|
|
| Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV (1145257) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
[1 2] |
||
|
Page 2 of 2 |
||
|
| (1145495) | |
Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Tue Mar 20 01:05:27 2012, in response to Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV, posted by Jersey Mike on Mon Mar 19 14:25:52 2012. That would be a colossal waste of dough. Wires and ALP-46s for the push-pulls ought to be enough . . . (or even the darn ALP-44s that NJT suddenly doesn't like to operate) |
|
|
| (1145496) | |
Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Tue Mar 20 01:06:48 2012, in response to Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV, posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Mon Mar 19 18:31:02 2012. You and your OPO. It's already proven that POP doesn't work; get off your cloud and face the real world . . . |
|
|
| (1145502) | |
Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Tue Mar 20 02:47:35 2012, in response to Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV, posted by Olog-hai on Tue Mar 20 01:06:48 2012. If POP doesn't work then where was the crippling loss of revenue would have expected to see when Caltrain transitioned to POP from conductor collected fares years ago? |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1145518) | |
Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV |
|
|
Posted by Jersey Mike on Tue Mar 20 08:37:40 2012, in response to Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV, posted by Olog-hai on Tue Mar 20 01:05:27 2012. Where'd you get that concept art from? |
|
|
| (1145520) | |
Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV |
|
|
Posted by Jersey Mike on Tue Mar 20 08:56:36 2012, in response to Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV, posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Mon Mar 19 18:31:02 2012. Rapid transitizing commuter rail lines ultimately is less flexible and more costly than keeping with traditional commuter rail principles. SEPTA Regional Rail is a good example where they can run Rapid Transit levels of service when it is demanded, but they can still get away with commuter rail level infrastructure.When you rapid transitize a system it raises the bar on what you can get away with. For example instead of being able to get away with a small platform serving one or two cars at a lightly used station you must built full length (and possibly high level) platforms at all new stations on the system. Even at 110mph traditional rail can get away with some traditionally protected grade crossings while rapid transit must often eliminate most of these crossings. POP is great, but it requires an infrastructure to support TVM's at all stations and when headways are long it can fuck people rushing to catch their train as they are no longer able to buy their ticket on board. Traditional rail is better able to recover from equipment failures while rapid transit's playbook consists of discharging and calling a bus. You can always achieve rapid transit levels of service using rail practices at a far lower cost. So where you don't need to use a transit type model (ie where you won't have extensive urban operations) go with a railroad model. |
|
|
| (1145521) | |
Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV |
|
|
Posted by Jersey Mike on Tue Mar 20 08:58:54 2012, in response to Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV, posted by WillD on Tue Mar 20 02:47:35 2012. Caltrain uses traditional conductors to check almost everyone's ticket (unless they are just going very short distances) so the only real difference is that you can't buy a ticket on the train. To this day I have been "POP'd" 100% of time on Caltrain. |
|
|
| (1145522) | |
Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV |
|
|
Posted by Jersey Mike on Tue Mar 20 09:01:03 2012, in response to Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV, posted by Olog-hai on Tue Mar 20 01:06:48 2012. POP does work, but the question is do you want to force people to buy a POP ticket when the headways are an hour and the train is pulling into the station? Of course Will would just run more trains, but if the demand isn't there they'd just be wasting money. |
|
|
| (1145529) | |
Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV |
|
|
Posted by Jersey Mike on Tue Mar 20 09:44:11 2012, in response to Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV, posted by J trainloco on Mon Mar 19 18:42:32 2012. Traditional railroad rolling stock is best able to handle grade crossing accidents, derailments and provide the SVU type ride that suburban commuters demand. S-Bahn type equipment works in Europe because the governments there have made it impractical for most people to drive anything except a Fiat Panda. In the United States rail has to actually compete by providing a compelling ride experience. |
|
|
| (1145530) | |
Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV |
|
|
