K 22
Full Member
Posts: 117
|
Post by K 22 on Nov 11, 2011 13:51:35 GMT -8
Is 2015 still going to be doable for Phase 2? 3 years really isn't that much time.
|
|
|
Post by Justin Walker on Nov 11, 2011 15:08:25 GMT -8
Do those scenarios include 15 years from now, when deferred maintenance results in speed restrictions? Huh? Didn't the Blue Line improve from 59 minutes to 54 minutes end-to-end now after 20 years of service? And the Gold Line Pasadena segment increased from 35 minutes to 30 minutes? Why would you consider a train would get slower as time goes by? The advantage of rail is that times stay consistent throughout. He's suggesting that inadequate maintenance over time will cause the track quality to degrade, thus requiring track speed restrictions. Thankfully, Metro has both a relatively new system and stable funding for a good track maintenance regime. Older systems often have quite a few slow orders in place to due to long-term deferred maintenance.
|
|
|
Post by darrell on Nov 11, 2011 15:26:03 GMT -8
Is 2015 still going to be doable for Phase 2? 3 years really isn't that much time. Skanska-Rados says they'll begin bridge column footings early in 2012. These have the longest lead time. For comparison, Phase 1's La Brea bridge columns began in October 2008, La Cienega began in January 2009, Ballona Creek began in July 2009 (the rail bridge, not the earlier National Blvd. bridge), and Culver City began in September 2009 (per dated construction photos). But FFP was awfully slow ramping up and LA DWP delayed progress on La Brea and La Cienega for months. If Phase 1 began bridge work in early 2009 (subtracting some of the delay time) and begins operations in early 2012, that would correspond to Phase 2 beginning bridge work in early 2012 and operating in early 2015. That should work.
|
|
|
Post by carter on Nov 11, 2011 15:40:29 GMT -8
All we can truly rely on are concrete milestones. When construction is finished, it will be finished. When revenue testing begins, it will have begun. Only when we have a scheduled date of opening festivities will I take these people at their word. I think you just invented a new philosophy: Expostentialism
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Nov 11, 2011 16:34:14 GMT -8
Here is a summary of my Expo timetable estimates, based on existing Metro timetables. The base case is one mile on private right-of-way with stations a mile apart takes 2 minutes; add more for traffic signal delays and slow curves. I'd like to know current station-station timings of test trains! Flower & 7th Flower & Pico -- 2 minutes Flower & 23rd -- 3-4 Flower & Jefferson -- 2-3 Expo & Vermont -- 3-4 Expo & Western -- 3-4 Expo & Crenshaw -- 3-4 Expo & La Brea -- 3 Jefferson & La Cienega -- 2 Venice & Robertson -- 2 Phase 1 subtotal -- 23-28National & Palms -- 2 Expo & Westwood -- 3 Expo & Sepulveda -- 1 Expo & Bundy -- 2 Olympic & 26th -- 2 Colorado & 17th -- 2-3 Colorado & 4th -- 3-4 Phase 2 subtotal -- 15-17Total -- 38-45You need to add Farmdale in there and won't trains have to wait for lights at Crenshaw? I think that once we get to what we think is normal and reasonable, add 2 minutes because Metro seems almost obsessed about making sure that trains meet at Washington on time. I think that they will lengthen the blue line run time by a couple of minutes as well to achieve the same result. And I don't blame them. There's lots of coordination that is going to have to happen to keep trains close to schedule. I'm very interested in seeing how well the trains can be coordinated, what happens, and what adjustments are made. Hopefully it doesn't involve NB trains sitting at Grand and 23rd street waiting to meet, but I suspect that's what it will be.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Nov 11, 2011 19:12:25 GMT -8
So, Dwight, do you know what is the hold-up on the Culver City TPSS? It looks like they've stopped working on it with the job only half done.
