|
|
Post by bobdavis on Mar 23, 2011 10:58:03 GMT -8
The zig-zag configuration for the trolley wire is typical of overhead construction where most, if not all the cars and/or locomotives use "pantograph" type current collectors. Railways used mostly by trolley-pole equipped units have the wire running parallel to the rails. Where both types are used often (e.g. the surface-running part of San Francisco Muni's "J" line, which carries both modern LRV's and traditional trolley cars) the zig-zag may not be as noticeable.
(historic note: as a volunteer overhead line worker at Orange Empire Ry. Museum, I have assisted on the installation of Pacific Electric-style overhead in Perris)
|
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Mar 23, 2011 11:22:21 GMT -8
Railways used mostly by trolley-pole equipped units have the wire running parallel to the rails. And that's because the contact point on the trolley wheel is dynamic, which helps avoid the overheating and carbonizing problem. Therefore, for trolleys, a straight overhead wire is more optimal, as the trolley pole wouldn't unnecessarily swing sideways:  |
|
|
|
Post by jamesinclair on Mar 23, 2011 12:03:17 GMT -8
Hey guys, Ive fixed the station pictured above and made it actually safe for pedestrians. Better looking too.  Someone explain to me the thousands of gates and lights and bells required for the train....and then building a pedestrian waiting area that looks like a ramp built for cars? |
|
|
|
Post by carter on Mar 23, 2011 12:05:38 GMT -8
I just wanted to take a moment to say how much I love this thread!
|
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Mar 23, 2011 12:31:24 GMT -8
Hey guys, Ive fixed the station pictured above and made it actually safe for pedestrians. Better looking too. Someone explain to me the thousands of gates and lights and bells required for the train....and then building a pedestrian waiting area that looks like a ramp built for cars? I am fairly certain there will be "Do Not Enter" signs in front of the tracks, once Expo opens for service. And I agree it might help to have one or two posts at the entrance, with reflectors on them, to keep cars out of that area in case of a crash. But I don't think anybody's going to be confused enough to try and drive up there. If it were a car ramp, where would it lead? Licensed drivers (many of whom are very stupid) already have all kinds of opportunities to drive their cars off roads, wrong way on freeway ramps, and onto sidewalks. But in practice that rarely happens. And realistically, we can't (and shouldn't) put posts up everywhere, just because someone might get confused. |
|
|
|
Post by jamesinclair on Mar 23, 2011 19:31:55 GMT -8
And I agree it might help to have one or two posts at the entrance, with reflectors on them, to keep cars out of that area in case of a crash. But I don't think anybody's going to be confused enough to try and drive up there. If it were a car ramp, where would it lead? Licensed drivers (many of whom are very stupid) already have all kinds of opportunities to drive their cars off roads, wrong way on freeway ramps, and onto sidewalks. But in practice that rarely happens. And realistically, we can't (and shouldn't) put posts up everywhere, just because someone might get confused. Thousands and thousands of people are killed every year by out of control cars. Trains? Not so much. But it's the trains we demand spend millions and million on "safety" features. Gates, bells, lights, cab signaling, ridiculous speed limits etc, even though they're operated by highly trained professionals and can only operate in a straight line. It takes just one drunk driver on a rainy night to mow down a crowd of people waiting for the light to cross. I know Id feel much safer standing there with an actual curb and bollard between me and 4,000lbs of out of control mayhem. Did you know that the overhead highway sign was invented because too many people kept crashing into the sign on the side of the road? A "do not enter" sign means nothing. |
|
|
|
Post by tonyw79sfv on Mar 23, 2011 19:53:30 GMT -8
I think the majority of car drivers know to not drive on the railway especially if it looks nothing like a drivable road. This isn't the Orange Line where the busway looks like the adjacent traffic lanes (and I've seen 5 cars get lost on it in the 5 years since it was in operation!).
|
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Mar 23, 2011 20:41:17 GMT -8
Thousands and thousands of people are killed every year by out of control cars. Trains? Not so much. But it's the trains we demand spend millions and million on "safety" features. Gates, bells, lights, cab signaling, ridiculous speed limits etc, even though they're operated by highly trained professionals and can only operate in a straight line. It takes just one drunk driver on a rainy night to mow down a crowd of people waiting for the light to cross. I know Id feel much safer standing there with an actual curb and bollard between me and 4,000lbs of out of control mayhem. Did you know that the overhead highway sign was invented because too many people kept crashing into the sign on the side of the road? A "do not enter" sign means nothing. I disagree that a "Do Not Enter" sign means nothing. I don't know about you, but I pay attention to "Do Not Enter" signs, and I think the vast majority of drivers do as well. Yes there are bad drivers, but if the situation is as bad as you make it sound, every tenth car would be involved in an accident each day, and all sidewalks would have been completely abandoned by pedestrians fearing "4,000lbs of out of control mayhem". It's not clear to me what you're trying to say about the Expo Line. Are you saying it's fundamentally unsafe from cars because it's at-grade? |
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Mar 23, 2011 21:47:55 GMT -8
That ramp looks too narrow for even a Mini to navigate. I'd be more concerned about out-of-control "sidewalk surfers" (skateboard riders). And regarding being unsafe from cars because it's at grade: there have been at least two cases of motor vehicles getting into the Gold Line freeway median right of way. We can't protect against everything.
