Discussion:
Rail Transit Obsolete as Winter-Weather Transport Option, Metro Declares
(too old to reply)
CJG Robinson
2003-12-07 09:29:56 UTC
Permalink
Blame it on the Republicans (and anti-rail Democrats local
and national.) After all, who needs 19th century technology
when everybody (including seemingly every other local resident)
owns an SUV?

(Blame the EPA for the death of the station wagon, but that's
another story. What, you thought SUVs were a market niche that
just magically appeared?)

Robert Lanza wrote:


Brian: METRO has officially given up any pretense of being able
to operate in the snow. PLease forward to interested parties.


Robert

------- Forwarded message -------
Subject: A washingtonpost.com article from []
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 21:17:09 -0500 (EST)
Metro Will Limit Service In Snow
By Lyndsey Layton
Metro has a new strategy for dealing with heavy snow: Trains will stop
serving above-ground stations and run only in the underground portions
of the subway system.
"When we get large, deep, heavy snow, we're going to be running a
lifeline-only type of service -- trains 20 to 30 minutes apart,
underground only," said James Gallagher, Metro's deputy general manager
for operations.
Metro's policy has been to run full service through snowstorms. But
that policy led to decisions that crippled the system in February, when
a blizzard left 18 inches of snow across the region.
As the snow fell Feb.16, Metro officials kept the system running, in
part because it had delivered trainloads of spectators to an ice show at
MCI Center. "Our policy had been, 'If we take you there, we'll get you
home,' " Gallagher said.
Metro ran empty trains, known as polishers, to keep the rails clear of
snow. As the storm intensified, snow blew onto the track bed, ice coated
the electrified third rail and several polisher trains got stuck. The
system faced two problems: Tracks serving its eight outdoor storage
yards became coated with ice, marooning trains in the yards; and snow
and ice damaged the motors of the cars, causing them to break down.
About 300 cars were sidelined by mechanical problems as a result of the
storm.
After the storm passed, the roads were plowed and the region's
workforce returned to jobs, Metro still ran seriously diminished
service. The subway system needs 650 cars to run normal service; on the
first workday after the storm, it began service with 366 cars.
Crowding was severe on the nation's second-busiest subway system. One
frustrated rider watched 11 trains roll by, all too packed for him to
squeeze aboard. Many riders gave up, angry that they had paid a premium
rush-hour fare and unwilling to wait or jostle. They set off in search
of a bus, a cab or just a clear path along which to trudge.
It took six days to return to normal subway service, and it wasn't
until summer before all the equipment broken by the storm was repaired,
said Lem Proctor, Metro's chief operating officer for rail.
Most of Metro's rail cars are vulnerable in snowy weather because
all-electrical components -- motors, ventilation fans, fuses -- hang
from the undercarriage. Once snow coats the electronics or is sucked
into fans, water blocks filters and causes fuses to blow.
After snowstorms nearly paralyzed Metro in January 1996, transit
officials spent $1.4 million on equipment for keeping outdoor tracks
working under a foot of snow.
Under the plan announced yesterday, Metro trains will run underground
only, at intervals of about 30 minutes, when snowfall reaches eight
inches.
Transit managers also will store 300 rail cars in the subway tunnels to
protect them from weather, Proctor said.
It may not be long before the snow policy is tested. Proctor has
memorized the forecast for the winter: "Expect higher than normal
precipitation," he said.Ý
Keith F. Lynch
2003-12-08 04:16:33 UTC
Permalink
After all, who needs 19th century technology when everybody
(including seemingly every other local resident) owns an SUV?
I don't own an SUV. Or any other motor vehicle.
METRO has officially given up any pretense of being able to operate
in the snow.
Time to get a new Metro board of directors. I'm tired of worse and
worse service for higher and higher prices.
--
Keith F. Lynch - ***@keithlynch.net - http://keithlynch.net/
I always welcome replies to my e-mail, postings, and web pages, but
unsolicited bulk e-mail (spam) is not acceptable. Please do not send me
HTML, "rich text," or attachments, as all such email is discarded unread.
John R Cambron
2003-12-08 04:33:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Keith F. Lynch
After all, who needs 19th century technology when everybody
(including seemingly every other local resident) owns an SUV?
I don't own an SUV. Or any other motor vehicle.
METRO has officially given up any pretense of being able to operate
in the snow.
Time to get a new Metro board of directors. I'm tired of worse and
worse service for higher and higher prices.
It isn't the board, It's the people that run the railroad that
are afraid of call out enough people to keep the system open
regardless of the weather conditions.

