Funding Larkspur SMART extension - Northwestern Pacific Railroad Network2024-03-29T05:27:03Zhttp://nwprr.net/forum/topics/funding-larkspur-smart-extension-1?commentId=3290209%3AComment%3A152790&feed=yes&xn_auth=noI no longer subscribe to the…tag:nwprr.net,2015-12-29:3290209:Comment:1529372015-12-29T05:32:55.903ZRichard C. Brandhttp://nwprr.net/profile/RichardCBrand
<p>I no longer subscribe to the PD so not up to speed on the planning for the Larkspur extension. Has there been anymore press on when this would start? The Anderson Dr/RoW commentary is quite interesting.</p>
<p>I no longer subscribe to the PD so not up to speed on the planning for the Larkspur extension. Has there been anymore press on when this would start? The Anderson Dr/RoW commentary is quite interesting.</p> Thanks for that. Have seen l…tag:nwprr.net,2015-12-22:3290209:Comment:1528072015-12-22T18:29:00.984ZRichard C. Brandhttp://nwprr.net/profile/RichardCBrand
<p>Thanks for that. Have seen little if any "Public discussion" from Caltrain as written on slide 23 here in my area. This slide set was created at the height of the high speed rail controversy here on the Peninsula which has now quieted down somewhat. And no mention of gauntlet tracks as an option either.</p>
<p>Caltrain has invested in all of the boarding aids shown on slide 12 so doubtful that they would spend the funds to add additional track at 33 stations and indeed since they use a…</p>
<p>Thanks for that. Have seen little if any "Public discussion" from Caltrain as written on slide 23 here in my area. This slide set was created at the height of the high speed rail controversy here on the Peninsula which has now quieted down somewhat. And no mention of gauntlet tracks as an option either.</p>
<p>Caltrain has invested in all of the boarding aids shown on slide 12 so doubtful that they would spend the funds to add additional track at 33 stations and indeed since they use a duplex track system, there may not be enough room to do so.</p>
<p>I did an actual measurement of platform height to top of rail at my local station and it exceeded 8 inches. Trust no one from FRA is monitoring this w-site.</p> Here is Caltrains presentatio…tag:nwprr.net,2015-12-22:3290209:Comment:1528032015-12-22T17:50:35.326ZSMART Fanhttp://nwprr.net/profile/SMARTFan
Here is Caltrains presentation explaining the regulations with level boarding, it should clarify the regulations a bit <a href="http://www.caltrain.com/Assets/Caltrain+Modernization+Program/Meetings/Caltrain+Level+Boarding+Discussion.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.caltrain.com/Assets/Caltrain+Modernization+Program/Meetings/Caltrain+Level+Boarding+Discussion.pdf</a>
Here is Caltrains presentation explaining the regulations with level boarding, it should clarify the regulations a bit <a href="http://www.caltrain.com/Assets/Caltrain+Modernization+Program/Meetings/Caltrain+Level+Boarding+Discussion.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.caltrain.com/Assets/Caltrain+Modernization+Program/Meetings/Caltrain+Level+Boarding+Discussion.pdf</a> Au contraire Fan.
CalTrain p…tag:nwprr.net,2015-12-22:3290209:Comment:1527712015-12-22T04:33:45.268ZRichard C. Brandhttp://nwprr.net/profile/RichardCBrand
<p>Au contraire Fan. </p>
<p>CalTrain platforms at my station (Palo Alto) are greater than 8 inches above the rail which had to be raised to support the aged Nippon Sharyo cars used on the line. Re: public comment about the installation of gauntlet tracks that talk is if/ever high speed rail comes up the Peninsula.</p>
<p>It seems that SMART chose to employ gauntlet tracks and lock NWP out of passing stations without these track rather than use the other option allowed by the PUC, ramps which…</p>
<p>Au contraire Fan. </p>
<p>CalTrain platforms at my station (Palo Alto) are greater than 8 inches above the rail which had to be raised to support the aged Nippon Sharyo cars used on the line. Re: public comment about the installation of gauntlet tracks that talk is if/ever high speed rail comes up the Peninsula.</p>
<p>It seems that SMART chose to employ gauntlet tracks and lock NWP out of passing stations without these track rather than use the other option allowed by the PUC, ramps which is what CalTrain employ. Details: <a href="http://www.greencaltrain.com/2015/12/samtrans-to-consider-dumbarton-reboot-on-january-6/" target="_blank">http://www.greencaltrain.com/2015/12/samtrans-to-consider-dumbarton-reboot-on-january-6/</a></p>
<p>NWP Fan</p> B. Richards: perhaps you rea…tag:nwprr.net,2015-12-20:3290209:Comment:1527662015-12-20T21:12:21.238ZDave S.http://nwprr.net/profile/dms
<p>B. Richards: perhaps you read the following:</p>
<p><strong>West Francisco Boulevard Partial Realignment.</strong> As currently configured, the existing rail alignment crosses West Francisco Boulevard at grade immediately south of the San Rafael Creek crossing. The alignment then crosses at grade over two additional roadways (Irwin Street and Rice Drive) further southwards along the alignment. As part of the Project, the existing locations of West Francisco Boulevard and the railroad…</p>
<p>B. Richards: perhaps you read the following:</p>
