# What is ACE Commuter?



## John Bobinyec (Jan 8, 2013)

I'm looking at trains in California in Amtrak's reservations system, and these two popped up:

3278 from San Jose to Stockton

3288 from San Jose to Stockton

What are these?

Thanks,

jb


----------



## Trogdor (Jan 8, 2013)

Altamont Commuter Express.

http://www.acerail.com


----------



## BCL (Jan 8, 2013)

They have stops at several Amtrak stations, including Stockton, Fremont-Centerville, Great America, Santa Clara, and San Jose Diridon.

The equipment they use seems a bit odd. They're pulling Bombardier Bi-levels with the less than modern-looking EMDs


----------



## GG-1 (Jan 8, 2013)

BCL said:


> They have stops at several Amtrak stations, including Stockton, Fremont-Centerville, Great America, Santa Clara, and San Jose Diridon.
> 
> The equipment they use seems a bit odd. They're pulling Bombardier Bi-levels with the less than modern-looking EMDs


Aloha
Very nice picture


----------



## roadman3313 (Jan 8, 2013)

They are a "Thruway" connection between San Jose and Stockton (SKT) to connect to the San Joaquin train. At the times when ACE is not running, a Thruway bus connection is in place instead. I believe that was the equipment they had funding for at the time. They currently have 4 trainsets in operation. Each set departs SKT in the morning heading towards SJC. The trains layover just south of the Caltrain Tamien Station (south of SJC) on some siding tracks. They then depart SJC in the afternoon heading back towards SKT. The ACE yard is in the Stockton area just south of SKT.

One round-trip per train set Monday-Friday excluding holidays. There were 4 trips, then it was reduced to 3, but as of last October (I believe) it has now gone back up to 4. All depends on the ridership and funding available. It started operation in October 1998 and is administered by the San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission (SJRRC). I believe this same Commission is looking into more oversight over the San Joaquin Amtrak route as well similar to how the Capitol Corridor has become more independant of Amtrak in administering its route.

Day to day operations and maintenance are provided by Herzog Transit Services (which also oversees Transit Services of America which is the current Caltrain contractor).


----------



## John Bobinyec (Jan 8, 2013)

John Bobinyec said:


> I'm looking at trains in California in Amtrak's reservations system, and these two popped up:
> 
> 3278 from San Jose to Stockton
> 
> ...


It's interesting that you can book a ticket on these trains via the Amtrak reservations system, in combination with an Amtrak train.

Does ACE use electronic "tickets" the same way Amtrak does?

Thanks,j

jb


----------



## BCL (Jan 8, 2013)

John Bobinyec said:


> It's interesting that you can book a ticket on these trains via the Amtrak reservations system, in combination with an Amtrak train.
> 
> Does ACE use electronic "tickets" the same way Amtrak does?
> 
> ...


Not sure. They claim that the monthly passes need to be signed, and that any other tickets need to be "validated" before boarding the train.

http://www.acerail.c...ngace/faqs.aspx

I use the Great America station quite a bit, and I've seen the validator machines. I think a ticket is inserted and stamped with the date/time to prevent it from being used another day. I don't know how they would do it if Amtrak provides tickets. The slot seems a bit too narrow to accept an Amtrak ticket. Perhaps they have a special deal with Amtrak. For the most part I think they utilize a proof of payment system similar to Caltrain, with fare inspectors. I've never seen the ticket booth open. I have seen the station totally crowded when the last ACE train was late. I was wondering what was going on and then someone said it was ACE. When the train rolled in, it was the first time I'd actually seen one of their trains in person.

They have ton of free shuttle buses every morning and evening. I've seen them lined up waiting to pick up passengers.


----------



## Blackwolf (Jan 8, 2013)

BCL said:


> The equipment they use seems a bit odd. They're pulling Bombardier Bi-levels with the less than modern-looking EMDs


I do believe that some, if not all, of their F40's are former Amtrak locomotives! I remember when ACE first started up services and distinctly remember that bit of knowledge being given out at the 'Open House' ceremonies for Pleasanton's station by a uniformed ACE staffer.


----------



## Texan Eagle (Jan 8, 2013)

The first time I saw Amtrak offers connection on ACE, I was surprised too. If they can do this with ACE, they should consider offering through connections from SJC to San Francisco on Caltrain too.

About the ACE itself- it seems to me like a terribly inefficient way of running business if you are going to use four trainsets for only one trip per day and keep all of them sitting in the sidings all day long. They do things like this and then say California is in so much debt :|

Could they not have managed to do some interlining agreement with Caltrain to mix and match Caltrain equipment, plus maybe one or two trainsets from ACE added to the inventory to mix and match and run the four ACE services using a common pool of equipment instead of purchasing four full sets and using them in super inefficient manner?


----------



## fairviewroad (Jan 8, 2013)

Couple of thoughts:

1. This, along with the NJT service between PHL and Atlantic City, would be the only two places Amtrak will sell you a ticket on another rail carrier. (Not counting

the Maple Leaf, which is a unique category of its own) Correct, or am I forgetting something?

2. Do people really commute daily between Stockton and SJC? Seems pretty brutal to spend more than 4 hours a day on a commuter train. That

4:20 AM departure out of Stockton must be for the true believers only.

3. This service has certainly lasted longer than the similarly-named ACES service between New York and Atlantic City!


----------



## Train2104 (Jan 8, 2013)

fairviewroad said:


> 2. Do people really commute daily between Stockton and SJC? Seems pretty brutal to spend more than 4 hours a day on a commuter train. That
> 
> 4:20 AM departure out of Stockton must be for the true believers only.


There are people who commute from Port Jervis to NYC...first departure 3:52am which arrives in NYC (after transfer) at 6:19am


----------



## Karl1459 (Jan 8, 2013)

Amtrak Surfliner tickets are honored on (LA) Metrolink between station pairs, also Metrolink monthly passes are honored on Surfliners.