It's been done in the past, why it can't be done today is a
mystery to me.
--
======================================================================
Ever wanted one of these John R Cambron
http://205.130.220.18/~cambronj/wmata/ or >>>Hebron<<< MD USA
http://www.chesapeake.net/~cambronj/wmata/ ***@chesapeake.net
======================================================================
David Lesher
2003-12-08 13:51:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by John R Cambron
Post by Keith F. Lynch
Time to get a new Metro board of directors. I'm tired of worse and
worse service for higher and higher prices.
It isn't the board, It's the people that run the railroad that
are afraid of call out enough people to keep the system open
regardless of the weather conditions.
It's been done in the past, why it can't be done today is a
mystery to me.
Lack of money?


What disturbs me is that we can't seem to buy rolling stock that is
immune to the issue of snow getting into the electronics & motors,
killing same.

While such rail stock is a low volume business; WMATA is not exactly
the only place with rail transit, and many of the European countries
get snowed upon as well. You'dathunk someone spent some effort on
snow-proofing cars by now. (Maybe they have -- I do not recall
Cleveland RTA's Red Line closing for blowing snow.)

I'd start by getting everything vulnerable out from under the cars.
Clearly the motors, shoes, etc. are there, but all possible electronics
should be somewhere topside. I suspect this clashes with the goal
of maximum usable passenger space, however.
--
A host is a host from coast to ***@nrk.com
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433
Brian Robinson OR Carol Goter Robinson OR Bill Robinson
2003-12-13 15:33:44 UTC
Permalink
Saw this on last week's "Potomac Confidential", a weekly online chat
with Post columnist Marc Fisher. Looks like Fisher et al. advocated
strongly for this change:

Excerpted From:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A16529-2003Nov26.html

Alexandria, Va.: Has Metro announced yet that is closing in anticipation of snow?

Marc Fisher:

Give them an hour.
Actually, this could be the first test of their new policy -- and you folks
should be basking in pride for helping to make that policy change. It was the public
storm of reaction after the last big shutdown that resulted in Metro announcing that
henceforth, if there's eight or more inches of snow, they will shut down the outdoor
track and keep running trains in the tunneled portion of the system -- which
is exactly what Metro was designed to do. Let's see if they can make it work
(but realistically, they won't get a chance til winter actually arrives.)

------------- Hmmmm! Looks like most people really don't give a damn about
Metro except as a commute tool on normal business days.
Post by John R Cambron
Post by Keith F. Lynch
METRO has officially given up any pretense of being able to operate
in the snow.
Time to get a new Metro board of directors. I'm tired of worse and
worse service for higher and higher prices.
It isn't the board, It's the people that run the railroad that
are afraid of call out enough people to keep the system open
regardless of the weather conditions.
It's been done in the past, why it can't be done today is a mystery to me.
--
======================================================================
Ever wanted one of these John R Cambron
http://205.130.220.18/~cambronj/wmata/ or >>>Hebron<<< MD USA
======================================================================
Alan
2003-12-13 18:26:42 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 10:33:44 -0500, Brian Robinson OR Carol Goter
Post by Brian Robinson OR Carol Goter Robinson OR Bill Robinson
Saw this on last week's "Potomac Confidential", a weekly online chat
with Post columnist Marc Fisher. Looks like Fisher et al. advocated
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A16529-2003Nov26.html
Alexandria, Va.: Has Metro announced yet that is closing in anticipation of snow?
Give them an hour.
Actually, this could be the first test of their new policy -- and you folks
should be basking in pride for helping to make that policy change. It was the public
storm of reaction after the last big shutdown that resulted in Metro announcing that
henceforth, if there's eight or more inches of snow, they will shut down the outdoor
track and keep running trains in the tunneled portion of the system -- which
is exactly what Metro was designed to do. Let's see if they can make it work
(but realistically, they won't get a chance til winter actually arrives.)
Apparently, according to a metropolitan transit system in Canada, the
solution is to keep trains running frequently during the snowfall in
order to keep the tracks clear. This clears the grooves in the tracks
that are laid on streets, and keeps the tracks navigable.

