|
Post by bobdavis on Mar 23, 2011 21:40:59 GMT -8
Regarding the former PE right of way in Long Beach and Seal Beach: Yes, it went through Huntington Beach, all the way to Balboa. The Balboa Pavilion that stands today was near the terminal. At times the track was extended even further when the breakwaters were built at the entrance to Newport Harbor, but the temporary tracks were used by small steam locomotives, and weren't electrified. Oscar Smith, the president of PE had a house in Balboa, and the PE business car 1299 would take him into LA in the morning and home in the evening. This car (which shows up in some of the Expo line history postings) is preserved at Orange Empire Ry. Museum (oerm.org)
|
|
|
Post by wad on Mar 24, 2011 3:40:29 GMT -8
I think the 757 is more symbolic than anything. Because it only provides an 11 percent time advantage over locals, this is a nominal time savings or advantage. That is all. On the other hand, if the service is rolled into the locals, heck, then riders only need one schedule to carry around with them. And, if it is more frequent, they might not need one at all. Local 207 is every 10 minutes, Rapid 757 is every 15 minutes. Besides, the buses almost never keep timed schedules. What happens on Western north of the 10 Freeway is that the Rapid stops are so close together that most passengers are walking a bit longer to catch the bus at a local/Rapid stop. This has made Line 207 a de facto Rapid line. Same thing for 204/754 on Vermont.
|
|
|
Post by trackman on Mar 24, 2011 4:53:16 GMT -8
I think the 757 is more symbolic than anything. Because it only provides an 11 percent time advantage over locals, this is a nominal time savings or advantage. That is all. On the other hand, if the service is rolled into the locals, heck, then riders only need one schedule to carry around with them. And, if it is more frequent, they might not need one at all. Local 207 is every 10 minutes, Rapid 757 is every 15 minutes. Besides, the buses almost never keep timed schedules. What happens on Western north of the 10 Freeway is that the Rapid stops are so close together that most passengers are walking a bit longer to catch the bus at a local/Rapid stop. This has made Line 207 a de facto Rapid line. Same thing for 204/754 on Vermont. I didn't know those were the frequencies of those lines; basically 6 buses/hour and 4 buses/hour. Combined, this is 10 buses/hour. I'd think 6 minute service is more marketable than 10 and 15 minute service frequencies.
|
|
|
Post by JerardWright on Mar 24, 2011 7:52:44 GMT -8
I think the 757 is more symbolic than anything. Because it only provides an 11 percent time advantage over locals, this is a nominal time savings or advantage. That is all. On the other hand, if the service is rolled into the locals, heck, then riders only need one schedule to carry around with them. And, if it is more frequent, they might not need one at all. Local 207 is every 10 minutes, Rapid 757 is every 15 minutes. Besides, the buses almost never keep timed schedules. What happens on Western north of the 10 Freeway is that the Rapid stops are so close together that most passengers are walking a bit longer to catch the bus at a local/Rapid stop. This has made Line 207 a de facto Rapid line. Same thing for 204/754 on Vermont. Except Vermont has virtually an extra lane north of Pico Blvd compared to Western and it doesn't have signalized intersections at almost every 2 block intervals north of Olympic Blvd. Thats why Vermont can achieve the time savings of 20% compared to Western.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Mar 24, 2011 8:35:03 GMT -8
To remind you again, there is a whole thread dedicated for Expo bus connections: Ok transit nerds... let's layout our proposals for rerouting and consolidation of bus routes when Expo phase 1 opens. I guess we can assume it will have phased opening so if you want, you can make you suggestions based on (1) when Expo opens to La Cienega, and/or (2) when Expo reaches Venice/Robertson. p.s. I know Wad did an write up on this at MetroriderLA before... but that was a while ago. Some of his suggestions are already outdated. Let's start fresh again. Therefore, let's not post things unrelated to Expo Phase 2 construction here.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Mar 24, 2011 9:24:49 GMT -8
Please continue the conversation about the bus service cuts in a bus service thread. It's an important issue, but it is off-topic here.
