|
Post by ieko on Feb 23, 2011 11:17:58 GMT -8
The Blue Line was our first light rail line -- to say that it isn't worth upgrading to better standards is silly, it's obvious it's significantly more dangerous than the Gold Line which was built to better standards because of the lessons Metro learned from the Blue Line and other light rail lines.
Just because it's older and manages to play your idea of darwin doesn't mean we shouldn't attempt to make the line safer, if not for the sake of making it more reliable.
Remember the more often this line gets itself into an accident in the future the more of a cascading delay it'll have on the rest of the system as the Expo Line and Regional Connector come online -- it's going to turn people off and so it should be addressed.
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Feb 23, 2011 11:45:41 GMT -8
Although I tend to agree with Mr. Kasperavicius that you can't build a bubble around people, and "you can't fix stupid", if the Gold Line is the new standard for pedestrian safety, the Blue Line should be "brought up to code." It's been a hard enough fight to get rail service back to Southern California; we don't need the "negative press" that fatal collisions generate. There was also the comment about pedestrian fatalities involving cars and buses; these actually do generate quite a bit of coverage, but we rail enthusiasts tend to pay more attention when a train is involved. If a Metro Rail incident makes the 11 PM news, my wife will sometimes call me in to see the video, and I'll usually say, "Oh that! It was all over Trainorders.com this afternoon."
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Feb 24, 2011 18:57:06 GMT -8
I do think that there can be a happy medium between "build a bubble around people" and "oops, we splatted somebody again".
the Gold Line is much closer to the level of safety that I would want rather than the Blue Line. I wouldn't slow the trains down. if people want to kill themselves, we can't stop them.
but gates, signals and fences are not a bad thing. even pedestrian bridges and tunnels would be nice if we can afford them.
|
|
|
Post by spokker on Feb 26, 2011 12:51:29 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by trackman on Feb 26, 2011 14:19:09 GMT -8
Construct separated grade crossings where it is proven to be more deadly and where it is possible without affecting service. That is the answer I tell ya.
|
|
|
Post by spokker on Feb 26, 2011 19:48:46 GMT -8
There's really no way to prove this, but I wonder if suicides are sometimes staged as accidents by the person killed.
I grew up Catholic and it was a taught that suicide is a grave injustice toward the Lord. I may have given all that up a long time ago, but that stuff is pounded into your head from birth. There is a similar sentiment in the Christian faith and suicide is generally a taboo subject anyway.
So I wonder if the departed make it look like an accident to spare their next of kin the embarrassment of knowing someone in their family committed suicide. The counterargument is that people who commit suicide don't plan things out like that, but I don't think all suicides are the spontaneous act of an insane individual. I have heard stories of people cleaning up their home, taking a shower and making themselves presentable before they end it. People write suicide notes with coherent thoughts and/or plans, which suggests a kind of logic and intelligence is still there.
So yes, I don't find it difficult to believe that someone would stage their suicide as an accident to spare their mother even more pain. It makes a lot more sense to me than the idea of people behaving so recklessly around rail lines.
Why rail? It gets the job done. Heavier than cars. Fewer tall buildings in South Central than elsewhere. And with light rail's horrid reputation, no one will really question it unless you left a note. There are better ways to off yourself, for sure, but those are too obvious.
|
|
elray
Junior Member
Posts: 84
|
Post by elray on Feb 27, 2011 13:37:55 GMT -8
While it is easy to write off stupid people for walking in front of a train, there will still be accidents, some of which are preventable AND foreseeable.
It is very short-sighted to cavalierly dismiss safety issues for expediency, on a line that will serve us in to the next century.
I dread to think what will happen in Santa Monica, when we have 200 grade crossings a day at Lincoln.