The system I read a reference to, whose name I don't remember, said
that, when snow is falling, they run a few trains all night, even when
they would not normally run, in order to keep the tracks clear.

What's the problem with Metro, aside from beaurocracy??'
drum118
2003-12-13 18:48:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan
On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 10:33:44 -0500, Brian Robinson OR Carol Goter
Post by Brian Robinson OR Carol Goter Robinson OR Bill Robinson
Saw this on last week's "Potomac Confidential", a weekly online chat
with Post columnist Marc Fisher. Looks like Fisher et al. advocated
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A16529-2003Nov26.html
Alexandria, Va.: Has Metro announced yet that is closing in anticipation of snow?
Give them an hour.
Actually, this could be the first test of their new policy -- and you folks
should be basking in pride for helping to make that policy change. It was the public
storm of reaction after the last big shutdown that resulted in Metro announcing that
henceforth, if there's eight or more inches of snow, they will shut down the outdoor
track and keep running trains in the tunneled portion of the system -- which
is exactly what Metro was designed to do. Let's see if they can make it work
(but realistically, they won't get a chance til winter actually arrives.)
Apparently, according to a metropolitan transit system in Canada, the
solution is to keep trains running frequently during the snowfall in
order to keep the tracks clear. This clears the grooves in the tracks
that are laid on streets, and keeps the tracks navigable.
The system I read a reference to, whose name I don't remember, said
that, when snow is falling, they run a few trains all night, even when
they would not normally run, in order to keep the tracks clear.
What's the problem with Metro, aside from beaurocracy??'
TTC in Toronto, Ontario.
Brian Robinson OR Carol Goter Robinson OR Bill Robinson
2003-12-14 00:20:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan
On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 10:33:44 -0500, Brian Robinson OR Carol Goter
Post by Brian Robinson OR Carol Goter Robinson OR Bill Robinson
Alexandria, Va.: Has Metro announced yet that is closing in
anticipation of snow?
Actually, this could be the first test of their new policy -- and you
folks should be basking in pride for helping to make that policy change.
It was the public storm of reaction after the last big shutdown that
resulted in Metro announcing that henceforth, if there's eight or more
inches of snow, they will shut down the outdoor
track and keep running trains in the tunneled portion of the system --
which is exactly what Metro was designed to do.
Let's see if they can make it work
(but realistically, they won't get a chance til winter actually arrives.)
What's the problem with Metro, aside from beaurocracy??'
The general public apparently does not want Metro to run service
outdoors at all in winter weather. They would prefer to have
minimal service, underground only (which, for those familiar with
the system, makes it utterly useless for anyone not living in
the posh neighborhoods of NW DC, NW Arlington and Capitol Hill)
under the logic that, I guess, better no service at all than
delays and uncertainty. Marc Fisher's readership are all too
happy to make that decision for those of us without SUVs.

