Japan Looks To Enter HSR Trains Market
Not to be outdone by European companies like Siemens and Alstom, which have already spent a lot of money on press, lobbying, and on growing their existing production facilities in California, Japan Central Railway is trying to enter the American HSR market, and hosted a demonstration of its trains to counter European claims that their trains are slow:
On a desolate stretch of track just before midnight, when all passenger lines have been put to bed, a juiced-up Japanese bullet train goes online and accelerates to over 200 miles per hour. The 700-ton train, about a quarter of a mile long, whooshes by rice paddies in under five seconds….
Diplomats, business leaders and journalists were crammed in to watch special speedometers record the feat last month, the first time operator Japan Central Railway Co. has allowed outsiders to join a test run. Rivals abroad said Japanese trains weren’t up to spec, and JR Central wanted to set the record straight.
“In France and Germany they have been saying we can only do 280 kilometers (170 miles) per hour, so we had to demonstrate,” says company chairman Yoshiyuki Kasai….
A diverse group of countries is at various stages of introducing super trains, including Russia, the U.K., Vietnam and Brazil, but the U.S. is the ultimate prize.
The article also notes that JR Central is proposing a package, as opposed to just the trainsets – they’d offer signaling, maintenance machinery, and training, instead of having the public builder cobble all that together from a number of different suppliers and contractors.
It’s an interesting proposal, and certainly one worth looking at. Having something holistic like this could wind up saving costs in the long run by ensuring the trains, signaling, maintenance and training are all integrated, whereas one presumes that getting those things from separate sources would actually lead to greater costs in dealing with possible incompatibilities even if the purchase price is lower.
As you all may have noticed, my blogging doesn’t always focus much on the technological details of the various trainsets, but I know many of the commenters are well versed in the subject. So I’ll leave it to you all to discuss this in the comments section.
It’s almost as if foreigners think there’s more of a market for HSR products in America than Americans do. I hope they’re right. Anyway, the more vendors there are, the better. A competitive market will guarantee a good price and high-performance rolling stock for us.
Hmm … the test run achieved 330 km/h (206 mph) according to this article.
Ugly Trainsets..I want Alstom …and French food onboard
Joey Reply:
December 17th, 2009 at 11:28 pm
Naaah we should go German … with unlimited beer and sausages for the whole trip ;)
jimsf Reply:
December 17th, 2009 at 11:54 pm
yes yes me too me too!
jimsf Reply:
December 17th, 2009 at 11:55 pm
I mean yes – alstom
Alex2000 Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 2:15 pm
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder I suppose. But I for one *love* the look of Japanese train sets (of which there is a wide variety), especially the 700 series which is being marketed.
So, up with JR, and down with Alstrom!
P.S I’ll take the Japanese quality service while I am at it too.
Alex2000 Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 2:23 pm
BTW, Which car would you buy? Would you buy a Renault/Citroen or Toyota/Honda?
Sure the Citroen might look cool, but you know it begins to disintegrate as soon as you pull out of the parking lot. I’ll take Japanese quality thank you.
are they serious about the cat ears?
fun, but I still prefer these
Gianny Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 12:59 am
How thin as those AGV, TGV Jim? Can you please tell me the seating configuration? These Nozomi 500 are soo freaking gorgeous though…
http://japanorama.co.uk/wp-content/gallery/trainspotters_photowalk/jr500_020608_002.jpg
EJ Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 3:54 am
You’re both wrong, the Talgo 350 is the coolest looking high speed train out there. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talgo_350
I just love that low slung sleek rake of talgo coaches, combined with that slab-sided brute of a power car. Not to mention talgo coach sets have some inherent design characteristics that make them well-suited for high-speed service – passive tilt, low center of gravity, lack of axles joining the wheels meaning the wheelsets don’t “hunt” at high speeds, etc.
We won’t be getting 500 series Shinkansen, that’s for sure. They were so expensive the Japanese only built 9 of the things. (I actually think the 300 series looks cooler – what can I say, I grew up in the 80s, I like angular, wedgy vehicle designs).
In fairness to the Japanese designers, those curious nose shapes they use in the latest series of Shinkansen are designed to combat “tunnel boom,” which is a big problem on the older lines that were built before the phenomenon was well understood. Tunnel entrances on modern high speed lines are flared outward to eliminate this problem, and thus the trains that Kawasaki built for Taiwan’s high speed system have much sleeker and sexier front ends.