|
|
|
|
Post by jamesinclair on Mar 23, 2011 22:35:31 GMT -8
No, we cant protect from everything, but how much do three bollards cost? How much would it have cost to make it an actual sidewalk and not asphalt? I mean, they spent money on the flashing "train" sign, because we all know the train is destructive one, right?
When someone gets killed, there is a pretty easy lawsuit against the city for negligent design.
|
|
|
|
Post by tonyw79sfv on Mar 24, 2011 0:21:14 GMT -8
This talk about bollards reminded me of a viral video from the UK that is used for transit only corridors, but yet cars want to risk passing through them. www.youtube.com/watch?v=AKVBK-0veE8 |
|
|
|
Post by trackman on Mar 24, 2011 4:47:29 GMT -8
The OCS zig-zag also helps prevent the wire from cutting into the pantogragh like a saw blade.
|
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Mar 24, 2011 6:24:42 GMT -8
No, we cant protect from everything, but how much do three bollards cost? How much would it have cost to make it an actual sidewalk and not asphalt? I mean, they spent money on the flashing "train" sign, because we all know the train is destructive one, right? When someone gets killed, there is a pretty easy lawsuit against the city for negligent design. In your picture, I counted six bollards, not three. Knowing Metro, even three bollards would cost $500k, LOL. I do hear what you're saying: good design and a little money upfront is worth it, if it will save lives and money down the road. But Metro has already spent tons of money (millions of dollars) on safety enhancements already, protecting against corner cases of stupidity and recklessness. At some point it has to stop. There are crosswalks all over L.A. where pedestrians sometimes stop and wait at a median. Two examples are at Santa Monica/Wilshire, and at San Vicente/Fairfax. These medians don't have bollards to protect pedestrians that have to wait there. In San Francisco, there are medians filled with pedestrians waiting for trains, on Market Street, Taraval Street and Ocean Ave. No posts. Theoretically, a drunk driver could mow down pedestrians at any of these crosswalks. But that doesn't mean we need to put steel posts into every crosswalk median. There are cities in Lakewood and in Orange County (and throughout the country) where the streets don't even have sidewalks or lampposts. These locations are much more vulnerable to drunk drivers than a well-lit, well-signed train station. |
|
|
|
Post by jamesinclair on Mar 24, 2011 16:36:58 GMT -8
So because lakewould doesnt give a crap about pedestrian safety, a rail line in urban LA that will carry 60,000 a day shouldnt either? San Francisco street stops are a product of their day, but even they have rudimentary protection measures for pedestrians. maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=san+francisco&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=San+Francisco,+California&ll=37.762132,-122.466413&spn=0.002019,0.004265&z=18&lci=transit_comp&layer=c&cbll=37.762206,-122.466311&panoid=ArY_ywn2qjdDxt7N3xBi1A&cbp=12,185.08,,1,11.98 Why is metro ok with spending on the flashing sign that says "train approaching" even though there's already a left turn red arrow? We dont put these at every other intersection, but metro believes drivers are stupid enough, that when presented with rail, they will ignore red lights. If rail is so confusing to drivers, it stands that they will crash into the pedestrian waiting areas, as they look like "car zones". "But it's not likely to happen" The way people perceive safety is a HUGE deal when it comes to how people act. Actual safety doesn't matter, it's perceived safety. Look at how irrational people are when it comes to airlines and airline safety. The average person will gladly drive to the airport (dangerous) and then worry that the plane will crash (extremely unlikely). If people dont feel safe when exiting the trains, theyre less likely to ride. This takes into account perceived safety against crime (lighting and such) and safety in walking (cars and such). The current implementation shows the transit rider as a second class citizen. No expense is too much when it comes to train/car interaction (again, the gates, lights, signs, bells etc), but the pedestrian is left to fend for himself. Reminds me of the freeway stops. Not a cent was spent to make the transit rider comfortable. Let them deal with the noise, exhaust and wind that comes with standing in the middle of a freeway. It's clear how the transit designers see the pedestrian. Nobody walks in LA after all. The designers simply don't think about what happens to the rider once