Questions & Answers

Technology

Will California’s high-speed train system use proven high-speed train technology?

Yes. The California High-Speed Train Project will procure extensively-proven high-speed train technology from Europe or Asia. There are a number of potential manufacturers worldwide and the precise type of steel-wheel-on-steel-rail trains will be decided through the state’s competitive bid process. Like the new lines being planned and built in Europe and Asia, the California High-Speed Rail Project assumes the use of the latest generation of high-speed train technology, which is capable of sustained operational speeds of over 220 mph.

High-speed steel-wheel-on-steel rail trains are a “modern technology” which can allow for efficient and safe passenger operations at speeds over 200 miles per hour. State-of-the art signaling systems can enable trains to operate in utmost safety at these high speeds with a minimum headway (time between trains) of as little as 3 minutes.

Since its introduction in Japan in 1964, high-speed train technology has been continually improving. For example, while the initial Japanese Shinkansen (bullet train) Series 100 operated at 130 mph over 40 years ago, the new Series 500 and 700 Shinkansen trains currently operate with maximum speed of about 187 mph, but with greater efficiency, less noise, and more comfort than the Series 100, and have been tested at speeds of nearly 300 mph. East Japan Railways is testing prototype trains capable of in-service speeds of 224 mph.

The European experience has been similar. While the first French TGV trains operated at top speeds of about 168 mph, top speeds were raised to 187 mph with the introduction of next-generation TGV trains in 1989. Currently, TGV trains regularly operate with maximum speeds of 200 mph, but the TGV has been tested at nearly 360 mph. In February of 2008, Alstom (the maker of the French TGV) unveiled the prototype of the AGV (Automotrice Grande Vitesse), its fourth-generation high-speed electric train. The AGV is designed to reach maximum commercial speeds of 224 mph, and Alstom already has its first customer: Italy’s new railway operator, Nuovo Trasporto Viaggiatori, which has placed firm orders for 25 AGV trainsets and signed a maintenance contract with Alstom. Production of the first trains has begun, and they will start being delivered in 2010.

New steel-wheel-on-steel-rail high-speed train systems have begun operations at 187-217 mph in Spain, Korea, Taiwan, and China. European and Japanese networks are continuing to expand (for example Spain and Italy are investing about $30 billion each to expand their high-speed train and conventional rail networks, and the TGV network is being extended to the Netherlands). By 2020, most of Europe will be interconnected by a compatible, electrified, standard-gauge, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail high-speed train network.

Why steel wheel on rail technology instead of Maglev?

Maglev technology was considered and rejected in November 2005 as part of the certified Statewide Program EIR/EIS document (see Section 2.6.6 High-Speed Train Technology Options Considered and Rejected). Maglev was eliminated since it “would not allow for direct high-speed train service to major intercity travel markets and therefore would not meet the purpose and need and objectives for the proposed project.” In certain heavily constrained urban corridors (i.e., San Francisco Peninsula from San Jose to San Francisco, and the LOSSAN rail corridor between Los Angeles and Orange County), the high-speed train service will need to share tracks with existing services. Maglev technology requires separate and distinct guideway configurations that would preclude the sharing of rail infrastructure and be limited in its ability to share existing rail right-of-way.

Further, there are no intercity Maglev systems in revenue service anywhere in the world, and none are under construction anywhere in the world. A short (approximately 20-mile-long) airport-to-downtown Maglev line has recently begun revenue service in Shanghai. This service does not demonstrate or simulate complex intercity operations. Moreover, China has not selected Maglev technology for an intercity high-speed line. According to press reports, the Chinese have concluded that as compared to steel-wheel-on-steel-rail high-speed train, Maglev would be two to three times more expensive to build, and has not been proven operationally (Hong Kong Standard, November 15, 2003; The Straits Times, October 4, 2003; China Daily, January 15, 2004). Authority studies have shown that Maglev technology would have higher potential maximum speeds and could accelerate and decelerate more quickly, than steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology but would require more energy to operate and be more expensive to build.

Why not expand slower, conventional rail services?

Steel-wheel-on-steel rail at lower speed (below 200 mph) was considered and rejected as part of the certified Statewide Program EIR/EIS document (see Section 2.6.6). Foreign high-speed train experience, the experience of the Northeast Corridor (Boston to New York to Washington, D.C.), high-speed train studies done elsewhere in the U.S., and the Authority’s feasibility studies have all shown that to compete with air transportation and generate high ridership and revenue, the intercity high-speed train travel times between major transportation markets must be below 3 hours. Amtrak’s “California Passenger Rail System: 20-Year Improvement Plan” (Amtrak, March 2001) suggests that by 2020 the improved conventional rail service between Oakland and Bakersfield with 110 mph maximum speeds could be reduced to 4 hours and 55 minutes (as compared with 6 hours and 9 minutes in 2000). Using the current 2.5-hour thruway bus connection between Bakersfield and Los Angeles, this would result in an Oakland to Los Angeles line-haul time (with bus connection) of about 7 hours and 25 minutes which would not be competitive with air travel.

Will high-speed trains carry any freight?

The primary purpose of the California High-Speed Train Project is to serve intercity (trips between regions) passengers. However, the proposed high-speed train system could be used to carry small packages, parcels, letters, or any other freight that would not exceed typical passenger loads. This service could be provided in either specialized freight cars on passenger trains or on dedicated lightweight freight trains. In either case, the lightweight freight vehicles would be required to have the same performance characteristics as the passenger equipment. This type of freight could be accommodated without adjustment to the passenger operational plan or modification to the passenger stations.

Moving medium-weight high-value, time-sensitive goods (such as electronic equipment or perishable items) on the high-speed train tracks would also be a possibility but would need to be operated overnight when it wouldn’t interfere with passenger operations and would require additional facilities for loading and unloading.

How were the design assumptions for the California high-speed train proposal developed?

The California High-Speed Train Project has been completely designed to serve California’s unique conditions. The Authority has appropriately utilized design criteria and performance characteristics from existing European and Asian high-speed train systems that realistically define the performance of the proposed high-speed trains system in California. However, the ridership and revenue forecasts, the capital and operating costs, the operational plan, and the adopted alignments are all based upon California’s current and projected future conditions and needs. The state-of-the-art forecasting model used to estimate ridership and revenue for the high-speed train system utilized California’s current and future population, employment, household characteristics, highway network, air and rail services, and transit systems (including costs, total travel times, frequency of service, and reliability), following current best practices and methodology.