|
|
Post by Justin Walker on Jan 6, 2011 11:17:12 GMT -8
Metrolink Looking to Test Express Service, Could Save Riders 45 Minutesby Zach Behrens on January 4, 2011 11:00 AM San Bernardino, South Orange County or Lancaster to downtown Los Angeles. By car, it could take one to two hours, or more depending on the time of day. By commuter train, it's at least one hour and a half. Each have their advantages: a personal car offers flexibility, even if it means dealing with traffic, and a train can offer leisure (you know, things like sleep, reading, zoning out), to name a couple. In a major metropolitan region that has 15 million registered personal vehicles and close to 400 miles of commuter rail track that only carries 20,000 or so passengers a day is, as the new Metrolink CEO John Fenton puts it, "abysmal" when compared to rail systems in the Northeast and Chicago. "I think one of the things that we have to become is more competitive with the car," Fenton said last month in his office. "Instead of sitting down and continue to look at 'this is what we do,' we need to go do more of what people want." So would commuters want an express train that delivers them to L.A. Union Station 30 to 45 minutes faster from the furthest-away stations (stations between would be skipped)? "I think people would ride that service," Fenton said with an inspired tone in his voice. While no line has been chosen yet--staff are still analyzing which route would be best to test out--Fenton would like to start the service in March or April. "I think there's going to be a few options as we develop what the data looks like." However, once the analysis is complete, the findings won't be just about supporting express service, but other features to the schedule. "The first thing we have to find out is really where people move from. Once I've got the data, we can do a lot of things like running through L.A. Union Station directly. Maybe there's a natural Fullerton to Burbank or Riverside to Irvine [demand for service]. There's all these options, we just have to have the data to support it. The first time we do this, I want to make sure that it's a success. I want to make sure it's something that will 'wow' people to get on that train and ride it." Other features Fenton would like to offer to help attract new riders is adding business class, a bar car for snacks and drinks, a quiet car for commuters to nap, wireless internet, TV screens and trains running later a night. All that sounds pie-in-the-sky, but Fenton understands the economic reality. "I can have all the great plans, but I still got to have a product that sells." The agency, which has a budget of over $350 million, has seen its fair share of budget problems over the last few years, leading to increased fares and service reductions. "How can we help ourselves without asking for any additional money [from the government]?. That's our first responsibility: to maximize the potential of what we have." That brings Fenton back to plans for this spring. Current infrastructure could support express service along some routes, and if popular enough, that service would pay for itself. "I think it's a game changer," he said.
|
|
|
|
Post by crzwdjk on Jan 8, 2011 13:13:49 GMT -8
Sounds like they've been looking at Caltrain, but I'm not sure how well the experience with express trains would generalize to Metrolink. The stop spacing is noticeably wider, and average speeds are higher (as is top speed). The other problem is that most of Metrolink is single track, and a lot of it is at capacity already, so fitting in express trains would be pretty difficult, except on the Orange County Line. What they really need to do is advertise run-throughs to Burbank (they already have a couple of those), and time transfers better at Union Station, especially on weekends. And they need to coordinate with Amtrak and Coaster better, but I think with the coming service increases in Orange County, a mix of Fullerton-Laguna Niguel locals and LA-Oceanside expresses would make some sense.
|
|
|
|
Post by jeisenbe on Mar 12, 2011 15:09:39 GMT -8
Crzwdjk, re: capacity issues with express trains and single-track:
Metrolink claims they will be adding the express trains without removing any local trains, so there is enough capacity for at least this limited express service.
Based on my understanding of single-track railways, I believe it Metrolink is nowhere near capacity on the Antelope Valley and San Bernardino lines, with a minimum headways of 30 minutes at rush hour, especially considering that there is only one reverse-commute train (headed away from Los Angeles).