they stop off the train (or bus). Im sure youve seen bus stops placed where there are no sidewalks right? Once the rider is off the bus, the transit agency doesnt give a damn about how they actually reach their destination. The result of course, is lower ridership. But wait, you think, of course the designer is aware that everyone who rides the train is a pedestrian! Just look at how parking lots are designed. Even though every single person has to leave their car and walk to the store (or wherever ) parking lots NEVER take into account pedestrian comfort, it's all about the cars. It doesnt make sense. Mind you, this isnt exclusive to LA. Look at this ludicrous bus stop near Boston: maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=01890&aq=&sll=34.00187,-118.23349&sspn=0.06774,0.136471&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Winchester,+Massachusetts+01890&ll=42.39919,-71.146651&spn=0.001901,0.004265&t=h&z=18&lci=transit_comp&layer=c&cbll=42.399227,-71.146771&panoid=DKR8CCIwVqICP3iV82XE7Q&cbp=12,340.18,,0,9.53 Theres no way to get to it! Same deal near DC, in Maryland. No sidewalks, no crosswalks....just a post with no way to arrive at it maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=20001&aq=&sll=42.399227,-71.146771&sspn=0.000475,0.001066&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Washington+D.C.,+District+of+Columbia+20001&ll=39.044586,-77.076366&spn=0.003966,0.008529&t=h&z=17&layer=c&cbll=39.044701,-77.076374&panoid=T1XNNPxe-DZ3Qe5DH_P53g&cbp=12,89.43,,1,5.97 Transit agencies around the country do a terrible job of making their services comfortable and accessible to the public. It's sad to see the same problem repeated in a fantastic new line in LA. Whats the budget of the expo line, a billion or so? 3 bollards + a curb at each station would have added.... $20,000? At most. |
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Mar 25, 2011 7:11:49 GMT -8
You have a very negative view of how the pedestrian is treated: I don't see things as being quite so bad. I certainly don't think this is a case of transit designers taking pedestrians for granted. The design team bent over backwards to involve members of the public in the process of designing the station area, including the safety features.
The area in front of the station is a crosswalk. So it's going to be designed like a crosswalk. Maybe we need to rethink how crosswalks are designed in this country. But that's a whole other topic.
|
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Mar 25, 2011 14:32:28 GMT -8
In the Boston example, there's a pedestrian bridge just a yards up the road from the bus stop. That's how bus riders are supposed to get there.
In fact, I think Google maps misplaced the "bus sign": when you mouse over it, it clearly says "Rt. 2 Westbound Pedestrian Bridge". The other side says "Rt. 2 East @ Overpass".
Los Angeles could probably use a few more pedestrian overpasses, tunnels and bridges. That's as much a safety feature as lights, bells and signs. If you want to know how to redesign a crosswalk, that's one way.
And I agree with MetroCenter. If they didn't care, they wouldn't have gone to the trouble of translating safety signs into Japanese at Little Tokyo. It's more a question of budget constraints.
|
|
|
|
Post by jamesinclair on Mar 25, 2011 15:14:18 GMT -8
Trust me, Ive been on that overpass. Theres actually no way to get to the bus stop. It was built 25 years ago and has never led anywhere.
Metrocenter, Ive probably been to 100+ cities in north america, south america, europe and asia. When one travels so much, it's easy to see which cities are thinking when they design stuff, and which ones arent. LA isn't. And yes, the crosswalk design is atrocious in LA. As far as I've seen, they're the only city to pain the yellow car lines through the crosswalk. LA also paints solid white turning lines across crosswalks. What message does that send?
Also, crosswalks, are under the law, an extension of the sidewalk. If no car will ever drive in the space directly in front of the ramp, why wasnt it built as a sidewalk, but they used asphalt and painted a white line, implying cars can and should enter that space?
A safety sign in Japanese is effectively useless, as nobody reads those, but provides protection against a lawsuit. A properly designed crosswalk is much more useful but LA isn't worried about lawsuits due to negligent crosswalk and sidewalk design, because there are so damn many of them. Although they should be. Just last week, a judge in Maryland ruled against the state agreeing that the bad road design was responsible for the death of a pedestrian.