AFAIK the popup cat ears were an experimental design for an aero-braking assist in case of emergency stops, but aren’t being considered for production use at this time.
jimsf Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 12:21 pm
I will admit the the nozomi are nice, and Ive always liked talgo coaches and interiors as we use them on the cascades up north. but I dont like those talgo power cars – the duck thing doesn’t work for me. There is something about french design and style, and they way they market, that is just better – japansese lack this – they may have the tech, but they don’t have sex appeal, in their trains or their marketing.
from fresno
One advantage the Japanese vendor has is a proven set of systems for sensing and responding to an earthquake. Other vendors may offer similar capabilities, but clearly the Japanese know the most about the issue.
wu ming Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 5:45 am
the earthquake thing alone makes the japanese a choice worth seriously considering.
AndyDuncan Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 10:39 am
Earthquake avoidance and automatic stopping of the trains is a big deal. Especially when you consider that the southern section of the San Andreas Fault is two “big ones” (1906, 1989) behind the northern section (but yeah, let’s tunnel across it so we don’t have to go through palmdale!), not to mention the myriad of other faults in CA.
Noise is another huge issue, the Japanese trains are much quieter than the european equivalents, the E5s are a tour de force in noise abatement: fully faired (covered) bogies, flush panels between cars, flat car bottoms, single-armed non-articulated pantographs, pantograph shields, etc. etc. NIMBYs listen up: Forget your misguided dreams of a tunnel and start calling for the lowest noise rolling stock available and standards for noise abatement based on zoning.
And acceleration, the large, racetrack section between bakersfield and los banos reduces the effect of having faster acceleration, but the dramatically faster acceleration of the shinkansens could shave a couple minutes off the runtime (assuming they ship us models with an equivalent top speed)
The space race is over. Welcome to the train race.
The rail vendor industry goes through booms and busts, just like any other. Right now, the large number and scale of HSR projects world-wide is overcompensating for a downturn in spending on standard-speed equipment and competition from new entrants into the market.
It’s somewhat fashionable to look down your nose to anything made in China. The same was once true of Japanese goods as well. However, the Middle Kingdom was the world leader in all sorts of technology for 28 out of the last 30 centuries. Just because they are still heavily dependent on expertise from Western vendors, the number of highly qualified HSR engineers and operators is growing at a very high rate. I for one wouldn’t be at all surprised if Chinese vendors put in some very competitive bids for tenders on the California HSR network.The two countries are chalk and chees wrt how they approach both planning and funding of megaprojects, but the Chinese sure know how to execute on the engineering and construction projects.
For all the passion the authors and readers on this blog have for California HSR, I find it instructive that it’s just one of many other countries are actually getting on with the business of laying track – which, in financial terms at least, is where the real action is. Some trains are purdier than others but at the end of the day, any HSR equipment is going to give you a fast, safe, afforable and comfortable intercity travel experience that cars and commercial flights no longer do.
jimsf Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 12:23 pm
still you can’t watch the sncf and alstom ads without being sucked in by the pure lush sexiness style and humor of the french. You just dont get that with asians.
Rafael Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 10:25 pm
Alstom does a good job of marketing its products, but high speed trains are first and foremost beasts of burden. Factors such as safety, passenger comfort, reliability, environmental compatibility (noise emissions) and cost of ownership ought to take precedence over looks.
Joey Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 10:34 pm
Japanese trains may be a bit ugly, though TBH the TGV and AGV always seemed a bit bland to me anyway…
Well, Japanese Shinkansen trains, such as the new N700 and the E5 series, are ugly due to the requirement to suppress tunnel boom and aerodynamic noise at high speed.
I believed it was mentioned in the cited article that JR Central doesn’t want to repeat the Taiwan HSR exporting case, such as that Japanese trains and signals needed to be built to meet standards originally written for European trains, resulting in hybrid system. But I think Taiwan HSR got the best of both worlds — Japan’s proven earthquake detection technology and reliability, while the larger European diameter tunnel enable the THSR 700 series train to shorten its nose, resulting in a much handsome train than the 700 series Shinkansen it was based on.
