California High-Speed Rail Authority California High-Speed Rail Corridor Evaluation German Peer Review Report Phase I submitted by DE-Consult Deutsche Eisenbahn-Consulting GmbH Frankfurt am Main, Germany December 2000 C010333 German Peer Review California High-Speed Rail Corridor EvaluationJ Table of Contents Chapter No. Chapter Title Pa.qe 1. INTRODUCTION 1-1 1.1 Objective 1-1 1.2 Reports and Data Used for the Review 1-1 1.3 Structure of the Peer Review Process 1-1 1.4 Structure of the Report 1-3 1.5 Comments Received from Parsons Brinckerhoff 1-3 2. ALIGNMENT AND PERMANENT WAY DESIGN CRITERIA 2-1 2.1 Introduction 2-1 2.2 Alignment Design Parameters 2-1 2.2.1 Design Speed 2-1 2.2.2 Horizontal Alignment 2-2 2.2.3 Vertical Alignment 2-4 2.2.4 Summary of Alignment Design Parameters 2-5 2.3 Gauges and Clearances 2-7 2.3.1 Kinematic Envelope 2-7 2.3.2 Structure Clearances 2-7 2.3.3 Overhead Catenary System 2-7 2.3.4 Track Centerline Spacing 2-7 2.3.5 Cross Sections 2-8 2.3.6 Permanent Way 2-9 2.3.7 Ballast versus Slab Track 2-9 2.4 Summary 2-10 3. ROLLING STOCK ISSUES 3-1 3.1 Introduction 3-1 3.2 Current ICE Train Types in Operation 3-1 3.2.1 ICE 1 3-1 3.2.2 ICE 2 3-1 3.2.3 ICE 3 3-3 Phase 1 Report C010334Page German Peer Review California High-Speed Rail Corridor Evaluation J 3.2.4 ICE-T 3-5 3.3 Future ICE Developments 3-5 3.3.1 Future Maximum Speeds in Germany 3-5 3.3.2 ICE 4 3-6 3.3.3 HTE 3-6 3.3.4 DPT 400 3-6 3.4 Comparison of CPT-type ICE 2 with DPT-type ICE 3 3-7 3.4.1 Technical Comparison 3-7 3.4.2 Life Cycle Cost Comparison 3-9 3.4.3 Summary of Relevant Technical Characteristics of ICE Trainsets 3-9 3.5 Acceleration Rates 3-10 3.6 High-Speed Freight Rolling Stock 3-10 3.6.1 Locomotives 3-10 3.6.2 Wagons 3-11 3.7 Summary 3-11 4. OPERATIONS ISSUES 4-1 4.1 General 4-1 4.2 Track Layout 4-2 4.3 Train Running Times 4-3 4.4 Operations Aspects 4-6 4.4.1 Timetable 4-6 4.4.2 Rolling Stock Requirements 4-7 4.4.3 Comparison with German High Speed Operations 4-8 4.5 Commuter Traffic 4-10 4.6 Freight Services 4-10 4.6.1 Freight Services in Europe 4-10 4.6.2 Freight Services on the California HSR System 4-11 4.6.3 Freight Compatibility Issues 4-12 4.7 O & M Cost Estimates 4-13 4.7.1 Energy Costs 4-13 4.7.2 Other O & M Costs 4-14 4.8 Summary 4-15 [ Phase 1 Report C010335Page ii German Peer Review California High-Speed Rail Corridor Evaluation J 5. CONSTRUCTION UNIT COSTS AND SCHEDULES 5-1 5.1 Unit Costs 5-1 5,1.1 Track and Guideway Items 5-1 5,1.2 Earthwork and Related Items 5-2 5.1.3 Structures, Tunnels and Walls 5-3 5,1.4 Grade Separations 5-4 5.1.5 Building Items 5-5 5.1.6 Rail and Utility Relocation 5-6 5,1.7 Right-of-Way 5-7 5.1,8 Environmental Impact Mitigation 5-7 5.1.9 Signaling and Communications 5-8 5.1.10 Electrification 5-8 5.2 Completeness of Cost Items 5-8 5,3 Comparison of Percentage Breakdown of Costs 5-10 5.4 Comparison of Typical Cross-Sections 5-10 5,5 Schedules 5-11 5,6 Summary 5-13 6. CONCLUSIONS 6-1 Phase 1 Report C010336Page iii } German Peer Review California High-Speed Rail Corridor EvaluationJ List of Tables Table No. Table Title Pa.qe 1-1 List of Basic Questions to be Answered by the Peer Review 1-4 2-1 Summary of Alignment Design Parameters 2-6 3-1 Summary of Technical Performance Characteristics of ICE Trainsets 3-10 3-2 Acceleration Rates of High-Speed Trainsets 