Amtrak California - even more questions

[jackal]

I'm slightly confused as to what you're saying.
If you're proposing the time for a route from SJC to LAX via the Central Valley and routing first north to MTZ and then east and then south down the Valley (i.e. the route of the SJC-BFD San Joaquins)

For the record, the San Joaquins doesn't run to San Jose. It runs OKJ/SAC to BFD.

Yes, you're right; I noticed that after I typed that but forgot to go back and edit that.

If you propose coming up Altamont Pass (skipping SJC but keeping OKJ and north)

This doesn't make a lot of sense to me. The time to get to Stockton from Oakland via Martinez is practically the same as via the Altamont Pass. And, because of the location of the Stockton stations, it would require back-tracking.

I was trying to answer (sorry, I was finishing up a long day at work when I typed that and my brain was only semi-functional, not that it's much better now) George Harris's point that an SJC-OKJ-MTZ-SKN-FNO-BFD-LAX route would take just as long as the current SJC-SLO-SBA-LAX route. Based on what I calculated here, that is true:

COAST: 9 hours, 12 minutesTEHACHAPI/TRACY: 10 hours, 2 minutes

TEHACHAPI/ALTAMONT: 8 hours, 14 minutes

(My original calculations were from LAX to the South Bay--i.e. San Jose--so these figures should work for what we are discussing here. Tehachapi/Tracy represents the current San Joaquins route around the north end of the Diablo Range through MTZ [iIRC--I may have been looking at UP's route, and the San Joaquins uses BNSF trackage for much of its run].)

As you can see, yes, going the long way around north between LAX and SJC does actually take nearly an hour longer than the current routing up the coast, and if you're choosing OKJ as the cut-off point, the times approach equilibrium. HOWEVER, if the proper connecting track were installed in Stockton, then routing the train over the Oakland Subdivision (Altamont Pass--i.e. SJC-SKT-FNO-BFD-LAX) actually saves almost an hour over running down the coast.

 

[George Harris]

As you can see, yes, going the long way around north between LAX and SJC does actually take nearly an hour longer than the current routing up the coast, and if you're choosing OKJ as the cut-off point, the times approach equilibrium. HOWEVER, if the proper connecting track were installed in Stockton, then routing the train over the Oakland Subdivision (Altamont Pass--i.e. SJC-SKT-FNO-BFD-LAX) actually saves almost an hour over running down the coast.

No arguement from here

 

[Green Maned Lion]

Good luck getting scheduled passenger service over Tehachapi pass. There is no way the freight railroads will allow this between Bakersfied and Mojave. It has about the same chance as LA's Metrolink running up Cajon Pass to Victorville from San Berdo, another thought that has surfaced but instantly killed due to all the freight being moved on those lines.
Wb

The freight railroads were all created with a lot of help from the government. If we were to strip ourselves of this silly antiquated idea of free market and such, we could easily simply require UP to allow those trains whether they bloody liked it or not.

 

[George Harris]

Good luck getting scheduled passenger service over Tehachapi pass. There is no way the freight railroads will allow this between Bakersfied and Mojave. It has about the same chance as LA's Metrolink running up Cajon Pass to Victorville from San Berdo, another thought that has surfaced but instantly killed due to all the freight being moved on those lines.
Wb

The freight railroads were all created with a lot of help from the government. If we were to strip ourselves of this silly antiquated idea of free market and such, we could easily simply require UP to allow those trains whether they bloody liked it or not.

If you are thinking of the Land Grants, that was the best deal the government ever made. The value of that was paid back many times over, not the least in that government freight, meaning for example all military moves had to be at half the going rate if over a land grant route. That provision stayed in effect until after WW2. AND: The government transprtation officers defined the route between any two points so as to maximize the percentage over land grant lines and based their payments on that, regardless of whether or not the freight actually moved over those tracks.

 

[Philzy]

In this article it states:

Due to track conditions, initial travel time for the length of the run will be about 12 hours. (In the 1950s SP was able to run it in 10 hours, which shows you how much things have deteriorated since then.)"

Which makes me wonder 1) what was the train speed then - was it not limited by the safety regulations we had today? or was the track jsut really well maintained? 2) what are the speed restrictions today? I guess a better question whats the normal speed between urban areas where the trains are most likely required to slow down?

