California High Speed Rail Routing

With new fires starting about the questioned routing of HSR in California. One such question is the route from San Francisco to San Jose, San Jose to the central valley. The Peninsula communities are clawing to get the route reengineered. One questioned option would be using existing infrastructure to get the trains rolling. Currently BART runs into the city, and in some areas is underutilized. Until the peninsula gets straightened out would it be feasible to engineer BART to handle HSR trains.

The best thing that CAHSR could do would be to get an LA-SF train up and running as quickly as possible. With BART into SF, CAHSR trains could run right into the heart of SF, with a stub track off the current line into the Transbay Terminal, and trains running through the Transbay Tube, out to Dublin, and connecting to High Speed rail tracks in Livermore. The tracks would then run to Tracy, and connect with the planned tracks through Merced and down to LA. This would allow for BARTs state owned facilities to be better utilized and decrease the start up costs of HSR. The nightmare of adding a standard track to BARTs system would offer BART the option of replacing its fleet with a Standard Gauge rolling stock.

The option would first put in a standard gauge rail inside the current BART rails, allowing current BART trains to keep operating while the system is readied for service. Interlockings would be left for final stages of construction, as to not interfere with current operations. Construction windows range on weekdays from 12AM-4AM, and weekends all day. This construction will provide jobs in the Bay Area and increase revenue generated by the current infrastructure. It will also allow access to OAK airport, SFO Airport, and large station stops without expensive new stations. The extension of BART to Livermore would mark the end of BART and the start of HSR tracks to the Central Valley.

This option will allow the issues on the peninsula to be worked out without error, because we have to get it right. As construction is completed over Pacheco Pass trains HSR trains could run on BART tracks to San Jose and meet with the HSR tracks there. This will provide access to SF via two routes, and as soon as to Peninsula route is completed trains could be routed over that route, up the East Bay, and also over the Altamont. The three routes would allow for maximum ridership, express trains on BART, and increased utilization of state owned assets.

What a bad decision it was to choose to use Spanish gauge for BART. That was like the decision in Australia to use three different gauges because no-one looked ahead to foresee unification.

Even in Spain they are changing the gauge.

But surely, it is very unlikely that a full-sized HSR train could pass through underground tubes. I suspect it would not be a good choice to mix HSR with metro trains. Building proper tracks into the city is the right choice, even if it costs more. Otherwise High Speed trains could drop passengers at a BART station, instead of going into town.

The Full Size HSR trains are going to come in at about the same size, the BART cars are approximately the same width as Amtrak's Amfleets. So the fleets are about the same width, just with a wider stance. With the first generation of HSR trains being single level, or so it appears, this might be an interesting option!

Might be an interesting, but completely impossible. BART trains are not FRA compliant.
California HSR trains will have to be FRA compliant in one form or another.

electricron wrote:Might be an interesting, but completely impossible. BART trains are not FRA compliant.
California HSR trains will have to be FRA compliant in one form or another.

In any case, it is bad practice to mix urban metro systems with full size trains. Usually urban metros have a very high frequency of service. Stations usually aren't compatible with full sized trains.
In London there used to be connections between the Underground and the Mainline systems but over the last 50 years all the connections have been severed.

My question in this case, could a gauntlet track be installed through the BART system to allow for HSR trains?

There is a reference to Full Size trains here? Are BART trains not full size? I thought their gauge was wider than standard Gauge?

I did over look the FRA compliant trains and BART trains being lighter, but it could still serve as a temporary solution for 10 years until the Peninsula gets worked out. The Dublin Pleasanton extension sees trains approximately every 15 minutes, HSR trains could easily slip in there, but on the Trunk route through Oakland and Transbay Tube is where the problem is. Another interesting solution would be to make the HSR trainsets Variable Gauge, which is done in parts of the world.

The use of BART tracks would be more of a long term temporary solution, until high speed routings can be completed, which is common practice in France and England. The solution gets trains running sooner and improvements come on line over time through new routings. With BART bringing on new cars hopefully in 2011 it could still be possible to make it happen. Making those trainsets variable gauge would allow for BART to slowly convert to standard gauge and move the conversion points throughout the system as construction progresses.

This is TOTALLY lame. There's no way that BART trains and CHSRA trains can coexist on the same tracks without the BART ones slowing down the CAHSR ones by some annoying amount. BART trains are scheduled for about 30 minutes between San Bruno and Embarcadero, while the CHSRA ones would make it in about 5 to 10 minutes on their own tracks -- and make it nonstop.

Furthermore, BART does something of a detour, to southwest SF.

