Siemens Brings High Speed Rail to the State Capitol

Feb 27th, 2015 | Posted by

Siemens, the German railcar manufacturer with a factory in Sacramento where they hope to build trainsets for California high speed rail, mocked up a high speed train at the State Capitol this week:


Photo by Keith Dunn

The German engineering company is exhibiting one of its high-speed train cars in front of the State Capitol in Sacramento, giving people a glimpse of what could be the future of rail transportation in California. The exhibit, which opened Wednesday morning, will run until 4 p.m. Thursday.

Siemens already has a strong presence in the state’s capital. The company’s south Sacramento plant employs 800 people who are working on projects for Caltrans, San Francisco’s Municipal Transportation Agency and Sacramento’s Regional Transit light-rail system. Siemens’ director of high-speed rail development, Armin Kick, says the bid to manufacture California’s high-speed trains could be very good for Sacramentans.

“With high-speed rail there would be significant growth of our business here in Sacramento, and that would add a couple hundred jobs to our plant. It’s a very significant bid, and we’re very interested in it,” he said.

This is a clever way for Siemens to not only stir interest in its vehicles, but to also help make HSR more of a reality – especially to the state legislators whose ongoing support is crucial to the project’s survival.

Did anyone get a chance to stop by and see it while it was on display at the Capitol this week?

  1. jimsf
    Feb 27th, 2015 at 22:51
    #1

    OT meanwhile Coachella Valley residents demand rail service, express doubts

    joe Reply:

    And this:

    Arguments against rail travel have not changed much over the decades, yet when they come online we often wonder how we ever did without them. “When D.C. was building its Metro,” Fallows recalls, “people in Georgetown were very much like HSR opponents. Now, the biggest complaint about Georgetown is that it doesn’t have the Metro.”

    Yet, high-speed rail opposition is affecting smaller-scale commuter projects. Officials in Riverside are considering a modern streetcar line. “Opponents are already associating it with HSR, and that’s hurting infrastructure investment,” said Mayor William “Rusty” Bailey.

    The city’s high-end estimate of $25 million per mile would work out to $300 million for the proposed 12-mile system, but Bailey, who also will speak at Wednesday night’s summit, cites a nearby freeway-widening project 10 miles long and costing $1.5 billion. “That’s $150 million per mile to go from eight lanes to 12.”

    http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/op-ed/bruce-maiman/article11032112.html#storylink=cpy

    Joshua Cranmer Reply:

    Ah yes, the infamous Georgetown Metro stop myth.

    joe Reply:

    Still, the Georgetown legend has a kernel of truth. Residents of many neighborhoods did protest planned Metro stations, and WMATA was forced to respond, even cancelling one station. [DA: I wonder which one?] But the residential protests lacked the clear-cut class and racial connotations of the Georgetown story, for the protests were common to black neighborhoods and white, to poor neighborhoods as well as rich ones. (Page 156)

    joe Reply:

    Above is a book quote via from http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/423/georgetown-never-blocked-metro-stop/

    The point being Metro opponents are very much like HSR opponents.

    Donk Reply:

    It really is a shame that there is no viable rail service from LA to Palm Springs. Now with the extensive rail network in LA, this is no brainer. But yeah the problem is that freight dominates that route.

    Eric Reply:

    When HSR to Phoenix is built, it will stop at Palm Springs.

    Ted Judah Reply:

    Probably not.

    It’s makes much more sense to run LA – OC – San Diego- Phoenix than LA – Phoenix and LA- OC – San Diego on spurs.

    Nathanael Reply:

    San Diego-Phoenix would need to be completely greenfield construction, and it would be hard. The last company to try to do it ended up going through Mexico. Which was easier in those days, without the border crossing madness we have today

    LA-Phoenix probably would be a direct line, and San Diego will probably always be on a spur.

    Nathanael Reply:

    Note that the highway (I-5) veers north (it does not take the most direct route) due to mountains; but it goes through what is now a giant national forest. An I-10 route is just much easier to build.

