Railroad Forums 

It is currently Thu May 09, 2024 2:38 pm

California High-Speed Rail (CAHSR) System

Discussion related to commuter rail and transit operators in California past and present including Los Angeles Metrolink and Metro Subway and Light Rail, San Diego Coaster, Sprinter and MTS Trolley, Altamont Commuter Express (Stockton), Caltrain and MUNI (San Francisco), Sacramento RTD Light Rail, and others...

Moderator: lensovet

Re: Extending the California HSR system?

  by Smart
 
Is there any more recent information on these possibilities?

This is a route I'd like:
Los Angeles to San Diego (stop in Escondido), San Diego to Yuma (stop in El Centro), Yuma to Phoenix (stops in Glendale, possible extensions to Tempe/Mesa, but they are close enough to do by bus)

Phoenix to Grand Canyon (with stops in Prescott, Flagstaff, etc)
Yuma to Tuscon (without stops)

Re: Extending the California HSR system?

  by kaitoku
 
Smart wrote:Is there any more recent information on these possibilities?

This is a route I'd like:
Los Angeles to San Diego (stop in Escondido), San Diego to Yuma (stop in El Centro), Yuma to Phoenix (stops in Glendale, possible extensions to Tempe/Mesa, but they are close enough to do by bus)

Phoenix to Grand Canyon (with stops in Prescott, Flagstaff, etc)
Yuma to Tuscon (without stops)
Los Angeles to SD- yes, it's being considered

SD to Yuma/ Phoenix- no, it's unnecessary. Presumably the LASD route will go via Ontario/Riverside, so a line off that to Phoenix is possible in the far future.

Phoenix- Grand Canyon- no, you can't make money on HSR just serving tourists, you need business travelers. Maybe a 90mph dmu service at the most.

Tuscon would best be served by a spur from Phoenix.

California: CHSRA releases Revised Business Plan

  by lpetrich
 
High-Speed Rail Authority to Issue Revised Environmental Report for Fresno to Bakersfield Section
It should be ready to go by spring next year, and construction should start near Fresno late next year.

Press Release about the Business Plan
The Business Plan Itself

The CHSRA projects 5 phases of construction, with a rather stretched-out schedule. Distances are total, while costs are for each segment: 2010 / year-of-expenditure (3%/year inflation).

Initial Construction Segment: Fresno - Bakersfield, 140 mi, $5/$6 billion, 2012-2017
This segment might possibly be used by the San Joaquins, but it should also suffice for test runs.

Initial Operating Segment: Either of
  • IOS-North: San Jose - Bakersfield, 290 mi, $20b/$25b
  • IOS-South: Merced - San Fernando Valley, 300 mi, $21b/$27b
Both: 2015-2021

The trains will connect to regional trains and buses on each end. IOS-South will need a Merced - San Jose bus, while IOS-North will need a Bakersfield - LA bus, like what the San Joaquins now have.

Bay to Basin: San Jose to SFV (410 mi, IOS-North: $14b/$24b, IOS-South: $16b/$21b), 2021-2026
Connections to Caltrain at north end, Metrolink at south end

Blended Phase 1: San Francisco to LA/Anaheim alongside Caltrain and Metrolink at each end, 520 mi, $14b/$24b, 2026-2030

Complete Phase 1: Separate tracks at each end, 520 mi, $11b/$20b, 2026-2033+
Alternative: start Merced - Sacramento and/or LA - San Diego construction (800 mi total system)


So the CHSRA's idea of starting operations is to go to only one of California's two big metropolitan areas, and to the near edge of it at that. It will need bus service to get to the other one of them. The "Bay to Basin" step is to go to both of them, but only to their near edges. Only in later steps will it go at full speed to central spots in these regions. The business plan presents the incremental construction of other HSR systems as justification, which seems reasonable.

Re: California: CHSRA releases Revised Business Plan

  by lpetrich
 
I'll now calculate total travel times, something I couldn't find in the business plan. I'll use Caltrain and Metrolink schedules for their times, and 50 mph for buses, a figure I once derived from some Ambus schedules. The buses will use Google Maps routes.
  • IOS North:
    • San Francisco - San Jose (Caltrain): 1h
    • San Jose - Bakersfield: 1h 21m
    • Bakersfield - Sylmar (bus): 1h 50m
    • Bakersfield - Los Angeles (bus): 2h 15m
    • San Jose - Sylmar (total): 3h 10m
    • San Francisco - Los Angeles (total): 4h 35m
  • IOS South:
    • San Francisco - Merced (bus): 2h 35m
    • San Jose - Merced (bus): 2h 20m
    • Merced - Sylmar: 1h 32m
    • Sylmar - Los Angeles (Metrolink): 30m
    • San Jose - Sylmar (total): 3h 50m
    • San Francisco - Los Angeles (total): 4h 35m
  • Bay-to-Basin:
    • San Francisco - San Jose (Caltrain): 1h
    • San Jose - Sylmar: 2h 1m
    • Sylmar - Los Angeles (Metrolink): 30m
    • San Francisco - Los Angeles (total): 3h 30m
  • Complete:
    • San Francisco - Los Angeles: 2h 38m
That may be overoptimistic for a SF - Merced bus, because of the traffic in the central Bay Area. Checking on Amtrak's schedules, I find a SF - Stockton Ambus that takes 2h 50m to travel 83 mi, giving an average speed of 30 mph. That means an SF - Merced time of about 3h 30m, which is about right for SF - Ambus - Emeryville - San Joaquin - Merced and SF - Caltrain - SJ - bus - Merced.