The San Deigo Trib, just published the truth about this project.
High-speed myths / Business plan shows deceit of bullet train push
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2009/dec/18/high-speed-myths-business-plan-shows-deceit-bullet/
All fair minded reader should view this article.
morris
EJ Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 4:15 am
Well, Morris, it’s hardly news that California government is completely broken and dysfunctional. Mediterranean climates seem to breed that sort of thing. I am sure that political gamesmanship and corruption will drive the costs of HSR up even higher.
Yet another way we’re like Spain. But the Spanish bit the bullet and invested in a system that will grow their economy (the way California used to do).
Joey Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 10:15 am
I wince every time an article mentions the “Reason” Foundation…
AndyDuncan Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 10:21 am
What I love about mouth-breathing articles like this is that they focus on something completely irrelevant, while missing the actual story: that CHSRA chose the ridership figures based on the higher ticket price at least partially because it allows them to take $1b in rolling stock off their estimates, thereby hiding $1b in cost inflation. That’s an actual story. The ridership estimates are exactly the same, it’s the same model, the ridership was always going to be lower with a 75% or 80% ticket price. Focusing on that, while missing the actual story about why the LA-Anaheim section is more expensive than previously claimed, is lazy, ignorant opposition for the sake of opposition. A two year old with spell-check could have written that article.
Why can’t we have an intelligent opposition to this project actually come up with some real critiques? Morris just posts any editorial that says anything bad about the system because he’s pissed it’s going to go by his house. We get NIMBYs that are claiming the trains are going to be like planes taking off (while they ride their $40k, straight-piped Harleys to their job at the bank, it’s casual Friday!) demanding tunnels, and people using laws that were written to protect endangered species to keep their property values over $600/sf.
Seriously, conservatives, get off your asses you’re making this too easy.
Robert Cruickshank Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 10:58 am
The SD Union-Tribune is one of the most far-right newspapers in the entire country, with an editorial board full of libertarian anti-government wackjobs. I take their opposition to the project as a point of pride. It’s a sign we’re doing something right.
My responses to the MNG editorial generally address the same points in the SDUT editorial.
jimsf Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 12:28 pm
san diego county is more conservative that orange county. I notice whenever Ive been there, is pretty , and its vacuous. and its dull. Think san diego and one has visions of over weight middle aged white guys in golf pants who drive mercury marquis with their plastic surgery assembled, pearl clad shoulder padded wives on their arms.
thats what I saw anyway. and being a big convention town, is always over run by hordes of the midwestern version of the same.
so its pretty frightening down there.
Brandon from San Diego Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 12:53 pm
Women in Pacific Beach are Ocean Beach… are hotties! The beaches are pretty nice too. That’s reason enough to venture to San Diego.
Admittedly, it is conservative, but not so certain as it’s described. People love the light-rail system – it’s often the backdrop in commercials for cars…. in a good light.
Of note, more and more people are shifting away from the SD Tribune. Each year, perhaps each month, it reflects less and less of community values. The Voice of San Diego is a recent addition to the local media outlets – an online pub. The SD Tribune is also just now undergoign a major editorial board make-over. Bob Kittle was recenlty let-go. I am unsure of the freakishly conservative editor that seems incesant like a small dog against HSR… where he’s at.
I can’t wait to ride the high speed rail with a cup of organic yogurt, my RSS feed picking up the latest articles on livable streets, all the while giving fellatio to a well-endowed gentleman.
GO HSR!
Robert Cruickshank Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 10:58 am
Club 220!
jimsf Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 12:29 pm
yeh but thats a long time from now.
So that’s JR Central’s angle, they want to market a complete solution. It has quite a few strengths, since it wouldn’t be cobbled together from several different vendors, their would be far fewer bugs to work out of the system. That combined with Japanese seismic engineering prowess makes this something CAHSRA should give a second or even third look.
Rafael Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 11:16 am
SNCF is pursuing much the same turnkey philosophy in its efforts to win HSR business in the US. The Moroccan HSR project is being implemented in just this way and Argentina’s would have been. The safety aspects of HSR mean it’s worth hiring someone who knows what they’re doing to prime the design-build-operate-maintain contract.