    Tokkyu40 Reply:

    If you’re familiar with the terrain (Or the San Diego & Arizona Railroad) you would know that any rail over those mountains on the I-8 corridor makes little or no sense.
    From an engineering standpoint, the best route is probably LA – Riverside/San Bernardino – Coachella Valley – Yuma – Phoenix – Tucson. This has minimal tunneling, no extreme grades and picks up most of the major population centers.
    Once service on that route is established I would extend the line to Las Cruces or El Paso and along the I-20 corridor through Midland and Odessa to Ft Worth to maximize revenue.

    EJ Reply:

    That’s a hell of a detour just to serve Yuma.

    Tokkyu40 Reply:

    It’s not much of a detour at all. The route is flat and reasonable clear, with possibly one short tunnel needed between Yuma and Wellton.
    Yuma has a regional population of 200,000, with 100,000 in the urban area. If it were in Illinois it would be one of the largest cities in the state.
    The I-10 corridor would pick up Quartzsite, which has a population of 3,600 and some abandoned mines. Scenic, but not big enough to make a stop.

    Ted Judah Reply:

    The Arizona Department of Transportation prefers the alignment you mention. Also, there would be more demand from San Diego to Phoenix than Palm Springs

    Paul Dyson Reply:

    ADoT has a stellar record in delivering rail projects, with plenty of backing from their elected officials.

    EJ Reply:

    CAHSR’s preferred LA-San Diego route goes via the Inland Empire anyway. (Personally, I think they should just upgrade the surf line but whatever). From there it’s a straight shot to Phoenix via Palm Springs along the I-10 corridor. Connecting San Diego to Phoenix along an I-8 alignment would mean a big detour for LA-Phoenix traffic.

    Not to mention as Tokkyu40 points out, the mountain crossing east of San Diego is much tougher.

    Joey Reply:

    There is a formidable mountain range east of San Diego. Putting HSR through it would not be a trivial task. The terrain east of the Inland Empire is much more forgiving.

  2. jimsf
    Feb 27th, 2015 at 23:12
    #2

    I would have stopped by to look at it if I had known it was going to be there!

    Jerry Reply:

    Another example of poor publicity for HSR. Why only two days. I can’t even find any interior shots of the ‘demo’. Channel 10 seems to be the only source of information about it.
    Where does the model move to next?? Will there be future locations for the ‘demo’??

    joe Reply:

    The CAHSRA has nothing to do with the demo. This is totally a Siemens event to lobby the State.

    That it didn’t get good coverage falls directly on them and our media. of the two I pick the later. The Corporate News establishment sucks.

    synonymouse Reply:

    Do you think the people in Acton and Sta. Clarita want to see this story? Add antipathy to apathy.

    FailRail is not that much in the popular consciousness as the Cheerleaders imagine.

    Ted Judah Reply:

    It’s true.

    I went to see it but only found out about it by accident. I was looking up a comment last weekend someone made about Siemens. When I loaded the corporate page, it was advertised on the front.

    I took some pictures and sent them to Robert, but take it with a grain of salt. I overheard some of the employees saying that this model was built about ten years ago and is used all over the place as their showcase. Only a very small part of the interior was designed to look like an actual cab with seats…the rest was used for various exhibits and displays that the company wanted to simulate. The seats and some fixtures definitely looked worn enough to validate what I heard.

    Lots of people stopped by to look and there was a fair amount of excitement. But clearly, it was all about influencing those at the State who might play a role in the awarding of the bid…

    Jerry Reply:

    “all about influencing those at the State who might play a role in the awarding of the bid”
    And are those the people standing in front of the mock up in the above blog photo by Keith Dunn??

    Ted Judah Reply:

    I don’t recognize them, personally…but maybe someone else knows?

  3. Jerry
    Feb 28th, 2015 at 00:06
    #3

    And who are the people in the photo standing next to the demo??

  4. Philippe
    Feb 28th, 2015 at 01:12
    #4

    To me this looks like the e320 Valero mock-up that Eurostar used to talk about their BR 374 class of trains that are coming later this year.