For SJ - Merced, I checked against a SJ - Salinas Ambus. It takes 1h 15m to travel 60 mi, giving an average speed of 50 mph. So my figure is about right.

There's also the problem of transfer times and lack of coordination of schedules, which likely adds about 15m or more per transfer.

Re: California: CHSRA releases Revised Business Plan

  by Smart
 
It is completely ridiculous that this has to be "blended" and "bit-by-bit".

A Republican will almost certainly occupy the White House between 2013-2021, with that in mind - there's no chance HSR will get any funding at all. Not even a penny.

All funds will need to be state, private and foreign (China?).

So we won't see a complete HSR in California til 2035+

Re: California: CHSRA releases Revised Business Plan

  by jbvb
 
Perhaps (not that I'll bet on it) the GOP's spirit of deregulation will extend beyond the banks and to the FRA, and we'll be able to trust the signals and operators (and PTC). Whereupon CA could implement a mixed old/new routing earlier and cheaper, using European trainsets.

Re: California: CHSRA releases Revised Business Plan

  by Smart
 
jbvb wrote:Perhaps (not that I'll bet on it) the GOP's spirit of deregulation will extend beyond the banks and to the FRA, and we'll be able to trust the signals and operators (and PTC). Whereupon CA could implement a mixed old/new routing earlier and cheaper, using European trainsets.
I'm Republican and I'd support that. :D

Re: California: CHSRA releases Revised Business Plan

  by lpetrich
 
First, I don't think that the Republicans will necessarily win in 2012 -- I think that Obama has a good chance of hanging on to the Presidency, especially if:
  • The Republican nominee is liked by the Republican base but not by others
  • The Republicans have nasty fights that they find difficult to paper over, much like the Democrats with George McGovern in 1972
There's also a good chance of the Democrats getting the House back and holding on to the Senate.

That aside, I've been perusing the CHSRA's business plan some more. On page 65, figure 3-1, is an illustration of how far planning has gotten:
Code: Select all
SF  - SJ  **
SJ  - Mcd ***
Mcd - Frs ****
Frs - Bkf ****
Bkf - Pmd *
Pmd - LA  **
LA  - Anh ***
This suggests that IOS-North would be ready to go earlier than IOS-South. However, Merced - Bakersfield seems ready to go.

The system would not get its full ridership right away; the business plan gives these ramp-up times (p. 109, Fig. 6-6):
  • Paris - Lyon: 5 yrs
  • Paris - Tours, LeMans: 4 yrs
  • Paris - London: 4 yrs
  • Paris - Brussels: 6 yrs
  • Madrid - Sevilla: 3 yrs
Their estimate: 5 years.

CHSRA also estimates the IOS-North ridership at 80% of the IOS-South ridership (from pp. 112-113). So IOS-North is cheaper and further along, but it will have fewer passengers than IOS-South.

As to getting private investment in it, I think that investors will be unwilling to go ahead unless they see that the CHSRA is able and willing to build some trackway.

Re: California: CHSRA releases Revised Business Plan

  by Smart
 
lpetrich wrote:First, I don't think that the Republicans will necessarily win in 2012 -- I think that Obama has a good chance of hanging on to the Presidency, especially if:
  • The Republican nominee is liked by the Republican base but not by others
  • The Republicans have nasty fights that they find difficult to paper over, much like the Democrats with George McGovern in 1972
There's also a good chance of the Democrats getting the House back and holding on to the Senate.
Other than Schumer, there is virtually no Democrat higher-up who is that optimistic. The idea of the Dems taking the House back is just as impossible as Obama's Jobs bill being passed. It won't happen.

As for the Senate, in every single race the Republicans have their best candidate in the race (Jeff Flake - Arizona, Linda Lingle - Hawaii, etc) whereas the Dems can't seem to find anyone to run in most states.

For President - both Ron Paul or Mitt Romney have significant non-Republican support. Paul especially appeals to Progressives, Liberals and disaffected Democrats. No one knows if Romney could get a chunk of the Dem vote, especially since he's identical in ideas to Obama.

_______

Pardon my ignorance, but I don't understand your train-speak. So the Southern route will be more viable?