Posted by Jersey Mike on Tue Mar 20 09:51:22 2012, in response to Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV, posted by WillD on Mon Mar 19 20:23:01 2012. How will it be more comfortable to need to use the bathroom and be unable to walk the full length of the train to find the one that doesn't smell like ass? How will it be more comfortable to travel in lightweight rolling stock that has the ride characteristics of a wheelie bin? Oh wait, you're assuming that Caltrain will be maintaining its track to German standards.The Superliners tried to get away with fancy panty German trucks, but when the second order came around Amtrak decided to go back to good old General Steel Castings. Hey, why don't we throw some half axles into the mix while we're at it. |
|
|
| (1145543) | |
Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Tue Mar 20 11:59:59 2012, in response to Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV, posted by Jersey Mike on Tue Mar 20 09:01:03 2012. I'm not sure why you're claiming I would do these things. I'm merely stating Caltrain's plans. It's Caltrain that has stated they will operate upwards of 4 TPH during off peak periods. In what way is *their* analysis incorrect? |
|
|
| (1145571) | |
Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV |
|
|
Posted by Jersey Mike on Tue Mar 20 15:24:50 2012, in response to Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV, posted by WillD on Tue Mar 20 11:59:59 2012. I'll believe that when I see it. Hopefully California's budget crisis will bring their pie in the sky back down to Earth. Even PATCO doesn't always run 4 tph in the off peak any more. |
|
|
| (1145576) | |
Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV |
|
|
Posted by chuchubob on Tue Mar 20 15:39:34 2012, in response to Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV, posted by Jersey Mike on Tue Mar 20 15:24:50 2012. Even PATCO doesn't always run 4 tph in the off peak any more.That's because of single tracking due to track work. Also, when I hear that you're coming back to South Jersey, I alert PATCO so they can crap up their schedule for you. |
|
|
| (1145587) | |
Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV |
|
|
Posted by J trainloco on Tue Mar 20 18:02:49 2012, in response to Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV, posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Mar 19 19:42:10 2012. Yes,but things like an advanced signal system,high platforms and grade separation are an absolute must for rapid transit.Are they? I suppose by definition, Rapid transit requires grade separation, but these rigid definitions of what's rapid transit and what's commuter rail hinder possibilities in this country (a point AEM7 makes all the time). Take for example RIVERline. It's not commuter rail, yet it uses low platforms and doesn't require grade separation. And on the other end of the argument, it seems as though we're going to require ANY passenger rail system to implement some form of an 'advanced signal system' sometime soon. Establishing a minimum standard for each mode of transportation is becoming an increasingly difficult thing to do, which is why i'm not sure that you can simply set a generic standard for infrastructure costs per mode. Each example needs to be looked at on a case-by-case basis. |
|
|
| (1145591) | |
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. |
|
|
| (1145593) | |
Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV |
|
|
Posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Tue Mar 20 18:51:45 2012, in response to Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV, posted by Jersey Mike on Tue Mar 20 09:44:11 2012. provide the SVU type ride that suburban commuters demandAs somebody who owns a Lincoln Town Car, SUVs ride like shit. Personally, I'd much rather have the suspension of a European car, or at minimum the Mazda 3. Secondly, I can't see how that awful leather seating constitutes "comfort". I'd much rather have the soft German style seats on the RiverLINE. S-Bahn type equipment works in Europe because the governments there have made it impractical for most people to drive anything except a Fiat Panda And yet somehow, the streets of European cities are littered with cars much larger than that. Of course, it may simply be due to the fact that in some areas, it's downright difficult to park a large vehicle when you don't have a driveway or a parking spot available. In the United States rail has to actually compete by providing a compelling ride experience. Dude, even beat up ten year old car offers more personal comfort than mass transit. Offering some non-existent compelling ride experience isn't going to get people to use transit. You need usable service and a fleet that maximizes performance in order to minimize the opportunity costs of using transit, but also a policy choice that encourages it be discouraging office parks and cheap CBD parking and ample highway access. |
|
|
| (1145601) | |
Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV |
|
|
Posted by J trainloco on Tue Mar 20 19:43:16 2012, in response to Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV, posted by Jersey Mike on Tue Mar 20 08:56:36 2012. When you rapid transitize a system it raises the bar on what you can get away with. For example instead of being able to get away with a small platform serving one or two cars at a lightly used station you must built full length (and possibly high level) platforms at all new stations on the system.Why would you have to? Rapid Transit always does because what we call Rapid transit usually isn't built in areas where such low ridership exists. You can always achieve rapid transit levels of service using rail practices at a far lower cost. And with significantly higher rolling stock and operating costs. |