Housing prices in San Jose-San Francisco are insane, Stockton-Sacramento-Modesto merely outrageous. The 580 freeway across Altimont Pass is 5 or 6 lanes each way and often choked morning and late afternoon (don't even think of the 580/680 interchange in Pleasanton! Perfect conditions for a viable commuter rail.

An interesting thought for me is to reroute the Coast Starlight via ...SAC-Stockton-Pleasanton/Livermore-SanJose... which by shortening the route slightly and cutting a lot of station work could cut at least 1-1/2 hours off the schedule. Station work between SanJose and Sacramento could be handled by Capitol Corridor trains.


----------



## calwatch (Jan 8, 2013)

Metrolink stopped cross honoring Amtrak tickets, with the exception of Amtrak monthly passes and trips from Burbank Airport to Los Angeles only, plus the special 761/768 train (first Surfliner of the morning) from Oxnard to LA as that takes a Metrolink slot. I don't believe ACE is e-ticketable. You have to pick up the tickets at the Quick Trak machine, which has the date printed on it for conductor checks. Hypothetically you could board ACE, not board the Amtrak rail segment, and then have the ticket automatically cancel and rebook again with the e-Voucher, as the conductor never physically collects the ticket. (That doomed Metrolink cross honoring since Amtrak tickets could be reused, and no punching was done to make the ticket void.) But that seems like a lot of trouble of standing in line.

And why would you cut the Starlight out of Oakland and San Francisco? While it might take some time that misses a huge trip generator, plus the Bay running which is nice.


----------



## MikefromCrete (Jan 8, 2013)

fairviewroad said:


> Couple of thoughts:
> 
> 1. This, along with the NJT service between PHL and Atlantic City, would be the only two places Amtrak will sell you a ticket on another rail carrier. (Not counting
> 
> ...


This has to do with the high cost of housing in the Bay area. A lot of people find they can get a bigger bang for their housing dollar in places like Stockton and endure the long commute in exchange for spending a lot less on homes.


----------



## MikefromCrete (Jan 8, 2013)

BCL said:


> They have stops at several Amtrak stations, including Stockton, Fremont-Centerville, Great America, Santa Clara, and San Jose Diridon.
> 
> The equipment they use seems a bit odd. They're pulling Bombardier Bi-levels with the less than modern-looking EMDs



What's so odd about F-40's and Bombardier coaches? They are two mainstays of North American commuting.


----------



## jebr (Jan 8, 2013)

MikefromCrete said:


> What's so odd about F-40's and Bombardier coaches? They are two mainstays of North American commuting.


Definitely. Heck, even our new-ish (3 years old) Northstar line uses them.





Northstar Doubleheader by chief_huddleston, on Flickr


----------



## Texan Eagle (Jan 8, 2013)

BCL said:


>


What I find odd about this is, this ACE train with a daily ridership of 3,700, divided among eight runs per day so ~450 passengers per train, runs with *six* bi-level cars. Each of these cars can accommodate 140 passengers so this train has capacity of around 840... so, basically the train runs 50% empty! On the other hand, Caltrain with daily ridership of 48,000 runs with 5 Bombarider bi-level cars. 

Would it not be a better use of resources if two cars from each of the 4 ACE trains are removed and given to add 1 car to the 5 Caltrain Baby Bullet sets (and keep 3 as spares)? But alas, if only so much thinking and co-operation went into things, the state would not be crying hoarse about it being bankrupt.


----------



## BCL (Jan 8, 2013)

MikefromCrete said:


> BCL said:
> 
> 
> > They have stops at several Amtrak stations, including Stockton, Fremont-Centerville, Great America, Santa Clara, and San Jose Diridon.
> ...


I'm used to seeing them attached to sleek-looking locomotives and not wide-nose ones.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore (Jan 8, 2013)

I think that a four-hour commuter is far too long. That's definately hit the sprawl wall. People probably take leter runs and more of the pax are probably not commuters, unless they are desperate.


----------



## chakk (Jan 8, 2013)

John Bobinyec said:


> John Bobinyec said:
> 
> 
> > I'm looking at trains in California in Amtrak's reservations system, and these two popped up:
> ...


You can not book tickets on the ACE trains from the Amtrak system. The 4-digit transportation you are seeing from San Jose to Stockton on the Amtrak website are Amtrak California buses.


----------



## roadman3313 (Jan 8, 2013)

3204 and 3218 can be booked as well. Those are indeed ACE Train to San Joaquin connections via SKT. You can book them through Amtrak as long as it is a day that ACE runs. If it is a day that ACE does not run then the connection on those trips will be made via Thruway Bus.


----------



## TCRT (Jan 8, 2013)

BCL said:


> I'm used to seeing them attached to sleek-looking locomotives and not wide-nose ones.


How about this?


----------



## Ryan (Jan 8, 2013)

HAWT!


----------



## johnny.menhennet (Jan 8, 2013)

The ridership figure of 3,700 Texan Eagle is citing was taken liekly before October, when the service was increased back to four round trips per day. I would say that for a long time, they hovered just around <4,000 and that was on just 6 runs. I think they actually have many more riders per train set than many other commuter rail systems, especially in the west.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore (Jan 9, 2013)

TCRT said:


> BCL said:
> 
> 
> > I'm used to seeing them attached to sleek-looking locomotives and not wide-nose ones.
> ...


***? The Bi-Levels are old! I better look for more old pics on Railpictures.


----------



## Texan Eagle (Jan 9, 2013)

Swadian Hardcore said:


> ***? The Bi-Levels are old! I better look for more old pics on Railpictures.


If Wikipedia is to be believed, these Bombardier bilevel cars first came in service in 1976, so yeah, quite old.

It's amazing that even after 35 years, so many commuter agencies across the US and Canada still prefer this design. The designers must have done something very right!


----------



## Blackwolf (Jan 9, 2013)

Texan Eagle said:


> Swadian Hardcore said:
> 
> 
> > ***? The Bi-Levels are old! I better look for more old pics on Railpictures.
> ...