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Feb 27, 2011 13:52:21 GMT -8
While it is easy to write off stupid people for walking in front of a train, there will still be accidents, some of which are preventable AND foreseeable. It is very short-sighted to cavalierly dismiss safety issues for expediency, on a line that will serve us in to the next century. I dread to think what will happen in Santa Monica, when we have 200 grade crossings a day at Lincoln. How many people died today on the roads in LA? Compare that to how many people died today by trains? BTW..an accident is not fatal. We sugarcoat what it really is, and that's a crash. Cars crash into humans and other moving objects on a daily basis. Trains crashes are very rare...and 99% of them are due to a person's negligence or suicidal attempts. When a car hits someone, it's the driver that most likely caused the crash and not the pedestrian. A train has a dedicated ROW, you can pretty much forsee where to be safe. A car can jump into the sidewalk and kill somebody. Look at when cars ran into the Starbucks in West LA, Wokcano in downtown LA, The Santa Monica Farmers Market, pedestrians at Crenshaw boulevard, etc... A train cannot jump out and kill somebody.
|
|
|
Post by tobias087 on Feb 27, 2011 14:12:54 GMT -8
I dread to think what will happen in Santa Monica, when we have 200 grade crossings a day at Lincoln. How many grade crossings do you think there are at that intersection right now? I'll give you a hint, it's a lot more than 200 per day.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Feb 27, 2011 14:51:32 GMT -8
I dread to think what will happen in Santa Monica, when we have 200 grade crossings a day at Lincoln. How many grade crossings do you think there are at that intersection right now? I'll give you a hint, it's a lot more than 200 per day. That has nothing to do with rail safety.
|
|
|
Post by jeisenbe on Feb 28, 2011 0:56:33 GMT -8
I dread to think what will happen in Santa Monica, when we have 200 grade crossings a day at Lincoln. How many grade crossings do you think there are at that intersection right now? I'll give you a hint, it's a lot more than 200 per day. I don't think Expo at Lincoln will be a problem. So far, the Expo line has been very well designed to be safe. Split platforms are annoying, but they mean every train comes to a full stop at the station before entering the intersection. And the safety features on the Gold Line, even the street-running portion of the Eastside extension, have worked well. I expect the downtown Santa Monica part of the Expo line to be even safer. (It would have been nice to have the train elevated that last mile, to speed up the total trip time, but I don't think that section will be unsafe). The Blue Line needs some investment to make it more like the Gold Line. There will still be some deaths (dozens of people die in the NY city subways each year, despite it being fully grade-separated, and the roads are many times more dangerous than trains), but some of them are preventable with cheap improvements.
|
|
|
Post by crzwdjk on Feb 28, 2011 20:41:23 GMT -8
One possible improvement, short of grade separation, is to provide an overpass or tunnel for pedestrians only. This increases both safety and convenience from not having to wait for a train, not having the temptation to inadvertently run in front of one train as you're rushing to catch another, etc.
|
|
|
Post by spokker on Mar 1, 2011 19:50:19 GMT -8
Those accidents where someone is hit by a train coming in the opposite direction are not unique to the Blue Line. www.pe.com/localnews/stories/PE_News_Local_D_wcrossing02.1a1e579a1.htmlSigns were put up after the last two times it happened. Perhaps the issue is not as cultural as some believe, as one of the most recent victims was a young Asian student and the other victim had the surname Kerr, which has Scottish origins, suggesting that this problem transcends ethnicity.
|
|
|
Post by ieko on Mar 1, 2011 22:39:44 GMT -8
That's why pedestrian crossing gates [like on the gold line] are important and should be added where possible to the Blue Line...
Being proactive in keeping rail lines up to current standards is important, if we can get half way to what the Gold Line provides in safety for the Blue Line that'd be a serious improvement.
Believe it or not, it's pretty easy to not notice another train is coming in the opposite direction, I think many of us could recall an instance where we were in a hurry or distracted by the most obvious vehicle approaching a station and didn't notice the second one until the last minute. When I'm at Artesia Station waiting for a bus I gaze over at the trains and I often don't even realize another train is approaching at the same time.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Mar 2, 2011 9:11:54 GMT -8
Believe it or not, it's pretty easy to not notice another train is coming in the opposite direction, I think many of us could recall an instance where we were in a hurry or distracted by the most obvious vehicle approaching a station and didn't notice the second one until the last minute. Yes, everybody makes mistakes, and sometimes those mistakes are fatal. Unfortunately, too many people in L.A. don't respect the train tracks. In San Francisco, everybody understands and respects the Muni trains. On the one hand, the trains are huge and thus very dangerous: on the other hand, they are confined to a track. So people know that, as long as you take care when crossing a track, you're ok. In L.A., most people don't even know how to walk in public. Their experience is with driving. Walking is just what you do in the parking lot at Walmart or the mall. I'd be curious to hear about the people involved in accidents with trains. How many speak English? How many lived near the tracks? What is the age distribution? How many were likely suicides, likely accidents, or unknown? I'm not trying to "blame the victim": I want to know if there are any common factors that could be mitigated by targeted education. I do think stations need to have additional safety features when: - The number of daily pedestrian crossings is high.