|
|
| (1145649) | |
Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Mar 21 01:31:06 2012, in response to Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV, posted by J trainloco on Tue Mar 20 18:02:49 2012. RiverLINE is clearly a light rail. The mechanism they use for power is generally irrelevant. Given its length, frequency and station spacing, I would say it is a modern Interurban. The "interurban" term is valid because Trenton is in the New York-Newark-Bridgeport Combined Statistical Area (CSA) and Camden is in the Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington CSA. |
|
|
| (1145650) | |
Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Mar 21 01:33:14 2012, in response to Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV, posted by J trainloco on Tue Mar 20 18:02:49 2012. And I missed the other point:Although there may be a fuzzy line between modes, generally outside of the boundary area there is no doubt as to the definition. The NYC Subway is definitely NOT commuter rail, for example. Anyway, I think there is more light rail/rapid transit overlap than rapid transit/commuter rail overlap. |
|
|
| (1145652) | |
Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Mar 21 01:47:15 2012, in response to Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV, posted by Jersey Mike on Tue Mar 20 08:56:36 2012. and when headways are long it can fuck people rushing to catch their train as they are no longer able to buy their ticket on board.This is easily subjected to a cost-benefit analysis. Is the lost time of the commuters screwed by the system worth more or less than the cost of the additional employees necessary to maintain an on-board ticket purchase scheme? |
|
|
| (1145659) | |
Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Wed Mar 21 02:10:55 2012, in response to Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV, posted by Jersey Mike on Tue Mar 20 08:58:54 2012. The ticket checkers are not conductors, and they do not ride the length of the line with a single train. They're actually very nice people and told me that they usually divide the train up into two or three sections between the inspectors to check tickets.I actually did end up making one ride without getting my ticket checked, but then I had it checked twice on an SJ-Millbrae run. |
|
|
| (1145660) | |
Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Wed Mar 21 02:30:22 2012, in response to Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV, posted by Jersey Mike on Tue Mar 20 09:51:22 2012. How will it be more comfortable to need to use the bathroom and be unable to walk the full length of the train to find the one that doesn't smell like ass?Last time I checked this was Caltrain we were talking about, not NJT and the MMC. It certainly seemed they were perfectly capable of actually emptying the toilet regularly so as to prevent Eau du Arrow. How will it be more comfortable to travel in lightweight rolling stock that has the ride characteristics of a wheelie bin? I've ridden UIC stock on some of the DB RB lines which made our tracks look downright good. I can honestly say I noticed no appreciable difference between their Bombardier push pull on a main line and our Bombardier push pull on a similar route. Maybe you just need to go back to Europe, because your anecdotal evidence of inferior ride quality seems either erroneous or outdated. Oh wait, you're assuming that Caltrain will be maintaining its track to German standards. They already do maintain their track to German standards. Hell, you probably could run an ICE 3 down those tracks without any appreciable change in ride quality over an NBS. Go talk to the folks at AREMA and they'll probably tell you that if you're doing concrete ties with heavy weight cars you'd damn well better dial in the alignment of the rails properly because every bump, jostle, or bounce of the cars above them will reduce the life of those ties. Sure, they'e made gains in isolating the rail's vibration from the concrete below, but you can still bet they're aligning the rails with the utmost precision before turning them over to freight trains. The Superliners tried to get away with fancy panty German trucks, but when the second order came around Amtrak decided to go back to good old General Steel Castings. Pretty sure I read that had more to do more with availability and bid prices than anything else. After all, the Superliners are still rolling around on those original German trucks. Not exactly a ringing endorsement for your erroneous theories of 'flimsy' European equipment. |
|
|
| (1145684) | |
Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV |
|
|
Posted by Jersey Mike on Wed Mar 21 09:14:35 2012, in response to Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV, posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Mar 21 01:47:15 2012. Well does the cost of on-board ticket collection out weight the cost of providing TVM's at all stations?Just remember that it doesn't take too many episodes of getting fucked like that to cause someone to just drive the next time and then the railroad has lost a good deal of repeat business. Also remember that on board ticket collection can be paid for through small LARGE ON BOARD TICKET PURCHASE PENALTIES. |