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Nov 11, 2011 19:51:22 GMT -8
Is Expo/Vermont the only new station to open on the Phase 1 with double entrances?
|
|
|
Post by darrell on Nov 11, 2011 20:36:28 GMT -8
Is Expo/Vermont the only new station to open on the Phase 1 with double entrances? 23rd also has entrances at both ends.
|
|
|
Post by darrell on Nov 11, 2011 20:52:10 GMT -8
Here is a summary of my Expo timetable estimates, based on existing Metro timetables. The base case is one mile on private right-of-way with stations a mile apart takes 2 minutes; add more for traffic signal delays and slow curves. I'd like to know current station-station timings of test trains! Flower & 7th Flower & Pico -- 2 minutes Flower & 23rd -- 3-4 Flower & Jefferson -- 2-3 Expo & Vermont -- 3-4 Expo & Western -- 3-4 Expo & Crenshaw -- 3-4 Expo & La Brea -- 3 Jefferson & La Cienega -- 2 Venice & Robertson -- 2 Phase 1 subtotal -- 23-28National & Palms -- 2 Expo & Westwood -- 3 Expo & Sepulveda -- 1 Expo & Bundy -- 2 Olympic & 26th -- 2 Colorado & 17th -- 2-3 Colorado & 4th -- 3-4 Phase 2 subtotal -- 15-17Total -- 38-45You need to add Farmdale in there and won't trains have to wait for lights at Crenshaw? I think that once we get to what we think is normal and reasonable, add 2 minutes because Metro seems almost obsessed about making sure that trains meet at Washington on time. I think that they will lengthen the blue line run time by a couple of minutes as well to achieve the same result. And I don't blame them. There's lots of coordination that is going to have to happen to keep trains close to schedule. I'm very interested in seeing how well the trains can be coordinated, what happens, and what adjustments are made. Hopefully it doesn't involve NB trains sitting at Grand and 23rd street waiting to meet, but I suspect that's what it will be. Farmdale is included - it would be 2 minutes instead of 3 from Crenshaw to La Brea without it. Western to Crenshaw is 1.5 miles and all gated crossings except Gramercy. Thus 3-4 minutes, depending on signal delay. I'd think they could keep close to schedule, so the merge at Flower & Washington - ideally 3-minute intervals at peak periods - should should work with little delay.
|
|
|
Post by jamesinclair on Nov 11, 2011 22:33:54 GMT -8
Do those scenarios include 15 years from now, when deferred maintenance results in speed restrictions? I believe you meant planned or preventative maintenance; deferred means not doing maintenance to save costs. Nope, I meant what I wrote. Huh? Didn't the Blue Line improve from 59 minutes to 54 minutes end-to-end now after 20 years of service? And the Gold Line Pasadena segment increased from 35 minutes to 30 minutes? Why would you consider a train would get slower as time goes by? The advantage of rail is that times stay consistent throughout. Nope, trains get slower as time goes by. There are dozens of instances of STEAM trains making runs faster than their current amtrak replacements....and thats with the steam trains making more stops! Why? deferred maintenance. Go look at mature systems like chicago, dc, NYC, Boston and so on. Almost universally you will find that current travel times are longer than at opening. A 10mph speed restriction on a Longfellow bridge here, a 15mph restriction on a curve there, and a 3mph (yes, THREE mph) restriction on a BU bridge over there and you find yourself taking much longer to make the same trip. My comment was intended as a joke, but the sad fact is, roads get repaved every so often because "everyone" uses it. Rail lines? Good luck with that. The sad fact is, there will come a day where a 30 minute run on that section of the expo line is considered a "dream". That is, if current politics continue as is. The 2030 LA Times will write a nice article about how in the glory days of 2012, trains were so much faster. The good news is, we get fast speeds on day one....as long as they manage to figure out those newfangled crossing gates.