I think its a combination of high capacity and low maintenance. The HVAC, electrical and auxiliary equipment are located in pods mounted above the ends of the cars (in that transition area between the two levels to one) and are accessed through hatches in the roof. Really easy to get to, and swap components out if needed. Not to mention, its all shielded from the elements! About the only thing that is (now) killing this funky car design is the crashworthiness. After Chatsworth, and combined with the data from the Glendale disaster, Metrolink in LA has pretty much mothballed their entire Bombardier fleet. Not that they ever failed to meet FRA requirements, of course.

I've long wondered if, when the original Superliners were being designed, they could not have incorporated a layout similar to the Bombardier bi-levels at one end of a transition car. It would have made Superliners so much more streamlined than the rectangular boxes we have today!


----------



## VentureForth (Jan 9, 2013)

Texan Eagle said:


> Swadian Hardcore said:
> 
> 
> > ***? The Bi-Levels are old! I better look for more old pics on Railpictures.
> ...


The older (c. 1976 design) were riveted bodies. The newer ones are welded and have quite a smoother finish. The Trinity Railway Express uses both; as they were all refurbished at the same time, though, the paint and interior are just as nice. One is just bumpy and the other is smooth. Interesting that the Wiki article doesn't touch on this, yet otherwise pretty informative. There is no mistaking when you are close to them.

I totally dig seeing photos of GO Transit's 10 car trains with a single locomotive, then seeing the TRE with almost no grade run 4 coaches with two locos sometimes. The Railrunner ran with two often, even with three coaches because the new MRCs kept breaking down. Now they probably need two for the climb from Bernalillo to Santa Fe.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore (Jan 9, 2013)

Blackwolf said:


> Texan Eagle said:
> 
> 
> > Swadian Hardcore said:
> ...


Metrolink dosen't even use Bi-Levels anymore?! It seems they still use them a lot but I haven't been to LAx recently. What else do they have?


----------



## johnny.menhennet (Jan 9, 2013)

Metrolink does not use any bilevel cab cars, and the second car behind the cab is always another Rotem car. The first car behind the engine is always Rotem as well, and the rest of the consists are slowly dropping one Bombardier at a time as the new ones come in.


----------



## MattW (Jan 9, 2013)

They aren't the Bombardier BiLevels, but they are double-decker (bi-level) cars.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore (Jan 10, 2013)

Due to virtually no experience with these cars, I don't know any difference between the Bombardier ones and the other ones.


----------



## roadman3313 (Jan 10, 2013)

Just like most people here wouldn't know the difference between an MCI and a Van Hool (or Prevost or Volvo) as a bus is just a bus, right? 

(Much less who made the models like the D4500's {102DL-3's} we have at work)

I don't want to use anyone's copyrighted images here but the Hyundai-Rotem cars are meant to be more protective in the event of a crash. The "cab car" front looks more like the front of a P42 than the flat front of the cab car. The coach cars look similar in exterior design minus the cab portion.

http://upload.wikime...tem_Cab_Car.jpg


----------



## Ryan (Jan 10, 2013)

Images on wikimedia commons are nearly 100% free for use, including that particular image. Here are the license terms, which require you only to provide attribution if you use the pictures (incidentally, this is the same license I post my pictures under, I don't care if they get used, as long as I get credit):

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/deed.en





2010-12-06 10.10.37 by plattypus1, on Flickr


----------



## The Davy Crockett (Jan 10, 2013)

TCRT said:


> BCL said:
> 
> 
> > I'm used to seeing them attached to sleek-looking locomotives and not wide-nose ones.
> ...


NICE, NICE, NICE. Is this your work? And if so,do you know when (and where in the Toronto area) this very nice picture was taken?


----------



## Ryan (Jan 10, 2013)

Guildwood, ON, 1980:

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=392962&nseq=0


----------



## The Davy Crockett (Jan 10, 2013)

Ryan said:


> Guildwood, ON, 1980:
> 
> http://www.railpictu...d=392962&nseq=0


Thanks Ryan! :hi:


----------



## battalion51 (Jan 10, 2013)

The Bombardier design has proven to be a workhorse in a number markets that have done new commuter service. Dallas, Minneapolis, Salt Lake City, Seattle, Miami just to name a few. Miami is about to switch their 15-20 year old fleet out for the Hyundai's with new Brookville locomotives. Meanwhile Orlando just ordered Bombardier's with MPI locomotives. Its all about who has the best deal for the contract that's put out to bid. The Bombardier design won't go anywhere as long as GO and other agencies keep placing orders.


----------



## BCL (Jan 10, 2013)

The way I see it, the Bombardier designs is sleek and modern looking even if it does come from the 70s. The complete paint job helps. A GMC motorhome looks really modern even though it's an old design.

A lot of the steel raircar designs almost have that retro futuristic look like the aluminum shell Airstream trailer RVs. I look at Caltrain rail sets passing each other, and the BiLevels look way more modern than the Nippon Sharyos.


----------



## sechs (Jan 10, 2013)

roadman3313 said:


> I believe this same Commission is looking into more oversight over the San Joaquin Amtrak route


This is a done deal. A joint powers authority will be formed this year to take over management of the San Joaquins from Caltrans.


----------



## sechs (Jan 10, 2013)

Texan Eagle said:


> The first time I saw Amtrak offers connection on ACE, I was surprised too. If they can do this with ACE, they should consider offering through connections from SJC to San Francisco on Caltrain too.


The existing connections to/from Emeryville and Oakland make more sense. They are dedicated, guaranteed, and more useful.


> About the ACE itself- it seems to me like a terribly inefficient way of running business if you are going to use four trainsets for only one trip per day and keep all of them sitting in the sidings all day long. They do things like this and then say California is in so much debt


And what are they supposed to do with them? Send them back to Stockton? Even with Amtrak thruway subsidy, the mid-day ACE round trip never managed to make any financial sense. It's literally cheaper to let them sit.