I'm not talking about the routing South of SF, there would be a dog leg from Embarc. to the TBay Terminal. This would merely be an idea to temporarily get trains into the city on as short of a construction schedule as possible.

This same idea was applied to the TGV trains in Europe, they ran on dedicated high speed lines outside the city and on conventional rail lines into the city center. While many view BART as a commuter only train, it runs at somewhat less frequency than the DC metro and NYC subways. So there is room to exploit the capacity available. This solution would only be used until HSR tracks are completed.

BART would benefit in the long run from capacity improvements, and a standardized fleet size. This would also allow ACE trains to tie in and expand BART to Livermore, and Possibly Tracy.

This same idea was applied to the TGV trains in Europe, they ran on dedicated high speed lines outside the city and on conventional rail lines into the city center. While many view BART as a commuter only train, it runs at somewhat less frequency than the DC metro and NYC subways. So there is room to exploit the capacity available. This solution would only be used until HSR tracks are completed.

BART is the equivalent of an urban metro. At best it might be compared with a Stadtbahn. No TGV trains run on such lines. Perhaps it is fortunate that BART is Spanish rather than standard gauge, which will certainly rule out this idea.

I thought the plan was to use the existing Caltrain (ex-SP) line down the peninsula. That's certainly what http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/google-map/ shows.

mikeydc03 wrote:This same idea was applied to the TGV trains in Europe, they ran on dedicated high speed lines outside the city and on conventional rail lines into the city center. While many view BART as a commuter only train, it runs at somewhat less frequency than the DC metro and NYC subways. So there is room to exploit the capacity available. This solution would only be used until HSR tracks are completed.

Mike, sorry but as a European living in France (no, I'm not French...) I need to clarify a couple of points. First, the TGV solution is French, these days copied by Spain, but quite different from what's going on in other European countries. What you describe sounds more like Germany to me. The French TGVs generally do not run though city centres. They are laid out like freeways, skirting the inner cities and having a dedicated high-speed station in the suburbs of each major town. These stations are designed so that the non-stop trains can run through at 185 mph. Of course the TGV trains have the OPTION of running off the HS track and visit the old station in the city centre. The French provincial capitals have some 3-6 trains per day connecting them with Paris in this way. But it's not part of the hourly schedule on the main lines.

george matthews wrote:In any case, it is bad practice to mix urban metro systems with full size trains. Usually urban metros have a very high frequency of service. Stations usually aren't compatible with full sized trains.
In London there used to be connections between the Underground and the Mainline systems but over the last 50 years all the connections have been severed.

Not all. There's the Watford DC lines, which operate mixed with Underground traffic, but are more what we'd call "commuter rail" over here.

And then there's the Amersham end of the Metropolitan line, which is shared with full-sized trains to Aylesbury.

I believe both of these are considered a bit of a pain operationally.

There are also other connections used for empty stock movements.

NE2 wrote:I thought the plan was to use the existing Caltrain (ex-SP) line down the peninsula. That's certainly what http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/google-map/ shows.

It is. And it's the only reasonable option up to San Bruno. North of there... well, suffice it to say that there is no direct, affordable route, and the Caltrain route seems like the best of the alternatives.

Not all. There's the Watford DC lines, which operate mixed with Underground traffic, but are more what we'd call "commuter rail" over here.

No long distance trains use these lines. They are the equivalent of a German or Swiss Stadtbahn. The recent change in franchising brings them under the same control as the Underground and are now labelled as Overground.

Routing of the CHSR is also being questioned in Southern California.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me ... 2823.story
Transit executives from Los Angeles and Orange counties are pressing officials with the state's high-speed rail project to consider resurrecting a plan to share existing track between Anaheim and downtown L.A.'s Union Station. The idea was considered and discarded by the California High-Speed Rail Authority in 2008, but key local leaders believe it could save up to $2 billion and avoid the need to condemn hundreds of homes and businesses. Bullet train officials have been pursuing the more costly and disruptive option of adding their own exclusive tracks and widening sections of the 34-mile route through the region's dense industrial and residential core. The existing corridor is used by Metrolink and Amtrak passenger trains as well as freight carriers.

Anyone thinking the CHSR train is going to need to reach speeds over 110 mph the 34 miles between Anaheim and Los Angeles needs to check what they are smoking and drinking. The reason why CHSR planners have suggested laying new dedicated tracks isn't to go faster than 110 mph, but to not go slower than 80 mph on the existing corridor --- because it is congested, and because they will be required to use FRA compliant HSR train-sets on the shared tracks. A dedicated HSR corridor can use lighter and faster non FRA compliant trains.