Double-tracking and electrifying Southern California commuter rail?

I've found that much of it is single track (1) alternating with double track (2).

• LAUS - 2 - Burbank
• Burbank - 2 - Van Nuys Woodley Ave. - 1 - siding - Northridge - 1 - Winetka Ave. - 2 - Mason Ave. - 1 - De Soto Ave. - 2 - Chatsworth - Chatsworth St. - 1 - Kuehner Dr. - 2 - Katherine Rd. - 1 - Madera Rd. - 2 - Los Alamos Canyon Rd. - Spring Rd. Moorpark - 2 - Sierra Ave. - 1 - Adolfo Rd. - 2 - Camarillo - 2 - Pleasant Valley Rd. - 1 - Rose Ave. - 2 - Oxnard - Cooper Rd. - 1
• Burbank - 2 - Lima St. Burbank Airport North - 1 - Sun Valley Penrose St. - 2 - Sheldon St. - 1 - Larkspur St. - 2 - Balboa Blvd. - 1 - Pine St. - 2 - 12th St. - 1 - Oak Ridge Dr. - 2 - near Soledad Canyon Rd. - 1 - Santa Clarita - 1 - Canyon Park Blvd. - 2 - Vista Canyon - 1 - Oak Spring Canyon Rd. - 2 - near Santa Clara River - 1 - Polsa Rosa Ranch - 2 - Crown Valley Rd. - 1 - Foreston Dr. - 2 - Vincent Grade / Action - 1 - E Palmdale Blvd - 2 - Lancaster
• LAUS - 2 - Marguerita Ave. - 1 - Baldwin Ave. - 2 - Amar Rd. - 1 - N Irwindale Ave. - 2 - Barranca Ave. - 1 - White Ave. - 2 - Central Ave. - 1 - Archibald Ave. - 2 - Rochester Ave. - 1 - Etiwanda Ave. - 2 - Citrus Ave. - 1 - Locust Ave. - 2 - S Lilac Ave. - 1 - San Bernardino
• San Bernardino - 1 - Tippecanoe - 2 - Nevada St. - 1 - Redlands University
• San Bernardino - 2 - W Rialto Ave. - 1 - Mill St. - 2 - Riverside
• LAUS - 2 - S Grove Ave. - 1 - Archibald Ave. - 2 - Milliken Ave. - 1 - I-15 - 2 - Jurupa Valley / Pedley Limonite Ave. - 1 - Santa Ana River Trail - 2 - Riverside Ave. - 1 - Riverside
• Riverside - 2 - Citrus St. - 1 - Center St. - 1 - Eucalyptus Ave. - 2 - Moreno Valley - 1 - South Perris
• LAUS - 2 - Fullerton
• Fullerton - 2 - West Corona
• West Corona - 2 - Riverside
• West Corona - 2 - S Van Buren St. - 1 - N Tustin Ave. - 2 - La Palma Ave. Anaheim Canyon - 1 - W Katella Ave. - 2 - Orange
• Fullerton - 2 - Orange
• Orange - 2 - Junipero Serra Rd. - 1 - San Juan Capistrano - 2 - Del Obispo St. - 1 - near I-5 - 2 - Pacific Coast Hwy. - 1 - Beach Club Rd. - 2 - Harbor Dr. - 1 - Surfrider Wy. - 2 - Oceanside
• Oceanside - 1 - El Camino Real - 2 - College Blvd. - 1 - North Dr. - 2 - Montgomery Dr. - 1 - N Las Posas Rd. - 2 - Shelly Dr. - 1 - Escondido
• Oceanside - 2 - Eaton St. - 1 - Carlsbad Village Dr. - 2 - Avenida Encinas - 1 - East E St. - 2 - Solana Beach Lomas Santa Fe Dr. - 1 - 26th St. - 2 - Coast Blvd. - 1 - near Sorrento Valley Rd. - 2 - I-805 - 1 - Miramar Rd. - 2 - San Diego

Looking at the rights of way, they are much broader in some places than in others. In some places, they are broad enough to allow two or sometimes more tracks without encroaching on neighboring property, while in other places, it is a tight squeeze around the tracks. So might second tracks be added in places where it is relatively easy to do so?

The longest stretch of double track is between Laguna Niguel, in southeastern Orange County, and Burbank, in southeastern San Fernando Valley.

Going further, one could electrify some of the track, but that would have big problems of coexistence with freight railroads' doublestacks. One would need a right of way broad enough for both electrified and non-electrified tracks.

lpetrich wrote: ↑Wed Jul 10, 2024 7:16 pm *SNIP*
Going further, one could electrify some of the track, but that would have big problems of coexistence with freight railroads' doublestacks. One would need a right of way broad enough for both electrified and non-electrified tracks.

Why? There's nothing that prevents doublestacks from running underneath catenary.

Electrify?...

