Join the discussion on the following article:
Caltrain electrification project OK’d
Last time I looked Caltrain served Gilroy with a couple of trains a day.
What, if any, are the plans to provide service after electification?
Change trains at San Jose?
Run diesels thru to and from San Francisco?
Tow MU’s between San Jose and Gilroy, by then maybe Monterey/Salinas/Santa Cruz?
Get UP to allow electrification all the way from San Jose southward?..
This can be interesting and…fun…
Mr Carlin,
I would hope they would obtain at least some dual service units, similar to what Metro-North runs north of NYC. On the Harlem line, the electric third rail went as far as the Southeast station. Everything north was served by diesel. During weekday rush hour service, some of these diesels would run all the way from the Wassiac station on the north end, thru southeast where the diesel primeover would shut down, and would then be powered off the third rail shoe into GCT.
California high speed rail is also coming that way between Gilroy and San Jose with electrical catenary at 25 kv, but maybe on its own route.
I believe the intent is for the current 4th and King depot to serve trains to Gilroy and over the Dumbarton Bridge along with extras for events at AT&T Park. Electric trains will operate to a new Transbay Transit Center.
Of course you could just purchase some electric locomotives and attached them to the current equipment. Not only would you reduce SIGNIFICANTLY the cost of the project, the operating costs of having only one motor per train vs having each car with a motor to be maintained would be a lot less. As far a builder there is a company in Sacramento that has a lot of experience building electric locomotives that work with a production line already existing.
But then again, being California why spend only a billion when you can spend a lot more.
Most electric railways are moving toward EMU’s (or DMU’s) all over the World. Lower costs, better acceleration and train handling, gentler on track owing to forces distributed all over the train, and a more flexible composition allowing a better fleet management. Extra units can be coupled to or uncoupled off the train quickly, even mid-trip during a station stop (hypothetical example: new service over Dumbarton bridge, joining an existing service from San Jose to San Francisco - just attach the units during the latter’s station stop, and off you go). This allow fine-tuning equipment utilization with demand that can fluctuate along trip segments. And finally, if a unit fails enroute, the train can keep moving, albeit at a reduced speed (unlike, say, a locomotive failure)
In my opinion, Going for EMU’s actually make much more sense than archaic push-pull sets with a cab car and a locomotive. The only benefit I would see for keeping locomotive-hauled stock is using dual-mode locomotives for service to Gilroy without changing locomotive in San Jose. This seems a very minor factor.
Given that electrification still is years away, the current rolling stock will be fully depreciated by then (if not alreadu), so it will also make financial sense to actually replace it with new EMU’s. It may just keep those F40’s and gallery cars in service a bit longer than originally expected of them. Then the remaining MP36’s and BBD Bilevels could be used for Gilroy to San Jose service - or down to Santa Cruz or Monterrey.