TrainBlog by Marcel Marchon

This is partially in response to Clem’s excellent article about the importance of timetables. I do agree with most of what he says, however I’d like to add one point to the discussion: He makes it sound a bit as if CAHSR and Caltrain would compete, not cooperate - thus the argument that CAHSR trains might “block” Caltrain from running a proper timetable.

However, if we have CAHSR “locals” running over those tracks, say at a half-hourly interval, with timetables that are coordinated with Caltrain locals and are offering those zero-wait transfers at RWC (or wherever), then there should in fact not even be a need for Caltrain express trains? The CAHSR trains can fulfill that function. But for that to work it is very important that fares and timetables are coordinated, i.e. if I have a ticket for San Jose - San Francisco, I should be able to use any train on the route.

I never noticed this before, so I think this is new - the following two photos show the signals at the Castro Street crossing in Mountain View.

If you look closely, you will see that the signals are dark in the first picture:

But a couple of minutes later, with a train approaching (and the sun is out, too, but I doubt that that is the reason ), the signals are now showing aspects:

Now I’ve seen this elsewhere before, but not on Caltrain. Or did I just never pay attention?

I took this picture from the ramp to the pedestrian underpass at San Antonio station. I think it’s a rather interesting perspective.

Wait, don’t look - did you know where it is, the oldest passenger railroad station in California?

This is California Registered Historical Landmark No. 955 and it is listed here:

“NO. 955 MENLO PARK RAILROAD STATION - This building, constructed in 1867 by the San Francisco and San Jose Railroad Company, is the oldest railroad passenger station in California. The Victorian ornamentation was added in the 1890s when the station was remodeled to serve the newly-opened Stanford University. The extension on the northwest was added to accommodate increased traffic generated by the establishment of Camp Fremont nearby during World War I.
Location: 1100 Merrill Ave, Menlo Park”

According to a report in today’s San Francisco Examiner, Caltrain’s ridership has reached record levels:

Average weekday ridership topped the 35,000 mark in December, the highest figure in the 143-year-history of Peninsula railroads, according to Caltrain.

[Quoted from Caltrain ridership booms to record high - Examiner.com]

So it seems very appropriate for the Governor to cut funding for transit - after all, nobody seems to be using it, right?

While doing some totally unrelated to rail, I ran across this site “The True Cost of Smoking” - quite interesting, but since I don’t smoke, not that relevant. But then I thought, obviously there are similar calculations out there for “The True Cost of Driving” - well sure, here you go.

Let’s give it a try - suppose my job was in downtown San Francisco. That wouldn’t be too unusual. To drive from Mountain View to San Francisco is roughly 38 miles (according to Google Maps), i.e. 76 miles round trip. Suppose I work 5 days a week and use my car for commuting exclusively. In that case, my annual cost of driving (or more precisely, the annual cost of my driving) according to that site would be ~$23,500, i.e. roughly $90 per day!

Well, that sounds like a lot. And I’d like to be able to say that using public transportation would be “cheaper”. Sure, I can tell you that a Caltrain ticket would cost me $6.33 per day (based on a monthly pass cost of $139.25 and an average of 22 days of usage every month). But that is clearly not the “full cost” - there are other costs to be factored in, i.e. contributions to Caltrain’s budget from tax monies, cost of pollution, etc.. Is there a site that shows “The True Cost of Public Transportation”? Adron, that sounds like something you might be interested in? I’m pretty sure that public transportation would still be cheaper than driving overall. Such a calculation would probably also show that there are economies of scale associated with public transportation, i.e. if ridership goes up and trains are fuller, farebox recovery will be better and less taxpayer money will be needed. In other words, the (absolute, not just relative) share of total costs covered by fare purchases will go up. Sure, as more and more people use the train, there will need to be some investments, i.e. add more cars to trains, acquire more rolling stock, even run more trains, but even there, the economies of scale should still prevail.

PS. The more comparable number to that Caltrain ticket cost would be the “Total Direct Drivers Expense per mile”, which in my example above was $0.86 - times 76 miles that results in a total per day of $65.35. Still a lot more expensive than using Caltrain.

PPS. Caltrain also has a calculator.