|
Post by darrell on Nov 4, 2011 21:12:09 GMT -8
Two photos on Flower yesterday: Two cars nose-to-nose and not coupled (nor was the one on the right coupled to another Siemens car out of frame to the right). This photo at 23rd turned out overexposed but strikingly vivid in its highlight colors. I followed this train, hoping to get station-by-station run times. But it stopped at Trousdale. Anyway, it took 3 minutes to Jefferson and another 2 minutes to Trousdale.
|
|
|
Post by carter on Nov 5, 2011 13:50:11 GMT -8
This photo at 23rd turned out overexposed but strikingly vivid in its highlight colors. Definitely Art of Transit material, if you ask me I like how it almost looks like the station is sitting in the middle of a white void.
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on Nov 6, 2011 9:46:32 GMT -8
This rain today is very good. Hopefully any more weather related problems will appear sooner rather than later. The sooner they are found, the sooner they are fixed.
RT
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Nov 6, 2011 15:40:11 GMT -8
A note to all parties concerning the USC trench. It is not a trench as you think it is....It is a subway and deemed that way by the CPUC! That's why ventilation was put in the subway, it was ordered by the CPUC. The trench under Figueroa is just that ...a trench, no ventilation is needed! So L.A. now has 4 subways! Can you name them all? Your post is clever, Roadtrainer, but I would prefer we avoid pedantic, hairsplitting "gotcha" definitions of subway. The Red Line counts, because every single station on the Red Line is underground. The Purple Line likewise. The Gold Line's Eastside Extension has a couple of underground stations, complete with station entrances and escalators. The Blue Line's short subway has 7th/ Metro. The Regional Connector will also have fully-underground stations. I'm wondering if you're including the tunnel under Colorado Boulevard, Pasadena, in your definition, although the Memorial Park station is not underground — I can stand at street level and take a photograph of the tracks below. If you include the USC tunnel as a subway, then ANY light rail tunnel or underpass, with or without stations, can be considered a subway, and that is ridiculous, regardless of what the CPUC says.
|
|
|
Post by roadtrainer on Nov 6, 2011 16:42:26 GMT -8
James Fujita said: "Your post is clever, Roadtrainer, If you include the USC tunnel as a subway, then ANY light rail tunnel or underpass, with or without stations, can be considered a subway, and that is ridiculous, regardless of what the CPUC says." That's why the hold-up...according to the hated contractors FFP they were told that this trench was a subway because of no ventilation, therefore it is a subway and from now on that's what I'll call it
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Nov 6, 2011 18:24:50 GMT -8
The CPUC can call a donkey a zebra, but that doesn't make it true.
Part of the USC TRENCH may very well qualify as a tunnel, but that's not a subway by any reasonable standards.
Or maybe.... the Sepulveda Boulevard tunnel at LAX is a subway! It's underground and it requires ventilation, therefore L.A. has a subway to the airport! We can stop building subways, because we have them everywhere! ;D
Also, I gave you several possible answers to the subway question. Red, Purple, Red/ Purple, Blue, Gold and possibly Gold (Pasadena). So, which ones qualify?
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on Nov 6, 2011 18:33:26 GMT -8
I believe the Gold Line tunnel that goes under Green, Colorado and Union before emerging into Memorial Park station has ventilation. So it would qualify if that is the threshold.
RT
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Nov 6, 2011 19:15:42 GMT -8
Isn't the ventilation of the USC trench mainly for emergencies, such as avoiding smoke poisoning if a train catches fire in the trench?
|
|
|
Post by jdrcrasher on Nov 6, 2011 21:11:34 GMT -8
I think if a line has an underground station, it can be considered a subway.
|
|
|
Post by rajacobs on Nov 6, 2011 22:50:28 GMT -8
One "underground" station is not enough. By that criterion, the Blue and Expo lines would be "subways" because they terminate in Metro Center which is underground. ...And the Figueroa trench is just too short as is the section under the 210 after Memorial Park station on the Gold line. A subwayrail line requires a substantial run underground to qualify as a subway.