    They could have used the pictures from various examples of the fleets like the ICE3 for the inside

  5. Lewellan
    Feb 28th, 2015 at 09:21
    #5

    Best Keystone XL Pipeline argument heard lately: ‘Our’ higher priority for pipeline is from Oklahoma/Omaha to Dakota Bakkan fields. Pipeline that reduces demand for off-shore drilling in the Gulf. Reduces hazards of rail transport and marine terminal operations east and west. Existing petro facilities and corridors get safety upgrades and fuels serve more domestic uses.

    Why trust Warren Buffett-run BNSF to not run roughshod over the Pacific Northwest? Remember, Buffett wanted 90-degree rail spurs on West Hayden Island on the Columbia CRC. How stupid is putting an explosive marine terminals near where oil tanker cars will derail? Oh thanks Warren, Nitwit.

    Very pretty train. Love the aqua/tourquoise. But since it won’t run south of Burbank nor north or west of Madera til who knows when, the honest consideration of alternate dual-mode locomotives would make one-seat rides for the interim. My only gripe remaining is Altamont vs Pacheco. Honest discourse might possibly resolve fairly how the San Juaquins, Capitals and ACE are most effectively rerouted.
    Eventually, a train of that model could run. Much sooner, a dual-mode would provide one-seat rides.
    I think that’s a fair assessment. Good luck. Keep up the good work.

    Lewellan Reply:

    Saying “Keep up the good work,” is said to not say, “Don’t keep up the NOT so good work.”
    Whatever good work that gets done is great. We’re still running behind the times worldwide.

    adirondacker12800 Reply:

    an excellent reason to skip over 1930s technology that you advocate.

    Tokkyu40 Reply:

    A reason to not skip over 1930’s technology such as Japan uses today is to allow immediate extension of service while the preparations are being made to extend electrification.
    A fleet of fast Diesel multiple unit trains would be able to give one seat service from San Diego to Sacramento on the day that the HSR opens from Burbank to Merced. Transfers discourage passengers.
    After HSR is on-line and extended they would still be valuable on the conventional lines like the Surfliner.

    Lewellan Reply:

    Thanx, the X an endearment or extra grateful, term, Tokkyu40.
    U.S.A. U.S.A = EsPanYol EsPanYol = Espanish Talgo derived during pre-WWII fleeing Spain engineers.
    It’s just such a great story told. As if someone would/should why not?
    Take care yall. TALGO AWEsome!

  6. Useless
    Feb 28th, 2015 at 09:45
    #6

    Since Siemens is so determined to enter the CHSRA rolling stock bidding, that effectively rules out CNR’s bid to sell CRH380B in California, because Siemens would certainly sue CNR and will not grant an export license to CNR.

    joe Reply:

    Everyone will sue.

    This is THE first project in the US and an important foothold.

    Products built for CAHSRA will comply with US content rules making them eligible for any other Fed funded project.

    The authority has avoided construction lawsuits by paying all bidders millions to cover the costs of proposal writing. If a losing bidder sues, they lose the proposal money.

    I don;t see what carrot will keep the transit manufactures from suing.

    synonymouse Reply:

    If the Chinese do bid, they will make every effort to come in very low.

    There is a strong bias in the American system to award to the lowest bidder; overturning that precedent is going to get very ugly. Out of political correctness my thought is that they would have to award to an Asian competitor.

    That won’t fly IHMO and litigation is certain.

    FailRail should just go with buying a few extra Sons of Acela and put off a large new rolling stock purchase for some years ahead. That way the NEC has to deal with the legal issues.

    synonymouse Reply:

    If the Judge throws out 2:40 that would facilitate going back to the NEC trainset in the interim.

    synonymouse Reply:

    They could even try to cut a lease deal with the NEC.

    adirondacker12800 Reply:

    There won’t be any available. People on along the NEC will be busy using them.