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Nov 12, 2011 9:13:12 GMT -8
Nope, trains get slower as time goes by. There are dozens of instances of STEAM trains making runs faster than their current amtrak replacements....and thats with the steam trains making more stops! Why? deferred maintenance. Go look at mature systems like chicago, dc, NYC, Boston and so on. Almost universally you will find that current travel times are longer than at opening. A 10mph speed restriction on a Longfellow bridge here, a 15mph restriction on a curve there, and a 3mph (yes, THREE mph) restriction on a BU bridge over there and you find yourself taking much longer to make the same trip. My comment was intended as a joke, but the sad fact is, roads get repaved every so often because "everyone" uses it. Rail lines? Good luck with that. The sad fact is, there will come a day where a 30 minute run on that section of the expo line is considered a "dream". That is, if current politics continue as is. The 2030 LA Times will write a nice article about how in the glory days of 2012, trains were so much faster. The good news is, we get fast speeds on day one....as long as they manage to figure out those newfangled crossing gates. Isn't that the reason the LA Metro doesn't run 24 hours? And nor do BART, SEPTA, MBTA, etc..? They need time for maintenance. That's what hurts maybe NYMTA, London Underground, etc... But, I still haven't seen how trains gotten slower over time on urban metro rail systems. I can believe this is true for Amtrak and regional rail. But not subway systems, light rail. By the way, the opposite of speed restrictions can happen. Case in point - the Metro Orange Line. After a pile-up of crashes the first 2 weeks with drivers unable to navigate the crossings, a 10 mph speed restriction was put in place on the Orange Line. Subsequently, it was lifted and now drivers cautiously roll in around 20 mph (due to sight limitations, but no official ruling). Also, the Gold Line Eastside was 10 - 15 mph on the 101 bridge..now it goes between 15 - 20 mph on the bridge. They were able to speed it up. And......the Gold Line Pasadena segment initially opened at 35 minutes and now its 30 minutes. So, regulations can go in reverse too! And track maintenance is always ongoing, it's never deferred. Read the signs on the Metro rail platforms, it lists all current maintenance schedules, so does Metro.net.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Nov 12, 2011 9:41:54 GMT -8
I believe you meant planned or preventative maintenance; deferred means not doing maintenance to save costs. Nope, I meant what I wrote. But what was your basis for writing it? From everything that I have seen, LACMTA is not deferring maintenance and has been doing a great job of maintaining all of the rail lines. I really only follow the blue line closely where just the last few years all of the major blue line road crossings between Wardlow and Washington have been replaced and all of the blue line transformers are being replaced. I see similar activities on the other lines, but I don't keep up with them. All budgets that I have seen include funds for maintenance and state of good repair. IINM Metro has replaced all of the red line signals that were the cause of the last WMATA crash. I've seen red line track work, green line track work, and not repairs. It was preventative maintenance. What maintenance has been deferred?!?
|
|
|
Post by jamesinclair on Nov 12, 2011 10:38:36 GMT -8
Isn't that the reason the LA Metro doesn't run 24 hours? And nor do BART, SEPTA, MBTA, etc..? They need time for maintenance. That's what hurts maybe NYMTA, London Underground, etc... But, I still haven't seen how trains gotten slower over time on urban metro rail systems. I can believe this is true for Amtrak and regional rail. But not subway systems, light rail. London doesnt run 24 hours. very few systems do. And the "night maintenance" excuse is simply a lie. Ask DC how much maintenance is done at night....every weekend huge portions of the metro are closed for maintenance, trains run on a single track, and headways exceed 20 minutes. Ask Boston how much work is done at night, 3 stations on the red line will be closed on weekends for track work...for 6 months. As for not seeing how it's true...someone above posted the Chicago speed restrictions. Im sure every system has such a map. I dont know where to find them, but here you see the the MBTA had 7.8 minutes of speed restrictions in their system in August. mbta.com/about_the_mbta/scorecard/So if you ride the green line, that's 8 minutes a day of time wasted (roundtrip) because of bad tracks. Heres a discussion, also in Boston, of trains being limited to 3mph over a highway bridge in 2007. www.railroad.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=65&t=42788#p438658That restriction has since been lifted to 10mph. This is important in the case of metro because the bridge is "owned" by the highway people. So deferred maintenance can hit transit because the highway people dont want to fix their bridge, like when expo runs over 110. This wasnt a case of bad tracks, it was bad concrete holding the tracks, and the movement of the train killing the concrete. Never deferred? Thats adorable. Deferred maintenance has been the SOP in this country for decades. Just look at any sidewalk or street in LA and tell me that the massive holes and cracks are supposed to be there. Look at the streetlights and tell me that 15% being out at any given time is supposed to be how things work. Metro hasnt seen problems because it's too new. HOWEVER, with all the expansions....well, every time you add track + operations, you spend more money AND accumulate more maintenance needs. Put it together, and things start being ignored. It's incredibly naïve to assume that metro is immune from the problems every single transit system in this country has faced. And the number 1 problem is putting expansion first, forgetting to maintain things, and repeating the rewards 15 years later when people wonder how a 10 minute trip became 13.