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Nov 7, 2011 0:13:50 GMT -8
Before this conversation gets derailed too far from the Expo Line, let me say that in our discussions, CLARITY is of the utmost importance.
I am not a fan of weasel words, and the word "subway" is not a word with should be tossed about lightly. While a subway does not need to be a third-rail, TBM-bored Red Line-style rail line (only two of Tokyo's many Metro lines fits this description), it should be made perfectly clear that a subway constitutes certain advantages and disadvantages of cost, construction, safety, speed and even neighborhood prestige over an at-grade light rail line.
I would argue for a definition of "subway" which would preferably include more than one underground station, as rajacobs suggested.
For those unwilling to give up on the 7th/ Metro Center station of the Blue Line/ Expo Line, I would point out that 7th/ Metro is in fact, the first station of the yet-to-be-built Regional Connector.
As for USC specifically, there are other words available to describe trenches, underpasses and especially light rail tunnels.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Nov 7, 2011 10:29:53 GMT -8
I am not a fan of weasel words, and the word "subway" is not a word with should be tossed about lightly. The word "subway" has formal legal meanings and informal non-legal meanings. For the CPUC, this segment of rail is legally a subway. For that matter, the CPUC calls any covered a tunnel a subway, including pedestrian tunnels. (Note: calling the segment a subway is not the same as calling a line a subway line. The Expo Line is not a subway line: it does have a short subway segment under Figueroa/Exposition.) The word "trench" also has formal legal meanings and informal non-legal meanings. In normal-speak, a trench usually means something that is dug out and left open on the top. So both legally and informally, the Figueroa crossing is not a trench. roadtrainer simply asserted this, in a light-hearted comment. So why all the hostility? What is gained by unleashing the word police on roadtrainer for calling this segment a subway?
|
|
|
Post by bzcat on Nov 7, 2011 11:33:51 GMT -8
No fighting. More train porn.
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Nov 7, 2011 11:55:15 GMT -8
In my line of work, using the wrong words can get a person in trouble or a company sued Seriously though, if my words sound a bit harsh, they are certainly not directed at Roadtrainer as a person. (This is a message board, after all and arguments, misunderstandings and disagreements will happen.) Words do matter, and the difference between a light railway and a streetcar can be humongous, as is the difference between a subway and a tunnel. Anyways, this is as close to an apology as you're going to get from me on this topic. Let's move on to the Expo Rail transit porn, please ;D
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Nov 7, 2011 12:38:43 GMT -8
Thanks for the video. They really like wrong-tracking for some reason.
|
|
|
Post by jamesinclair on Nov 7, 2011 13:26:37 GMT -8
RE: Subway. For the average person, Subway = metro = rapid transit rail line. Chicago has a subway.....even though its all elevated. Miami has a subway system, again, even though its all elevated. The average person doesnt give a crap about the technicalities, they just associate urban rail systems that arent streetcars as subways, mostly because of the huge influence NYC has. So yes, people will refer to expo as part of the subway system. Words do matter, and the difference between a light railway and a streetcar can be humongous, as is the difference between a subway and a tunnel. Well, no, because words refer to one specific item, while the real world is a gradient. If expo ran 2 blocks in Santa Monica, in the street, with cars, that would make it a streetcar. But its still a light rail line. And when it goes under downtown, it's a subway. So you'd be correct in calling it either one. The real world doesn't fit into the neat categories humans like to create. Anyway, I asked this before but didnt get a reply....the video above again shows that not a single crosswalk has the red textured pavement that was promised. Did the contractor take the red paint money and run? Whats going on?