<p><strong>West Francisco Boulevard Partial Realignment.</strong> As currently configured, the existing rail alignment crosses West Francisco Boulevard at grade immediately south of the San Rafael Creek crossing. The alignment then crosses at grade over two additional roadways (Irwin Street and Rice Drive) further southwards along the alignment. As part of the Project, the existing locations of West Francisco Boulevard and the railroad alignment would be “flipped” between the San Rafael Creek crossing and Rice Drive. Doing this would eliminate two at-grade crossings at West Francisco Boulevard and Irwin Drive, providing more efficient and safe rail operations, and also would eliminate disruptions to local traffic during train movements through the area. The total length of West Francisco Boulevard that would be “flipped” would be approximately 1,800 feet and would run approximately from just south of Second Street to Rice Drive.</p>
<p></p>
<p>See, p. 1-2: <a href="http://www2.sonomamarintrain.org/userfiles/file/2015-05-14_SMART_Addendum.pdf" target="_blank">www2.sonomamarintrain.org/userfiles/file/2015-05-14_SMART_Addendum.pdf</a></p>
<p>(this link was posted yesterday)</p>
<p></p> My understanding is that the…tag:nwprr.net,2015-12-20:3290209:Comment:1527652015-12-20T20:50:53.963ZBob Cleekhttp://nwprr.net/profile/BobCleek
<p>My understanding is that the gauntlet tracks are required by FRA regs. The tracks must be a minimum distance away from any vertical structure more than four feet high. The SMART DMUs are designed to have platform level entry and the platforms are more than four feet high, so the main line cannot run that close to the platform. They could have opted for platforms with mechanical 'bridges" that extended out to permit platform level boarding, but did not. I think the gauntlet track solution…</p>
<p>My understanding is that the gauntlet tracks are required by FRA regs. The tracks must be a minimum distance away from any vertical structure more than four feet high. The SMART DMUs are designed to have platform level entry and the platforms are more than four feet high, so the main line cannot run that close to the platform. They could have opted for platforms with mechanical 'bridges" that extended out to permit platform level boarding, but did not. I think the gauntlet track solution was one of those things that Mansourian inherited from the prior initial SMART administration which "didn't know how to run a railroad." The selection and contract for the DMUs was done by a group of local politicians who didn't have a clue about the engineering ramifications that the system is now stuck with. That's what happened when they hired somebody who only had light rail transit experience to design a heavy rail transit system and you have politicians who are choosing rolling stock based on "the color of the upholstery." ... or so I've heard.</p> It's a PUC regulation for pla…tag:nwprr.net,2015-12-20:3290209:Comment:1527902015-12-20T16:53:48.809ZSMART Fanhttp://nwprr.net/profile/SMARTFan
It's a PUC regulation for platforms above 8 inches, Caltrain platforms are 8 inches, which exempts them from this rule.
It's a PUC regulation for platforms above 8 inches, Caltrain platforms are 8 inches, which exempts them from this rule. I read somewhere, recently, t…tag:nwprr.net,2015-12-20:3290209:Comment:1526762015-12-20T15:51:21.062ZB Richardshttp://nwprr.net/profile/BRichards
I read somewhere, recently, that the train and the city are considering relocating the ROW to the now existing Francisco Blvd., West, thus eliminating several at grade crossings including the one at Anderson Avenue. And the city would utilize the existing ROW, thru that area, as a street.
I read somewhere, recently, that the train and the city are considering relocating the ROW to the now existing Francisco Blvd., West, thus eliminating several at grade crossings including the one at Anderson Avenue. And the city would utilize the existing ROW, thru that area, as a street. Andrew: With all due respect…tag:nwprr.net,2015-12-20:3290209:Comment:1527452015-12-20T07:36:39.916ZRichard C. Brandhttp://nwprr.net/profile/RichardCBrand
<p>Andrew: With all due respect the CalTrain platforms are definitely not at ground level. CalTrain has two types of coaches, Nippon Sharyo which need a elevated platform because the lower level is 3 steps above the elevated platform level, and the Bombardiere (sp?) cars that still need the elevated platform but have their entry at that elevated level.</p>
<p>So who is directing this SMART requirement for separate tracks at stations? I'll have to talk to John about this.</p>
<p>Andrew: With all due respect the CalTrain platforms are definitely not at ground level. CalTrain has two types of coaches, Nippon Sharyo which need a elevated platform because the lower level is 3 steps above the elevated platform level, and the Bombardiere (sp?) cars that still need the elevated platform but have their entry at that elevated level.</p>
<p>So who is directing this SMART requirement for separate tracks at stations? I'll have to talk to John about this.</p> The gauntlets are needed beca…tag:nwprr.net,2015-12-20:3290209:Comment:1524822015-12-20T04:42:51.407ZAndrew Rothhttp://nwprr.net/profile/AndrewRoth
<p>The gauntlets are needed because the platforms will be too close to the tracks for freight cars to pass. Caltrain doesn't have this because the coaches come close enough to the ground that they can have ground-level platforms. The SMART DMUs are fairly high off the ground, so raised platforms are needed. Raised platforms have to be right up against the tracks to eliminate large gaps. </p>
<p>The gauntlets are needed because the platforms will be too close to the tracks for freight cars to pass. Caltrain doesn't have this because the coaches come close enough to the ground that they can have ground-level platforms. The SMART DMUs are fairly high off the ground, so raised platforms are needed. Raised platforms have to be right up against the tracks to eliminate large gaps. </p>