--
Keith F. Lynch
2003-12-16 04:30:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Robinson OR Carol Goter Robinson OR Bill Robinson
The general public apparently does not want Metro to run service
outdoors at all in winter weather. They would prefer to have
minimal service, underground only ...
What makes you think the general public had anything to do with
Metro's decision? I, for one, was not consulted by Metro.
--
Keith F. Lynch - ***@keithlynch.net - http://keithlynch.net/
I always welcome replies to my e-mail, postings, and web pages, but
unsolicited bulk e-mail (spam) is not acceptable. Please do not send me
HTML, "rich text," or attachments, as all such email is discarded unread.
Brian Robinson OR Carol Goter Robinson OR Bill Robinson
2003-12-16 20:31:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Keith F. Lynch
Post by Brian Robinson OR Carol Goter Robinson OR Bill Robinson
The general public apparently does not want Metro to run service
outdoors at all in winter weather. They would prefer to have
minimal service, underground only ...
What makes you think the general public had anything to do with
Metro's decision? I, for one, was not consulted by Metro.
I'm referring to Marc Fisher's readership, c.f. earlier note in
this thread for details from the latest "Potomac Confidential"
talkback on washpost.
Tiny Human Ferret
2003-12-18 21:08:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Robinson OR Carol Goter Robinson OR Bill Robinson
Post by Keith F. Lynch
Post by Brian Robinson OR Carol Goter Robinson OR Bill Robinson
The general public apparently does not want Metro to run service
outdoors at all in winter weather. They would prefer to have
minimal service, underground only ...
What makes you think the general public had anything to do with
Metro's decision? I, for one, was not consulted by Metro.
I'm referring to Marc Fisher's readership, c.f. earlier note in
this thread for details from the latest "Potomac Confidential"
talkback on washpost.
Aren't we all of the general opinion that Fisher's readership is largely
imaginary?
--
The incapacity of a weak and distracted government may
often assume the appearance, and produce the effects,
of a treasonable correspondence with the public enemy.
--Gibbons, "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire
Keith A. Glass
2003-12-16 23:17:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Keith F. Lynch
Post by Brian Robinson OR Carol Goter Robinson OR Bill Robinson
The general public apparently does not want Metro to run service
outdoors at all in winter weather. They would prefer to have
minimal service, underground only ...
What makes you think the general public had anything to do with
Metro's decision? I, for one, was not consulted by Metro.
Nor oare you likely to. You're not a Transit consultant, nor do you
contribute large amounts of money to certain politicians.
Furthermore, as you don't own a vehicle, much less a house, you're
not taxed all that much. So it's a wash. .
Keith F. Lynch
2003-12-17 00:57:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Keith F. Lynch
What makes you think the general public had anything to do with
Metro's decision? I, for one, was not consulted by Metro.
Nor oare you likely to. You're not a Transit consultant, nor do you
contribute large amounts of money to certain politicians.
Exactly. The general public has little to do with Metro's decision to
strand everyone who isn't within walking distance of an underground
station during every non-trivial snow storm.
Post by Keith F. Lynch
Furthermore, as you don't own a vehicle, much less a house, you're
not taxed all that much. So it's a wash. .
I'm not taxed all that much?? I pay *more* income taxes than someone
with the same income who owns a house, since they get to make use of
the biggest tax loophole of all -- the mortgage interest deduction.
Neither do I have children, nor am I blind, over 65, paying large
medical bills, or anything else which leads to large tax deductions.

It's true I don't directly pay property taxes. But my landlord
certainly does, and passes those costs along to all the tenants.

It's true I don't pay gasoline taxes, but why should I? I'm not
responsible for road congestion, air pollution, risks to pedestrians
and cyclists, the need to police the roads, the need for constant wars
for oil, the need for constant wars against terrorists who would be
flat broke if not for oil money, or the need for constant road
building and road maintenance.

I pay the same sales taxes, phone taxes, electricity taxes, etc., as
anyone else. Probably *more* sale taxes, since, not being a motorist,
it's not as convenient for me to slip over the border into Maryland to
buy groceries free of sales taxes.

And even if it were true that I wasn't taxed all that much, what does
that have to do with whether it's reasonable that I be stranded during
every significant snow storm? And even if it were true that it was
reasonable for me to be stranded, what does that have to do with
whether I, and the rest of the general public, had any input into
Metro's decision to strand people?
--
Keith F. Lynch - ***@keithlynch.net - http://keithlynch.net/
I always welcome replies to my e-mail, postings, and web pages, but
unsolicited bulk e-mail (spam) is not acceptable. Please do not send me
HTML, "rich text," or attachments, as all such email is discarded unread.
Access Systems
2003-12-17 21:01:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Keith F. Lynch
Post by Keith F. Lynch
What makes you think the general public had anything to do with
Metro's decision? I, for one, was not consulted by Metro.
Exactly. The general public has little to do with Metro's decision to
strand everyone who isn't within walking distance of an underground
station during every non-trivial snow storm.
and usually most paratransit users, the first to be declared surplus
during any storm.......those folks don't work, go to school, eat, or need
to go out in the snow.

your right of course there is no reason any of the public transit system
needs to shut down except in the worst storms.