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Nov 7, 2011 13:59:32 GMT -8
RE: Subway. For the average person, Subway = metro = rapid transit rail line. Chicago has a subway.....even though its all elevated. Miami has a subway system, again, even though its all elevated. The average person doesnt give a crap about the technicalities, they just associate urban rail systems that arent streetcars as subways, mostly because of the huge influence NYC has. So yes, people will refer to expo as part of the subway system. Words do matter, and the difference between a light railway and a streetcar can be humongous, as is the difference between a subway and a tunnel. Well, no, because words refer to one specific item, while the real world is a gradient. If expo ran 2 blocks in Santa Monica, in the street, with cars, that would make it a streetcar. But its still a light rail line. And when it goes under downtown, it's a subway. So you'd be correct in calling it either one. The real world doesn't fit into the neat categories humans like to create. Anyway, I asked this before but didnt get a reply....the video above again shows that not a single crosswalk has the red textured pavement that was promised. Did the contractor take the red paint money and run? Whats going on? FYI, Chicago's system is not all elevated. There are subway sections and stations.
|
|
|
Post by rajacobs on Nov 7, 2011 14:27:22 GMT -8
Heck, I'd just as soon harken back to the days of PCC light rail when the term "Rapid Transit" was commonly used for light rail in places like Cleveland (where it's still used) and Chicago. And thus, for me, "subway" would be an uncommon usage for a train unless it was underground.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Nov 7, 2011 15:42:43 GMT -8
Today From PICO Blvd to S barrington Ave All the Buildings Were Coming Down I'm loving all the images of destruction along the Phase 2 part of the ROW. It is visual confirmation of actual progress on the project. Keep 'em coming explodingfan (I mean expolinefan!) Technically though, these belong in the Phase 2 thread.
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Nov 7, 2011 16:16:10 GMT -8
RE: Subway. For the average person, Subway = metro = rapid transit rail line. Chicago has a subway.....even though its all elevated. Miami has a subway system, again, even though its all elevated. The average person doesnt give a crap about the technicalities, they just associate urban rail systems that arent streetcars as subways, mostly because of the huge influence NYC has. So yes, people will refer to expo as part of the subway system. Words do matter, and the difference between a light railway and a streetcar can be humongous, as is the difference between a subway and a tunnel. Well, no, because words refer to one specific item, while the real world is a gradient. If expo ran 2 blocks in Santa Monica, in the street, with cars, that would make it a streetcar. But its still a light rail line. And when it goes under downtown, it's a subway. So you'd be correct in calling it either one. The real world doesn't fit into the neat categories humans like to create. Nonsense. Botanists have come up with dozens of different kinds of pine tree or palm tree or rose, often determined by minute differences which the layperson would have trouble differentiating. This categorization process is featured throughout the biological world. Arguments may start when new species are found or when a scientist thinks the categories are wrong, but there is a system in place. Books are divided up by category. "Average people" may have trouble learning the system, but that does not mean that the system does not work. At the very least, within our particular rail hobbyist/ specialist/ transit advocate/ transit nerd/ otaku community, we should be able to come up with terms to differentiate between 3rd-rail, light rail subway, at-grade light rail, streetcar and BRT. Right now we and the MTA are trying to determine whether or not the Crenshaw LRT should be a subway or not. Next up will likely be the Westside-to-Valley rail line. When we are not clear in our intentions and do not educate people about the Regional Connector or the Expo Line or the Westside Subway, we leave open gaps for the NIMBYs to exploit. If I say there will be a subway line in Little Tokyo, people want to know: What sort of construction methods? How much disruption will this cause? Cut or cover? Tunnel boring machine? Trench? Tunnel? These things make a difference. Yes, there are shades of gray. In Japan, they do not differentiate between at-grade electric commuter trains and subway trains. A town as small as Nagano (winter Olympics) can have a "subway" system. But here in California, the lines are drawn very clearly. Metro Rail and Metrolink are not one and the same. I am embarrased whenever a newscast says that a "Metro Rail" train in Fullerton or a "subway" train in Long Beach was involved in an accident. That is sloppy, ignorant (as in to "ignore the facts") reporting and it breeds confusion. If people think that the Expo Line is going to be noisy, is it because they really think light rail is noisy or because they associate rail with mainline freight or Amtrak or even Metrolink? It's not just finding the funding that's a problem, we have to fight people's misconceptions about what a subway train looks like (they all aren't NYC stereotype), what the downtown streetcar will be like (it won't be light rail) and what light rail is like (it's not Metrolink).