> Could they not have managed to do some interlining agreement with Caltrain to mix and match Caltrain equipment, plus maybe one or two trainsets from ACE added to the inventory to mix and match and run the four ACE services using a common pool of equipment instead of purchasing four full sets and using them in super inefficient manner?


This is a lot more complicated than you make it sound. And that's not even taking politicking into account.


----------



## sechs (Jan 10, 2013)

Texan Eagle said:


> What I find odd about this is, this ACE train with a daily ridership of 3,700, divided among eight runs per day so ~450 passengers per train, runs with *six* bi-level cars. Each of these cars can accommodate 140 passengers so this train has capacity of around 840... so, basically the train runs 50% empty! On the other hand, Caltrain with daily ridership of 48,000 runs with 5 Bombarider bi-level cars.


You statistics are a little misleading. 
That 3700 number is from 2008, divided among the six trains running at the time is >600 passengers per run. I haven't checked recently, but ACE trains generally run with four or five cars, not six. Using your math, that's only ~20% empty for a five-car train.

On the other hand, Caltrain weekday ridership was 42,354 in February 2012, and runs 92 trains each weekday. That's a dismal-looking ~460 passengers per train.


----------



## Texan Eagle (Jan 10, 2013)

> > About the ACE itself- it seems to me like a terribly inefficient way of running business if you are going to use four trainsets for only one trip per day and keep all of them sitting in the sidings all day long. They do things like this and then say California is in so much debt
> 
> 
> And what are they supposed to do with them? Send them back to Stockton? Even with Amtrak thruway subsidy, the mid-day ACE round trip never managed to make any financial sense. It's literally cheaper to let them sit.


No, not send back to Stockton. Use them more efficiently, which brings us to this-



> > Could they not have managed to do some interlining agreement with Caltrain to mix and match Caltrain equipment, plus maybe one or two trainsets from ACE added to the inventory to mix and match and run the four ACE services using a common pool of equipment instead of purchasing four full sets and using them in super inefficient manner?
> 
> 
> This is a lot more complicated than you make it sound. And that's not even taking politicking into account.


I never said it is simple. But it is not rocket science either. Don't tell me a country that can send a robot to the Mars does not have the intelligence to devise efficient schedules for using a dozen trainsets running a few services each per day. Countries around the world manage much more complicated train set rotation than a simple ACE-Caltrain rake sharing I suggested. This is the thing with American public transit- the moment you suggest something that's out of their comfortably dumb zone, they will go "NOOOOOOOOOO! So complicated.. never possible ever" about it. If I was employed to do this, give me a day's time and I can give you an efficient ACE+Caltrain schedule that can make use of all available resources rather than keeping trains sitting for 8 hours a day and then complain there can't be enough services because there is no equipment. Yes the problem will be political, since none of the transit agencies can stand each other, leave aside co-operating and sharing resources.


----------



## sechs (Jan 11, 2013)

Texan Eagle said:


> I never said it is simple. But it is not rocket science either. Don't tell me a country that can send a robot to the Mars does not have the intelligence to devise efficient schedules for using a dozen trainsets running a few services each per day. Countries around the world manage much more complicated train set rotation than a simple ACE-Caltrain rake sharing I suggested. This is the thing with American public transit- the moment you suggest something that's out of their comfortably dumb zone, they will go "NOOOOOOOOOO! So complicated.. never possible ever" about it. If I was employed to do this, give me a day's time and I can give you an efficient ACE+Caltrain schedule that can make use of all available resources rather than keeping trains sitting for 8 hours a day and then complain there can't be enough services because there is no equipment. Yes the problem will be political, since none of the transit agencies can stand each other, leave aside co-operating and sharing resources.


You're ranting and not proving anything. Sure, given time and money, anything is possible. I don't see you volunteering either.


----------



## Trogdor (Jan 11, 2013)

Texan Eagle said:


> I never said it is simple. But it is not rocket science either. Don't tell me a country that can send a robot to the Mars does not have the intelligence to devise efficient schedules for using a dozen trainsets running a few services each per day. Countries around the world manage much more complicated train set rotation than a simple ACE-Caltrain rake sharing I suggested. This is the thing with American public transit- the moment you suggest something that's out of their comfortably dumb zone, they will go "NOOOOOOOOOO! So complicated.. never possible ever" about it. If I was employed to do this, give me a day's time and I can give you an efficient ACE+Caltrain schedule that can make use of all available resources rather than keeping trains sitting for 8 hours a day and then complain there can't be enough services because there is no equipment. Yes the problem will be political, since none of the transit agencies can stand each other, leave aside co-operating and sharing resources.


So, the ACE equipment would be available for extra service during the midday, which is the same time that Caltrain already has extra equipment sitting around because of lower demand.

All you've done is swapped one equipment set sitting around during the day waiting for the PM rush for another equipment set sitting around during the day waiting for the PM rush.


----------



## Texan Eagle (Jan 11, 2013)

sechs said:


> You statistics are a little misleading.
> 
> That 3700 number is from 2008, divided among the six trains running at the time is >600 passengers per run. I haven't checked recently, but ACE trains generally run with four or five cars, not six. Using your math, that's only ~20% empty for a five-car train.
> 
> On the other hand, Caltrain weekday ridership was 42,354 in February 2012, and runs 92 trains each weekday. That's a dismal-looking ~460 passengers per train.


Look at the photo shared at the start of this thread. It shows six car ACE train, that's what I was looking at when I said six car trains. All the photos on ACE Wikipedia page are also showing six car trains. If they are running four or five car trains, good for them.

This document shows ACE annual ridership for 2011 as 718,226. Dividing this by 260 weekdays in a year gives 2,762 riders per day. Dividing them by 6 trains gives ~460 riders per train. Four car Bombardier set can seat around 540 passengers, so if they all were four car trains, this is good use of resources. However if they were six car trains like shown in all the photos floating around, it is a lot of excess capacity.