Most trains peak-direction trains are 40 to 60 minutes apart, except for the 5:45am and 6:15am antelope valley trains. That means an express train can leave a few minutes before one of the currently scheduled trains, and arrive without passing the train ahead of it (since it will be about 30 minutes faster). It looks like the reverse-direction train (there is only one at rush hour) takes 10 minutes longer for the same route, which suggest that it has a few minutes to wait at a station or siding while the peak-direction trains pass. It shouldn't be too hard to add one more passing movement.
The San Bernardino line has trains every 20 minutes at rush hour, but it also has 6 passing sidings. The express trains will have to overtake the slower local-stop trains at one of the stations in the middle of the line, since it will be 30 minutes faster, in addition to passing the one reverse-direction train (since they come every hour).
The problem would be if there is any freight service that needs to move during rush hour. Then it could get complicated.
In the long term, if Metrolink can get a second track for a couple miles at a few more strategic places, it would be possible to run trains every 30 minutes in even the reverse-peak direction, and still run an "express" train every 30 or 60 minutes (in the peak direction), as long as the sidings and passing tracks are carefully designed.
|
|
|
|
Post by spokker on Apr 1, 2011 14:21:26 GMT -8
Metrolink didn't just add four new express trains, but they added eight more trains on the San Bernardino and Antelope Valley Lines. www.metrolinktrains.com/news/?id=6143Looking at the new schedules, LA -> SB will see a new noon run, plus an 11PM weekday departure from LAUS. SB -> LA will also have a new afternoon run and an 8:50PM weekday departure from SB. Everybody seems to complain that Metrolink has no midday service or late service, so this should help matters some. |
|
|
|
Post by spokker on Apr 8, 2011 18:54:02 GMT -8
Went over to Orange Station tonight to see how many people were riding the first Northbound Angel train that terminates in Anaheim. You can't make a 100% accurate assessment from the outside, but Metrolink ran a four car train from Laguna Niguel to Anaheim and here is what I saw.
The first two cars seemed empty. The second two cars seemed very well patronized, i.e., I noticed people in every window, top and bottom. Lots of red.
I don't think the Angel trains will be as successful as the Dodger trains. There is less distance covered and Orange County is less transit friendly. Angel stadium itself is much easier to park at. There are also lots that are close by that are cheaper.
I imagine Metrolink will operate three car trains for Angel games if those first cars remain nearly empty.
Still, it's a very good deal. $7 round trip. And for some games you can get a free voucher for a Angels ticket. I hope it's successful.
|
|
|
|
Post by crzwdjk on Apr 8, 2011 23:51:35 GMT -8
Looking at the new timetables, I noticed that the San Bernardino Line schedule now involves overtakes of trains 305 and 324 at Covina. This maneuver adds some 14 or 15 minutes to the run time between Pomona and Baldwin Park for these trains, which means they take about 30 minutes instead of 15, and presumably have a rather lengthy wait in Covina. Hopefully as they get more experience with this timetable, they'll be able to tighten up the timings a bit and not have such a long and frustrating delay for those on the local train.
|
|
|
|
Post by jeisenbe on Apr 9, 2011 15:12:18 GMT -8
... the San Bernardino Line schedule now involves overtakes of trains 305 and 324 at Covina. This maneuver adds some 14 or 15 minutes to the run time between Pomona and Baldwin Park for these trains ... Ouch. That's no way to run a railway. Hopefully when the PTC (positive train control) system is finally in place they will be able to have the trains pass more closely. If not, they need to consider building another track for a mile or two around this station. |
|
|
|
Post by crzwdjk on Apr 10, 2011 14:35:44 GMT -8
PTC will, if anything, make things slower, not faster. The signals and track circuits will stay the same, there will just be a system to make sure that the train slows down and stops before passing a red signal, which might be rather conservative and slow the train down well before the red signal. And, as far as I know, the section between Pomona and Covina is the biggest bottleneck on that line, and Metrolink had a plan to extend the double track some distance west of Pomona as the highest priority project on that line. If they could somehow rework the timetable so the express passes the local on the Pomona-Montclair double track section, that would work pretty well too, and the local might not have to wait very much beyond the normal dwell time at three stations.