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Nov 7, 2011 16:22:12 GMT -8
I have a "field day" with attempts to catogorize the various forms of local passengers service electric railways. For example: Boston, Philadelphia and San Francisco all have lines that run underground downtown and then go onto surface tracks in residential areas. Boston has the Blue Line which runs underground then comes out of the tunnel, switches from third-rail to overhead power collection, and runs in a fenced-off surface right of way to Revere Beach. Cleveland's "heavy" rail line runs in a former steam-railroad right of way with no at-grade street crossings and high-platform loading, but it uses overhead wire, not third rail for power. For a few miles it shares track and trolley wire with the "light" rail lines, formerly known as the Shaker Heights Rapid Transit lines. And I must correct the person who said Chicago has no subways: some of the rapid transit lines run underground in the Loop area then climb onto old elevated structures. CTA has had subways since the 1940's, but the trains are usually called "L" or "El" trains regardless of grade level. The New York "subway" system includes a lot of elevated and even some surface-running tracks outside of Manhattan. (and we haven't covered the Pacific Electric Subway Terminal)
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Nov 7, 2011 16:32:02 GMT -8
You're making this harder than it has to be.
There are only a few things which really matter: primarily power system, location, articulation.
Power systems are 3rd-rail, overhead and diesel-electric, along with hybrids.
Location would be underground, at-grade street, at-grade private ROW, and elevated.
Articulation would be simply articulated body or not. Smaller vehicles with articulation can make sharper turns, but at the cost of capacity.
EDIT: And, of course, there's always the "if it looks like a subway" test, but really, everything ought to fit into the above categories. You're never going to see a 3rd-rail streetcar, not if you value people's lives. And none of the more modern light rail systems follow the MBTA Blue Line or Shaker Heights ideals, so there's little need to bring those up in discussions of L.A. Metro Rail.
Also, people are confusing the term "Metro" or "rapid transit" with the term "subway". San Francisco's Muni would qualify as a subway because of Market Street, but I would suggest that BART is the true Metro for S.F.
EDIT 2.0: Justin Walker below describes things better. Read his post:
|
|
|
Post by Justin Walker on Nov 7, 2011 16:39:57 GMT -8
So yes, people will refer to expo as part of the subway system. From what I have personally observed, people refer to our Metro Rail system collectively as "the Metro" and only refer to the Red/Purple Line as "the subway." I can't imagine many people referring to the Expo Line as part of "the subway system." Well, no, because words refer to one specific item, while the real world is a gradient. If expo ran 2 blocks in Santa Monica, in the street, with cars, that would make it a streetcar. But its still a light rail line. And when it goes under downtown, it's a subway. So you'd be correct in calling it either one. The real world doesn't fit into the neat categories humans like to create. Regardless of what most people do, we, as transit activists, know how to correctly categorize our rail transit system. We have modes/technologies: - heavy rail/rapid transit
- light rail
- streetcar
- commuter rail, etc.
and we have alignment characteristics: - at-grade mixed-traffic
- at-grade dedicated lane
- at-grade dedicated ROW
- elevated
- subway
- trench/open-cut subway,etc.
A given rail line will have one technology but can different alignment characteristics along its length. It is therefore most appropriate to refer to a rail line by its mode/technology (e.g. you can say the Red Line is a heavy rail line or the Expo Line is a light rail line). However, it is not appropriate to refer to the line solely by an alignment characteristic unless it applies for the full length of the line (e.g. you can say the Red Line is a subway line but you should not simply say the Expo Line is an elevated rail line). FYI, Chicago's system is not all elevated. There are subway sections and stations. The Chicago L also has at-grade segments. (See CTA Brown, Pink, and Yellow Lines.)