The same document says Caltrain carried ~12 million passengers during the same period. It does not separate weekday and weekend so I will believe your figure of ~460 riders per train. Caltrain operates a few five car Bombardier trains that can seat ~675 passengers but most of the services are on five car Nippon Gallery cars that seat ~550-600 passengers based on my back of the envelope calculation based on visual memory of those train interiors.


----------



## Texan Eagle (Jan 11, 2013)

Trogdor said:


> So, the ACE equipment would be available for extra service during the midday, which is the same time that Caltrain already has extra equipment sitting around because of lower demand.


Not mid-day. The first two ACE trains arrive SJC at 6.32am and 7.47am, well in time to use them for additional Caltrain services. For example, these are the morning departures for Caltrain out of SJC during peak commute hours-

6:20, 6:45, 6:50, 6:57, *7:03*, 7:18, *7:45*, 7:50, 7:55, *8:03*, 8:20, 8:40 (bold indicates *Baby Bullet* express services)

The first ACE train set can now be used as a new service inserted between the 7.18am limited and 7.45am Bullet since there is a nice big 27 minute gap between trains. Similarly the second ACE train can be used for an additional service between the 8.03am Bullet and 8.20am limited, or between 8.20am and 8.40am limiteds.

This is a very simple example, with proper resources in hand, one can come up with an even more streamlined schedule that can help commuters across both corridors, but it requires one thing that's very difficult to get- *co-operation between different transit agencies.*


----------



## AlanB (Jan 11, 2013)

Texan Eagle said:


> sechs said:
> 
> 
> > You statistics are a little misleading.
> ...


According to the National Transit Database, charged with tracking all public transit agencies in the US, ACE saw an average weekday ridership of 2,851 people per day in 2011.

And according to the reports from APTA, as of the third quarter of 2012, that number had climbed to 3,300.

http://www.apta.com/resources/statistics/Documents/Ridership/2012-q3-ridership-APTA.pdf

Page #5, and it's listed under Stockton.


----------



## conductor_sac (Jan 11, 2013)

This subject has brought up some interesting ideas and discussion. I too agree that in the bay area alone there are far too many rail carriers and that this could be mannaged under on agency and eleminate the redundant funding from the state to multiple agencies to provide the same service. For instance the the new Maintance facility currently being built in Stockton, the existing facility in SJC and the Maintainence yard in Oakland are all built from tax dollars and all provide the same thing. Would it not make more sense to have on large yard for servicing all 3 equipment pools...ACE and Caltrain equipment is identical this would eliminate excessive overhead, and by having the Capitol Corridor turned to more of a reginal service and extending the runs to SLO to meet with the Surfliner for a cross platform transfer CalTrain could than run the 'mass transit' service into sac. I just see lots of political waste and independent fifedoms that could be elimnated and service improvements over all.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Jan 11, 2013)

The Real Mission of any Government Agency, Bureau etc., Once Established, is to Increase it's Budget, Grow the Staffing and Stake out More Turf without being Accountable for Anything!  Name One Government Program that has Ever been Totally Eliminated? There have been Consolidations (ie Homeland security)but this always results in Huge Increases in Budget and Staffing! And We pick up the Tab!

*

*Disclaimer: I am a Retired Government Employee, both Federal and State! Of Course, My Agencies and Programs were the Exceptions that Proved the Rule! :giggle:


----------



## Swadian Hardcore (Jan 11, 2013)

Jim, you were in the armed forces?


----------



## Bob Dylan (Jan 11, 2013)

Swadian Hardcore said:


> Jim, you were in the armed forces?


Proudly served 4 years in the U,S. Navy plus my Dad was Career Air Force so I lived on Many Bases and Places while Growing up.

But my Government Service I refer to was with the Dept. Of Labor (Federal/ NationalJob Corps Office ) and the Dept. of Health and Human Services (State of Texas!)My Formal Education (Bachelors and Masters) was in Public Administration/Govt.


----------



## Ryan (Jan 11, 2013)

jimhudson said:


> Swadian Hardcore said:
> 
> 
> > Jim, you were in the armed forces?
> ...


Navy? Air Force?!? The man said "Armed F*o*rces", not "Armed F*a*rces"!!!


----------



## Bob Dylan (Jan 11, 2013)

Ryan said:


> jimhudson said:
> 
> 
> > Swadian Hardcore said:
> ...


As I remember Ryan, You were a Naval Officer and had one of the Best Lines ever here on an exchange with a Retired Master Chief that said: "You would have called me Sir!"  Marines are the ones who think that all the other Armed services are "Soft"

but we always reminded them that the Navy was who gave them Rides so they could be "First to Fight!" :giggle:


----------



## Swadian Hardcore (Jan 11, 2013)

jimhudson said:


> Swadian Hardcore said:
> 
> 
> > Jim, you were in the armed forces?
> ...


Now I understand "exceptions that proved the rule"!


----------



## X (Jan 11, 2013)

Texan Eagle said:


> Trogdor said:
> 
> 
> > So, the ACE equipment would be available for extra service during the midday, which is the same time that Caltrain already has extra equipment sitting around because of lower demand.
> ...


Ok, so you've managed to move two aditional train loads of passengers in the morning, now how do you get them back in the evening?


----------



## Texan Eagle (Jan 12, 2013)

X said:


> Texan Eagle said:
> 
> 
> > Trogdor said:
> ...


Not sure if serious or trolling. As I said, this was just an *example* of how rolling stock can be used more efficiently. I just spent five minutes to insert two new services into existing timetable, but if a serious interest exists, Caltrain and ACE can definitely do much better than this with all resources (schedules, maintenance, crew timings etc) at their disposal.

