Caltrain's new electric trains
Caltrain’s rollout of Stadler KISS electric multiple-unit trains between San Francisco and San Jose is prompting debate over comfort, operations, and environmental impact. Commenters highlight quieter service, faster acceleration, and more frequent schedules as major gains, but note trade-offs like stiffer seats, door and step mechanisms that slow boarding, and continued diesel freight on the same corridor. The thread situates Caltrain’s partial electrification within a broader global context, contrasting the U.S.’s limited passenger rail progress with long-established electric networks in Europe and Asia.
Overhead Electrification & Power
- Overhead wires are typically copper or slightly alloyed copper; some mention bronze, steel cores, or other alloys for strength and wear resistance.
- Caltrain uses 25 kV AC, compatible with California HSR; commenters stress severe shock risk even without direct contact.
- Discussion clarifies distinction between track electrification and diesel‑electric locomotives: US freight mostly uses diesel‑electric, but very little electrified track.
Operations, Speed & Service Patterns
- Confusion about Sunnyvale–SF trips over 2 hours is explained by all‑stop locals versus faster “Baby Bullet”/limited services.
- Passing is enabled only at a few segments with extra tracks; most overtakes are carefully scheduled rather than frequent.
- New schedules (from Sept 21) shorten Sunnyvale–SF trips to roughly 50–65 minutes.
- Speed is capped around 79 mph by track and level‑crossing constraints; time savings mainly come from faster acceleration/braking, enabling more stops with similar end‑to‑end times.
Noise & Rider Experience
- Nearby residents report the new EMUs as “much quieter” than diesel, though horns and bells at crossings remain a major annoyance.
- Some riders complain about loud door warning tones and inconsistent PA volumes across cars.
- Seats are widely described as stiffer and less comfortable, but trains add Wi‑Fi, outlets, better climate control, more storage, and more leg/knee room, which others value more.
Environment & Energy Sources
- Debate over Atherton‑style environmental lawsuits: construction is acknowledged as environmentally costly, but many argue that rail beats highways and aviation long‑term.
- One breakdown of California generation for train power: ~51% solar, 22% natural gas, 21% other renewables, 6% nuclear, ~0% coal; nuance around “marginal” versus average generation.
- Several participants criticize the article’s framing of Caltrain as a “first” or unique electric conversion and note earlier US electric mainlines.
Comparisons & Broader Rail Debates
- Europeans and others find it odd that basic electrification is newsworthy, noting their systems have been largely electric and using EMUs for decades.
- Comparisons with UK, Germany, Italy, Japan, India, Switzerland, and Australia touch on punctuality, electrification percentages, platform height/boarding efficiency, and mixed diesel–electric fleets.
- Disagreement over EMUs vs. locomotive‑hauled trains: some argue all‑powered sets are now standard and efficient; others claim added complexity and cost.
Freight, Safety & Miscellaneous
- Freight traffic on the Caltrain corridor is described as infrequent but still diesel; some see no excuse for not using electric freight locomotives.
- Earthquake behavior is briefly discussed via Shinkansen auto‑braking and memories of Loma Prieta disruptions.
- A technical blog notes new trains waste ~8–10 seconds per stop due to slow step deployment software, partially eroding travel‑time gains; suggestions include software fixes or deploying steps at low speed, with safety concerns raised.