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Nov 7, 2011 18:25:55 GMT -8
You're making this harder than it has to be. There are only a few things which really matter: primarily power system, location, articulation. Power systems are 3rd-rail, overhead and diesel-electric, along with hybrids. Location would be underground, at-grade street, at-grade private ROW, and elevated. Yes, it is very simple. As an engineer, I too am in a line of work where precision is paramount. Subway is a location indicator. Subway = underground (this is exactly what "sub" and "way" mean). Similarly, elevated = above ground. The short segment at Figueroa is a subway, however short it may be. The Expo Line also elevated segments. However, the Expo Line is neither a subway line nor an elevated line, because it is not predominately below-ground or above-ground. It is definitely a metro line, because it is an urban mass-transit rail line. But it is debatable whether or not it is a rapid-transit line (depends on what level of ridership is achieved).
|
|
outthere15
New Member
Take back the rails
Posts: 33
|
Post by outthere15 on Nov 7, 2011 19:07:48 GMT -8
A life some should get - just saying ; }
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Nov 7, 2011 19:24:31 GMT -8
LOL Yes, the most passion on this board happens when it comes to the definitions of forms of the rail transit. This is still so even though the same people discuss it over and over again. (1) The definitions will always be somewhat blurry and will have intersections between them. Fort this reason, stop giving counterexamples -- simply because there are always intersections between these sets. (2) Rapid transit is nothing but an alternative term for a fully grade-separated rail line. The use of this term for other types of rail lines is simply incorrect. The only rapid-transit light-rail line in LA is the Green Line. The Expo Line is not a rapid-transit line. See this 1925 map. Click on it to enlarge. Rapid transit is clearly synonymous with separation of grades in the map. (3) And, yes, subway is something underground and elevated is something elevated! LOL But, most of NYC subway is not underground (still grade-separated) and there is nothing wrong with still calling it a subway as everyone knows what it is and why it is called a subway (because the heart of it is underground). (4) My take on the subway lines in LA: The only subway lines here are the Red and Purple Lines. I wouldn't call a line subway unless the majority of it is underground or the heart of it is underground. If a light-rail line has a subway stop or two, it has a subway section but to call the entire thing a subway is incorrect. For the USC trench, it's nothing but a simple underpass. Yes, it's a short subway section, but you wouldn't even refer to it as a subway section except for purely technical reasons -- such as the definition of subway for the ban of Prop A funds for subway construction in the past (the Zev bill). (5) In any case, go ahead call them whatever you like and how you feel like. The only exceptions are: Don't use the term rapid transit (which means grade-separated) for a line with frequent grade crossings, and don't call a subway line with third-rail electrification and six rail cars linked together running in a tunnel a light-rail line (which means usually overhead electrification, usually mostly at-grade, and usually not more than four cars). In this case, it would simply be wrong.
|
|
|
Post by roadtrainer on Nov 7, 2011 20:45:05 GMT -8
[quote gokhan ((5) In any case, go ahead call them whatever you like and how you feel like. The only exceptions are: Don't use the term rapid transit (which means grade-separated) for a line with frequent grade crossings, and don't call a subway line with third-rail electrification and six rail cars linked together running in a tunnel a light-rail line (which means usually overhead electrification, usually mostly at-grade, and usually not more than four cars). In this case, it would simply be wrong. [/quote] And that's what I'll call the trench "The USC subway!" Fight On!