    Useless Reply:

    adirondacker12800

    Well, AMTRAK can have all the rolling stocks delivered within a 4 year time period, then let CHSRA use half the units until the last built Acelas are retired. AMTRAK can get a price discount with a compressed delivery schedule.

    synonymouse Reply:

    Just add on to the order a few.

    What options will PB have if the bidding process proves a total disappointment? Say the bids they like turn out much higher than anticipated and they don’t want the low bid. There is no law that say you have to move ahead with a unsuccessful process.

    They can cancel and start over or they can cancel and go back to the NEC with a lease proposal or similar. Clem and Richard M. could detail what compromises the NEC equipment would impose but are they that onerous for an interim period? Operating on the Blend with AAR ops will mean FRA boilerplate anyway and my impression is that all the Acelas celebrate the AAR-FRA extra weight.

    adirondacker12800 Reply:

    Amtrak can go and make money using them on the NEC while they are designing Acela IIIs for the new regulations and the people wedged into 40 year old Amfleets can use the current Acelas. The 40 year old Amfleets can get reassigned to the branch routes that fairly often sell out because Amtrak doesn’t have enough cars to service the demand.

    synonymouse Reply:

    They could always negotiate an increase to the NEC order. To my mind the difficulty could come with any modifications PB would require, say to meet a different platform height.

    This I dunno.

    Useless Reply:

    synonymouse

    > If the Chinese do bid, they will make every effort to come in very low.

    Prices matter only if the bidder’s bid is qualified. CNR and CSR do not have their own high speed rolling stock designs of their own, so their bids are not qualified under the 5-year use rule. Ditto for Japanese bids too because the Kawasaki efSET doesn’t exist physically so it can’t qualify even if CHSRA decides to be the launch customer of the efSET.

    So the only qualified Asian bidder is Rotem. So it’s Rotem vs Europeans contest, and Rotem projected to be the lowest bidder among qualified bidders.

    > FailRail should just go with buying a few extra Sons of Acela and put off a large new rolling stock purchase for some years ahead.

    Guess what? Bombardier is not bidding, Siemens’s silent, and the only high speed rolling stock maker confirmed to have bid is Rotem. So CHSRA will end up with Rotem rolling stocks either way.

    synonymouse Reply:

    The Chinese with a very low bid will certainly take “if the bidder’s bid is qualified” to court.

    synonymouse Reply:

    Could prove interesting in that case if FailRail’s Rotem’s price out way more expensive than NEC’s Rotems.

    adirondacker12800 Reply:

    SEPTA’s Rotems came in at a reasonable price.

    synonymouse Reply:

    Do they go 160 mph.

    EJ Reply:

    I’m sure they suck. I mean, everything sucks, right? Especially stuff supported by Democrats and unions.

    adirondacker12800 Reply:

    He thinks anything not a PCC streetcar, with a trolley, sucks.

    synonymouse Reply:

    SEPTA’s requirements and specs are much less demanding than those of FailRail.

    adirondacker12800 Reply:

    assembling a Silverliner isn’t all that much different than assembling something that can go faster. you may have noticed that almost all factories are stationary.

    EJ Reply:

    Siemens’s silent

    You should read the post attached to this comment section.

    les Reply:

    5 years from when?

    Useless Reply:

    les

    I would assume the bid submission date.

    Peter Reply:

    Well, I’m glad that at least someone here knows exactly what the future RFP will require. Thanks for keeping us informed!

    Useless Reply:

    Peter

    It’s not that hard to figure out. The CHSRA is asking for 220 mph revenue service capable FRA Tier-III rolling stocks that have been in use since 2010. This restricts possible candidates to TGV POS, Siemens Velaro, KTX-II, and possibly Talgo 250(Bombardier as partner).

    Three out of four qualified candidates are loco-pulled rolling stocks, one EMU.

    Useless Reply:

    Reading the FRA Tier III regulation proposal, the Velaro must not seat passengers in cab cars from San Jose to Palmdale, which actually puts Velaro in a severe disadvantage against other loco-pulled rivals because the FRA rule favors loco-pulled coaches over EMUs.

