California High-Speed Rail (CAHSR) System

a grade crossing collision

TGV lines should not have any such crossings. Any existing line would have to eliminate them.

By "TGV lines", do you mean the LGVs or all railroads that the TGV may run on? The TGV runs on a number of traditional railroads.

With reference to grade crossings we were talking about the use of High Speed trainsets not meeting the FRA requirements on mixed used lines, hence the possibility of a grade crossing collision at speeds of around 80 mph. I believe this is one of the reference crash cases used in design.

VPayne wrote:With reference to grade crossings we were talking about the use of High Speed trainsets not meeting the FRA requirements on mixed used lines, hence the possibility of a grade crossing collision at speeds of around 80 mph. I believe this is one of the reference crash cases used in design.

the design explicitly calls for the removal of all grade crossings along the route, including on mixed-use lines...

If the trains are going into SF, then the Caltrain route would be the route. It'd be remarkable to see its grade crossings go. (But is it necessary? They won't be running at 150 mph on there.)

PullmanCo wrote:If the trains are going into SF, then the Caltrain route would be the route. It'd be remarkable to see its grade crossings go. (But is it necessary? They won't be running at 150 mph on there.)

remarkable or not, it has been a requirement from day 1 that this entire route is grade-separated. there was some opposition *to the entire project* from cities along the caltrain route as a result of this, but it has so far been overridden by the authority.
in fact, some communities are getting smart and planning already. palo alto wants to develop a plan whereby the trains go into a covered trench and the area above the right of way is developed into parks/mixed use developments.

Do we really need it? it passed and all BUT do we really need it????????? why not just hand that money over to Amtrak and get them settled? They have been doing a great job so far with the Surfliners, why not improve the Amtrak system in some way?
Plus it seems most the areas they plan to run this railroad through hardly have little to no room for such a thing to go through. Imagine all the traffic involved with those grade crossings and the accidents that could follow. They wanna expand to Ontario Airport, those of you that have been in Ontario or in that area around it, theirs no room and the traffic is dense!. I say improve the amtrak system and make it would it should be.

I was thinking does Californa really need it and I have come to the conclusion it would make more sense for you guys to have just expanded Amtrak services as you stated. However a system like this needs to be built somewhere in order for people to see the feasibility of such a project. If it works you will start seeingmore systems pop up in the US.

yes it's needed and i wish more people would educate themselves on this subject.
the entire line will be grade-separated. with the exception of dense downtown areas with no room for the ROW to grow, it will also be on completely separate tracks from all other passenger and freight operations.
there's no point in amtrak handling this service, though nothing would stop them from running if they wanted to. after all, all intrastate amtrak services are heavily subsidized by the state of california anyway. btw, don't forget that this will be a private-public partnership which would not work well with amtrak at all.

High-Speed Train Wreck
City Journal

Long article, here's a teaser:

In October 2008, Joseph Vranich, a preeminent authority on high-speed rail in the United States, testified before a hearing of California’s State Senate Transportation and Housing Committee. Vranich, the best-selling author of Supertrains and a 40-year advocate of high-speed rail, had come to offer his thoughts on the state’s plan to build a high-speed rail line from Orange County to San Francisco. “This is the first time I am unable to endorse a high-speed rail plan,” he told the senators, saying that he found the California High Speed Rail Authority’s work to be “the poorest I have ever seen.”

...

Passenger wrote:High-Speed Train Wreck
City Journal

Long article, here's a teaser:

In October 2008, Joseph Vranich, a preeminent authority on high-speed rail in the United States, testified before a hearing of California’s State Senate Transportation and Housing Committee. Vranich, the best-selling author of Supertrains and a 40-year advocate of high-speed rail, had come to offer his thoughts on the state’s plan to build a high-speed rail line from Orange County to San Francisco. “This is the first time I am unable to endorse a high-speed rail plan,” he told the senators, saying that he found the California High Speed Rail Authority’s work to be “the poorest I have ever seen.”

...

I have the impression he is someone who generally gets his kicks from being pessimistic and negative about anything. Is he really an "authority"?

Got any evidence he's wrong about what amounts to corruption?

Maybe if we just believe hard enough we'll get high speed rail.

Vranich wrote the novel SuperTrains very far back. I call his credibility into question after putting his name on the Due Dilligence Report by the Reason Foundation. I am not sure why the infrastructure is costing more than a TGV line per mile, even with 20% viaducts. I am highly concerned these costs might sink the project. I would like to see another engineering firm review the analysis and see if it is overestimated. Is Parsons trying to get as much as possible for this project?

Today's Wall Street Journal (subscription site; access may be denied) has both an article and an opinion piece relating to High Speed Rail. The article suggests that the California HSR "well' will soon be dry considering the State is "broke' and the Federal funding envisioned at $15B for the $45B project has only amounted to some $3B - and likely none more on the way. The article suggests that the 140 mile route from "roundly" Merced to "roundly" Bakersfield be built and "let it go at that'. Existing Amtrak San Joaquin trains would make use of such and presumably a 'test track' would be in place to develop HSR components for "another day":

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 99460.html

Brief passage:

• Including state matching funds, the California project has $6 billion, and plans are set to use that to start laying track next year—140 miles in the rural Central Valley. Even that part is running into higher costs, project managers say, and the updated business plan from the California High-Speed Rail Authority is likely to include a higher price tag and a stretched-out construction timetable....Rather than operating a separate high-speed rail service, the state could let the new track be incorporated into Amtrak's existing service until more funding became available, he said. That would slow the San Francisco-to-Los Angeles travel time—which project planners have envisioned as less than three hours—and make rail less competitive with the 80-minute flight

The Opinion piece suggests a new source for infrastructure improvements, including rail, be explored - Philanthropy. Just think, Amtrak accesses Manhattan through the Buffett Tunnel:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 97616.html

Brief passage:

• Given the scale of U.S. infrastructure needs, it may seem that even the wealthiest Americans lack the financial firepower to make a measurable difference. And indeed, the funds needed for some projects are huge. Only a few ultra-wealthy donors could meaningfully contribute to a $10 billion-plus rail tunnel between New Jersey and New York City. But billionaires could fund significant portions of smaller projects that are still crucial for jobs and growth: $800 million to repair a portion of the Boston-New York-Washington train corridor, or $100 million to speed construction of the Dulles metrorail project, which will link Dulles International Airport to downtown Washington, D.C. Smaller projects could be built for even less.

I am not sure why the infrastructure is costing more than a TGV line per mile, even with 20% viaducts.

The United States has the highest infrastructure construction costs in the world. Blame a flawed bidding process, self-serving and often incompetent consultants, "not invented here" syndrome, and good old fashioned political corruption.