|
|
|
Post by jamesinclair on Nov 7, 2011 23:05:45 GMT -8
Heck, I'd just as soon harken back to the days of PCC light rail when the term "Rapid Transit" was commonly used for light rail in places like Cleveland (where it's still used) and Chicago. And thus, for me, "subway" would be an uncommon usage for a train unless it was underground. Right, its a regional thing. "To get to the theater take the... T Rapid Subway El Metro Train Rail" What matters is what came first. People will say "tale the el" even if as pointed out, the el runs under, not over, some parts of town. Likewsise, in new york, people will tell you to take the subway even when it's elevated outside of manhattan. In Boston, the slowest line (still using PCCs) is called the "high speed line". Its only higher speed than a horse, but thats what its called. And quite frankly, it doesnt matter. It's one of many features of our language that doesn't mean what the technical portion means. Like pointing at your wrist is the universal "what time is it" even though few people sue wristwatches these days. Thats never going away. Nonsense. Botanists have come up with dozens of different kinds of pine tree or palm tree or rose, often determined by minute differences which the layperson would have trouble differentiating. This categorization process is featured throughout the biological world. Arguments may start when new species are found or when a scientist thinks the categories are wrong, but there is a system in place. Books are divided up by category. "Average people" may have trouble learning the system, but that does not mean that the system does not work. Nonsense to you. Have you heard of the "ring species"? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_speciesIt is literally impossible to draw an acceptable line between one species and the other because it's a constant gradient. Scientists will keep trying to put it into neat categories, but unless you decide to name each individual, then you have to deal with the fact that the line is blurry. No theyre not, but that line can be blurred. Again, in the ring example, youre noting two very different "end points" but we can create nice middle grounds that blur thing. In oakland, Amtrak runs on the street....making it a streetcar. Indeed in stockton, people board the amtrak train in the middle of an intersection. Metro rail and metrolink may not be the same, but what if you took the red line and extended it 42 miles? Again, you could take metrolink and run it like a streetcar in downtown LA, like the chicago system does in their suburbs. You can run PCCs in a grade separated subway system. You can take a blue line train and run it on the sunset limited route (itll cost a trillion or so to electrify it though) EDIT: And, of course, there's always the "if it looks like a subway" test, but really, everything ought to fit into the above categories. You're never going to see a 3rd-rail streetcar, not if you value people's lives. : DC's historic streetcar system would like to have a word with you. There is also a streetcar system in France that runs on third rail. And there are even more forms of power. Steam, battery, cable... The downtown streetcar could run on diesel you know, there are systems in the US that do this. Indeed, there are rail-guided streetcar systems powered by overhead electricity.....that run on tires. Try and classify that one.
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Nov 8, 2011 13:28:29 GMT -8
JamesInclair, for somebody who hates categorization and classification, you certainly divided up your previous post into lots of little compartments. That makes it impossible to follow a conversation.
Look, I'm sure that somewhere out there, there is a hamster-wheel powered, narrow-gauge, trans-Siberian underground light railway using parts manufactured only for the Trans-Siberian Narrow-Gauge Hamster Railway. (And if there is, I'd like to see the photos). None of these exceptions matter because Los Angeles is not considering these hybrid alternatives, nor should we. (For one thing, the maintenance would be a nightmare.) Angels Flight is not going to come down from Bunker Hill and invade the historic core.
Also, your definition of streetcar is ridiculously over-broad. The Sprinter DMU in San Diego does not have street operation, but runs on a private ROW.
Also, keep in mind that the Downtown Streetcar will be a low-floor operation, so that even if it share similarities with Metro Rail, they should still be considered distinct systems.
For electrified, long-distance commuter train operations, we must also consider the voltage, which is often higher than is needed for light rail. [Example: Metra Electric, 1500v DC, South Shore, 1500v DC, Yamanote Line 1500v DC, Metro Blue Line 750v DC ]
Categories and classifications are good. Defined categories, even if there are exceptions to the rule, help people understand what it is that we are trying to accomplish.
|
|
|
Post by roadtrainer on Nov 8, 2011 20:36:02 GMT -8
Isn't the ventilation of the USC trench mainly for emergencies, such as avoiding smoke poisoning if a train catches fire in the trench? You might be half-right, the ventilation is for breakdowns and that a stalled train will need air because there is no natural air flow.
|
|