They most likely are going to use the Siemens Velaro Nova wide which is 3300mm wide. that would also mean 7 93ft cars vs 8 85ft cars
Here they are without the ridiculous malware-infested ads:
I have not experienced the Siemans cars in service now but those seats look as they wouldn't be any more comfortable. You hope Siemans and CHSRA will learn from that negative reaction and look to improve the comfort. But, I understand, they are simply concept images and the vendor has yet to be been chosen, so a long way to go.
You have to wonder if the same amount of money (probably less) had been invested in higher speed rail SFO - LAX - SAN on existing tracks including moving the LAX - SAN corridor away from the ocean, whether we would be better off. But that ship has sailed unfortunately.
It’s hard to look at a project like this - a pair of cities where true 350kph HSR makes absolutely perfect sense in every possible way - and have the foresight to know that higher speed rail would be the better option due to any number of factors contributing to ballooning costs.
That is what I have seen and heard as well, including the funding/rescinding issues mentioned by @Tlcooper44, and the delays/inflation resulting therefrom. There's also the matter of not having a robust HSR industry established at the regional, domestic, continental, or hemispheric level. If real HSR does take off in CA and/or NV future HSR projects might get a lot faster and cheaper if the industry and regulators can maintain momentum from one project to the next.
I don't think there is a shelf to buy off. Siemens Velaro is by definition variable in terms of width and height.
Wow, not really. Currently CHSRA has spent about $13B. Current Administrative costs, that include lawsuits are less than $500M. All lawsuits have been settled, most lost by the plaintiffs with the loser paying court costs.
Here is detailed specifications on the Palmdale to Burbank EIR. https://hsr.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Attachment-E-Exhibit-B-Findings-SOC_A11Y.pdf
I think this project is at a point of too big to fail. It has also potentially destroyed any future entirely publicly funded true high speed rail projects in the US, especially if a certain political philosophy gains total control of government. But to abandon this project now would seem to be a monumental tragedy of epic proportions, given what has already been invested. I am just at a loss to know where the additional needed funds will come from.
What route could you do higher-speed rail on though? That's the issue.
Yep, the only way into the Bay Area that doesn't involve a crossing of the various coast ranges is the current route used by the San Joaquins. And at the other end, there's Tehachapi Pass, and then all the current rail lines that go into the Los Angeles Basin also have to cross mountain ranges. Not even "higher speed" running. I suppose that designing a 110-mph maximum route to cross those mountains in this seismically active region isn't going to be much cheaper than doing a 200-mph maximum speed route. I suppose they could save some money by ordering Airos instead of specialized 200 mph high speed train sets. Maybe they could save some money on some of the other engineering expenses if they design the route for 125 mph max instead of 200 mph max, but they really should build it on an alignment that could be upgraded to 200 mph max after the initial service is a success and there's more interest in funding things. But all the tunneling and viaducts and stuff is going to be wickedly expensive, whether they build it for 110 mph, 125 mph, or 200 mph.
The cheaper way would have been the 90s plan to run at 110mph down the coast.
This speeded up coast route was never a practical alternative. First and foremost the intermediate population centers are all in the Central Valley. Second, and a close second, geography makes a significant speed up of the coast line extremely expensive.
SJ to gilroy it will be the UP line with some minor realignment work and with 3-4 tracks. The tunnels haven't changed for Pacheco Pass they've always been around that long. It is close to a base tunnel to meet the 200-250mph design speed.
There are some sections its easier than others but 110mph from San Jose to Guadalupe outside of Cuesta isn't that complex. South of that 90mph can be done for most of the route. Single level cars running at 6in would also help speeds some, but the old plans were all lets do super elevation for pax instead of being setup for freight and pax lives with it.