    Page 21 : http://www.apta.com/mc/hsr/previous/2011/presentations/Presentations/Implementing-High-Speed-Rail-in-the-United-States.pdf

    Observer Reply:

    I believe that the Siemens Velaro first entered service from Madrid to Barcelona in 2007. If FRA regulations will not allow passengers in cab cars, I am sure Siemens can easily rectify that; they would just come up with a version with no seating in cab cars.

    Joe Reply:

    It is not clear to me how CA will define new and proven.
    The probable bias is to be inclusive and encourage competition.

    The Boeing 737 is a “proven” aircraft that is continuously updated and if any other product eould be rebranded but for aircraft is still a 737 to avoid recertification.

    Clem Reply:

    CHSRA’s lead consultant has pre-selected a single-level EMU distributed traction architecture. Like five years ago. Read their technical memos!

    Joe Reply:

    Not sure Clem answered how CA will define proven.

    Richard Mlynarik Reply:

    CHSRA’s lead consultant has pre-selected a single-level EMU distributed traction architecture. Like five years ago. Read their technical memos!

    Not just America’s, but clearly The World’s Very Finest Transportation Planning Professionals are on the case here.

    Who do you want to design your trains (and infrastructure, and service plans, and project phasing, and competitive procurement, and …)?
    Some dodgy foreigners who actually operate or build trains? Jesus.

    Peter Reply:

    Useless, you’re citing to documents referencing preliminary drafts of the Tier III regulations from FOUR years ago. Things have moved on since then.

    Peter Reply:

    Does anyone know where to find an actual copy of ETF_01-003? All I can find is -002.

    joe Reply:

    Who do you want to design your trains (and infrastructure, and service plans, and project phasing, and competitive procurement, and …)?
    Some dodgy foreigners who actually operate or build trains? Jesus.

    Blindly asserting foreign corporate or political interests will better service California is very serious.

    CA should just turn our government services over to these professional and fix all these PBQD bastards once and for all.

    Thank you for this enlightened perspective.

    Joey Reply:

    Blindly asserting foreign corporate or political interests will better service California is very serious.

    How about foreign technical knowledge? Decades of divestment in rail infrastructure has left us at a point where we actually have no clue how to design a functional rail system. Can-do attitudes and ribbon cutting ceremonies are nice, but they’re not going to magically produce decades of research and actual real-world experience.

    Clem Reply:

    I think we should explore the technical possibilities of a cylindrical wheel profile, which has the potential to push supported-duorail technology to the next level.

    Max Wyss Reply:

    @Clem: Aren’t you a month too early?

    joe Reply:

    “How about foreign technical knowledge? Decades of divestment in rail infrastructure has left us at a point where we actually have no clue how to design a functional rail system.”

    How fascinating – maybe we should build institutions of higher learning to disperse this foreign technical knowledge to our citizenry.

    We can build supercomputers, rockets and aerospace marvels and we can build trains without acting like this is something really fucenken hard. The French Germans or whomever are NOT going to come into CA and change our political system.

    The good old days of colonialism. Our foreign masters will make things right.

    Jerry Reply:

    @Clem
    Would there be a guide rail in the middle with the duorail wheels on the outside? Or what?
    Any working models anywhere?
    A modified Lionel train model could demonstrate something.

    synonymouse Reply:

    Clem, we need a testtrack and about 5 years to perfect this new-fangled steel wheel on steel rail technology.

    Joey Reply:

    joe, we haven’t divested in supercomputers and rockets for decades (quite the opposite). In the long run, if there is a large reinvestment in domestic rail, we can build up domestic knowledge back up. But that’s not going to happen overnight, and probably not on the timescale of, say, CAHSR ordering its first batch of trains.

    The other side of this is that many of these systems are safety critical. Any home-grown system would necessarily be untested, thus increasing the risks.

    jonathan Reply:

    @Max: Clem is alluding to BART. which does use cylindrical-profile wheels.
    George Stephenson? Whossat?