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Nov 12, 2011 10:50:46 GMT -8
Never deferred? Thats adorable. Deferred maintenance has been the SOP in this country for decades. Just look at any sidewalk or street in LA and tell me that the massive holes and cracks are supposed to be there. Look at the streetlights and tell me that 15% being out at any given time is supposed to be how things work. Metro hasnt seen problems because it's too new. HOWEVER, with all the expansions....well, every time you add track + operations, you spend more money AND accumulate more maintenance needs. Put it together, and things start being ignored. It's incredibly naïve to assume that metro is immune from the problems every single transit system in this country has faced. And the number 1 problem is putting expansion first, forgetting to maintain things, and repeating the rewards 15 years later when people wonder how a 10 minute trip became 13. James..I know you have a very pessimistic view of Metro at all times. But, let's be reasonable. You can either be argumentative, Tea Partyish, etc.. but look at facts instead of making your own opinions become facts (i.e. Beverly Hills Courier or LA Weekly) There IS maintenance that happens. You can see it sometimes on the weekends on the Gold Line. Bluelineshawn noted all the improvements on the Blue Line. There's notices on Metro.net about maintenance all the time. To be naive and say they are lying is an opinion, not a fact. Don't confuse the two. Regarding street maintenace........that's a different issue. That deals with local communities, developers (i.e. sidewalks have to be funded by PROPERTY OWNERS in LA, not Metro) and then the LADOT will maintain the sidewalk. It's a stupid rule (look at Broadway/5th), but unfortunately, that's what it is. So don't blanket blame Metro for everything. It makes you sound like a troll who's just picking a fight and getting people angry/mobish (i.e. Tea Party, #occupy). Let's work with the facts. Yes, you corrected me on London and I appreciate that. But to come up with these blanket statments about deferred maintenance is you not paying attention to realities and/or facts. As Justin Walker correctly pointed out, Metro's budget INCLUDES maintenance funding today. If you still don't believe that, then you're just looking to instigate dumb arguments here on the Transit Coalition board.
|
|
|
Post by jamesinclair on Nov 12, 2011 12:43:23 GMT -8
I'm not trying to argue that there's no maintenance. I'm saying if Metro is like any other system, they defer that expensive stuff. The concrete. The ties. The wires. Changing light bulbs counts as maintenance, but thats not what causes issue in the future.
Im not blaming Metro for sidewalks or streets. I was using that as a point to show that deferred maintenance culture is a part of every agency, not exclusive to metro.
And please stop throwing in the word "tea party" it simply isn't relevant here. From what I understand, their whole thing was "taxed enough already". You'll find me arguing that taxes are too low to cover things like....proper maintenance!
Again, of course the budget includes maintenance.
But if, FOR EXAMPLE(100% made up numbers), you have a maintenance budget of $50million......but you have $75million of things that need to be maintained, guess what, you're deferring $25m worth of it until the money appears.
Do any of the red line subway stations have water leaks? I dont know, this is an actual question. If they do, well, there's concrete evidence that your concrete isn't being maintained properly. That's just one example that is extremely typical of most subway stations around the world. NYC is well known for subway stations that continue to drip water onto passengers....even if it hasn't rained for 2 weeks!
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Nov 12, 2011 14:39:21 GMT -8
Well everything that I have seen shows that Metro is not only actively committed to not deferring maintenance, it's a top priority. Unless you have any information to the contrary I think that your negativity is unwarranted.
|
|
|
Post by carter on Nov 12, 2011 15:07:06 GMT -8
Well everything that I have seen shows that Metro is not only actively committed to not deferring maintenance, it's a top priority. Unless you have any information to the contrary I think that your negativity is unwarranted. There's a fine line between "negativity" and "skepticism" and I think James' skepticism is fair given the general neglect of transportation system maintenance everywhere in the United States. Metro is probably better than average in this regard, but it's important that advocates keep their guard up on this issue.
|
|
|
Post by roadtrainer on Nov 14, 2011 21:26:10 GMT -8
I don't know why or how you got the idea that Metro delays it's maintenance . I am a former metro Bus operator and I'll let you know that all the buses going for regular routine maintenance . After a determined period of time buses are pulled for the routes and send downtown and there they the buses are gone over with a fine tooth comb. Motors are replaced buses are painted and interiors are redone. And it is the same with the metro rail cars The first generation rail cars are to be shipped to a vendor and be refurbished. With new motors and transmissions. The concrete railroad ties have a fifty year life cycle. ,Rails are inspected and replaced. So why do you think that Metro defers it's maintenance? Where is your proof? How did you come up with this thinking? Think positive for Metro does take care of it's fleet, it's systems and rail lines! Thank You the Roadtrainer
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Nov 15, 2011 13:24:59 GMT -8
Good news:
City is finally repaving Exposition Boulevard! It was much needed because it had turned into a war zone.