Btw, back in the 1980s there was a serious push to build HSR between LA and San Diego along the coast corridor using only private money but with sweeteners like monopoly rights and tax breaks. Shinkansen technology was selected for the turnkey construction project, the Japanese rolled out the red carpet. The project died for a number of reasons, mostly because environmental reviews were waived which led to massive protests from property owners close to the proposed line.
Having been burned one, the Japanese are now a little twice shy about pursuing HSR in California. The original assessment still holds, though: there’s a lot to be said for top-of-the-line shinkansen technology, especially if the service is going to be run at higher fare prices that originally planned.
jimsf Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 12:30 pm
I trust the french cuz they are fabulous and I can understand them.
CAHSR shoudl go for the fastest trains commercially available. Journey time be locked in for the life of the trains (25+ years), while mroe or less everythign else about the passeneger experiecne can be changed. We can (and probably will) get into (firendly) arguments about how the interiors shoudl be laid out, what on board amenities shoudl be offered, etc. However, none of those depend on the trains purchased, and all can be potenially changed. (I can think of many examples of trauin ‘refurbishment’ which involved replacing inside the vehicle bodyshell).
PeakVT Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 5:34 pm
Top speed probably is locked in for any particular model, but each new generation of trainsets has gone faster. There’s no reason to think that that won’t change until the limits of steel on steel are hit.
PeakVT Reply:
December 19th, 2009 at 6:47 am
Forgot to add: Unless the project is a failure, the CHSRA will buy a new generation of equipment ever 5-10 years, the newest of which will be put on the route needing the highest speed. So I don’t think speed should be the dominating consideration.
From the rider’s perspective, I think the Japanese trains are clearly the best option, if only for one reason: their trains are WIDER than everyone else’s. French trains are significantly narrower than anything plying the rails in the US now. Width makes a big difference in comfort.
I have several concerns about the Japanese system, though.
(1) Will the TBT design categorically exclude anything Japanese?
(2) How will the Japanese “full package” of signals, maintenance equipment, etc. compare cost-wise?
(3) Will the Japanese systems be compatible with commuter trains? The Shinkansen lines in Japan carry only bullet trains.
Alon Levy Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 8:19 am
Owen, the Japanese trains aren’t much wider than European export trains. The domestic European trains are narrower because they need to be able to run on European legacy track, which has a narrow loading gauge. In the US the loading gauge is wide, so the trains will be wide, regardless of who makes them. I don’t think there’s any wide version of the AGV, but there are existing Velaro models fitting the US loading gauge – Velaros run in China and Russia, which have the same train width as the US.
The CAHSR system will not be compatible with legacy commuter trains no matter what, because of FRA regulations. Caltrain plans to transition to non-compliant equipment, which will make it HSR-compatible, but such a transition has required it to run computer simulations of crashes to convince the FRA that non-compliant trains are safe, and will require it to electrify. Metrolink has proposed nothing of the sort, and will not be compatible with any HSR system.
Owen E Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 9:40 am
Certainly you’re correct that the fact that the AGV is narrow is a product of the loading gauges in Europe. And I do see your point about the Velaro (comes in 2950mm and 3265mm versions – though according to Wikipedia the 3265mm version is limited to 300km/h) But correct me if I’m wrong, but re-designing a train to be narrower or wider seems to me like it would be non-trivial, negating the benefits of getting an “off the shelf” design in the first place. Increasing the width (and therefore weight) of an AGV would have to be increased by almost 20% to match the width of Japanese trains.
AndyDuncan Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 10:07 am
Except that you’re only adding 20% to the width of certain structures. The wheels aren’t 20% more massive, for example. The axles and bogies are the same size. The wider train will be heavier than the skinnier train, but not by 20%.
AndyDuncan Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 10:09 am
Also, wikipedia is incorrect on the max speed for the wide velaros, the Chinese velaro that just ran that record breaking run is a widebody velaro.
Rafael Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 11:41 am
The business end of an HSR train is the bogies, propulsion and train control systems. Compared to messing with any of those, tweaking the body shell is relatively simple, though there are of course consequences for weight (i.e. mean time between maintenance inspections) and other parameters. “Off the shelf” without any modifications at all is virtually unheard of in the rail vehicle world, we use the term here to indicate a level of technology risk that is very manageable.