|
|
| (1145685) | |
Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV |
|
|
Posted by Jersey Mike on Wed Mar 21 09:20:00 2012, in response to Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV, posted by J trainloco on Tue Mar 20 19:43:16 2012. Commuter rail has larger disparities in ridership over time and geography so building the infrastructure to a common standard could become wasteful as the context of the line changes. Also I am not sure that rapid transit vehicles are cheaper than railroad vehicles, especially on the used market. For one, railroad stock can be unpowered, so increasing capacity once the locomotives are delivered is much more manageable. |
|
|
| (1145686) | |
Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV |
|
|
Posted by Jersey Mike on Wed Mar 21 09:23:04 2012, in response to Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV, posted by chuchubob on Tue Mar 20 15:39:34 2012. PATCO has been performing "track work" for the last decade. I think we've entered the realm of a SEPTA style "temporary" service reduction. |
|
|
| (1145688) | |
Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV |
|
|
Posted by Jersey Mike on Wed Mar 21 09:27:16 2012, in response to Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV, posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Tue Mar 20 18:35:28 2012. It's interesting to see how much more affordable commuter rail can get when you get out of the New York Metro area. Even after the recent fare hikes the Caltrain one way ticket from San Jose to San Francisco is only 8.75 (used to be like 6 something). |
|
|
| (1145692) | |
Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV |
|
|
Posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Wed Mar 21 10:50:14 2012, in response to Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV, posted by Jersey Mike on Wed Mar 21 09:14:35 2012. Just remember that it doesn't take too many episodes of getting fucked like that to cause someone to just drive the next timeYet the hourly off-peak headways aren't liable to do that? As I noted in my brother's case, in the hour that he's waiting for train to come, he can drive to the subway, or if there isn't much traffic, he can drive to the core. |
|
|
| (1145789) | |
Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Wed Mar 21 17:11:30 2012, in response to Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV, posted by Jersey Mike on Tue Mar 20 09:01:03 2012. No, POP doesn't work. And what's most ironic is that Caltrain has POP, and the conductors are told not to take the tickets. They increased the total personnel therefore by requiring fare inspectors in addition to conductors. |
|
|
| (1145815) | |
Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV |
|
|
Posted by J trainloco on Wed Mar 21 18:32:16 2012, in response to Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV, posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Mar 21 01:33:14 2012. Ok, RIVERline is obviously light rail, but why is that? What if instead of light rail vehicles they had chosen to go with a locomotive/un-powered coach arrangement? Is that the only thing differentiating light rail from commuter rail in that instance?Although there may be a fuzzy line between modes,generally outside of the boundary area there is no doubt as to the definition. The NYC Subway is definitely NOT commuter rail,for example. NYC is the perfect example actually. While we all know what's subway, and what's commuter rail, the main differences are fleet type, Fare collection method and signal system (what is SIRT anyway?) However, the cost savings advantages of 'minimums of modality' are practically non-existant. LIRR needs high platforms, within the city limits is generally grade separated, and requires a signal system that can handle the kind of headways generally associated with Rapid Transit systems. This all speaks to the point that you can't compare capital costs purely based upon mode; a case by case analysis must be made. Anyway,I think there is more light rail/rapid transit overlap than rapid transit/commuter rail overlap. Using the criteria you stipulated previously for commuter rail (low platforms, lack of grade separation, 'advanced' signalling not necessary), one could argue that the most overlap is actually between light rail and commuter rail. |
|
|
| (1146292) | |
Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV |
|
|
Posted by Dan Lawrence on Sat Mar 24 11:13:31 2012, in response to Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV, posted by Olog-hai on Wed Mar 21 17:11:30 2012. POP does work. Get out of your cave and visit places that use POP. |
|
|
| (1146300) | |
Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV |
|
|
Posted by Alan Follett on Sat Mar 24 11:42:53 2012, in response to Re: PHOTOS: CALTRAN CALTRAIN IV, posted by Dan Lawrence on Sat Mar 24 11:13:31 2012. I imagine the viability of POP varies from system to system according to the likelihood of inspection, severity of penalties, and general level of honesty among transit users in the community.Alan Follett Hercules, CA |
|
|
[1 2] |
||
|
Page 2 of 2 |
||