- The number of daily peak (rush-hour) pedestrian crossings is high.
- The visibility of trains is poor (blind curves, for example).
- The frequency of trains is high.
Of course, where to set thresholds on all of these is subject to debate. I think Pico station tops the list of stations needing significant access improvements. This is because of items 2 and 4 - high volumes of trains and pedestrians. It already has tons of people crossing the tracks nearby, whenever there's a game or concert. And once Expo opens, trains are going to be arriving from one direction or the other every 90-120 seconds.
|
|
|
Post by spokker on Mar 2, 2011 11:55:11 GMT -8
Pico is not the problem. One of the articles recently said that the street running portions see relatively few fatalities compared to the dedicated right of way. Trains at the street running stations are often going slow enough while entering and exiting stations that nothing happens. I've seen operators slam on the brakes at street-running stations and the point is that they can.
Also, don't think that adding pedestrian gates is going to automatically lower the Blue Line's accident rate. These safety measures will still be ignored by many of the people currently ignoring the current safety measures.
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Mar 2, 2011 12:23:54 GMT -8
Yes, everybody makes mistakes, and sometimes those mistakes are fatal. Unfortunately, too many people in L.A. don't respect the train tracks. In San Francisco, everybody understands and respects the Muni trains. On the one hand, the trains are huge and thus very dangerous: on the other hand, they are confined to a track. So people know that, as long as you take care when crossing a track, you're ok. We should not be comparing a streetcar (Muni) to a real mass transit line that hits speeds up to 55 mph on the Alameda corridor. The Muni is nowhere near as fast as the Blue Line. I would agree with more safety enhancements ONLY so it could speed up the Blue Line. Look at the speed of the Gold Line outside of Mariom Way through Pasadena..fantastic, phenomenal. On the street running and ungated sections (east LA), it blows. Put in a few more crossing arms and let this puppy speed up.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Mar 2, 2011 13:53:41 GMT -8
Pico is not the problem. One of the articles recently said that the street running portions see relatively few fatalities compared to the dedicated right of way. Trains at the street running stations are often going slow enough while entering and exiting stations that nothing happens. I've seen operators slam on the brakes at street-running stations and the point is that they can. Also, don't think that adding pedestrian gates is going to automatically lower the Blue Line's accident rate. These safety measures will still be ignored by many of the people currently ignoring the current safety measures. Yes, Pico is not a problem...yet. Expo has not yet opened. It is a problem waiting to happen. Farmdale, on the other hand, is overkill, based on some people's belief that black and brown teenagers are incapable of crossing a set of tracks safely. Also, I don't remember recommending pedestrian gates. But since you bring them up: gates are one of many possible solutions that can allow Metro to move more people and trains in and out of these stations. For Pico, I lean more toward grade separation - of either the pedestrians or the tracks. IOW, this is not just an issue of safety: it's an issue of performance. The more safety challenges that are presented to the transit rider and pedestrian, the slower the train has to go. Yes, as I said, people need to be responsible for their own safety. But I think we also have a right to expect Metro (a government agency ostensibly for benefit of the people) to make good design choices that promote performance and safety.
|
|
|
Post by wad on Mar 4, 2011 4:20:24 GMT -8
Just before noon Thursday, I saw a two-car Siemens train being tested on the Blue Line. It was parked on the eastern track of 7th Street Metro Center.
|
|
|
Post by carter on Mar 4, 2011 14:14:21 GMT -8
Does this have to do with Expo. I know that at some point I knew what Metro was planning to do with the trains, but could someone job my memory?