Two main things have slowed down the train:

1. When the SP was running it in 10 hours, the train had absolute priority over everything, so there was very little delay beyond minimum practical running time in practice and virtually zero slack in the schedule.

2. Through the 1960's superelevaiton was reduced in many curves due to the advent of piggyback which had/has a high center of gravity and is also relatively light. There were several occasions where train forces pulled these cars off the rails toward the inside of the curve. Many companies made it a policy to reduce all curve superelevations above 4 inches to that amount or less. Before that, the maximum was 6 inches on most railroads. Also, much 79 mph territory was reduced to 70 mph. One more thing: With the emphasis on timliness, even the 79 mph would be ignored where conditions permitted with a wink from all in management. The Daylight steam engines and thier diesel sucessors were quite capable of running 90 mph or faster.

Yeah thats kinda what I figured... Airlines are kind of similar in the fashion that there is a preset of how fast to fly the aircraft- something they really enforce now with the price of fuel. if you're a smartpilot and actually give a hoot, you can ask ATC for a direct routing (a bouns of not having tracks) or ignore the flight plan speed and knock it back up to 93% power the whole ride there. I left late out of Atlanta one night when I worked for Delta and was non-reving home to Orlando. The pilot of the plane, mind you I don't remember the type of aircraft but take off to touch down was 38 minutes! Thats in comparrison from the scheduled "gate to gate" time of an hour and 30 minutes... not too shabby...

When I mangaed Operations for jetblue anytime we had anything running late I usually tried to rearrange the gates and ramp crews to give special attention to get flights back on time... Doubt there is much like this still going on in the rail industry... or is there?

 

[jackal]

When I mangaed Operations for jetblue anytime we had anything running late I usually tried to rearrange the gates and ramp crews to give special attention to get flights back on time... Doubt there is much like this still going on in the rail industry... or is there?

I'm not entirely sure there's much like this going on in the airline industry outside of JetBlue! :lol:

 

[Philzy]

When I mangaed Operations for jetblue anytime we had anything running late I usually tried to rearrange the gates and ramp crews to give special attention to get flights back on time... Doubt there is much like this still going on in the rail industry... or is there?

I'm not entirely sure there's much like this going on in the airline industry outside of JetBlue! :lol:

Sadly, before I worked at JetBlue I was at Delta doing a similar job. When I used to try to do this the sups would get pissed off as hell if I switched anything up... I would say "but..." and the resposne is "thats not how we do things. what we have is something that works, don't change it..." oh well, now we see JetBlue eating in Delta's margins, go figure

 

[George Harris]

When I mangaed Operations for jetblue anytime we had anything running late I usually tried to rearrange the gates and ramp crews to give special attention to get flights back on time... Doubt there is much like this still going on in the rail industry... or is there?

I'm not entirely sure there's much like this going on in the airline industry outside of JetBlue! :lol:

Sadly, before I worked at JetBlue I was at Delta doing a similar job. When I used to try to do this the sups would get pissed off as hell if I switched anything up... I would say "but..." and the resposne is "thats not how we do things. what we have is something that works, don't change it..." oh well, now we see JetBlue eating in Delta's margins, go figure

And Delta used to be considered the best by many. Wondered what happened, but this does show some of it

 

[Philzy]

so, a friend of mine has never been on a trian and lives here in Sac. So, we're making plans to go down to the bay one weekend next month. Are all the Capitol Cor trains 4 or 5 cars or are there any that are longer? I love to sit in the last car of a train so i can see the rest of the train when we bank around a turn

 

[George Harris]

So far as I know, all Cap Corr trains are usually 4 cars long, maybe a few at 5. About the only way to get on a longer train is to take the CZ or the Starlate.

 

[tp49]

Depends on which cafe car it has. All Capitol Corridor trains have four coaches. If it is running an 88xx cafe then there will be five total cars. If it is running a 6xxx coach/cafe there will only be four cars. The 88xx cafe cars have the cafe on the upper level thus no coach seats unlike the 6xxx which have full coach seating on the upper level and the cafe on the lower level.