22-and-50.5-inch (559 and 1,283 mm) platform heights in anticipation of sharing facilities with California High-Speed Rail trains.[206] Units can reach speeds of 110 mph (177 km/h), though operations will likely be limited to 79 miles per hour (127 km/h).[109]"
Note 109 "Caltrain/California HSR Blended Operations Analysis" (PDF). Caltrain.com. LTK Engineering Services. Retrieved November 13, 2016.

The link to the pdf no longer works. But, as late as 2016, the engineering firm Caltrain hired suggested 79 mph would be the maximum allowed speeds for these trains.

I will agree the average speeds of the Caltrain service will probably increase, but not as much as many of you suggest. And certainly not enough for CHSR would like to spend a dime on promoting it.

[homebucket]

^ It won’t “probably” increase. It will increase.

[tech12]

Originally Posted by electricron

CHSR may have help fund the electrification upgrade, but I do not think they want to take credit for a train that goes no faster than the diesel powered Caltrain trains.
80 mph max speed trains is not anywhere close to 200+ mph trains. Instead of a fast train to nowhere, we would have the slow train to somewhere.

This is a silly post. Every single HSR system in existence has sections that are slower than the top speed, and many also have blended sections, just like CA HSR will have with Caltrain and Metrolink. But I never hear anyone complaining that those systems are slow.

And as others have said, once electrification and grade separations are complete, the top speed between SF and SJ can be raised to 110 mph.

Also, for the hundredth time, the Central Valley is not nowhere. The section that'll be served by HSR has around 6 million people, and the section that will be served first has around 3 million residents, with the Fresno and Bakersfield metro areas having about one million residents each.

Furthermore, if the CA HSR authority is allegedly ashamed of the existence of blended sections (lol, that's a weird thing to claim), then why does their youtube channel have a bunch of videos about those sections, such as these:

• Video Link

• Video Link

And why do their documents keep mentioning them? You know, like this:

https://hsr.ca.gov/wp-content/upload...-Factsheet.pdf

[homebucket]

CAHSRA also had a prominent booth at the Caltrain event yesterday.

And on their IG @cahsra, they had this post to celebrate the event. The idea that CAHSRA should be ashamed of Caltrain electrification is ludicrous.

[homebucket]

Originally Posted by tech12

This is a silly post. Every single HSR system in existence has sections that are slower than the top speed, and many also have blended sections, just like CA HSR will have with Caltrain and Metrolink. But I never hear anyone complaining that those systems are slow.

And as others have said, once electrification and grade separations are complete, the top speed between SF and SJ can be raised to 110 mph.

I've also not seen anything that supports electricron's claims that Caltrain will be limited to 80 mph.

In this document from 8/27/20, it still shows the ultimate plan is for track modifications to support higher speeds up to 110 mph and 4 HSR trains and 6 Caltrain trains per hour/per direction during peak hours.

https://www.caltrain.com/media/954/download?inline

[TWAK]

^I think he was talking about CAHSR (?), but yeah what an odd rhetoric-like claim. Similar to the "it will never get built!", although they had to change it to "never get finished!" .
Aficionados like us know about the Caltrain/Metrolink tracks being used by HSR and how those systems are being electrified, but the general public of California don't. It's good to see that the Authority has been pushing the fact that the systems are connected and part of the overall project.
Then the whole "train to nowhere" nonsense. The haters like to say that or include other stuff that was in the ballot measure as a strike against the project...well connecting population centers WAS in the ballot measure.

[homebucket]

^ This Youtuber also highlights Caltrain electrification as being a key component of CAHSR, as well as giving a shoutout to BART for its new rolling stock as an example of improvements made in American transit recently.

• Video Link

[Scaevola]

Can confirm: the difference between the old and new BART trains is like night and day when it comes to noise reduction. Can't wait to try out the new Stadlers (though I kind of miss the old upper level seating arrangement)

[TWAK]

Originally Posted by Scaevola

Can confirm: the difference between the old and new BART trains is like night and day when it comes to noise reduction. Can't wait to try out the new Stadlers (though I kind of miss the old upper level seating arrangement)

Even in the transbay tube?
The sound and pressure really hurt my ears.

[Busy Bee]

They've improved the horns, that's for sure. There's a video somewhere about how they've tweaked them to sound closer to the old horns.

[homebucket]

‘Transit First’ Policy and a Better Bus Stymied, Again, by Parking Spots on Geary
False claims and lax leadership deny clear benefits to Muni riders, residents, and even businesses.
Mark Sawchuk
The Frisc

For half a century, San Francisco’s city charter has contained a “transit-first” policy that remains all but dead letter.