    Max Wyss Reply:

    @jonathan: Yeah, I get it… Well, it sounds more like Richard Trevithick to me…

  7. morris brown
    Feb 28th, 2015 at 10:07
    #7

    You can read an article on the results of the recent Cap and Trade auction at:

    http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/index.cfm/go/news.display/id/26171

    What is very interesting is the comment made to the article, the author being an information officer of the ARB.

    Just how much funding will go to the State and then how much will go to HSR is obviously not yet known.

    I read earlier, that a full accounting will be availabe around March 17th.

    ———–

    Author:
    Dave Clegern

    Date Posted:
    02/26/15 11:48 PM

    It is incorrect to imply that California will have $1B to spend as a result of this month’s carbon allowance auction. The majority of that money (considerably more than half) is returned to utilities for the benefit of their customers (to avoid rate increases, for on-bill credits twice a year, etc.) The remaining proceeds are split between California and our auction partner, the Canadian Province of Quebec. The amount of the actual total for California is also affected by the exchange rate at the time the total is tallied, and that has not yet happened.

    Dave Clegern Air Resources Board Public Information Officer for Climate Change Programs dclegern@arb.ca.gov

    joe Reply:

    To recap -You and your kind insist CnT is illegal and want it abolished.

    This benefit is also illegal: “The majority of that money (considerably more than half) is returned to utilities for the benefit of their customers (to avoid rate increases, for on-bill credits twice a year, etc.)”

  8. Emmanuel
    Feb 28th, 2015 at 12:14
    #8

    Reminds me of this sad thing I gave a visit once or twice in Germany.
    http://www.vuz-essen.de/rip/2003/fr/b06-1.jpg

    Jerry Reply:

    An innovative company would have its models available for 3-D printers.

    Jerry Reply:

    Siemans could have picked a blue and gold color scheme.

  9. joe
    Feb 28th, 2015 at 15:32
    #9

    Texas HSR Opposition.

    AUSTIN TX:
    A lawmaker whose district sits near the proposed route for a planned bullet train connecting Houston and Dallas filed a bill Wednesday that could stop the project in its tracks.

    House Bill 1889, from state Rep. Will Metcalf, R-Conroe, a persistent critic of the plan, would require the elected officials of every city and county along the route to approve the project. That seems improbable, given the opposition in some rural areas.

    While officials in Houston and Dallas have championed the project, officials and residents in rural communities in between have questioned how it would benefit them.

    http://www.star-telegram.com/news/politics-government/state-politics/article11175374.html#storylink=cpy

    Jerry Reply:

    W I I F M
    What’s In It For Me?

    joe Reply:

    Exactly. They get the tracks and trains and impacts with no benefit. They sure are selfish,

    Clem Reply:

    They are flyover country.

    joe Reply:

    Fly-over with anti-aircraft.

    Maybe people need to know their place in society. Are they are insignificant and need to STFU or is it more realistic to expect fly-over country to oppose impacts without benefits?

    We have a representative government so lets see how their representatives lobby for their constituents.
    Possibly a stop or detour.

    Eric Reply:

    If you’re a small minority (relative to the inhabitants of Houston and Dallas areas), then yes, you need to STFU. We have eminent domain for a reason, you’ll get a fair market price for the land you have to give up (if any) and the (minor) inconvenience it may cause you. You’re just not entitled to stop the project entirely.

    Both TX and CA have whiners of this sort. But I expect that for cultural and legal reasons and from experience up to this point, TX will be able to take care of the whiners more easily than CA.

    EJ Reply:

    It’s amazing how many so-called progressives pine for the days of Robert Moses.

    joe Reply:

    CA whiners have a political process which got us to where we are now.

    TX whiners not so much an opportunity with this once described I-45 alignment.

    CA system doesn’t follow I-5 and services the flyover county.

    TX system is end to end – No College Station no Fort Worth. Profit first.

    jimsf Reply:

    people in the path of the keystone pipeline are in flyover country too. In the way of a project that will benefit others but notthose whos back yard it will be in. They should be diregarded.

    joe Reply:

    Benefit who and how? The keystone pipeline is private owned infrastructure to export oil on the world market so it’s not going to benefit anyone in North America. In fact, by making it easier to export domestic oil, it will increase prices.