I can just see all the complaints from San Juan Capistrano to San Onofre about how the catenary is obstructing the beachfront views and devaluing property even further than the existence of the railroad does...

eolesen wrote: ↑Wed Jul 24, 2024 4:26 pm I can just see all the complaints from San Juan Capistrano to San Onofre about how the catenary is obstructing the beachfront views and devaluing property even further than the existence of the railroad does...

Connecticut residents on the eastern shore towns brought up the same reasons to block NEC/Shore Line
electrification in the late 1990s.

Projects Archive - LA Metro has some Metrolink double-tracking projects:

• Antelope Valley Line Capacity and Service Improvements Program - LA Metro double tracking: Balboa Blvd. - Sierra Hwy. (Balboa Blvd. - 1 - Pine St. south of Newhall Tunnel) and Soledad Canyon Rd. - Golden Oak Rd. (near Soledad Canyon Rd. - 1 - Santa Clarita - 1 - Canyon Park Blvd; Golden Oak Rd. is between Santa Clarita and Canyon Park Blvd.)
• Brighton to Roxford Double-Track (Regional Rail) - LA Metro (Lima St. - 1 - Penrose St. - 2 - Sheldon St. - 1 - Larkspur St.)
• Doran Street Grade Separation Improvements (Regional Rail) - LA Metro (and San Fernando Road)
• Lone Hill Avenue to White Avenue Double-Track Project - LA Metro (Barranca Ave. - 1 - White Ave.; Lone Hill Ave. is in between)
• Montebello /Commerce Station Relocation Feasibility Study - LA Metro
• Northridge Station Relocation Feasibility Study - LA Metro

A small fraction of the existing single track.

Since we are talking Metrolink, has anyone compared the Valley’s route maps for the Pacific Electric to Metrolink’s expansions?

Couldn't find a relevant topic. Anyway, according to this, it's not going to happen anytime soon: https://ktla.com/news/local-news/dont-e ... cials-say/

Don’t expect Metrolink to go electric any time soon, officials say

Transit activists are lauding a Bay Area passenger rail service for switching from diesel to electric and urging Southern California’s Metrolink to follow its lead.
...
An online petition with hundreds of signatures is now urging Southern California’s regional train service to follow in Caltrain’s footsteps.

An organization called Californians for Electric Rail drafted the petition and says the populous Los Angeles area is in need of faster, cleaner rail service, arguing that improved and more frequent service would help gain riders and improve their overall experience.

Electrification, according to the petition, should be a priority for Metrolink, especially ahead of the 2028 Summer Olympics.
...
For one, Metrolink’s entire system is vastly larger than Caltrain. While Caltrain serves about 77 miles of tracks, Metrolink has more than 545 total service miles across six counties.

The price tag for electrification would be significantly higher than the $2.4 billion that Caltrain spent, which also included funding help — $700 million — from the California High-Speed Rail Authority.
...

The Caltrain electrification is shorter than that, some 50 miles between San Francisco and Tamien station. It does not extend out to Gilroy.

So could Metrolink be partially electrified? If so, what parts should be electrified first?

I could find riders per line, even if not riders per station: Fact Sheets & Numbers | Metrolink For Q4 2023-2024 (Apr-Jun 2024):

• Weekday avg: SnBr 6,305, OrCt 4,331, AnVl 4.020, IEOC 2,349, VtCt 2.078, 91PV 2,049, Rvsd 1,299, Arw 419
• Weekend total: SnBr 73,062, AnVl 60,800, OrCt 52,300, IEOC 29,800, 91PV 22,164, VtCt 15,595, Arw 7,323, Rvsd (none)

The San Bernardino line is the champion, with the Antelope Valley and Orange County lines not far behind.

For the AV and OC lines, I doubt that many passengers go the whole length of the lines, to Palmdale and Lancaster and Oceanside, so I checked Metrolink's schedules. For the AV line, some trains do not go further than Via Princessa, while for the OC line, some trains go only as far as Irvine or LNMV or San Clemente. So for the AV line, it may be most practical to electrify only into the San Fernando Valley, and for the OC line only into its eponymous county.

As a comparison, I checked on the SB line. All of its trains stop at both LAUS and SB downtown station.

Wouldn't be best to see which lines in the LA area share the most trackage with the CAHSR and then electrify those lines?

RandallW wrote: ↑Sat Aug 24, 2024 12:12 pm Wouldn't be best to see which lines in the LA area share the most trackage with the CAHSR and then electrify those lines?

Burbank to Anaheim for completion of CHSR phase 1 will have to be electrified if CHSR plans to share the tracks with Metrolink. If sharing tracks is not on the plan, but building HSR line adjacent to the existing corridor, then only the new HSR tracks will need to be electrified.

CAHSR has zero plans for dedicated trackage in urban areas. The cost would probably go up to 1 trillion if they tried that.

So it makes zero sense to electrify the lines shared with CAHSR because CAHSR is going to electrify them for free.

I decided to examine the San Bernardino line is more detail. To avoid getting confused, I will go westward from downtown SB station.