But if you so insist, here is an example for evening commute hours too-

Evening commute hours Caltrain schedule:

San Francisco...* 4:09* 4:19 4:27 *4:33* 4:56 *5:14* 5:20 5:27* 5:33*

San Jose........... *5:06* 5:27 5:57 *5:32* 6:16 *6:11* 6:28 6:58 *6:32*

The last two ACE trains depart SJC at 5:35pm and 6:38pm.

So, if you move the 4:19 departure back by two minutes to 4:21, you can insert an additional limited stop run departing San Francisco at 4:15pm, reaching SJC around 5:25. This train can then become 5:35 ACE service to Stockton.

Next, between 4:56 limited and 5:14 Baby Bullet there is a twenty minute gap at peak office hours, insert an additional limited stop run at say, 5:04pm, reaching SJC around 6:25pm, which can then become the 6:38 ACE departure to Stcokton.

Happy?


----------



## X (Jan 13, 2013)

A 10 minute layover is barely enough time to get everyone off and back on, let alone clean or do anything else. What happens if they're even the tiniest bit late? You just shot all the scheduling straight to hell.

There's a lot more to running trains then just finding slots to fill, you need time for padding, maintenance, crew rest / changes, cleaning, servicing, etc.


----------



## Texan Eagle (Jan 13, 2013)

X said:


> A 10 minute layover is barely enough time to get everyone off and back on, let alone clean or do anything else. What happens if they're even the tiniest bit late? You just shot all the scheduling straight to hell.


We are talking about commuter trains here, not long distance Amtraks that need a long time for people and their baggage to get off and get on. Here people are so used to running a rural railway line with decent frequency as "commuter line" that they don't realize how real commuter lines work across the world. Around ten to fifteen minutes is comfortably sufficient time to turnaround a commuter train. BTW, I don't know if you ever saw Caltrain schedules- Caltrain's Baby Bullet services turn around in San Francisco in twelve to fifteen minutes in the morning.

Padding and late running you ask? Caltrain schedule already has padding to allow small delays, the times I suggested also includes the same. And worrying about tiniest bit late? LOL. I travel by Caltrain daily and it doesn't even surprise anyone anymore when trains are running ten-fifteen minutes late, happens on an average five-ten days a month under the current schedule too. It's not like they are currently running epitome of punctuality and adding two additional services will shoot stuff to hell.



> There's a lot more to running trains then just finding slots to fill, you need time for padding, maintenance, crew rest / changes, cleaning, servicing, etc.


Yes, and that is why I said twice, and I repeat a third time, what I gave was *just sample* of what can be done regarding efficient use of resources. If Caltrain and ACE can come together with all the operational constraints they have, they can churn out a more efficient running than what exists now, *if there is the will to do so.*


----------



## roadman3313 (Jan 13, 2013)

Just for comparison, Capitol Corridor (Amtrak California) does have some quick turn around times. A few in Sacramento and San Jose are between 20-30 minutes and one at Oakland-Jack London is between 15-20 minutes. It is a fairly common practice and the trains do run rather on-time on the route. But if there is a delay then it will affect the turning of the trainset and following schedule as well.

Crews are used to the drill and often times don't even cycle the doors between off-loading passengers and boarding passengers. Some of the trains even utilized the same crew and did not exchange.

With that said, I'd stick to keeping the layovers between 20-30 minutes. Allows for some recovery and turn-around time.

As for ACE... they tend to pull in their equipment early to provide for an on-time departure as they have their slots they have to stick to on their rail line. I don't know how the ACE passengers would feel about combining.

In theory I like the idea. But working in transportation in the Bay Area, the agencies are not going to exhibit that kind of cooperation without extensive agreements to cover liability and costs for each. All comes down to the politics, which often times has little to do with the passenger.


----------



## AlanB (Jan 13, 2013)

X said:


> A 10 minute layover is barely enough time to get everyone off and back on, let alone clean or do anything else. What happens if they're even the tiniest bit late? You just shot all the scheduling straight to hell.


The Long Island RR does that all the time. A train pulls into Penn Station, discharges, picks up new passengers, crew swaps out, and the train is on its way 10 minutes later. During rush hour, NYP can't afford to have a train that sits on a platform for more than 10 minutes.


----------



## calwatch (Jan 13, 2013)

The contrast is Metrolink which is through running more trains now. Sometimes a delay due to a grade crossing incident on one line can now cascade into other lines, affecting their service.


----------



## VentureForth (Jan 14, 2013)

AlanB said:


> X said:
> 
> 
> > A 10 minute layover is barely enough time to get everyone off and back on, let alone clean or do anything else. What happens if they're even the tiniest bit late? You just shot all the scheduling straight to hell.
> ...


I agree with Alan. When there is a commuter railroad involved, most folks understand the concept of get out and get in. This includes passengers and crew. The next driver, ideally, is waiting at the platform, ready to do a pre-flight and take over the controls as soon as the inbound arrives. 10 minutes should be plenty of time.



calwatch said:


> The contrast is Metrolink which is through running more trains now. Sometimes a delay due to a grade crossing incident on one line can now cascade into other lines, affecting their service.


Metrolink operates on a ton of single track with grade crossings, and at the mercy of UP. It's a miracle they do as well as they do.


----------



## BCL (Jan 15, 2013)

I tried a different station yesterday. This one serves ACE, Caltrain, and Amtrak.

When the ACE train stopped, there was a loud announcement that "This is an ACE train. This not Caltrain. This is not Amtrak." I would have thought the colors would have been obvious but I suppose there are blind passengers.


----------



## Texan Eagle (Jan 15, 2013)

BCL said:


> I tried a different station yesterday. This one serves ACE, Caltrain, and Amtrak.
> 
> When the ACE train stopped, there was a loud announcement that "This is an ACE train. This not Caltrain. This is not Amtrak." I would have thought the colors would have been obvious but I suppose there are blind passengers.