|
|
|
|
Post by jdrcrasher on Mar 25, 2011 15:35:12 GMT -8
You have a very negative view of how the pedestrian is treated: I don't see things as being quite so bad. I certainly don't think this is a case of transit designers taking pedestrians for granted. The design team bent over backwards to involve members of the public in the process of designing the station area, including the safety features. The area in front of the station is a crosswalk. So it's going to be designed like a crosswalk. Maybe we need to rethink how crosswalks are designed in this country. But that's a whole other topic. Let's be honest, though. Certain thick-headed wheelchair (or stupid kids) morons are going to FIND a way to get in front of the train... then the NIMBYs and and other activists go apeshit... it's inevitable. |
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Mar 25, 2011 16:24:24 GMT -8
Although I understand jamesinclair's position, the Vermont stations aren't that different than a few other street running stations. Those never struck me as a problem and I'm not aware of any incidents due to their configuration.
|
|
|
|
Post by darrell on Mar 25, 2011 18:41:03 GMT -8
A few new photos from early this afternoon ...  That is an Expo train coming, right?  The Ginkgo trees are starting to leaf out (here west of Arlington). Roland told me they need to be planted by then.  A new construction notice says La Brea will be closed April 1-10 for reconstruction. You see its road surface is higher than the new Exposition Blvd., left over from the old grade crossing hump.  Sheet metal is newly installed on the eastern La Cienega stairway. |
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Mar 25, 2011 22:54:58 GMT -8
Thanks Darrell. Stairs are now starting to look like something. Rain must have helped the trees. I can't even remember the grade crossing at La Brea.
If only they would have built light-rail on the Pacific Electric right-of-way on Santa Monica Boulevard through Beverly Hills and Century City as well, we would have a great light-rail system in the Westside.
|
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Mar 25, 2011 23:02:26 GMT -8
Interesting that they would choose to plant ginkgos along the ROW.
For me, ginkgos will always be the tree of Tokyo; in fact I believe they are an official symbol of Minato-ku, one of Tokyo's major central "wards". You see them on subway signs (that's how you can tell the two subway systems apart).
I'm not sure how quickly they grow, or what variety they have planted here, but mature, fully-grown Japanese ginkgos can make a lovely, leafy, shady boulevard.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Mar 25, 2011 23:13:00 GMT -8
Interesting that they would choose to plant ginkgo along the ROW. It's misleading to call them ginkgo because these are actually Ginkgo biloba Princeton Sentry, not the majestic trees you have in mind. They are basically small trees that grow vertically, meaning that they don't branch horizontally and they have a small footprint. This is the main reason they were chosen -- as accent trees that don't interfere with the overhead catenary system. |
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Mar 25, 2011 23:16:03 GMT -8
I'm not sure how quickly they grow, or what variety they have planted here, Ah, okay. Thanks, Gokhan. I wasn't sure what variety they were. I was wondering about that. MTA must have good horticulturalists. |
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Mar 25, 2011 23:30:19 GMT -8
See how Neighbors for Smart Rail vice president criticizes the landscaping by saying "Metro screwed up even this trivial issue, having promised native sycamore trees but they are planting southeast-Asian Ginkgo biloba trees -- those puppies grow an inch a year." Her two-minute speech starts at 2:00:
|
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Mar 26, 2011 0:51:06 GMT -8
Well, it goes to show that you can't satisfy everybody. I like ginkgos, regardless of the specific variety.
I know native plants are supposed to be better for us than non-natives, but honestly, Los Angeles is FILLED with non-native eucalyptus, ficus, palms, jacaranda, etc. etc. etc. that I hardly see how it makes a difference to have a few ginkgo biloba as street trees.
As long as you keep the males separate from the females, and use a variety which won't get in the way of the trains, I don't see a problem here ;D
They will still have those unique fan leaves, and they still ought to turn that golden yellow color in the fall.
|
|
|
|
Post by darrell on Mar 26, 2011 12:04:19 GMT -8
See how Neighbors for Smart Rail vice president criticizes the landscaping by saying "Metro screwed up even this trivial issue, having promised native sycamore trees but they are planting southeast-Asian Ginkgo biloba trees -- those puppies grow an inch a year." Roland also told me that they would plant sycamores along the bike path west of Ballona Creek where there is more space. |
|
|
|
Post by jamesinclair on Mar 26, 2011 17:33:49 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Mar 26, 2011 17:41:35 GMT -8
I'm not sure just from the one photo, but it looks like a type of ficus. Mind you, that's just a guess.
|
|
|
|
Post by carter on Mar 27, 2011 10:54:05 GMT -8
See how Neighbors for Smart Rail vice president criticizes the landscaping by saying "Metro screwed up even this trivial issue, having promised native sycamore trees but they are planting southeast-Asian Ginkgo biloba trees -- those puppies grow an inch a year." Roland also told me that they would plant sycamores along the bike path west of Ballona Creek where there is more space. That's nice to hear. Big leafy trees can go a long way to making sure that this piece of infrastructure feels integrated into the community. |
|
