On: I'd like Caltrain to publish raw train data

[mcpherrinm]

Sure, they could fix delays! A good start to doing so would be:

  - Eliminate at-grade crossings
  - Switch to level platform boarding
  - Double the number of trains
  - Replace the current trains with faster accellerating electric ones

That ought to be done within a decade or two. Seems like more work than releasing the data they already have.

[toomuchtodo → mcpherrinm]

You should also add "station-specific spurs", to allow trains to express through while trains are dropping off/picking up passengers at that station.

[guard-of-terra → mcpherrinm]

This is a good start. Many railway systems in the world have that since, I don't know, 70s. Even in not first world exactly (Moscow railway in mind).

Sounds like doable in a few years. You may even keep some at-grade crossings.

[mcpherrinm → guard-of-terra]

Electrification will be started by 2019. Level crossings will be eliminated by the time California HSR opens in 2029.

Whether or not level boarding happens, and what sort of service increases come with electrification are unclear.

[jonemo → mcpherrinm]

Level boarding is currently not possible due to the requirements imposed by the one (or two?) freight trains going through per day.

[guard-of-terra → jonemo]

Why is that? It doesn't cause general problems, and specific problems may be treated if there are any.

Mentioned Moscow rail has lots of freight traffic and high-level boarding.

[mcpherrinm → guard-of-terra]

It's an issue of "loading gauge".

If caltrain adopted higher platforms, they would interfere with the size of freight trains passing through.

There are ways around this: If all the high platforms were on 4-tracked sections, the freight could use the express tracks only. Mixing high and low boarding might be more painful though.

Not to mention the current train stock doesn't support level boarding, so Caltrain would be restricted to use them as express trains and only have high platforms at local stations, for example.

Or the platforms could be far away from the trains and they use extending platforms: That is potentially unreliable and costly.

There is a somewhat reasonable blog about this type of issues at http://caltrain-hsr.blogspot.com/ which is mostly reasonable though it tends to be written as if it is the only reasonable choice.

[guard-of-terra → mcpherrinm]

If you have unusually wide freight trains - make separate tracks for those, restrict them from urban core, or make passenger trains as wide.

[jonemo → guard-of-terra]

You use Moscow as an example so I'll assume you are from there. I am from Germany. That means we both have experienced countries with a well designed public infrastructure including public transport. Americans do not have this background. In America, the general attitude towards providers of public infrastructure (be it government or private like Caltrain) is that they are assumed to be incompetent, their actions should be opposed, and their business disrupted.

I ride Caltrain every day and the experience annoys me a lot (still less than driving), but I feel sorry for the people running Caltrain because despite providing a valuable infrastructure service that is in huge demand, they are considered the lowest priority by everyone they interact with and have to deal with the most ridiculous restrictions and regulations. For example, Caltrain knows that they are always behind schedule during rush hour and want to adjust their schedule. But to do that they have to consult everyone and their uncle over a year-long process where every nutjob's concerns about a five minute scheduling change can stall the entire process.

Infrastructure projects deal with such problems everywhere, but I have not seen a place where this attitude is so deeply engrained and systematic like here.