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Nov 15, 2011 17:04:56 GMT -8
I have at times observed that the US appears to have what I have dubbed "Golden Spike Syndrome": once the last rail is laid and the last spike pounded in (or Pandrol clip installed), we tend to think the job is done. No, the work has just started, but the workers who keep the track level and in proper alignment rarely get much respect, and the politicians who attended the ribbon cutting are nowhere to be seen when wornout rails are replaced. Perhaps Mr. Fujita can help me on this--I have never been to Japan, but my understanding is that keeping the Shinkansen tracks in proper shape for speeds that are only a dream here in the US is a never-ending task, and the workers take pride in the condition of the railways.
|
|
|
Post by jamesinclair on Nov 16, 2011 17:12:18 GMT -8
I don't know why or how you got the idea that Metro delays it's maintenance . I am a former metro Bus operator and I'll let you know that all the buses going for regular routine maintenance . After a determined period of time buses are pulled for the routes and send downtown and there they the buses are gone over with a fine tooth comb. Motors are replaced buses are painted and interiors are redone. And it is the same with the metro rail cars The first generation rail cars are to be shipped to a vendor and be refurbished. With new motors and transmissions. The concrete railroad ties have a fifty year life cycle. ,Rails are inspected and replaced. So why do you think that Metro defers it's maintenance? Where is your proof? How did you come up with this thinking? Think positive for Metro does take care of it's fleet, it's systems and rail lines! Thank You the Roadtrainer I dont wish to drag this on by repeating myself. -Deferred maintenance usually refers to the big expensive things. Not filling bus tires. Things like leaks in the concrete in the subway. Or bad joints in bridges. It's about the infrastructure, not the vehicles (which can be "maintained" to last well past their designed life. -I said, multiple times, that if metro is like EVERY OTHER transit system in the country, deferred maintenance will be an issue. It's 2011. The rail system hasn't been around long enough for it to be an issue yet. I don't have specific metro examples because I never claimed they exist. -Concrete rail ties do not last 50 years. Ask Amtrak or the MBTA who are spending hundreds of millions to replace 30 year old, or younger, concrete tracks. Let's drop this conversation and revisit it in 2020, when the blue line turns 30.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Nov 17, 2011 17:35:02 GMT -8
I don't know why or how you got the idea that Metro delays it's maintenance . I am a former metro Bus operator and I'll let you know that all the buses going for regular routine maintenance . After a determined period of time buses are pulled for the routes and send downtown and there they the buses are gone over with a fine tooth comb. Motors are replaced buses are painted and interiors are redone. And it is the same with the metro rail cars The first generation rail cars are to be shipped to a vendor and be refurbished. With new motors and transmissions. The concrete railroad ties have a fifty year life cycle. ,Rails are inspected and replaced. So why do you think that Metro defers it's maintenance? Where is your proof? How did you come up with this thinking? Think positive for Metro does take care of it's fleet, it's systems and rail lines! Thank You the Roadtrainer I dont wish to drag this on by repeating myself. -Deferred maintenance usually refers to the big expensive things. Not filling bus tires. Things like leaks in the concrete in the subway. Or bad joints in bridges. It's about the infrastructure, not the vehicles (which can be "maintained" to last well past their designed life. -I said, multiple times, that if metro is like EVERY OTHER transit system in the country, deferred maintenance will be an issue. It's 2011. The rail system hasn't been around long enough for it to be an issue yet. I don't have specific metro examples because I never claimed they exist. -Concrete rail ties do not last 50 years. Ask Amtrak or the MBTA who are spending hundreds of millions to replace 30 year old, or younger, concrete tracks. Let's drop this conversation and revisit it in 2020, when the blue line turns 30. Of course you would want to drop it. You have no facts to support your statement, just unsubstantiated and unwarranted generalizations. I don't agree that every TA in the US defers maintenance. NYC used to and after seeing where it got them, no longer does. But even if every TA did defer maintenance, that means nothing unless LACMTA is deferring maintenance.