Bob
--
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve Neither liberty nor safety", Benjamin Franklin
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
ASCII Ribbon Campaign accessBob
NO HTML/PDF/RTF in e-mail ***@smartnospam.net
NO MSWord docs in e-mail Access Systems, engineers
NO attachments in e-mail, *LINUX powered* access is a civil right
*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#
THIS message and any attachments are CONFIDENTIAL and may be
privileged. They are intended ONLY for the individual or entity named
Keith A. Glass
2003-12-17 23:12:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Keith F. Lynch
Post by Keith F. Lynch
What makes you think the general public had anything to do with
Metro's decision? I, for one, was not consulted by Metro.
Nor oare you likely to. You're not a Transit consultant, nor do you
contribute large amounts of money to certain politicians.
Exactly. The general public has little to do with Metro's decision to
strand everyone who isn't within walking distance of an underground
station during every non-trivial snow storm.
Post by Keith F. Lynch
Furthermore, as you don't own a vehicle, much less a house, you're
not taxed all that much. So it's a wash. .
I'm not taxed all that much?? I pay *more* income taxes than someone
with the same income who owns a house, since they get to make use of
the biggest tax loophole of all -- the mortgage interest deduction.
Neither do I have children, nor am I blind, over 65, paying large
medical bills, or anything else which leads to large tax deductions.
It's true I don't directly pay property taxes. But my landlord
certainly does, and passes those costs along to all the tenants.
You choose to rent, and women have chosen to keep you single and
childless. Reality. Deal with it.
Post by Keith F. Lynch
It's true I don't pay gasoline taxes, but why should I? I'm not
responsible for road congestion, air pollution, risks to pedestrians
and cyclists, the need to police the roads, the need for constant wars
for oil, the need for constant wars against terrorists who would be
flat broke if not for oil money, or the need for constant road
building and road maintenance.
Do we need to have this argument again ? The vast and overwhelming
majority of our population have chosen personal auto transport.

And if you care little for roads, THEN WHAT BRINGS THE FOOD
TO YOUR LOCAL GROCERY ? The parts to the local bike shop.

Hint: it ISN'T the tooth fairy. . .
Post by Keith F. Lynch
I pay the same sales taxes, phone taxes, electricity taxes, etc., as
anyone else. Probably *more* sale taxes, since, not being a motorist,
it's not as convenient for me to slip over the border into Maryland to
buy groceries free of sales taxes.
So you admit to tax avoidance ? You realize, you STILL owe Use Taxes
on those groceries. . .
Post by Keith F. Lynch
And even if it were true that I wasn't taxed all that much, what does
that have to do with whether it's reasonable that I be stranded during
every significant snow storm? And even if it were true that it was
reasonable for me to be stranded, what does that have to do with
whether I, and the rest of the general public, had any input into
Metro's decision to strand people?
No, it's ALL of our decision to ignore YOU personally. Notices went
out with the last meeting of the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy AND the
International Communist Conspiracy, we've all decided to make your
life hell. . . .
Keith F. Lynch
2003-12-19 02:07:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Keith A. Glass
Post by Keith F. Lynch
It's true I don't pay gasoline taxes, but why should I? I'm
not responsible for road congestion, air pollution, risks to
pedestrians and cyclists, the need to police the roads, the need
for constant wars for oil, the need for constant wars against
terrorists who would be flat broke if not for oil money, or the
need for constant road building and road maintenance.
Do we need to have this argument again ?
Yes. I know you won't learn anything, but there are always new people
tuning in.
Post by Keith A. Glass
The vast and overwhelming majority of our population have chosen
personal auto transport.
That must be why Metro is often standing room only.

