4 ms·
So, one of the interesting ways Caltrain can expand is to simply add additional rolling stock (cars) to handle capacity. However, there's a problem with that: e
by kposehn 11y ago
So, one of the interesting ways Caltrain can expand is to simply add additional rolling stock (cars) to handle capacity. However, there's a problem with that: each additional car reduces acceleration and directly effects the timetable.
For example, currently caltrain consists are 1 locomotive + 5 cars. Locomotives range from 2,500 usable horsepower (after HEP) to 3,600.
The highest horsepower locomotives, the MP36PH-3C's, are pretty much reserved for the baby bullet service. This means that to add an additional car to a train would increase weight on average by 20% - a big addition to a train that has is running flat out at nearly all times.
The problem that caltrain faces is pretty simple: they can't expand capacity without significant investment of capital into additional locomotives and rolling stock.
- pbreit 11y agoIf it only affects acceleration, not that big a deal since the Express trains matter most and only have a few stops.
- Patrick_Devine 11y ago... and electrification is coming which means a large part of their rolling stock will be redundant within the next five to six years.
- ryanx435 11y agosounds like a runs_per_hour vs capacity_per_run issue. there is likely a point where the decrease in runs_per_hour is offset by the increase in capacity_per_run. This assumes that the users will still use the service as long as the time_per_run (how long it takes to get from point A to point B) doesn't increase to a point where users choose to travel by different means.
- samcheng 11y agoIndeed. Lighter, nimbler, quieter, and less-smoggy trains are planned, which will run from electricity instead of diesel. The project is estimated to cost $1.5 Billion and finish in about 5 years.
- SilasX 11y agoI thought the bottleneck was station size, since they already have enough cars to fill them up? Do they have room to add more cars?
- avuserow 11y agoBurlingame and Menlo Park are both restricted by street crossings on both sides of the station, not to mention that many stops are limited by platform length. I'm not sure if it would make sense to make just a subset of the stops. An unofficial blog about Caltrain and California HSR talks about one solution to the capacity problem and some non-solutions. I personally take it with a grain of salt, but it's still interesting: http://caltrain-hsr.blogspot.com/2013/02/the-virtues-of-width.html http://caltrain-hsr.blogspot.com/2013/02/the-virtues-of-widt...
- samengland 11y agoHow about selective door opening? That's used widely in the UK and Europe.
- SilasX 11y agoI figured that would be the next step, but there's still a lot of inertia: some stations are bookended by perpendicular streets and would require the train to the parked on the road while loading, which may raise legal or political issues. I hear they're trying to move all the stations to grade separated ones though, which should alleviate that. Also, you'd have to get the public accustomed to "want to get out here, have to be in these cars", which, knowing the public, will take a big information campaign and still end up with people frantically charging through cars and screaming at conductors to open the doors...
- avuserow 11y agoMany of the "baby bullet" trains are slowed down by other trains on a daily basis. Some stations only get one stop per hour, even during rush hour, so those trains are overcrowded and can take minutes to make those stops. It's not uncommon to see a bullet have to come to a complete stop behind one of those trains. More cars should allow the passengers to exit the train faster, so that would counteract the impact of slower acceleration. There are 4 (edit: looks like 5) unused Metrolink cars sitting in the siding at 4th and King. I don't know why they aren't being used on some of the busier routes.
- pm24601 11y agoThey need refurbishing