|
|
|
Post by jamesinclair on Nov 17, 2011 20:55:03 GMT -8
Of course you would want to drop it. You have no facts to support your statement, just unsubstantiated and unwarranted generalizations. I don't agree that every TA in the US defers maintenance. NYC used to and after seeing where it got them, no longer does. But even if every TA did defer maintenance, that means nothing unless LACMTA is deferring maintenance. I have a ton of facts. Ive provided actual references. Scroll up and youll see MBTA link, someone provided a Chicago link, and we all know about amtraks maintenance troubles. Those look like facts. Speaking of no facts... NYC has BILLIONS in deferred maintenance coming to roost. MTA is now proposing to shut down entire subway lines for 3 months to do work. If they had kept up on it, no extra work would be needed. Please, scroll up and read what I actually wrote instead of what you've imagined I said.
|
|
|
Post by carter on Nov 17, 2011 22:44:29 GMT -8
Alright folks, let's keep this on topic.
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Nov 18, 2011 9:31:20 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Nov 18, 2011 11:24:51 GMT -8
Of course you would want to drop it. You have no facts to support your statement, just unsubstantiated and unwarranted generalizations. I don't agree that every TA in the US defers maintenance. NYC used to and after seeing where it got them, no longer does. But even if every TA did defer maintenance, that means nothing unless LACMTA is deferring maintenance. I have a ton of facts. Ive provided actual references. Scroll up and youll see MBTA link, someone provided a Chicago link, and we all know about amtraks maintenance troubles. Those look like facts. Speaking of no facts... NYC has BILLIONS in deferred maintenance coming to roost. MTA is now proposing to shut down entire subway lines for 3 months to do work. If they had kept up on it, no extra work would be needed. Please, scroll up and read what I actually wrote instead of what you've imagined I said. Ummm...we're waiting on facts about how LA is deferring maintenance now, not what other TA's did 3 decades ago. You made the statement that LA was going to have to deal with deferred maintenance yet haven't provided a single fact to substantiate it. I saw that last month Antonovich and Ridley-Thomas had a motion for a short term transportation plan that will address Metro's plan for state of good repair. Let's see what that says before deciding.
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on Nov 18, 2011 12:09:22 GMT -8
You know, in all the videos that I watched of the junction testing, every train that went through the junction went straight through, as if to be running on the Expo line. Maybe there are still issues related to switching back and forth between Expo and Blue trains? Seems they would have been able to figure that out long ago though...
RT
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Nov 18, 2011 12:29:34 GMT -8
Or maybe they're just getting ready to run Expo Line trains from 7th street to Jefferson/La Cienega? Currently, they've just been doing Flower/21st or Flower/Washington to Jefferson/La Cienega. Maybe this is the day begin true operations of trains 100% all the way to La Cienega from 7th street. We haven't seen that happen yet! If so, they should also test the switch track by having 1 be Blue Line (to Washiongton station) and 1 be Expo Line (La Cienega).
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Nov 18, 2011 13:06:39 GMT -8
Back Now almost 8 Weeks ago was the Last time EXPO Trains went into 7th street, but only went out as far as Jefferson and Back as in My Past Video shows, on this back to back weekend Metro Gave Thumbs Up to the Junction Have they tested 1 Blue line and 1 Expo Line as it would happen during operations? I don't remember seeing that. I've seen them do straight shots of Expo Line (i.e. south on Washington only), but I think they need to simulate how it will work when operations begin..........and that may still need to be tested this weekend.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Nov 18, 2011 17:31:52 GMT -8
Back Now almost 8 Weeks ago was the Last time EXPO Trains went into 7th street, but only went out as far as Jefferson and Back as in My Past Video shows, on this back to back weekend Metro Gave Thumbs Up to the Junction Have they tested 1 Blue line and 1 Expo Line as it would happen during operations? I don't remember seeing that. I've seen them do straight shots of Expo Line (i.e. south on Washington only), but I think they need to simulate how it will work when operations begin..........and that may still need to be tested this weekend. That makes sense. Hopefully someone will have time to check it out and let us know. We had preliminary plans to take the blue line downtown this Sunday afternoon, but that's out now.
|
|