Passenger Trains > BART Questions

Leaving aside all the politics (please), is not the extension of BART to San Jose a replication of the service already provided by CalTrain? Conversely, is the thinking that this extension will be needed in the future and better to build the infrastructure now?

Be of good cheer,
—Mac

www.lowellamrine.com

The BART line is coming in from the north and east through Fremont and Milpitas.  So it more replicates the Amtrak Capitol Corridor service.

There is still talk of running BART between Santa Clara and Milbrae, replicating CalTrain, but that is still talk stage.

Z

Also, the ride from the Berryessa BART station in San Jose to downtown SF is considerably quicker than the ride on CalTrain.

That line was not in when I lived up there, so I was curious about that too. Thanks for the answer to that question. Is it possible electrification of CalTrain will ease if not erase that time difference?

wzd Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Also, the ride from the Berryessa BART station in
> San Jose to downtown SF is considerably quicker
> than the ride on CalTrain.

MacBeau Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That line was not in when I lived up there, so I
> was curious about that too. Thanks for the answer
> to that question. Is it possible electrification
> of CalTrain will ease if not erase that time
> difference?
>
> wzd Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Also, the ride from the Berryessa BART station
> in
> > San Jose to downtown SF is considerably quicker
> > than the ride on CalTrain.

Cal trains issue is there are so many stops. The Bullets are semi quick but the others take 2 hours. And even in the other post I said I supported this project. It is actually pretty handy in that once done this will be downtown like Oakland and SF. Right now they don't have that. Except for the very slow VTA. Add in that it connect to the bart system and it is a good thing imo.

Posted from Android

Actually the time difference between BART from Berryessao  Powell, and Caltrain from Diridon to 4th St from current schedules is  11 minutes in BART's favor.   Of course the actual times, then, depend on where within SJ and SF your actual endpoints are.   When electrified w/ the fleet under construction, Caltrain should become faster.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/21/21 13:58 by BrynMawr.

The baby bullets were an hour from SF to SJ, Bart shows an hour and 36 minutes... and the all stop train shows it is still 2 minutes quicker than BART. But the advantage is you have to get to CalTrain, so if you are in the East Bay, then yes BART is quicker.

Posted from Android

Could the new Caltrain equipment have quicker station stops with more doors than the gallery cars?
I suspect that the EMUs will have better acceleration than the diesels so there may be some time to save that way.
But as said above it is not an arbitrary point to point contest like an airline.
Railroads work so very well as networks, connecting the various stations along the line in all possible combinations of origin and destination.
It's complicated, and people want simple answers.
Beyond all this, the schedule frequency of BART will be a big draw.  Even if the trip time is the same or longer passengers won't want to wait for a departure time, they want to go now.

Departing Berryessa on Tuesday around 10:00am, the trip will take 64 minutes, per the BART planner.

 

wzd Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Departing Berryessa on Tuesday around 10:00am, the
> trip will take 64 minutes, per the BART planner.
>
>  

Oh my mistake, for some reason when I Google it, it added a bunch of walking etc I should have just gone to the bart planner. So either way depending on the side of the Bay you are on take either one. And it is a good program.

Posted from Android

BART down the Penisula to San Jose was part of the dream and, the dream resulted in the incredibly expensive wye at the San Francisco airport with south end of the wye extending the short distance to the CalTrain Millbrae station.  The wye gave direct access to the airport from San Francisco and the East Bay and, in the future, from the Peninsula.  The county of San Mateo, which was not a part of the original BART system had to foot the capital costs of the expensive wye as well as operating costs.  The alternative to the wye would have been a simple extension to the CalTrain Milbrae station with an airport stop opposite the airport an an extension of the airport people mover system to the BART station.  As it is now, unless you are going to the international terminal you have to get on the people mover system to reach the other  terminals.

With the electrification of CalTrain it would seem unlikely that the Peninsula extension of BART will occur, given the many other projects seen as high priority - including a second BART trans bay crossing needed to relieve capacity limits with the present tube and the closely spaced downtown San Francisco stops.  Incidentally,  top speed for both BART and CalTrain is 80 mph (actually 79 for CalTrain).

BART trains rarely (probably never) exceed 66 miles/hour.

BrynMawr Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Actually the time difference between BART from
> Berryessao  Powell, and Caltrain from Diridon to
> 4th St from current schedules is  11 minutes in
> BART's favor.   Of course the actual times,
> then, depend on where within SJ and SF your actual
> endpoints are.   When electrified w/ the fleet
> under construction, Caltrain should become faster.

That sounds about right, but it's more about convenience than speed.

Attending a SF Giants game, or transferring to the MUNI streetcar to the Embarcardero? Caltrain is my preferred choice. Going to Mission District/Market St. corridor, or going to Richmond/Sunset districts? I usually take BART. Many visitors neglect Balboa Park as a convenient transfer point to MUNI light rail. I often take Caltrain to Millbrae and tranfer to BART there.