The Valero RUS version does have a wider body shell, in no small part because of the extra-thick insulation needed to keep the interior warm in arctic winter conditions. They also This added a lot of weight to the Velaro, which isn’t an ultralight design to begin with. In addition, different bogies had to be used since Russian gauge is 1520mm rather than the usual 1435mm. The 300km/h speed limit is imposed mostly by the level of investment and maintenance RZD is willing to make into the line, initially the voltage on the catenaries will impose an even lower limit of 250km/h. At least the tracks between Moscow and St. Petersburg are dead straight.
The Japanese trains already have wide body shells, which are used for 3+2 seating in 2nd class. The California system would probably use the 2+2 arrangement reserved for 1st class in Japan, simply because the average American is still larger (ie. wider) than the average Japanese person. On the other hand, the recent switch to more expensive nominal fares creates an opportunity for adding a cheaper but less comfortable service level to the mix.
AndyDuncan Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 12:00 pm
The shinkansen legroom, however, is luxurious by american standards, we might be able to squeeze a couple more rows of wider seats into the cars using a more american seat pitch to offset the 20% reduction in seats.
Of course, americans ride in Shinkansen economy-width seats (17 inches wide) all day long on 737s and NEC trains. It would certainly be nice to have japanese “green” width or TGV-width seats, however.
If we end up with a slightly skinnier shinkansen made to fit the slightly skinnier US passenger car loading gauge, I’m not sure the 3+2 will fit anyway.
AndyDuncan Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 12:15 pm
Actually from what I can find that works out just about right. If you reduce the seat pitch to the same as United offers on their “economy plus” expanded legroom fares, you gain another 4 rows for every 20 rows of seats that you take a seat out of, or 16 new seats for every 20 you lose going from the 3+2 configuration.
Business class width seats and more legroom than americans are used to from flying, while only losing 4 seats/car over the economy configuration of the shinkansen. Not a bad deal.
jimsf Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 12:31 pm
Maybe americans just need to lose some weight.
AndyDuncan Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 12:35 pm
I am one of those people who could stand to lose some weight, but even when I was skinny, I would have to dislocate a shoulder to fit into a 17-inch wide seat. I still not fat enough to need gut room, I’m talking about shoulder room.
jimsf Reply:
December 20th, 2009 at 11:38 pm
standard rail seating in the US on a typical train now is pretty comfy. I’d assume the tgv seats would be the same as that. also leg room is way better on the train, any train… than a 737.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 1:10 pm
Depends on which train on the NEC you are talking about. There’s the 3+2 seating on single level commuter cars. There’s the 2+2 seating on the Amfleets etc. There’s the 1+2 seating in first class on Acela. The new NJTransit multilevels have 2+2 seating. Rumor, and this is just rumor, is that 2+2 seating is as many as they can squeeze in and still have an ADA compliant aisle width. Seat pitch varies, even on the commuter cars. The Amtrak seat pitch is better than first class on most planes.
Bixnix Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 4:02 pm
gawd, please, no 737 size seats. That’s why I swore off flying Southwest and try to fly Jetblue’s A320′s that have wider seats. And I ain’t that big, either.
Andre Peretti Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 9:49 am
Suppliers customize the width to the loading gauge of the customer. For instance, Alstom currently sells Pendolinos in three widths: narrow (UK), standard UIC (Europe), wide (Finland). Italian Pendolinos are very comfortable. Their English twins have narrower seats and aisles.
So, unless California intends to buy secondhand trains, car width is a non-issue.
PeakVT Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 5:24 pm
Most rail lines in Japan are Cape Gauge, which is 3′-6″. IIRC Japanese engineers found the narrow gauge limited top speeds, so they went with standard gauge.
trainsintokyo Reply:
December 20th, 2009 at 4:43 pm
Correct. The fastest narrow-gauge trains are able to hit 160 km/h on straight track, and many limited express service trains are fitted with tilting mechanisms and active suspension to increase speed in the corners without sacrificing passenger comfort.
The package proposed by the Japanese is new for them but is just routine for other suppliers. The Taiwan HSR was designed and run by Europeans partly because the Japanese had no “exportable” staff available (I know, there were also psycho-political reasons).
Can they now beat SNCF International? I doubt it, for a simple reason: many SNCF engineers and drivers are eligible to full retirement pension at 50. Those of them who can speak a foreign language are then ready to start a second career. This allows SNCF International to instantly mobilize any number of English-speaking experienced engineers and drivers.