3-10 4-1 Comparison of Running Times Los Angeles - Bakersfield, Option A 4-6 4-2 Train Numbers by Type of Train on the German High Speed Line Hanover - WQrzburg 1996 / 1997 4-9 4-3 Approximate Running Time of Non-Stop Freight Trains, San Diego - San Francisco, Option B (6% Schedule Recovery Time Included) 4-12 5-1 Alignment Unit Costs 5-13* 5-2 Comparison of Percentage Breakdown of Construction Costs 5-13* 5-3 Comparison of Line Profiles 5-13* 5-4 Percentage Cost Distribution of Authority Option A by Line Section 5-13" * Follows th~s page [ Phase 1 Report C010337Page iv German Peer Review California High-Speed Rail Corridor EvaluationJ List of Figures Fi,qure No. Fi.qure Title Pa.qe 2-1 Structure Clearance GC for r greater 250 m 2-11 2-2 Cross Section at Grade Ballasted Track (German Railway DS 800.0130) 2-12 2-3 Cross Section at Grade Slab Track (German Railway DS 800.0130) 2-13 2-4 Trench Section Slab Track (German Railway DS 800.0130) 2-14 2-5 Provisions for Right of Way (German Railway DS 800.0130) 2-15 2-6 Typical Cross-Section of Slab Track System Rheda 2-16 3-1 Configuration of an ICE 2 385-m Version 3-2 3-2 ICE 2 Trainset on the New High Speed Line Berlin - Hanover 3-2 3-3 ICE 3 Trainset 3-4 3-4 Tractive Effort Curve and Resistances in Gradients 3-4 3-5 Configuration of ICE 3 400-m Trainset 3-5 3-6 Distributed Power Concept of the iCE 3 3-7 3-7 Train Speed Decreases on 3.5% Sustained Gradient 3-8 3-8 Train Speed Decreases on 5.0% Sustained Gradient 3-9 3-9 Class 101 Locomotive 3-11 4-1 Standard Track Layouts for Intermediate Stations 4-3 4.2 Schematic Diagram of the Cologne - Frankfurt / Main High-Speed Line 4-3 4-3 Typical Acceleration-Versus-Speed Diagram 4-4 4-4 Maximum Speed Profile Los Angeles - Bakersfield, Option A 4-5 C010338 Phase 1 Report Page v j German Peer Review California High-Speed Rail Corridor EvaluationI List of Annexes Annex No. Annex Title Pa_qe 4-1 ICE - Services (1998 / 1999) 4-16 4-2 Speed-Versus-Distance Diagrams Los Angeles - Bakersfield, Option A 4-17 4-3 Comparison of Speed-versus-Distance Diagrams Los Angeles - Bakersfield, Option A 4-18 4-4 Speed Profile San Diego- San Francisco, Option B 4-19 4-5 Approximate Longitudinal Profile San Diego - San Francisco, Option B 4-19 4-6 Page 1 Simulation Results for the Direction San Diego - San Francisco, Option B (12 Hours) 4-20 4-6 Page 2 4-21 4-7 Page 1 Timetable Graph for the Simulation from 4 a.m. to 8 a.m. 4-22 4-7 Page 2 Timetable Graph for the Simulation from 8 a.m. to 12 noon 4-23 4-7 Page 3 Timetable Graph for the Simulation from 12 noon to 4 p.m. 4-24 4-8 Page 1 Trainset Roster according to the Timetable shown in Exhibit 5-4 and Appendix C (Option B) 4-25 4-8 Page 2 4-26 4-9 Running Performance of the Trains, Option B 4-27 4-10 Maximum Speed of Freight Trains in Gradients, Initial Speed 200 km/h 4-28 4-11 Approximate Calculation of Energy Consumption 4-29 I Phase 1 Report C010339Page vi J German Peer Review California High-Speed Rail Corridor Evaluation J 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Objective The objective of this Phase I peer review is focused on a critical assessment of the current assumptions and parameters for planning, design and operation of a statewide high-speed rail system in California. As one of three peer review groups, the German experts have furthermore been requested to contribute to this review the special ICE experience with "mixed-use" operations. More specifically, the Authority has provided the Consultant with a list of 14 basic questions (as presented in Table 1-1 ) the answers to which constitute the bulk of this assessment. 