Even if it were true, what is that supposed to prove? No vote was
ever held on the topic. People voted with their feet, you say? If
so, it was a North Korea style election -- one in which people making
the "wrong" choice were threatened with grievous bodily harm.

So called safety features such as seat belts, air bags, crumple zones,
safety glass, brighter headlights, louder horns, etc., don't so much
create safety as they steal it from people outside the car, and give
it to people inside. It would be fairer to do the opposite. Replace
the air bag with a sharpened steel spike. People would drive much
more safely. The total numbers of crash deaths would be about the
same, but it would be the motorists themselves who die, not
pedestrians or cyclists.

Anyhow, our country is supposed to be based on individual rights. And
not just for those individuals who go along with the majority. These
rights include the right to travel within the country without having
to carry or show "papers, please".
Post by Keith A. Glass
And if you care little for roads, THEN WHAT BRINGS THE FOOD TO YOUR
LOCAL GROCERY ? The parts to the local bike shop.
Trucks carry goods the last mile. The previous miles may have been by
truck, rail, ship, or airplane. Or the goods may have been produced
nearby.

The only reasonable way to allocate costs fairly, and to ensure that
goods are being moved in the most efficient fashion, is for the
shippers to pay the full costs, and pass them on to their customers.
Would you rather pay $1200 for rail-delivered food, and $200 in taxes?
Or $1000 for road-delivered foods, and $1000 in taxes?

I do value the roads. I just don't think they're the highest good,
or that wider and more plentiful is always better, even if it means
spending close to a *billion* dollars to upgrade a single intersection
(the "mixing bowl"). That's just crazy.

I also value trees and wildlife, but I'm not a Green. I would never
advocate tearing down homes and businesses to expand a swamp. (Or
"wetlands" or whatever they're calling it these days.) Neither would
I ever advocate tearing down homes and businesses to widen a highway.
Post by Keith A. Glass
Post by Keith F. Lynch
I pay the same sales taxes, phone taxes, electricity taxes, etc.,
as anyone else. Probably *more* sale taxes, since, not being a
motorist, it's not as convenient for me to slip over the border
into Maryland to buy groceries free of sales taxes.
So you admit to tax avoidance ? You realize, you STILL owe Use
Taxes on those groceries. . .
It's motorists who typically go grocery shopping in another state.
Post by Keith A. Glass
Post by Keith F. Lynch
And even if it were true that I wasn't taxed all that much, what
does that have to do with whether it's reasonable that I be
stranded during every significant snow storm? And even if it were
true that it was reasonable for me to be stranded, what does that
have to do with whether I, and the rest of the general public, had
any input into Metro's decision to strand people?
No, it's ALL of our decision to ignore YOU personally.
You seem to be doing a spectacularly poor job of ignoring me.
Post by Keith A. Glass
Notices went out with the last meeting of the Vast Right-Wing
Conspiracy AND the International Communist Conspiracy, we've all
decided to make your life hell. . . .
So far, I haven't noticed.
--
Keith F. Lynch - ***@keithlynch.net - http://keithlynch.net/
I always welcome replies to my e-mail, postings, and web pages, but
unsolicited bulk e-mail (spam) is not acceptable. Please do not send me
HTML, "rich text," or attachments, as all such email is discarded unread.
John R Cambron
2003-12-18 17:26:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Keith F. Lynch
Post by Keith A. Glass
Post by Keith F. Lynch
It's true I don't pay gasoline taxes, but why should I? I'm
not responsible for road congestion, air pollution, risks to
pedestrians and cyclists, the need to police the roads, the need
for constant wars for oil, the need for constant wars against
terrorists who would be flat broke if not for oil money, or the
need for constant road building and road maintenance.
Do we need to have this argument again ?
Yes. I know you won't learn anything, but there are always new people
tuning in.
Post by Keith A. Glass
The vast and overwhelming majority of our population have chosen
personal auto transport.
That must be why Metro is often standing room only.
WMATA both metrobus metrorail, VRE, MARC, RideOn, Farfax
Connector, Dash and the other transit providers in the area
account for less then 5% of all types of trips made in the
Washington Metropolitan area.

