 |
Fine to plan 4 1st class decades from now, but a fix in the next year or two would allow hourly service that's good enough. Walk before running
Author: Steve Edwards Nicks
Date: 02-19-2024 - 20:24
Any tunnels are a decade away at best. With a black swan triggered debt bombs correction likely in between that will push that out more decades. Fix the current corridor now while we still have some money. Go back to the original goal of reliable hourly service with some modest time gains and call that good enough for the moment. They've made good progress double tracking most of the corridor. A few remaining gaps are not a huge deal. Europe has many examples of that. Can be scheduled around. Fix now what is affordable, plan for a later expensive future.
I love these money saving solutions by folks who think we can just run at a 30 mph. slow order when these cliff's disolve in rain or coastal wave action. The current single tracked 1887 segment through San Clemente is only 30 mph. now.
The current single tracked 30 mph line from the end of double track at the Toll Road IC via San Juan Capistrano and San Clement to San Onofre currently takes over 25 minutes of running time without meets to cover about 13 miles.
The 2010 timetable shows southbounds slowing from 60 mph to 45 for the Serra curve, then 90 for 3.4 miles to San Clemente station at milepost 203.7. The slowest section is 40 mph 203.7 to 206.3, then 70 mph to County Line 207.4, 60 to 208.7, 70 to 209.0 San Onofre then 90 mph south of there. It would be reasonable to argue for the necessary ROW improvements to return to these speeds, if that section really is down to all 30 mph. There is already room to add a second track Serra to San Clemente. That would reduce the single track gap and reduce the time padding needed for scheduling over such an unnecessarily long section of single track.
How exactly are these cliffs dissolved by coastal wave action when only a very rare storm will have wave heights reaching over the riprap and track ROW? If that is truly a concern, and not just an argument technique, then elevate the tracks 10 to 12' on a toughened sea wall. Not just a ballasted earthen berm, but hardened concrete walls protected by a base of riprap. A seawall that would protect both the railroad and slopes from wave action while protecting from displacement by minor landslides. With a second wall next to the cliffs like the emergency wall as a first buffer to slow debris flow. Shotcrete and terrace walls as high up as necessary. Raised tracks would allow pedestrian tunnels below so the trespassing issue goes away if fencing also installed along the top. So track speeds could be raised to probably a minimum of 60 mph.
The rain and underground water induced landslide is the real risk. And less of an issue Serra-San Clemente since there is a highway in between the slopes and the tracks. If not a slide wall on the hill side of the road, place a 6' wall between the road and the tracks. With the added benefit of preventing vehicle intrusions onto the tracks.
The biggest landslide risk to trains is in the less than 4 miles between San Clemente and County Line where the cliffs are next to the tracks. Less than 4 miles to engineer a solution of walls, terraces, shotcrete, along with a raised rail line and fortified seawall. Seawalls can cause beach erosion, but we've learned design techniques where they can be engineered with proper placements of rip rap and jetties to preserve beaches in many cases. Situational.
If elevating on a seawall, there is no reason not to also double track this section. After the already existing planned other double tracking projects are complete that would leave just 2 single track segments for the entire corridor. A less than half mile purely foofoo section at SJC station and less than 2 miles atop the fragile Del Mar bluffs (that can also be engineered to stabilization, politics being the only real impediment.) SJC could be double tracked by constructing a center platform south of Del Obispo St, another parking garage in part of an existing parking lot and convert an existing business into a small new station building. Bank branches are disappearing, Remove the old platform and there is room for 2 tracks without taking any of the historic properties.
So now we would be down to a single section of less than 2 miles for the entire corridor. Reduced schedule padding for meets and the higher variances of multiple and long single track segments. Reduced running times for higher speeds San Clemente to San Onofre. That should be good for at least 5 minutes shaved off schedules. Allowing for clock faced schedules and better reliability. Improved safety with a fully protected ROW from pedestrians along this stretch.
I love these money saving solutions by folks who think we can just run at a 30 mph. slow order when these cliff's disolve in rain or coastal wave action. The current single tracked 1887 segment through San Clemente is only 30 mph. now.
The current single tracked 30 mph line from the end of double track at the Toll Road IC via San Juan Capistrano and San Clement to San Onofre currently takes over 25 minutes of running time without meets to cover about 13 miles.
The 2010 timetable shows southbounds slowing from 60 mph to 45 for the Serra curve, then 90 for 3.4 miles to San Clemente station at milepost 203.7. The slowest section is 40 mph 203.7 to 206.3, then 70 mph to County Line 207.4, 60 to 208.7, 70 to 209.0 San Onofre then 90 mph south of there. It would be reasonable to argue for the necessary ROW improvements to return to these speeds, if that section really is down to all 30 mph. There is already room to add a second track Serra to San Clemente. That would reduce the single track gap and reduce the time padding needed for scheduling over such an unnecessarily long section of single track.
How exactly are these cliffs dissolved by coastal wave action when only a very rare storm will have wave heights reaching over the riprap and track ROW? If that is truly a concern, and not just an argument technique, then elevate the tracks 10 to 12' on a toughened sea wall. Not just a ballasted earthen berm, but hardened concrete walls protected by a base of riprap. A seawall that would protect both the railroad and slopes from wave action while protecting from displacement by minor landslides. With a second wall next to the cliffs like the emergency wall as a first buffer to slow debris flow. Shotcrete and terrace walls as high up as necessary. Raised tracks would allow pedestrian tunnels below so the trespassing issue goes away if fencing also installed along the top. So track speeds could be raised to probably a minimum of 60 mph.
The rain and underground water induced landslide is the real risk. And less of an issue Serra-San Clemente since there is a highway in between the slopes and the tracks. If not a slide wall on the hill side of the road, place a 6' wall between the road and the tracks. With the added benefit of preventing vehicle intrusions onto the tracks.
The biggest landslide risk to trains is in the less than 4 miles between San Clemente and County Line where the cliffs are next to the tracks. Less than 4 miles to engineer a solution of walls, terraces, shotcrete, along with a raised rail line and fortified seawall. Seawalls can cause beach erosion, but we've learned design techniques where they can be engineered with proper placements of rip rap and jetties to preserve beaches in many cases. Situational.
If elevating on a seawall, there is no reason not to also double track this section. After the already existing planned other double tracking projects are complete that would leave just 2 single track segments for the entire corridor. A less than half mile purely foofoo section at SJC station and less than 2 miles atop the fragile Del Mar bluffs (that can also be engineered to stabilization, politics being the only real impediment.) SJC could be double tracked by constructing a center platform south of Del Obispo St, another parking garage in part of an existing parking lot and convert an existing business into a small new station building. Bank branches are disappearing, Remove the old platform and there is room for 2 tracks without taking any of the historic properties.
So now we would be down to a single section of less than 2 miles for the entire corridor. Reduced schedule padding for meets and the higher variances of multiple and long single track segments. Reduced running times for higher speeds San Clemente to San Onofre. That should be good for at least 5 minutes shaved off schedules. Allowing for clock faced schedules and better reliability. Improved safety with a fully protected ROW from pedestrians along this stretch.