Whether there will be one bid for a package or separate bids for building, signalling, rolling stock, will be decided by CHSRA, not the suppliers.
For the Saudi HSR there was a first bid for track building and signalling, won by a consortium of Alstom and China Railway Construction Company. There will be a separate bid for the rolling stock.
Brazil’s choice is build and operate. There will be, among others, a joint offer by Alstom and the SNCF.
Now, whatever the merits of an Alstom-SNCF consortium, it has not a single chance of winning a bid in California. The choice will be political more than technical. They are French, which is a big handicap. Besides, the SNCF is state-owned. Can you imagine a “socialist” company getting a foothold in the land of the free?
Such a deal would be an easy target for the “deniers”, and the CHSRA will likely avoid the problem.
Here is how I would rank the chances of winning the bid for the rolling stock:
#1: Kawasaki, #2: Siemens, #3: Bombardier, #4 Talgo.
There is also an outsider whose possibilities are still unknown: GE+Chinese consortium, which would have the advantage of being American while using the European/ Japanese technology cheaply acquired by the Chinese. So far, little has transpired about the partership GE signed with the Chinese.
Alex2000 Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 3:00 pm
Plus, in the minds of the average person, Japan is synonymous with top quality cars and electronics.
You announce to John Q Public, that you are buying the Japanese (Or German for that matter) system they probably wouldn’t even blink: “Japan? Buying a high tech system from them? – Of course. Probably super reliable too!” they would think.
Announce you are going to buy a high tech train from France, people might do a double take.. “France? Isn’t that the country that makes cars which disintegrate?” – whatever the actual merits.
AndyDuncan Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 4:35 pm
Renault, Citroen and Peugeot haven’t sold cars in California in over 30 years, there’s nearly two full generations of Californians who have no idea if the French make decent cars or not (though admittedly, most of the brats don’t vote).
Alon Levy Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 9:37 pm
On the other hand, the xenophobes in the US love to hate Japanese cars as some sort of foreign invasion of America.
Joey Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 9:42 pm
Well then I’d love to hear what the Japanese have to say about all the Western culture that seems to have made its way over there…
jimsf Reply:
December 20th, 2009 at 11:41 pm
(those aren’t xenophobes, they’re loyal americans who support their country and american workers first)
adirondacker12800 Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 9:52 am
The third or second biggest car manufacturer in the US is a Japanese company. How is buying a car assembled in Tennessee not supporting American workers?
AndyDuncan Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 10:37 am
You’re looking for rationality in a xenophobic argument? Good luck. :-)
Watch out for vendor lock. CAHSR should aspire to build its system to proven international standards, not to the standards of whichever country offers the best show for top HSRA officials.
Rafael Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 12:17 pm
The biggest single headache in HSR is actually the train control system, which includes signaling. The Japanese have long relied on a combination of basic ATC (automatic train control), centralized line operations and excellent staff training. This philosophy relies more on people than on super-extra-fancy software and other technology.
Some implementations of European ERTMS standard have had a lot of teething troubles, especially due to reliability issues with GSM-R early on and a specification that was in flux. The biggest issues were and still are related to safe interoperation with legacy national signaling systems in Europe, which vary widely in how they handle off-design conditions. Since California HSR will be a brand-new stand-alone system, those aspects of ERTMS aren’t pertinent.
As for trains, one aspect that has received only limited attention is platform height for level-entry systems. Most vendors rely on conventional bogies, which imply a high platforms of around 1000mm. Talgo’s properietary wheelset technology has a great many advantages, such as a lower center of gravity. However, it also means the company’s high speed trains are designed to 760mm. That’s actually a UIC standard but the difference means mixing Talgo and non-Talgo HSR trains on a single line that calls for level boarding would be difficult. Note that RENFE’s fleet in Spain is mixed, but not every vehicle can be used on every line. Ironically, since Talgo is the only HSR vendor to adhere to a UIC standard on platform height, choosing them effectively locks customers to a single vendor.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
December 20th, 2009 at 7:55 pm
The rail systems on the East Coast, none of which use any UIC standard except by accident, are able to find multiple vendors when they buy new rolling stock. I take that back, all the new cars use IEEE 1473L networks which while it may not be a UIC standard is used worldwide.