Of the Metropolitan areas around the United States the
Washington Metropolitan area is near the top of the list of
high public transit use regions.
--
======================================================================
Ever wanted one of these John R Cambron
http://205.130.220.18/~cambronj/wmata/ or >>>Hebron<<< MD USA
http://www.chesapeake.net/~cambronj/wmata/ ***@chesapeake.net
======================================================================
Brian Robinson OR Carol Goter Robinson OR Bill Robinson
2003-12-20 11:30:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by John R Cambron
Post by Keith F. Lynch
That must be why Metro is often standing room only.
WMATA both metrobus metrorail, VRE, MARC, RideOn, Farfax
Connector, Dash and the other transit providers in the area
account for less then 5% of all types of trips made in the
Washington Metropolitan area.
Of the Metropolitan areas around the United States the
Washington Metropolitan area is near the top of the list of
high public transit use regions.
John is that why you're so unconcerned whether Dulles Metro
gets built now or ten years from now..? I've noticed little
comment on this, a TRANSIT subject.
John R Cambron
2003-12-21 03:55:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Robinson OR Carol Goter Robinson OR Bill Robinson
Post by John R Cambron
Post by Keith F. Lynch
That must be why Metro is often standing room only.
WMATA both metrobus metrorail, VRE, MARC, RideOn, Farfax
Connector, Dash and the other transit providers in the area
account for less then 5% of all types of trips made in the
Washington Metropolitan area.
Of the Metropolitan areas around the United States the
Washington Metropolitan area is near the top of the list of
high public transit use regions.
John is that why you're so unconcerned whether Dulles Metro
gets built now or ten years from now..? I've noticed little
comment on this, a TRANSIT subject.
I am fully confident that the Tyson, Dulles, Loudoun county
route will be built. It may not be built by the original
propose timetable but it will be built. What most here don't
remember is the original ARS was scheduled to be completed in
the 1980s but was completed in 2001.

I do have concerns about noises come from various politicians
to truncate the line back to Tyson and replace the rest of the
line with BRT and call it done.

What pisses me off is how all the studies are based on use 20
years in to future. We should be looking at use 40, 50 and 60
years in the future.

The quicker ground is broken, construction done and line is
opened the cheaper it will be. Converting the BRT to metrorail
20 years from now after BRT becomes over burdened will cost a
lot more then building complete line now.

Does ansewer your questions?
--
======================================================================
Ever wanted one of these John R Cambron
http://205.130.220.18/~cambronj/wmata/ or >>>Hebron<<< MD USA
http://www.chesapeake.net/~cambronj/wmata/ ***@chesapeake.net
======================================================================
Brian Robinson OR Carol Goter Robinson OR Bill Robinson
2003-12-24 17:17:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by John R Cambron
I am fully confident that the Tyson, Dulles, Loudoun county
route will be built. It may not be built by the original
propose timetable but it will be built. What most here don't
remember is the original ARS was scheduled to be completed in
the 1980s but was completed in 2001.
The quicker ground is broken, construction done and line is
opened the cheaper it will be. Converting the BRT to metrorail
20 years from now after BRT becomes over burdened will cost a
lot more then building complete line now.
Does ansewer your questions?
John, if the first half of the line isn't funded by early 2004,
nothing could be built for the next 8 years. Eight years!!

By the end of that time period sprawl will have rendered any
further Metro expansion politically and economically inviable,
past Tysons or otherwise.

--Brian

Keith A. Glass
2003-12-08 12:42:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Keith F. Lynch
After all, who needs 19th century technology when everybody
(including seemingly every other local resident) owns an SUV?
I don't own an SUV. Or any other motor vehicle.
Which puts you in a VERY tiny minority. Politicians look for the
support of LARGE groups, not tiny ones. . .
Post by Keith F. Lynch
METRO has officially given up any pretense of being able to operate
in the snow.
Time to get a new Metro board of directors. I'm tired of worse and
worse service for higher and higher prices.
Welcome to reality: everything ELSE is that way. . .
Loading...