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Mar 4, 2011 19:06:27 GMT -8
Does this have to do with Expo. I know that at some point I knew what Metro was planning to do with the trains, but could someone job my memory? Maybe this. 4. The gold line will get all of the P2550's except 5 for the blue line. Expo will get none and will instead get P865's (wtf??). 16 of the P2000's will be reassigned to the blue line.[/b]
|
|
|
Post by carter on Mar 5, 2011 16:08:56 GMT -8
Does this have to do with Expo. I know that at some point I knew what Metro was planning to do with the trains, but could someone job my memory? Maybe this. 4. The gold line will get all of the P2550's except 5 for the blue line. Expo will get none and will instead get P865's (wtf??). 16 of the P2000's will be reassigned to the blue line.[/b] [/quote] Is Expo getting some Breda trains then?
|
|
|
Post by spokker on Mar 5, 2011 21:05:36 GMT -8
There was an anonymous commentator on Curbed LA who was complaining about Blue Line riders trashing the trains once it is connected to the Pasadena Gold Line. I trolled him back a bit but it got me thinking about how the lines will be connected.
So it looks like the Pasadena Gold Line and the Blue Line will become one long line, and the East LA Gold Line and the Expo Line will become one long line.
Will equipment generally be shared or will EXPO+GOLD and GOLD+BLUE have their rolling stock permanently set?
Depending on what happens, we could test anonymous' assertion. If he is correct, when trains are vandalized on the Blue Line portion of the line riders in Pasadena may not want to use the Gold Line anymore.
My own observations are that when the Gold Line was extended to East LA, I did not notice an appreciable difference in vandalism or trash, but then again I have no reason to ride it that often.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Mar 6, 2011 8:32:15 GMT -8
Part of the problem is that blue line riders do trash the trains more and part of it is that trains get many more riders so they get dirtier quicker. Also most of the blue line fleet is in use every day which leaves little time for extensive cleaning/rotating of vehicles.
In any event the gold line trains will be dirtier but there will still be many more riders because of the convenience of the connector.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Mar 6, 2011 9:48:39 GMT -8
Maybe this. 4. The gold line will get all of the P2550's except 5 for the blue line. Expo will get none and will instead get P865's (wtf??). 16 of the P2000's will be reassigned to the blue line.[/b] [/quote] Is Expo getting some Breda trains then?[/quote] Based on the old information, no. The bredas are the p2550's. But that's old info. Who knows what might have changed since then. Is Expo getting some Breda trains then?
|
|
|
Post by jeisenbe on Mar 6, 2011 13:37:36 GMT -8
In any event the gold line trains will be dirtier but there will still be many more riders because of the convenience of the connector. If Blue Line trains run all the way from Long Beach to Pasadena on the same frequency, the Gold Line will enjoy longer and more frequent trains. Speed (versus driving), reliability and frequency of service are by far the most important determinants of transit use. These are followed by relative price, ability to get a seat, subjective safety, number of transfers ... with cleanliness way down the line. So even if there is more graffiti and trash due to sharing trains with the Blue Line, the Pasadena section of the Gold Line (future Blue Line) will get more use, just due to better frequency and more seats, not to mention the ability to get to Downtown faster and without a transfer.
|
|
|
Post by trackman on Mar 6, 2011 17:50:11 GMT -8
In other places, cleaning staff is at the terminal and goes through each train to clean them - picking up trash and so forth. Is Metro doing this today, either in Long Beach or downtown?
|
|
|
Post by spokker on Mar 6, 2011 18:21:38 GMT -8
In other places, cleaning staff is at the terminal and goes through each train to clean them - picking up trash and so forth. Is Metro doing this today, either in Long Beach or downtown? They do sweeps on the Red Line but the only thing they are picking up is any homeless who are sleeping.
|
|
|
Post by trackman on Mar 6, 2011 21:07:05 GMT -8
That is something.
And, if that is all that is being done, it's only a management and budget decision to choose to do the cleaning at the end of the line. Maybe the timeliness of cleaning vehicles is not an issue. Myself, I have not noticed any repeateded problems on the Gold Line. Sometimes on the red, but that line has 4x the riders.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Mar 7, 2011 9:03:10 GMT -8
They don't really have time to clean the trains. They are only empty for minutes. And as Spokker mentioned the main purpose is to get the homeless off.
|
|