[PRCo] Re: Portland Green Line

[Phillip Clark Campbell]

Mr.Dunfield;

It is true that some lost a one seat ride downtown;
unfortunate but the trend with modern rail is to change
nearby bus routes into rail feeders.  Rail has catered
to more new riders while inconveniencing a few of the
regulars.  (Fine when it is some else isn't it.)  Like I
have mentioned before it is an imperfect world; what
works for one can be a burden for someone else.
Planning usually works to minimize adverse impacts;
it is difficult if not impossible to eliminate all.

Municipalities have their codes for operation;  tough
to get that changed.  It works out to be a matter of
priorities, not of right and wrong.  Timing on the lights
downtown is excellent so trains keep moving.
Having the train block an intersection during a
stop for passengers is bad PR isn't it.

By way of comparison for average speed, the
Washington Interurban was 29-miles one way; running
time one way was 1-hour 39-min terminal to terminal
not including layover.  Including dwell time for stops,
average speed is 17.58-mph,

Charleroi, 35-miles, 2-hr 10-min averages 16.15-mph.
This from 1952 schedules.  City schedules often in the
7-12-mph average speed range.

I agree with Mr.Allman;  Portland is superb in operations
and the technical side in construction.  Their staff is
very professional.  Some of the historical operators are
'different' to use a word but my experience there is more
than pleasant.

Mr.Brashear has the idea;  bring something to occupy the
time.



 Phil
Without  a   'coast'   but  not  a   'cause.'




________________________________
From: Joshua Dunfield <joshua.dunfield at gmail.com>
To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2009 4:24:26 PM
Subject: [PRCo] Re: Portland Green Line

2009/9/17 Phillip Clark Campbell <pcc_sr at yahoo.com>:
> Train length is hardly a qualifier of success.  Systems
> of the 40s and 50s were generally single cars;  some
> had MU service which ended quite early in Pgh. didn't it.

Different ball game.  They weren't trying to make everyone transfer to
a single line.

To be fair, I'm not sure Tri-Met is trying to do that on the Eastside,
but they definitely did on the Westside.  Westside MAX service was an
improvement in many ways, but a formerly lucky minority who had a
one-seat trip downtown on rush-hour express buses ended up with a
slower commute and an extra transfer.

> It is acknowledged that city streets dictate train length;
> that has to be accepted.  Blocking an intersection is
> wrong; transit trains need to work within the confines
> of theenvironment.

It "has to be accepted" that stopping at a red light because a MAX
train is dwelling is incomparably worse than stopping at a red light
for some other reason?

Anyway, Portland's downtown grid wasn't a gift from God.  Closing off
a few cross streets 24/7 wouldn't cause an apocalypse.

-j.