    StevieB Reply:

    The Keystone Pipeline benefits the Oil Companies with Gulf Coast refineries stockholders, lobbyists and the politicians they donate to.

    jimsf Reply:

    My point was just that either people matter or they don’t. I don’t have an opinion on the pipeline because its not in california. I don’t care what they do either way.

    joe Reply:

    Okay. I think they matter and TX is an example of why CA s doing HSR right..

    This Texas opposition is somewhat motivated by the fact the system impacts but isn’t producing any benefit for those in-between the two end points.

    Our system does produce benefit for the entire state that is impacted. We have nuts who will oppose HSR and so will Texas but in our case those living in between SF and LA will have something to gain.

    jimsf Reply:

    they should have the chance to lobby for stations. Not every train has to stop in the smaller stations but if they get some trains, then they’ll get a benefit.

    I think texas is doing it wrong anyway. Instead of building a useful peice of infrastructure that will benefit a lot of people in a lot of ways for years to come, it seems like they are building a novelty.

    joe Reply:

    Texas is the private model – one station at DAL and HOU end points and express between to maximize revenue.
    CA is the public model – infrastructure for the State including the CV.

    Texas gives private interests eminent domain powers so they’ll be able to build this profitable system and it will be the envy of many here who criticize CA’s approach and pine for the I-5 alignment.

    Alon Levy Reply:

    In all US states, railroads have eminent domain power by federal law.

    joe Reply:

    …and CA’s HSR system is public which means the CA Authority is subject to greater public oversight and is not a for profit entity or system.

  10. joe
    Feb 28th, 2015 at 15:38
    #10

    Google’s proposed campus buildings look like the Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center

    On Friday, Feb. 27, 2015, Google revealed it proposal to expand its Mountain View campus, including some structures that would feature translucent biosphere canopies instead of traditional roofs. This rendering shows the inside….http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_27611291/slideshow-google-biosphere-like-mountain-view-headquarters-plans

  11. Jerry
    Feb 28th, 2015 at 15:42
    #11

    Video showing the inside and assembly of the Siemens wooden mock up of HSR.
    http://www.kcra.com/news/bullet-train-mockup-turns-heads-at-capitol/31435338

    jimsf Reply:

    I love the “critic” at the end lol.

  12. synonymouse
    Feb 28th, 2015 at 16:04
    #12

    http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Apple-Yahoo-eBay-Zynga-Genentech-bus-drivers-6106688.php

    As the cost of operation goes up and some of these companies inevitably experience bad times these little benefits will dry up.

    commute ops lose money

  13. Useless
    Feb 28th, 2015 at 19:23
    #13

    I actually found the last Acela-CHSRA joint ROC doc dated May 2014, just before their separations. CHSRA does not require EMUs, just that train sets be electric. In other word, both loco-pulled and EMUs are qualified. I don’t know what happened to FRA’s prohibition of passengers riding in cab cars. The CHSRA train set is required to be able to sustain the top speed of 390 km/hr under a full load.

    This is a very tough requirement indeed. Right now, there is only one bullet train model able to run faster than 390 km/hr everyday, and that’s Rotem’s HEMU-430X prowling the railways of Korea since 2012 for a 1 million km endurance testing, but the HEMU-430X fails the “in use since 2010” requirement. Every other qualified train set maker would have to upgrade their existing models significantly to comply with the CHSRA’s requirements.

    http://www.hsr.ca.gov/docs/about/doing_business/RFP_X034_14024/Amendment_No_009_Sched1_PtA%20_TierIII_Next_Gen_Trainsets_Spec_Rev10_clean_draft.pdf

    Peter Reply:

    This Q&A from the joint procurement process makes reference that many regulatory issues were still being hashed out for ETF_001-03.

    Zorro Reply:

    That Rotem HEMU-430X looks very promising, I’m hoping it’s allowed to compete for being a part of California’s HSR project.

Comments are closed.