From that station to W Rialto Ave., it is single-tracked with a tight squeeze, but west of that, the right of way becomes wide enough for two tracks while still being single-tracked. Just W of S Lilac Ave, it becomes double-tracked to just east of Locust Ave. (the tree not the insect). The ROW is double-track wide, and the line becomes double-tracked halfway between Citrus and Beech Aves., then single-tracked a little E of Etiwarda Ave. with wide ROW. It becomes double-tracked a little W of Rochester Ave., then single-tracked just W of Archibald Ave.

It continues single-tracked with a double-track-wide ROW to just W of Central Ave., becoming double-tracked again. It then becomes single-tracked just E of White Ave., but the ROW stays wide. LA County Fair's station platforms may need to be moved, however. W of Walnut Ave., a parking lot encroaches into the ROW, but it's wide again further W. Just E of Cataract Ave., there is an unused switch on an industrial track just N of the main track, a switch for a track further E that is now absent. Another industrial track? A former second track? There is no similar switch on the W side, and some industrial lot's fence encroaches into the ROW.

W of Lone Hill Ave., there is a lot of residential property that makes the ROW single-track, and W of E Cypress St. and N Banna Ave., also a lot of commercial and industrial property. Just W of Barranca Ave. the route becomes double-tracked again, becoming single-tracked just E of Irwindale Ave. with a narrow ROW.

N of N Feather Rd. the route becomes double-tracked again, and it's that way when it crosses Amar Rd. It merges with another rail line at Railroad Ave. & N Baldwin Park Blvd. and becomes single-track about halfway between Baldwin Ave. and Temple City Blvd. The ROW is wide, however.

It enters a trench W of Walnut Grove Ave., a trench wide enough for two tracks. The line becomes double-tracked at Marguerita Ave., as it goes underneath that street. The trench ends a little W of S Fremont Ave. The tracks go by a yard between Alhambra Ave. and Valley Blvd., and becomes triple-tracked just W of Boca Ave. and stays that way all the way to the Los Angeles River.

There is a bridge over that river that is wide enough for two tracks, even though it is single-tracked. Across that bridge is LAUS.

Most of this route could be double-tracked, but there are two stretches of single track where property is built close enough to make the ROW single-track.

Burbank to Los Angeles - California High Speed Rail
I checked on the officially-endorsed routing of the CA HSR lines, and I found that the HSR line will be joining the existing lines south of Burbank Airport. The line will be underground at the airport itself, and will go to the Ventura County Line, surfacing just before where that line meets the Antelope Valley line.

Los Angeles to Anaheim - California High Speed Rail
Using the Orange County Line to the ARTIC transit center in Anaheim.

Los Angeles to San Diego - California High Speed Rail
Still not settled; using the San Bernardino and/or the Riverside line out to Ontario Airport or San Bernardino, then going south to San Diego.

Most of Metrolink's trains go only part of their lines' extents. Here's a list, from north to south:

• Antelope Valley -- LAUS -- Via Princessa, Lancaster
• Ventura Line -- LAUS -- Chatsworth, Moorpark, Ventura
• San Bernardino -- LAUS -- San Bernardino
• Arrow -- San Bernardino -- Redlands
• Riverside -- LAUS -- Riverside
• 91 / Perris Valley -- LAUS -- Riverside, Perris
• IEOC -- San Bernardino, Riverside -- Irvine, Laguna Niguel Mission Viejo, Oceanside
• Orange County -- LAUS -- Irvine, Laguna Niguel Mission Viejo, Oceanside

Partial service:

• Antelope Valley -- E San Fernando Valley, Santa Clarita
• Ventura Line -- SE, SW, NW San Fernando Valley -- Simi Valley
• San Bernardino -- (all)
• Arrow -- (all)
• Riverside -- (all)
• 91 / Perris Valley -- Riverside -- Perris Valley
• IEOC -- San Bernardino -- Riverside -- -- SE Orange County -- Oceansde
• Orange County -- Orange County -- Oceansde

Extent of electrification:

• Tier 1
  • San Bernardino -- (all)
• Tier 2
  • Antelope Valley -- LAUS to E San Fernando Valley, Santa Clarita?
  • Orange County -- LAUS to Orange County
• Tier 3
  • IEOC -- San Bernardino to Orange County
  • 91/Perris Valley -- LAUS to Riverside
  • Ventura County -- LAUS to SW San Fernando Valley, Simi Valley?
• Tier 4
  • Riverside
  • Arrow

Caltrain's 2 main track electrification, all same performance EMUs is the ideal of 1/2 hour clock face operations. The 4 track passing area will provide for any incidents that may delay the locals. That is although that 4 track area will no longer be used for baby bullets passing locals.

What is an unknown is the bridge replacement of both bridges that will call for single tracking in the future that may mess up schedules.

It would seem that there is no way for that kind of scheduling in southern California due to not all 2 main tracks and the mix of different types of equipment. As well there are more slow sections requiring slowing and acceleration.