The BART vs. Caltrain speed comparison isn't too relevant for me. For example, it's quicker to San Francisco (Embarcardero) from Millbrae on Caltrain + MUNI T Line than on BART, due to the higher number of stops BART makes in between. Furthermore, Millbrae --> SF fare is cheaper on Caltrain + MUNI than BART, so keep that in mind. Some may choose BART for the one seat ride.

BART to San Jose should give public transit users more options, so it's more about convenience than "bench racing" which is only interesting for discussions.

timz Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> BART trains rarely (probably never) exceed 66
> miles/hour.

That is true.  I've been told that the higher speed is available for making up time.

First, about BART speeds; if you look through the window into the cab you can read the digital speedometer.  Having ridden starting day one in 1972, I have seen speeds up to 80 numerous times.
Second, about the lame design of the airport route.  It was indeed intended to be the camel's nose under the tent for replacing Caltrain.   I personally gave a drawing to a then director suggesting a 3 system transfer station with BART  on two tracks, the air train in between and Caltrain in the center with all platforms arranged to be Roll on/Roll off to meet ADA and baggage convenience.  My idea included a train shed so all of this could have been rainproof and secure.  Unfortunately BART decided on what we got--vastly more expensive and user hostile.  
Third, indeed 11 minutes is not critical on an hour plus trip.   Convenience is the issue.   I cited the time only to correct the impression thaty BART was meaningfully faster.   As a former resident of NYC, I appreciate the concept of multiple routes to various places accessing disparate destinations between end points.   
About the need for a second transbay tube; BART refuses to give us 24/7 service with only the current tube, and when CAHSR  is up and running, a one seat ride to Sacramento should be part of the system. 

BrynMawr Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Convenience is the issue.  
> I cited the time only to correct the impression
> thaty BART was meaningfully faster. 

Yup, but other comments in the thread were just "bench racing."

BART to San Jose doesn't benefit me personally for East Bay access, since Warm Springs extension gave me the convenience I needed by taking Hwy 237 across Silicon Valley to the BART station there. I have to deal with more driving congestion with Milpitas and Berryessa stations. On the South Bay end of the Bay Area, not enough people can walk to access public transit, so it's still "Park and Ride" country here.

Higher density housing being built around Warm Springs, Milpitas, and Berryessa stations are supposed to change that, but more and more people are figuring out the "Big Tech Scam" which is that higher paying jobs don't necessarily lead to better standards of living, especially with inflated housing costs, so I am skeptical that the transit villages will actually make enough of an impact for BART ridership.

As a long time resident of San Mateo County, we dont want POS BART. We have voted agaisn't it again and again. But yet it keeps getting shoved down are throats. WE DON'T WANT IT. Vetran of riding the SP as a kid to go to school, and as well taking Caltrain to and from work. Too bad the morons on the design commitee decided that the gauge should be 5' 6" instead of 4' 8 1/2" it could have circled the bay already. Noisy? again they ignored the recomdations of people in the field and spec'ed square wheels That's why it's so goddamn noisy and they have to grind the track every night. We don't want/need BART to ruin my quality of life nor my property value
.

cchan006 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> BrynMawr Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Convenience is the issue.  
> > I cited the time only to correct the impression
> > thaty BART was meaningfully faster. 
>
> Yup, but other comments in the thread were just
> "bench racing."
>
> BART to San Jose doesn't benefit me personally for
> East Bay access, since Warm Springs extension gave
> me the convenience I needed by taking Hwy 237
> across Silicon Valley to the BART station there. I
> have to deal with more driving congestion with
> Milpitas and Berryessa stations. On the South Bay
> end of the Bay Area, not enough people can walk to
> access public transit, so it's still "Park and
> Ride" country here.
>
> Higher density housing being built around Warm
> Springs, Milpitas, and Berryessa stations are
> supposed to change that, but more and more people
> are figuring out the "Big Tech Scam" which is that
> higher paying jobs don't necessarily lead to
> better standards of living, especially with
> inflated housing costs, so I am skeptical that the
> transit villages will actually make enough of an
> impact for BART ridership.

 I do not believe transit villages with low rise buildings (now planned) will provide the number of riders anticipated by BART.  The transit villages we should be building are high rises that substantilly boost the number potential transit riders.  And they should be apartments or condos that are affordable to the average working family. 

Affordable... lol you do know we are talking about the bay area... the Tech world killed the concept of Affordable!

Posted from Android

>  Having ridden starting day one in
> 1972, I have seen speeds up to 80
> numerous times.

BART's top speed was originally 76-77 mph.
Normal top speed dropped to 66 mph
around 1975, to save energy. Supposedly
trains were known to use Performance
Level 1 after being delayed, but I doubt
they ever do that now.

Fastest speedometer reading I ever saw was 88.
Cheap speedometer, apparently.