|
|
|
|
Post by thanks4goingmetro on Aug 23, 2011 10:43:37 GMT -8
Metrolink to present its first partially electric train Diesel locomotives are electric drive already. They are "diesel-electric series hybrid" formally titled. In other news, I tweeted MetroLink, Amtrak, and NCTD about a combined schedule to simplify travel between Los Angeles, Orange County, and San Diego by showing all trains available in the corridor. NCTD tweeted back that it's in the works and they are cooperating to make it happen. |
|
|
|
Post by crzwdjk on Aug 27, 2011 21:18:37 GMT -8
I'm cautiously optimistic about the increasing cooperation between Metrolink and NCTD now that Metrolink has decided to venture south of Oceanside with the special trains to Solana Beach. Metrolink also seems to be showing some signs of caring about weekend and off-peak service, as does Coaster. Having more dobule track around Oceanside should also give more scheduling flexibility to provide actual connections between Metrolink and Coaster trains, and a third track at the Oceanside station probably wouldn't hurt either, for a proper cross-platform transfer and not tying up the whole line.
|
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Aug 28, 2011 10:31:45 GMT -8
The issue of connections has been the "Achilles heel" of mass transit, bus or train ever since Henry Ford's factories started cranking out Model T's by the trainload, and paved streets and highways spread across the land. Only when traffic becomes intolerable or gas prices become prohibitive, do Americans submit to the discipline required by mass transit systems.
|
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Sept 2, 2011 12:02:55 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on Sept 2, 2011 12:44:33 GMT -8
And the Caltrans description of the same $38M award: www.dot.ca.gov/hq/paffairs/news/pressrel/11pr77.htmIt's interesting, the article says that this will fund the "final segment" of third track between LA and Fullerton. I was checking other sources and found that the 7th of what was 8 segments was funded by $38,800,000 back in January 2010: www.fra.dot.gov/downloads/HSIPR_ARRA_and_FY09_Applications_list_012810.pdfI don't know if these two articles are talking about the same $38M, or if there were two different $38M grants. Also unclear is whether the segment being built is the 7th of 8, or the final segment. Kind of confusing, but looks like the 3rd track between LA and Fullerton is getting some serious loving at least. RT |
|
|
|
Post by johanragle on Sept 25, 2015 7:12:38 GMT -8
Metrolink will be shuffling up the SB line service on October 5; it seems that the 383/384 trains are going away in favor of upgrading trains 307/324 to express service. Here's the new timetable. Unfortunately for some, moving the express up to 307 means that riders who want the express now have to catch it ten minutes earlier. But it's better for riders at the LA County line, since they've added an express stop at Montclair - which makes perfect since considering that station is the end hub for many buses from Foothill Transit, Omnitrans, and even RTA. This change also bodes well for Metro's proposal to extend the Gold Line out to Montclair. Better news is that the eastbound express 324 will depart LAUS at 5:30 instead of the current 5:15 departure. This will make it easier for commuters heading home to catch the train, as right now I have to be at the Expo Line La Cienega/Jefferson station by 4:20 in order to have even a chance (with no delays) of catching the express. Even better is the extended peak hour service; while currently the peak service hits 20 minute intervals, it does so for such a short time that it's pretty much useless, and I've been burned before by delays/etc getting to Union Station right after the 6:20 train, forcing me to wait until 7:20 for the next train out. No relief for night-owl riders, though; the latest eastbound train still departs at 9:30. Both the SB and IE-OC lines will now end at San Bernardino Transit Center as soon as the tracks are completed. The new system map, shown on page 4, also includes the Perris Valley extension of the 91 Line. |
|
|
|
Post by johanragle on Oct 22, 2015 8:10:50 GMT -8
As anyone riding the SB line knows, the schedule change has been very rough. Passengers have been complaining of overcrowding and delays. Art Leahy wrote a letter that was left on all the seats today apologizing for the problems, and mentioned that to solve the overcrowding they are adding extra cars to trains 307, 309, 317, 322 and 324. Trains 309 and 322 will have 8 passenger cars each and a 2nd conductor, which means that those trains will be longer than the platforms at a number of stations besides CSULA.