Alon Levy Reply:
December 20th, 2009 at 8:04 pm
The rail systems on the East Coast have the advantage of volume. The MTA makes huge orders and is a major customer, so it can write its own specs for trains, and multiple companies will bid. Caltrain, which is a two-track back and forth whose current fleet consists of a little more than a hundred cars, isn’t in the same position.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
December 20th, 2009 at 9:47 pm
There’s life beyond the Hudson. The MBTA, SLE, NJTransit, SEPTA, MARC VRE and METRA all manage to get new cars. PATH is busy buying new cars. If you believe all the urban legends about PATH, PATH cars are compatible with the IRT. IRT cars are not FRA compliant. PATH cars are. If the rumors about PATCO cars are correct PATCO cars are very similar to PennCentral’s M1 and M3 cars. Caltrain and Metrolink get together and spec cars for “California HSR compatible” and they will find vendors.
Alon Levy Reply:
December 20th, 2009 at 11:05 pm
PATH isn’t FRA compliant – it’s considered a railroad, but it runs under a waiver. The compliance it needs to observe is in little things like the brakes. And MBTA, NJT, SEPTA, and Metra are all much larger than Caltrain is; VRE isn’t, but it runs EMD locomotives from the 1970s, hardly something to aspire to.
More importantly: those agencies don’t have vendor lock because they don’t have vendor-specific specs, like a boarding height of 760 mm. The NEC’s boarding height is similar enough to this of any first-world rail line. The standards the FRA is trying to foist on Caltrain aren’t.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 7:48 pm
I thought the whole point of UIC standards was so that multiple vendors would have products that could be used. 760 mm is a UIC/TSI standard height. . . but then reading the Wikipedia article on platform height it seems that every country in the EU has exemptions from the standards. I suspect the manufacturers are skilled at adjusting platform heights. . .
adirondacker12800 Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 7:49 pm
..adjusting trains to different platform heights…
Japan does mass transit right. I have visited Japan over half a dozen times and ridden the shinkansen and other trains many times. They are incredible, clean, efficient, amazing. Here is a terrific blog article that provides a great overview of the Japanese train system. It’s titled: Seven reasons why Japanese Trains are Different. America and American transit agencies could learn a lot from Japanese train systems. All American transit officials should be required to travel to Japan and ride the train system for a month.
http://www.muza-chan.net/japan/index.php/blog/japanese-trains
so deos france oooooohh and aaaaaahh
and of coursemy favorite
Joey Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 1:00 pm
It’s like synchronized swimming for trains o_O
only the french can bring on the style and sex appeal worthy of california.
Alex2000 Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 2:50 pm
If we are going to be making somewhat subjective and somewhat over-the-top comments, let me join in:
Style and Sex appeal don’t mean much if it spends all its time in the shop.
Look a the electronics or auto industry. I’d take a German or Japanese car over any French (or Korean) car. Sure the Japanese models can be more pedestrian, but like a lot of people, I choose reliability and functionality over looks.
Andre Peretti Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 4:11 pm
You prove my previous point. Even though the TGV has never had a single fatality in 30 years whereas the German ICE killed more than 100 people, Americans will always think German is reliable and French is not.
French companies should stop spending money preparing for a bid they are sure to lose.
AndyDuncan Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 4:31 pm
While I agree with the general anti-french sentiment, it’s not quite as bad in CA as the rest of the country.
The French are also the ones that built the TGV. Most people I talk to still refer to the CAHSR system as “the TGV they’re going to build in CA”. Your average non-trainfan doesn’t know what an ICE is. They know “Bullet Train” (not “Shinkansen”) and “TGV”.
The brand-recognition of the TGV alone (especially when you tell them the AGV is “one better” than the TGV) could be enough to counter any anti-cheese-eating-surrender-monkey biases.
@jimsf
TGV, Velaro, Shinkansen (i.e. N700i Bullet)- all fine trainsets that would get the job done. However, on the topic of reliability, and echoing Alex2000′s sentiments, let me refer to comments by the CEO of France’s national railways (SNCF), Mr. Guillaume Pepy, about the reliability of the TGV Duplex vs. Shinkansen:
“As of today, the reliability of a Duplex train is on average six incidents per million km, which is good, but 60 times worse than Shinkansen reliability.”
