|
|
| Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV (1145591) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV |
|
|
Posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Tue Mar 20 18:35:28 2012, in response to Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV, posted by Jersey Mike on Tue Mar 20 09:01:03 2012. Of course Will would just run more trains, but if the demand isn't there they'd just be wasting money.FWIW, one could argue that even we kept traditional fleets instead of the UIC stock that you find contemptous, the alternative is simply to go with shorter consists, OPTO, and the conductor becomes the engineer for the second run, and the assistant conductors become ticket inspectors. In turn, even if we don't go with full blow UIC stock, maybe we should look to aim for a lightweight rolling stock with higher acceleration and more doors to reduce dwell times and improve schedules. One could even argue that we should even try and aim for the level of quick turn-around times that rapid transit achieves. Mind you, I'm biased because I'm watching my co-workers commuter on slow bus rides because of the high costs and operating practices of commuter railroads, and despite living on a line with 2 tph, my brother still finds it faster to drive to Queens to pick up the subway than to ride the railroad, so I'm desperate for any improvement on the status quo for this group, and I'll admit that I have less qualms in screwing over railway employees who make the equivalent of $40k to $100K for those who make $25K. |
|
|
|