What they really need to do is double-track the entire line, but I doubt San Bernardino County would be willing to pony up their share of the funding. It's a shame that the government over here is so obstructionist...
|
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Oct 22, 2015 9:40:20 GMT -8
As anyone riding the SB line knows, the schedule change has been very rough. Passengers have been complaining of overcrowding and delays. Art Leahy wrote a letter that was left on all the seats today apologizing for the problems, and mentioned that to solve the overcrowding they are adding extra cars to trains 307, 309, 317, 322 and 324. Trains 309 and 322 will have 8 passenger cars each and a 2nd conductor, which means that those trains will be longer than the platforms at a number of stations besides CSULA. What they really need to do is double-track the entire line, but I doubt San Bernardino County would be willing to pony up their share of the funding. It's a shame that the government over here is so obstructionist... Why is it overcrowded? Yes, the SB line could be double tracked and electrified and would be a great line. Expensive, but it would be better than extending the Gold Line. As far as SB, they talk a big game but when push comes to shove they don't come up with much. Metrolink continues to be the bastard step-child of the public transportation system. We really could get so much more out of it if it wasn't so ignored in general. |
|
|
|
Post by johanragle on Mar 4, 2016 16:43:12 GMT -8
Because of the overcrowding issues, schedule issues, and train congestion causing delays, Metrolink ran an online survey of riders' preferences for schedule changes. As a result, they will be removing the express trains (which only just added a Montclair stop in the last schedule change!) and adding more frequent trains during peak service hours effective April 4. metrolinktrains.com/news/page/title/sb_schedule_effective_april_4_2016On the down side, I really liked the 30-minute headways lined up with the top of the hour - it made it very easy to remember when the next train was. But hopefully, between going back to an earlier style timetable, removing the need for the express to leapfrog other trains, and the new locomotives on loan from BNSF, they can get the delays under control.  |
|
|
|
Post by cygnip2p on Jul 7, 2016 10:02:45 GMT -8
Haven't seen it mentioned here, but the first of Metrolink's new EPA Tier IV locomotives has arrived and begun testing.  And a Picture of a completed unit at LAUS care of Jonathan Camacho.Metrolink has an order for 20 of these units from EMD, designated the EMD F125, to be delivered by April 2017. They are massively powerful, producing 4,700hp (!) at the alternator. Originally they were meant to replace some of the older locos in service (including the leased EMD F59PH's) while also expanding the fleet, but I imagine they will be replacing some of the BNSF units Metrolink has been using instead. |
|
|
|
Post by jdrcrasher on Jul 11, 2016 19:46:33 GMT -8
^ Lord I hope so. The BNSF trains are so freakin' loud i'm surprised some local paper hasn't latched onto it and made it a big issue yet.