Source:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BQQ/is_3_47/ai_n27177502/
*which may be why SNCF is going to allow bids for replacements of older TGV stock from all builders- Alstom no longer will have a captive market in their backyard:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601101&sid=aWDb8VO.Yplc
PeakVT Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 5:43 pm
Reliability should be a significant consideration. However, to get the reliability of a proven system, that system needs to be taken as-is (for the core parts, at least). There’s always a temptation for a customer to tack on this or that customization, which often turns out to be the most problematic part.
Andre Peretti Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 6:11 pm
At the SNCF many find Alstom uncooperative, compared to Bombardier whose attitude is more flexible and understanding. Alstom should realize they no longer have a captive market in France. These last few years, the SNCF bought many more trains from Bombardier than from Alstom.
What americans forget is that america and france have long history of camaraderie and have the same basic values of freedom, liberty and equality, more passionately so than any other country including britain. and we nothing in common with asia.
but whatever. first you have to figure out how to get the tracks laid in the face of mounting opposition.
I mean who knows who will be building what trains 20 years from now when we actually need them.
AndyDuncan Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 5:42 pm
Rolling stock procurement is scheduled for 2011, so it’s actually not that far off.
But yes, the Statue of Liberty was a nice present, and we have a street named after this guy.
jimsf Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 5:46 pm
here he is again in the eastbay
but if this is what you prefer I guess I can’t stop you.
I don’t see the appeal. Their language is so not attractive compared to french.
AndyDuncan Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 5:53 pm
I don’t see what the language has to do with anything, by 2030 everyone on the train is going to be speaking spanish anyway :-)
jimsf Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 7:02 pm
crap, thats right.
whatever . Im taking my pension and moving to the philipines where I can get a maid massage cook and driver for 89 cents a day.
Joey Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 9:04 pm
So much for social equality…
jimsf Reply:
December 19th, 2009 at 9:09 pm
all my philipine friends co workers and customers, are the ones who told me I should retire there. they highly recommend it.
Alex2000 Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 6:10 pm
The sound of language is in bounds now? ;-)
Okay, then lets compare something is equally as off topic. Service.
Eat in a restaurant in Japan. Go to a department store in Japan. Fly in a Japanese airline. Take the train. Then compare the level of service to what you would get in a Restaurant in France, or an airline here for that matter.
PS I suppose only French spoken in France is in bounds? Since, like English there are different French accents. I think you would find French spoken in Quebec for example to be decidedly less pleasant sounding.
AndyDuncan Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 6:46 pm
And Tokyo has more Michelin Stars than Paris…
jimsf Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 7:03 pm
sushi. barf.
AndyDuncan Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 7:13 pm
You don’t deserve San Francisco. It’s too good for you.
Seriously, terrific sushi in SF, you’re missing out.
Joey Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 9:22 pm
Seconded (believe me I live in SF).
jimsf Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 11:44 pm
again, sushi, barf.
jimsf Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 11:49 pm
my fav sf place: yum
I don’t eat raw things. I do eat rice a roni though.
joey you live in SF? you have to go see this wonderful christmas play I went to tonight…hysterical.
trainsintokyo Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 5:25 pm
::rolls eyes::
I sometimes wonder if some americans are either intimidated by the french embrace of nice things ( due to our own insecurities, I mean we area kind of trailer trashy compared to them) or maybe a little jealous because they are better at the things we are suppose to be good at like technology and patriotism. The french are far more patriotic than americans.
meanwhile heres an article about infrastructure that says american are moving to the right. wtf?
but mostly it just has a pic of our pretty new bridge.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 8:28 pm
looks like a pair of overgrown on ramps to me.
Joey Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 9:10 pm
Yeah … a $6b freeway over water … plus a single self-anchored suspension span which AFAIK has yet to be shipped over from China (actually I think the “signature” span was a major reason for the cost overflow).
jimsf Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 11:36 pm
yes well, at least we are finally getting to spend some of the money that LA has been spending for decades.
jimsf Reply:
December 18th, 2009 at 11:41 pm
don’t be jealous cuz you all don’t have any bridges like this (or the stunning setting in which to put one)
adirondacker12800 Reply:
December 20th, 2009 at 12:14 pm
Can yours do this