More likely countermeasure against litigation-happy society- "Why didn't you announce it is not my train? I missed an hour's productivity and I will sue Caltrain, ACE and Amtrak for eleventy gazillion dollars!" :angry2:


----------



## AlanB (Jan 15, 2013)

BCL said:


> I tried a different station yesterday. This one serves ACE, Caltrain, and Amtrak.
> 
> When the ACE train stopped, there was a loud announcement that "This is an ACE train. This not Caltrain. This is not Amtrak." I would have thought the colors would have been obvious but I suppose there are blind passengers.


This happens all around the country, but especially here in the NE. Many people simply pay no attention to details like that. Most Amtrak conductors will state several times when arriving at stations like Trenton, Metropark, Newark, Stamford, and New Haven that "this is an Amtrak train, not a MN or NJT train." If they don't, when the doors open, people just board the train without paying any attention to what train it is that they've boarded.

It becomes an even bigger problem if Amtrak is running late and arriving right around the time that a commuter train was expected.


----------



## Eric S (Jan 15, 2013)

AlanB said:


> This happens all around the country, but especially here in the NE. Many people simply pay no attention to details like that. Most Amtrak conductors will state several times when arriving at stations like Trenton, Metropark, Newark, Stamford, and New Haven that "this is an Amtrak train, not a MN or NJT train." If they don't, when the doors open, people just board the train without paying any attention to what train it is that they've boarded.
> 
> It becomes an even bigger problem if Amtrak is running late and arriving right around the time that a commuter train was expected.


In my (admittedly limited) travels on the NEC, I've noticed this practice (of specifically stating "this is an Amtrak train, NOT an NJT train") more in NJT-land than anywhere else (MARC, MNR, MBTA, SEPTA, etc). Any idea if that's just been a fluke, if in fact it occurs throughout the NEC in commuter train territory, or if there are more problems with NJT passengers boarding Amtrak trains than other commuter rail passengers?


----------



## Ryan (Jan 15, 2013)

Never heard it on MARC.

Maybe us Marylanders are just smarter than our New Jersey brethren.


----------



## BCL (Jan 15, 2013)

AlanB said:


> BCL said:
> 
> 
> > I tried a different station yesterday. This one serves ACE, Caltrain, and Amtrak.
> ...


I've definitely experienced situations where the conductor made a concerted effort to says which route. I've seen one case where a Capitol Corridor and San Joaquin train arrived at about the same time and actually in different directions (each train came in on the left). The conductor on the San Joaquin didn't just make and announcement but came out and yelled out that it wasn't the Capitol Corridor. I've also seen three trains at Emeryville. All were Amtrak and it could get confusing.

However, today was probably the most puzzling. I was waiting in Fremont for the southbound 527. I did see several southbound ACE trains come and go. The electronic board finally indicated that the 527 would be late due to track maintenance, but the last update said 9:44 which was bout 15 minutes late. It said this until maybe 10:14 when I saw the late northbound 528 on the tracks, and another train pulling (well - pushing really) into the station northbound on what would normally be the southbound platform. I tried listening in near a door, and barely heard an announcement that it was the 527 and got on about two seconds before the door closed. The electronic signs weren't indicating anything; they sometimes indicate "now boarding". When I got on, the train reversed direction and headed towards San Jose. I asked someone on board what happened, and was told that they bypassed the normal route to get past the station, and then backtracked to the Fremont station. I'm not sure how they would do it, but there are lots of tracks around the industrial areas of Hayward and Fremont.


----------



## roadman3313 (Jan 16, 2013)

Just saw the ACE train come into San Jose. It was 7 cars long. If they have the equipment they do use longer trains. There was a decent load getting off. I know the electric display signs do display ACE service information as well such as if a train will be missing a bike car.


----------



## Trogdor (Jan 16, 2013)

BCL said:


> When I got on, the train reversed direction and headed towards San Jose. I asked someone on board what happened, and was told that they bypassed the normal route to get past the station, and then backtracked to the Fremont station. I'm not sure how they would do it, but there are lots of tracks around the industrial areas of Hayward and Fremont.


I don't know the exact details of what trackwork was going on, but the train probably used the UP Coast subdivision, which is the same route the Coast Starlight takes (the Starlight and Capitol Corridor normally do not use the same routes between Oakland and San Jose).


----------



## Cristobal (Jan 16, 2013)

Trogdor said:


> BCL said:
> 
> 
> > When I got on, the train reversed direction and headed towards San Jose. I asked someone on board what happened, and was told that they bypassed the normal route to get past the station, and then backtracked to the Fremont station. I'm not sure how they would do it, but there are lots of tracks around the industrial areas of Hayward and Fremont.
> ...


Yeah, there is a switch a mile or so past the Coliseum station that takes you off of the normal CC route and then you rejoin it at the 'Y' that is at the slow turn that occurs just before the salt plant. If you are on the CC s/b, once past the Coliseum keep an eye out for the rental yard on the right-hand side of the train (usually has several man-lifts extended and sitting in the yard). Just pass that is switch off to the sub.


----------



## sechs (Jan 18, 2013)

Texan Eagle said:


> As I said, this was just an *example* of how rolling stock can be used more efficiently.


If I can continually punch holes in your "example" it's obviously not an example of anything. I can provide infeasible options all day.


----------



## sechs (Jan 18, 2013)

Texan Eagle said:


> BTW, I don't know if you ever saw Caltrain schedules- Caltrain's Baby Bullet services turn around in San Francisco in twelve to fifteen minutes in the morning.


I'm not aware of any layover in San Francisco less than fifteen minutes, even during commute. Under the old schedule, it would take about two hours for any problem northbound to ripple out to cancelled southbound trains due to no equipment.
Caltrain doesn't assign particular consists to specific runs. In fact, in order to accomodate maintenance work, the trains move through the schedule during the week. I would have thought that, as a regular rider, you would have noticed your engine number change.


----------



## Texan Eagle (Jan 18, 2013)

sechs said:


> Texan Eagle said:
> 
> 
> > BTW, I don't know if you ever saw Caltrain schedules- Caltrain's Baby Bullet services turn around in San Francisco in twelve to fifteen minutes in the morning.
> ...