1.2 Reports and Data Used for the Review The basis of this evaluation are the following documents and data compilations: ¯ Final Report, California High-Speed Corridor Evaluation, prepared by Parsons Brinckerhoff, December 30,1999 ¯ Draft Business Plan "Building a High-Speed Train System for California", prepared by the California High-Speed Rail Authority, January 2000 ¯ Maps of the alignment alternatives, and cost, travel time and alignment data supplied by Parsons Brinckerhoff In addition, specific data and information as requested by the Consultant during this assignment were utilized. 1.3 Structure of the Peer Review Process In order to facilitate a structured review process, the wide range of issues and specific questions were assigned to four task groups as shown below: "Alignment and Permanent Way Design Criteria ¯ Design speed/horizontal curve radii ¯ Superelevation (equilibrium and unbalanced) ¯ Vertical curves ¯ Transition curves ¯ Minimum tangent length ¯ Maximum gradients (3.5% and 5.0%) ¯ Dynamic clearance envelope ¯ Minimum clearances to fixed objects (horizontal and vertical) ¯ Track centerline spacing Phase 1 Report C010340Page 1 - 1 German Peer Review California High-Speed Rail Corridor EvaluationI ¯ Minimum right-of-way requirements ¯ Special requirements for sub-standard curve radii ¯ Permanent way dimensions (ballasted and direct fixation trackways) ¯ German experience with ballasted versus direct fixation trackways ¯ Overhead catenary system Rolling Stock Issues ¯ Future ICE generations and operational speeds ¯ Maximum sustained gradients for ICE ¯ ICE acceleration and deceleration rates ¯ ICE clearance and right-of-way requirements ¯ Weight of ICE trainsets, axle loads ¯ Comparison of ICE 1/2 (locomotive-hauled type) with ICE 3 (EMU type) trainsets ¯ High-speed freight rolling stock (locomotives and wagons) ¯ Rolling stock unit costs Operations Issues ¯ Review of train running times and running time calculations for the section LA (Union Station) - Fresno (including energy consumption per train run) ¯ Review of operations and comparison with similar operations in Germany (including dwell times and schedule recovery times) ¯ Use of ICE trains by commuters; need for specialized commuter trains ¯ Description and critical assessment of freight services on ICE lines ¯ Assessment of freight compatibility of the California HSR system ¯ Assessment of O&M cost estimates Construction Unit Costs and Schedules ¯ Review of capital cost assumptions and comparison with ICE lines ¯ Review of unit cost assumptions for appropriateness and completeness in view of ICE experience ¯ Planning and construction times for ICE lines in different terrain ¯ Critical assessment of planning and construction times assumed for the California HSR system C010341 Phase 1 Report Page 1 - 2 J German Peer Review California High-Speed Rail Corridor Evaluation J 1.4 Structure of the Report Following this introduction, the findings of our peer review are presented in four chapters covering the above subjects.