A key reason for that is that our city’s efforts to improve public transportation get bogged down in outright hostility, especially when improvements involve the removal of street parking. Such is the case with the latest flare-up over SFMTA’s efforts to proceed with the Geary Boulevard Improvement Project, along the city’s most critical east-west bus corridor.

Changes that Muni completed in 2021 as part of the first phase of the project — on Geary between downtown and Stanyan Street — have reduced travel times on the 38/38R bus line by about 18 percent, while travel time reliability has improved up to 37 percent, according to the agency. SFMTA staff is now planning to add red transit-only lanes, bus and pedestrian bulb-outs, and stop relocations between Stanyan and 34th Avenue, with work scheduled to begin this year.

The project’s “quick-build” phase requires removing an approximate net 31 of 583 street parking spaces along this two-mile, 34-block stretch of Geary. This is an average of less than one space per block across the entire project — or up to 1.5 spaces per block in the commercial zone between Park Presidio and 25th Avenue.

In spite of the modest number of parking spaces involved, and significant provisions to improve loading zones within the project area, the Geary Blvd. Merchants Association has alleged that the parking loss will negatively affect small businesses that were hard hit by the pandemic. Yet the project has received robust support from local residents, organizations, and businesses. It will benefit tens of thousands of daily Muni riders and pedestrians.

Factual context here is important. Prior to the COVID pandemic, the 38/38R was the busiest bus line west of the Mississippi, with more than 50,000 daily riders. The route serves three major hospitals, many schools, and connects multiple neighborhoods outside of downtown, from the Outer and Inner Richmond to the Fillmore, Japantown, and the Tenderloin, promoting the city’s recovery. Today, even with many continuing to work from home, its ridership has recovered to 36,000 daily riders and it still ranks among the country’s busiest.

Merchants’ concerns are understandable, but evidence does not suggest that removing a few parking spots will have much of an impact. A 2013 survey conducted by the SF County Transportation Authority found that only 22 percent of people along this stretch of Geary arrived by car, and that those who walked or rode transit visited more frequently and collectively planned spent more than those who drove.

...

Unfortunately, our local political leaders are failing to provide the support needed to see through the Geary improvement project to completion. Mayor London Breed has conspicuously avoided the topic altogether. District 1 Sup. Connie Chan, whose district includes Geary as far east as Arguello Boulevard, signaled her opposition to the project in a June 16 press release that falsely claimed that 30 percent of parking spaces on the Geary corridor would be removed.

Chan consistently opposes projects that deprioritize auto traffic. Last year she voted against the popular car-free John F. Kennedy Promenade (previously part of the high-injury network), and this week was the only supervisor to vote against an increase in bridge tolls to support the Bay Area’s public transit agencies.

...

Further delays will increase costs and jeopardize the entire Geary Boulevard Improvement Project. Riders and residents have already been waiting for improvements on Geary for over 65 years, since the last streetcar ran in December 1956. Our city has long deserved a faster, more accessible, safer Geary, and the reality of a rapidly changing climate means that we need bold action — and bold leadership — now.

https://thefrisc.com/transit-first-p...y-f51d9f706748

[electricron]

Originally Posted by homebucket

I've also not seen anything that supports electricron's claims that Caltrain will be limited to 80 mph.

In this document from 8/27/20, it still shows the ultimate plan is for track modifications to support higher speeds up to 110 mph and 4 HSR trains and 6 Caltrain trains per hour/per direction during peak hours.

https://www.caltrain.com/media/954/download?inline

That's a draft EIS statement from 2020, not the Final EIS statement. The ultimate plan states before CHSR modifications are completed, the max speed of the Caltrain new trains will be 79 mph. So the very pdf link and the very page you quote states 79 mph before any modifications. Is that too difficult to read?

I suppose the Final EIS has been released or will soon. Never-the-less, when CHSR plans to fund these modifications is not answered. It could be a few years, it could be a few decades from now. Meanwhile, the Caltrain trains will have max speeds of 79 mph.

Additionally, Caltrain testing will only reach 79 mph. Here's the official Caltrain link from July 2023 stating so...
https://www.caltrain.com/media/31312...rain%20service.
"Starting July 21, 2023, Caltrain will begin testing the new electric trains between Santa Clara and Palo Alto.Testing will begin at walking speed and will increase to maximum authorized speed of 79 mph. Testing will be completed at night between 9 pm and 6 am to reduce impacts on regular Caltrain service. Residents may hear additional noise during testing hours, including grade crossing activations and train horns. We appreciate your patience as we complete this transformational project."

Does that read the new Caltrain trains will be reaching 110 mph anytime soon?