Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

The Quaking Widow

Train Attendant
Joined
Sep 30, 2022
Messages
37
Location
Live in Toledo
Last edited:
its Ralph V.
everything he says about HSR can be ignored its just a bad rehash of everything he said over the last 12 years. without the other side I'm not going to take the SNCF quotes as the truth
 
Last edited:
That McNamara? No, now that I've read it, um, the hyper conclusions don't seem fully supported by the detailed arguments (such as they are). No doubt, there's a need for a good look at why it's taking so long and costing so much, but I don't think this is it.
 
Last edited:
What type of rolling stock do you think California High Speed Rail will get? Also, do you think it's possible for CAHSR to lease out the Acela Express sets for rail certification and testing if the order for the new rolling stock are delayed?
 
What type of rolling stock do you think California High Speed Rail will get? Also, do you think it's possible for CAHSR to lease out the Acela Express sets for rail certification and testing if the order for the new rolling stock are delayed?
Highly doubt it as the old Acelas are extremely heavy and antiquated in just about every way. It’s sort of like qualifying a state of the art aircraft carrier with F4 phantoms.
 
Highly doubt it as the old Acelas are extremely heavy and antiquated in just about every way. It’s sort of like qualifying a state of the art aircraft carrier with F4 phantoms.
I agree. I don't see the original Acelas being used for that purpose. OTOH a short term borrowed Avelia Liberty would actually make technical sense, though I don't see that happening either.

In any case the signaling and train control system I understand will be some ETCS L2 compliant implementation which of course won;t be available on anything running anywhere else on main line in the US.
 
Last edited:
What type of rolling stock do you think California High Speed Rail will get? Also, do you think it's possible for CAHSR to lease out the Acela Express sets for rail certification and testing if the order for the new rolling stock are delayed?
these are the bidders left
1: Siemens Valero (Valero Nova?)
2: Hitachi STS ETR1000/ Zefiro
3: Alstom Avelia Liberty/?
4: Talgo
5: Hyundai Rotem
6: Kawasaki

Personally think its the Valero Nova or ETR1000 that are near the top. the ETR1000 accelerate very well for a high speed train that can do 250mph

here is a fun PDF that lists a lot of the performance of different sets https://uic.org/IMG/pdf/202100801_high_speed_rolling_stock.pdf

I expect they'll test with the AEM-7 caltrain has for 125mph but for over that they could borrow a set from brightline west as both will be ETCS L2 and 25kv
 
these are the bidders left
1: Siemens Valero (Valero Nova?)
2: Hitachi STS ETR1000/ Zefiro
3: Alstom Avelia Liberty/?
4: Talgo
5: Hyundai Rotem
6: Kawasaki

Personally think its the Valero Nova or ETR1000 that are near the top. the ETR1000 accelerate very well for a high speed train that can do 250mph

here is a fun PDF that lists a lot of the performance of different sets https://uic.org/IMG/pdf/202100801_high_speed_rolling_stock.pdf

I expect they'll test with the AEM-7 caltrain has for 125mph but for over that they could borrow a set from brightline west as both will be ETCS L2 and 25kv
I would like to see a Valero Nova bi-level with low platform boarding. Bi-level because it will increase capacity and the train set would be short enough to use on existing stations. Low platform because stations, already built before the completion of the system, have only low platform boarding.
 
I would like to see a Valero Nova bi-level with low platform boarding. Bi-level because it will increase capacity and the train set would be short enough to use on existing stations. Low platform because stations, already built before the completion of the system, have only low platform boarding.
There are no bi level Valeros nor do we need the capacity at the start, the train length is 200m/400m (650/1300ft)
the only low floor trains right now that can meet the 250mph speed requirements are Talgos and even then with the walkthough requirement for ADA its not easy to do a 250mph train

At this point high floor is nearly locked in and I do not see the state changing
 
I'm surprised Avelia Liberty is still in the running. Didn't the CHSR Authority turn down the chance to do a joint order with Amtrak?
It does not have to be an order associated with Amtrak. Avelia Liberty is an Alstom product for the US market, not an exclusively Amtrak product.
 
I'm surprised Avelia Liberty is still in the running. Didn't the CHSR Authority turn down the chance to do a joint order with Amtrak?
I highly doubt it will win given the cost of it but assuming it can meet the 220mph service 240 testing Alstom is free to bid it
 
I highly doubt it will win given the cost of it but assuming it can meet the 220mph service 240 testing Alstom is free to bid it
The other minor detail is that CAHSR's requirements are very different from Amtrak's. That is the primary reason that they decided to part ways. Everything looks similar from 70,000' feet away. The devil is in the details you discover as you get closer.
 
