|
|
| Re: Metrolink trip report and pics—Part 1 (543638) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Metrolink trip report and pics—Part 1 |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Sun Dec 30 00:39:18 2007, in response to Re: Metrolink trip report and pics—Part 1, posted by Olog-hai on Sun Dec 30 00:17:50 2007. There was a rumor I heard a few years back that in the mid 1990s Pacific Gas and Electric approached Metrolink about electrification of their operation. PGE was prepared to pay for the entire installation and then charge for power at the pantograph, removing the cost of transmission losses from Metrolink's ledger. Metrolink considered the proposal, but reached the conclusion that the conversion to electric locomotives wouldn't save them any money. The Metrolink bean counters had only considered the case where they maintained the same schedule. It didn't occur to them that converting to electric would potentially allow off-peak service at lower cost which would raise ridership far more than expansions of diesel service. By the time that issue was broached PGE was starting to have problems with weekday peak demand and the last thing they needed was a few more megawatts being sucked down by trains whose operation they were subsidizing.I have to admit I don't know if this is in any way accurate, I only heard it from one person who has in the past made up stories. However, I also heard that PGE was supporting the 1990s Caltrain electrification and LACMTA/SCRTD trolleybus installation on the same program they approached Metrolink with, and those were definitely real before NIMBYs killed them. |
|
|
|