Of course I have noticed engine number changes. My observation about 12-15 minute turnaround was based on seeing the schedules where incoming Bullets returning as outgoing Bullets. I do not commute upto 4th & King so haven't seen what happens in person but I can put a fairly confident bet that the 12-15 minute turnarounds I am seeing are the same train sets, because, 99% of the times Caltrain uses the Bombardier sets for Baby Bullet service and Nippon Gallery sets mix and matched with some Bombardier for everything else, so when I see a Bullet arrival and a Bullet departure at 4th & King in 15 minute period, I guess it is the same Bombarider set returning, though I could be wrong in some instances.


----------



## sechs (Jan 18, 2013)

Trogdor said:


> I don't know the exact details of what trackwork was going on, but the train probably used the UP Coast subdivision, which is the same route the Coast Starlight takes (the Starlight and Capitol Corridor normally do not use the same routes between Oakland and San Jose).


The Capitol Corridor has to go via Niles, or it will miss stops at Hayward and Fremont; the Coast Starlight will take which ever route (Coast or Niles) is faster. It usually takes the Coast Subdivision, as it's more direct, but I have taken the train on both.


----------



## sechs (Jan 18, 2013)

Cristobal said:


> Yeah, there is a switch a mile or so past the Coliseum station that takes you off of the normal CC route and then you rejoin it at the 'Y' that is at the slow turn that occurs just before the salt plant. If you are on the CC s/b, once past the Coliseum keep an eye out for the rental yard on the right-hand side of the train (usually has several man-lifts extended and sitting in the yard). Just pass that is switch off to the sub.


The routes diverge at North Elmhurst, which is just south of 98th Ave. They meet back up at Newark Junction, south of Thornton Ave on the Coast Subdivision and west of Cherry Ave on the Niles Subdivision.


----------



## sechs (Jan 18, 2013)

Texan Eagle said:


> Of course I have noticed engine number changes. My observation about 12-15 minute turnaround was based on seeing the schedules where incoming Bullets returning as outgoing Bullets. I do not commute upto 4th & King so haven't seen what happens in person but I can put a fairly confident bet that the 12-15 minute turnarounds I am seeing are the same train sets, because, 99% of the times Caltrain uses the Bombardier sets for Baby Bullet service and Nippon Gallery sets mix and matched with some Bombardier for everything else, so when I see a Bullet arrival and a Bullet departure at 4th & King in 15 minute period, I guess it is the same Bombarider set returning, though I could be wrong in some instances.


I don't know where you got that 99% statistic, but it's patently false. There aren't even enough Bombardier sets to cover all of the "baby bullet" service.
While maintenance seems to make an effort to keep all of them in action, they move around just like the gallery cars do.


----------



## BCL (Jan 19, 2013)

sechs said:


> Texan Eagle said:
> 
> 
> > Of course I have noticed engine number changes. My observation about 12-15 minute turnaround was based on seeing the schedules where incoming Bullets returning as outgoing Bullets. I do not commute upto 4th & King so haven't seen what happens in person but I can put a fairly confident bet that the 12-15 minute turnarounds I am seeing are the same train sets, because, 99% of the times Caltrain uses the Bombardier sets for Baby Bullet service and Nippon Gallery sets mix and matched with some Bombardier for everything else, so when I see a Bullet arrival and a Bullet departure at 4th & King in 15 minute period, I guess it is the same Bombarider set returning, though I could be wrong in some instances.
> ...


I've taken the 322 Baby Bullet quite a few times, and it's always been an F40 with Nippon Sharyo cars. I know they like to have the MP36 with the Bombadier cars for Baby Bullet service, but in my experience it's nowhere near 99%. I remember when they did the track work on weekends and completely shut down service. The whole work was about building bypasses to go around trains stopped at stations and didn't seem to be about the trainset per se.


----------



## roadman3313 (Jan 19, 2013)

Certain Baby Bullet Trips will use the Nippon Sharyo cars with an F40 and others will use the Bombardier cars with the MP36. When the service first rolled out they mainly assigned the Baby Bullet trips the "new" cars at the time. As the service expanded there were not enough "new" trainsets to cover all the Baby Bullet trips so Nippon Sharyo cars began to be placed in the mix. Every time I have ridden a Baby Bullet in the past few months it has been a Nippon Sharyo. With that said, I usually take the same trip or two and that's generally what is assigned.

The "new" trainsets were also used for a midday trip in between their Baby Bullet runs. Certain trips were sometimes assigned a certain car type due to Bicycle capacity, however that issue has been addressed for the most part by Caltrain by publishing the projected bike schedule.

Train sets are assigned to a certain rotation on a daily basis based on a few factors. The Bombardier cars are generally assigned to Baby Bullet trips but those trips are often linked to other Non-Baby Bullet trips as well. As a guideline the following trains will use Bombardier trainsets during the week (based on mechanical and operational needs - as published by Caltrain):

http://www.caltrain.com/riderinfo/Bicycles/BikesOnBombardiers.html

That hopefully will give you some idea on the train rotations and turn-time as well. But as you can see the Bombardier cars are used on much more than just the Baby-Bullet trains, but they also are used on a similar rotation during the week. That doesn't mean the same set of Bombardier cars run the same rotation all week, but they are generally scheduled to a rotation that serves the trips on the list.


----------



## Texan Eagle (Jan 20, 2013)

roadman3313 said:


> http://www.caltrain.com/riderinfo/Bicycles/BikesOnBombardiers.html


99% was going a bit overboard based only on my limited set of data (every Baby Bullet I have ridden in last six months have been a Bombardier) but this is what I was referring to- Caltrain tries as much as possible to keep the fixed trains, mostly Bullets, on Bombardier cars. Based on this information and the timetable I was talking about fifteen minute turnaround times. I may be wrong, I will have to ride upto 4th and King one day and check it myself.


----------