The other minor detail is that CAHSR's requirements are very different from Amtrak's. That is the primary reason that they decided to part ways. Everything looks similar from 70,000' feet away. The devil is in the details you discover as you get closer.
yep CASHR wants a very different thing when you look closer. amtrak wants tilting and has to fit in a much smaller loading gauge
 
Since I spent several years working on this thing, I could say a lot, but hardly know where to begin. I did not read the NYT article as they are behind a paywall and I don't either know or care what they have said bad enough to pay for it. As to quotes from the SNCF people: I have learned over the years that if can say SNCF and then spout the most complete nonsense with a French accent people will fall all over themselves to believe it. They had some early participation with CAHSR and so far as I am concerned poisoned the well with some of their ideas.

For starts on things concerning CAHSR, here are the alignment standards.
https://hsr.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/docs/programs/eir_memos/Proj_Guidelines_TM2_1_2R00.pdf(Note author)
Design speed is to be 220 mph, with 250 mph not to be precluded. This excludes San Jose north and the approaches to Los Angeles.
As to the vehicle, there is much to be said for using the latest version of the Shinkansen trainsets. They are somewhat wider than standard AAR clearance diagrams, but still within the most restrictive of AREMA clearance diagrams. The primary advantage of this extra width beyond larger passenger space is the stations platform clearance can meet ADA gap maximums and still pass standard AAR width cars. Also, by use of 3+2 seating, and you can do this with standard width seats, you have a lower vehicle unit weight per passenger. By the time you get rid of stairwells, exc., you actually have more area per passenger and capacity per car on these single level trains than on bi-levels. Single level means greater stability, a particularly important factor in earthquake prone areas. Another primary advantage is that they are EMU sets, so that they can have the same or greater power to weight ratio on a lower maximum axle load than any of the European power unit and coach sets. Plus, there are less issue with oil or contaminants on the rail as the power is spread over more axles.
more later
 
Last edited:
As to the vehicle, there is much to be said for using the latest version of the Shinkansen trainsets.
The issue is they don't meet FRA T3 standards. they are considered T4 which cannot be mixed with any other stock outside of yard operations.
They are somewhat wider than standard AAR clearance diagrams, but still within the most restrictive of AREMA clearance diagrams. The primary advantage of this extra width beyond larger passenger space is the stations platform clearance can meet ADA gap maximums and still pass standard AAR width cars. Also, by use of 3+2 seating, and you can do this with standard width seats, you have a lower vehicle unit weight per passenger.
The NA version of Siemens Velaro Nova looks to be wider than europes at 10ft6in
By the time you get rid of stairwells, exc., you actually have more area per passenger and capacity per car on these single level trains than on bi-levels. Single level means greater stability, a particularly important factor in earthquake prone areas.
I doubt California will start with bi levels but it could be an option in the future however given ADA regs it would likely have 1-2 single level cars with some ADA setting and a cafe car with the rest of the train being bi level. I'd suspect we only see that on a 400m set
Another primary advantage is that they are EMU sets, so that they can have the same or greater power to weight ratio on a lower maximum axle load than any of the European power unit and coach sets. Plus, there are less issue with oil or contaminants on the rail as the power is spread over more axles.
more later
The most likely trainsets from Europe would be EMU as well be that a Hitachi ETR1000 or Siemens Velaro Nova
 
If the administration changes, what are the chances funding is pulled from both of these projects?
Congress plays a large role. If it were a trifecta to spend much less, Brightline West might still get its private-public grants and financing, but CAHSR would get zeroed out. (For future spending. GDRRiley is right it's not easy to stop money already appropriated?) The state and feds would be deadlocked on CAHSR, so privatization with incentives does not seem too feasible. But money finds a way, if a contractor comes calling to Congress/Administration. That's why Amtrak was carefully structured as semi-independent in 1970. (And moving Long Distance planning to US DOT last year chipped away at that, again, though you can argue the merits. And the value of compromise.)
 
Congress plays a large role. If it were a trifecta to spend much less, Brightline West might still get its private-public grants and financing, but CAHSR would get zeroed out. (For future spending. GDRRiley is right it's not easy to stop money already appropriated?)

Appropriated money can be rescinded as long as it has not actually been disbursed to the targeted recipient AFAICT. Here is a blog with somewhat detailed discussion of the President initiated rescission process. Congress itself can also originate rescission bills.

https://www.crfb.org/blogs/rescissions-how-do-they-work
 
Back
Top