|
|
|
|
Post by cygnip2p on Jul 12, 2016 10:52:06 GMT -8
I think there have been a significant number of complaints, according to this LAT article. www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-ln-metrolink-parts-20160707-snap-story.htmlAlso last Friday, Metrolink's board voted to spend $1.5m to replace/repair the 'cow catchers' on the Hyundai cab-cars that failed in the Oxnard accident last year. Once those repairs are made, and with the arrival of the new locos, the noisy (and ugly) BNSF locos should be returned. |
|
|
|
Post by TransportationZ on Jul 12, 2016 11:02:58 GMT -8
^ Lord I hope so. The BNSF trains are so freakin' loud i'm surprised some local paper hasn't latched onto it and made it a big issue yet. Covina has (understandably) made a big fuss over the BNSF locomotives. So much so that Metrolink is reversing train sets for the early morning trains so that the Metrolink locomotive is facing LA and uses its horn through Covina. Even Art Leahy said himself that BNSF locomotives will be removed from the SB line first as repairs are made to the cab cars. I live in Rialto, 1.5 mile from the station and can hear those BNSF horns from my bedroom with the windows closed. Can't wait for those $20 million pumpkin battering rams to be gone. |
|
|
|
Post by cygnip2p on Nov 30, 2016 20:22:08 GMT -8
Wow! The FRA has posted draft rules that will answer 20+ years of prayers of US commuter railroads. Sub 125mph trainsets will have the option of using European safety specs, regardless of whether they travel on lines shared with freight or not, and with no waivers needed. This opens the door to "off the shelf" DMUs, coaches, the whole 9 yards. Metrolink already has 40 F125's on order, so its unlikely they will swap to DMUs for current service or anything, but assuming these rules come into effect after the comment period, it will mark a massive shift in US railroading. This could cut rolling stock purchase costs, maintenance, and start up costs by as much as 50%. Lower costs possibly = more routes, more riders, and/or cheaper fares. usa.streetsblog.org/2016/11/30/federal-regulators-will-let-u-s-railroads-run-faster-more-efficient-trains/ |
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Nov 30, 2016 21:35:21 GMT -8
Wow! The FRA has posted draft rules that will answer 20+ years of prayers of US commuter railroads. Sub 125mph trainsets will have the option of using European safety specs, regardless of whether they travel on lines shared with freight or not, and with no waivers needed. This opens the door to "off the shelf" DMUs, coaches, the whole 9 yards. Metrolink already has 40 F125's on order, so its unlikely they will swap to DMUs for current service or anything, but assuming these rules come into effect after the comment period, it will mark a massive shift in US railroading. This could cut rolling stock purchase costs, maintenance, and start up costs by as much as 50%. Lower costs possibly = more routes, more riders, and/or cheaper fares. usa.streetsblog.org/2016/11/30/federal-regulators-will-let-u-s-railroads-run-faster-more-efficient-trains/This potentially a huge boost to commuter and passenger rail long term, which is underutilized in SoCal. Seems like a great opportunity for better performance and cheaper operations for Metrolink and Amtrak. Too bad we can't boost Metrolink's share of Measure M to take advantage. |
|
|
|
Post by TransportationZ on Dec 1, 2016 11:10:43 GMT -8
Wow! The FRA has posted draft rules that will answer 20+ years of prayers of US commuter railroads. Sub 125mph trainsets will have the option of using European safety specs, regardless of whether they travel on lines shared with freight or not, and with no waivers needed. This opens the door to "off the shelf" DMUs, coaches, the whole 9 yards. Metrolink already has 40 F125's on order, so its unlikely they will swap to DMUs for current service or anything, but assuming these rules come into effect after the comment period, it will mark a massive shift in US railroading. This could cut rolling stock purchase costs, maintenance, and start up costs by as much as 50%. Lower costs possibly = more routes, more riders, and/or cheaper fares. usa.streetsblog.org/2016/11/30/federal-regulators-will-let-u-s-railroads-run-faster-more-efficient-trains/This could've saved Metrolink significant time and money. Metrolink could've replaced their entire fleet of cars and avoided this year and a half of BNSF BS caused by the defective plows of the cab cars. Looks like the FRA finally has some sense. Unfortunately, this kills hope for off-the-shelf HSR designs for CAHSR. One can dream of a shinkansen E5 speeding between LA and SF though. |
|
expo
Junior Member
Posts: 71 
|
Post by expo on Oct 16, 2018 8:11:55 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by mattapoisett on Oct 16, 2018 9:54:46 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by usmc1401 on Mar 8, 2024 16:06:01 GMT -8
The orange county line in San Clemente Ca has reopened to Amtrak for a few trains a day. But no Metrolink yet.
|
|
|
|
Post by usmc1401 on Mar 19, 2024 14:38:30 GMT -8
Per KNX radio full service through San Clemente Ca will resume for Metrolink and Amtrak on Monday March 25 2024.
|
|