Re: California: CHSRA releases Revised Business Plan

  by lpetrich
 
From p. 171 of the Business Plan,
The schedule is highly dependent on funding availability. If all of the funding required to complete
the program were available, it could be built as early as 2024. For the purposes of financial planning,
a schedule was developed to illustrate program completion (see Chapter 4, Business Planning
Schedule) that results in a completion date of 2033. This additional time in the financial plan
schedule would mitigate most schedule-oriented risks. Funding risks would remain.
This stretched-out schedule assumes less-than-optimistic funding, which I think is a reasonable approach. Immediately-available funding yields a completion date not far from earlier projected dates, so this plan is not fundamentally far off from earlier projections.

As to the Republicans in 2011, several Republicans and Republican-supported initiatives lost in the recent elections, so I think that the Republicans are vulnerable next year. As to Ron Paul, he gets a lot of enthusiasm from Republican activists, but not from the Republican rank-and-file.

Re: California: CHSRA releases Revised Business Plan

  by Smart
 
lpetrich wrote:From p. 171 of the Business Plan,
The schedule is highly dependent on funding availability. If all of the funding required to complete
the program were available, it could be built as early as 2024. For the purposes of financial planning,
a schedule was developed to illustrate program completion (see Chapter 4, Business Planning
Schedule) that results in a completion date of 2033. This additional time in the financial plan
schedule would mitigate most schedule-oriented risks. Funding risks would remain.
This stretched-out schedule assumes less-than-optimistic funding, which I think is a reasonable approach. Immediately-available funding yields a completion date not far from earlier projected dates, so this plan is not fundamentally far off from earlier projections.

As to the Republicans in 2011, several Republicans and Republican-supported initiatives lost in the recent elections, so I think that the Republicans are vulnerable next year. As to Ron Paul, he gets a lot of enthusiasm from Republican activists, but not from the Republican rank-and-file.
You don't need the rank-and-file to get the nomination, as exemplified by Reagan and Dole.

Re: California: CHSRA releases Revised Business Plan

  by lpetrich
 
I still don't think that Ron Paul has much appeal outside of his rather limited circle of fervent admirers.

But I think that it's good that the CHSRA had taken into account possible funding shortfalls, because HSR has become a politically-polarized issue, with Democrats supporting it more than Republicans. This means that many Republicans are not likely to support it except on a "I'll vote for your pork if you vote for mine" basis. This polarization is likely because the Democrats do best in dense areas, the sort of areas that HSR is most suited for. Of the FRA's proposed HSR lines, most are in Democratic or Democratic-leaning states with only a few in Republican or Republican-leaning states. California has a version of this polarization inside itself, with the Central Valley being more pro-Republican than the Bay Area or the LA area.

Re: California: CHSRA releases Revised Business Plan

  by Zmapper
 
At 100 Billion, the cost is too high for California to afford. Now there are some very obvious places to value engineer (Hello, do you need a 6 mile long viaduct over San Jose? Is a mile-long tunnel under Millbrae at 500 million wise when the station was built for 100 million?) the answer is to fire everyone whose grubby hands touched the project and start over anew. Bring in SNCF or one of the Japanese companies; they seem to know what they are doing and how to keep costs down.

With regards to Ron Paul, first I want to say that I am a fervent Ron Paul supporter. From what I have heard, only 5% and 20% of republicans vote in caucuses and primaries respectively. If he can get 90% of his supporters to attend those events (very probable, considering how active they are) then he has a great chance of winning the nomination. If he wins the nomination, you can say goodbye to Obama.

Re: California: CHSRA releases Revised Business Plan

  by Smart
 
Zmapper wrote:At 100 Billion, the cost is too high for California to afford. Now there are some very obvious places to value engineer (Hello, do you need a 6 mile long viaduct over San Jose? Is a mile-long tunnel under Millbrae at 500 million wise when the station was built for 100 million?) the answer is to fire everyone whose grubby hands touched the project and start over anew. Bring in SNCF or one of the Japanese companies; they seem to know what they are doing and how to keep costs down.

With regards to Ron Paul, first I want to say that I am a fervent Ron Paul supporter. From what I have heard, only 5% and 20% of republicans vote in caucuses and primaries respectively. If he can get 90% of his supporters to attend those events (very probable, considering how active they are) then he has a great chance of winning the nomination. If he wins the nomination, you can say goodbye to Obama.
I concur with the sentiment of having "foreign" companies helping run the project. However, I'm pretty sure that won't happen.

I concur also with the RP sentiment.

Re: California: CHSRA releases Revised Business Plan

  by jstolberg
 
I only skimmed the document because it didn't appear to be a real business plan, but a political document. As the second post on this topic attests, the plan did not give travel times for the various segments. I expected a phased approach; but I expected to see travel times, frequencies, conceptual schedules, fares, ridership, operating costs and revenue estimates for each phase.
  • 1
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 50
 Return to “California Commuter, Rail Transit, and High Speed Rail (HSR)”
 - All times are UTC-05:00 -