Comparison of two train systems

  1. 1 References

Here I will compare Caltrain and the Guangzhou-Zhuhai Intercity rail. It’s an apples-to-oranges comparison, as the two systems are built in very different places, with very different needs and considerations. So this comparison is just for fun!

FIGURE 1 Caltrain Stadler KISS EMU
FIGURE 2 CRH-6A, such as on the Zhuhai-Guangzhou intercity line
TrainCaltrainGuangzhou-Zhuhai
Type of constructionModernization, grade separation, electrificationNew construction from scratch
Rolling stockStadler KISS EMU caltrainwikiCRH-6A EMU gzwiki
Length (km)77 km (San Jose to San Francisco) caltrainwiki116 km gzwiki
Operating speed127 km/h (79 mph) caltrainwiki200 km/h (120 mph) gzwiki
CostUSD 2.72B caltraincostRMB 18.19B (USD 2.59B) gzdoc
Grade separated\times (71 at grade crossings left crossings)\checkmark (92% viaducts gzwiki)
Commenced2017-07 calmodwiki2005-12 gzwiki
Opened2024-09 calmodwiki2011-01 gzwiki
Time to build7 years5 years
Daily ridership24583 caltrainwiki342000 gzwiki
Goes along a bay area\checkmark yes\checkmark yes
Table 1 Comparison of two systems.

At first, the fact that the Caltrain modernization program cost more than it took to build the whole Guangzhou-Zhuhai intercity line from scratch may seem like a shock. But this is easily explained by the following facts:

The other observation is that Caltrain is a slower line. First of all, it doesn’t make too much sense to invest hugely to speed up a line that has a ridership less than a tenth of the Guangzhou-Zhuhai intercity, so the current speed, which roughly matches driving, is acceptable. Secondly, there are some technical reasons. In fact, the Stadler KISS trains are capable of up to 200 km/h, but the speed is limited in practice for two reasons: a large number of crossings, and the turns and track quality of the old line. Currently, there’s a big effort to eliminate grade crossings crossings, so at least the first reason will be gone hopefully!

Also, the fact that Caltrain has bilevel coaches comes with tradeoffs. It is a cost-effective way to provide nearly twice as high capacities given the same frequency and platform length. However, it reduces the speed of boarding.

Finally, some technical quirks further reduce Caltrain’s performance. For example, the trains take an extra 8-10 seconds to begin opening the doors when stopping at stations, resulting in a high dwell time. Hopefully these quirks will be ironed out soon!

1 References