|
|
|
Post by Alexis Kasperavičius on Mar 24, 2011 14:42:04 GMT -8
Apparently the overhead catenary was tested today with a bit of trouble. See video link. Expo Catenary Test
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Mar 24, 2011 15:55:28 GMT -8
Apparently the overhead catenary was tested today with a bit of trouble. See video link. Expo Catenary TestI didn't know the Phase 2 construction had already advanced to this point. LOL That's a crazy electrical short. Don't these things have a fuse for crying out loud? You may end up like Oddjob in Goldfinger:
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Mar 24, 2011 17:38:57 GMT -8
OK we've had our visit to "Zap City" (not sure where it was, but it didn't look like anything in North America). Regarding fuses, one of the problems in providing "fault protection" for electric railways, especially those with intensive service, is that rush hours loads aren't that far from a "dead short". There's a story about a New York subway track crew working late at night. They had taken a clearance on a block of track and the few trains running at that hour were using a bypass route in the same tunnel. One of the workers was trying to pry loose a stubborn piece of track hardware. His liner bar (heavy forged steel about four feet long) slipped out of his grasp and went flying over to the other track, where it landed on a running rail and hit the third rail. There was a very loud "Crack!", a brilliant flash, and much of the steel bar was vaporized. They had 600 volts at thousands of amps finding ground in a hurry. And I don't think the protective relays opened (if they did, it took a while).
|
|
|
Post by tonyw79sfv on Mar 24, 2011 21:07:38 GMT -8
Apparently the overhead catenary was tested today with a bit of trouble. See video link. Expo Catenary TestThat train didn't go 88MPH while drawing 1.21 gigawatts, so it just sat there in the present getting juiced.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Mar 30, 2011 12:02:01 GMT -8
Today I saw a survey crew at National and Palms. Perhaps they were there for the Expo Line.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Apr 5, 2011 8:52:12 GMT -8
A design contract for the Expo maintenance facility in Santa Monica will now be awarded to Maintenance Design Group (MDG) for about $8 million. This one was one of the remaining pieces of Expo Phase 2 but it will now be underway as well. The design for the maintenance facility is being done under separate contract because there are very few firms who have the technical qualifications to do that.
|
|
|
Post by jeisenbe on Apr 6, 2011 0:30:47 GMT -8
A design contract for the Expo maintenance facility in Santa Monica will now be awarded to Maintenance Design Group (MDG) for about $8 million. 8 million for the design? That's almost 10% of the total cost, right Will it really take 4 dozen engineers to finish that design in a year, at $150,000 a piece? Remind me to "retire" as a consultant. Well, I'm glad the maintenance facility will get built soon. They need a place to park and fix up the trains. But do bus divisions cost this much to "design"?
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Apr 6, 2011 7:30:54 GMT -8
A design contract for the Expo maintenance facility in Santa Monica will now be awarded to Maintenance Design Group (MDG) for about $8 million. 8 million for the design? That's almost 10% of the total cost, right Will it really take 4 dozen engineers to finish that design in a year, at $150,000 a piece? Remind me to "retire" as a consultant. Well, I'm glad the maintenance facility will get built soon. They need a place to park and fix up the trains. But do bus divisions cost this much to "design"? It is a breathtaking amount of money, for design/architecture of a single facility. In the olden days, the government would have assigned 8-10 staff architects/engineers to do the design. I see the same type of thing with respect to Metro's electronic and software systems. Things like changing the messages on the electronic station signs, or changing simple rules for the TAP cards. Take a look at the budgets to see how much these changes cost. As a software engineer, I know that for many of these changes, it can be done by a decent programmer in a day or two, at most. Incremental cost: maybe $1,000 for something simple. Yet Metro will pay hundreds of thousands of dollars -- taxpayer dollars -- for these changes, either because it lacks the staff to do it itself, or because it's giving sweet deals to cozy contractors.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Apr 6, 2011 8:53:19 GMT -8
It will be a nice maintenance facility but there will be no trains in it because Metro hasn't placed any orders yet or doesn't seem to have any intention to do so in the near future. They can run a one round-trip train a day as in the Air Line days and store the single train in the huge maintenance facility overnight. Perhaps by 2017 they will receive the first batch of the new LRVs. LOL
|
|
|
Post by jeisenbe on Apr 6, 2011 16:48:03 GMT -8
It will be a nice maintenance facility but there will be no trains in it because Metro hasn't placed any orders yet or doesn't seem to have any intention to do so in the near future. Yikes. But cars and even houses can be built in 1 year when needed. Could Metro pick an "off-the-shelf", tested train design (like the same as a previous order) and get trains built in time for 2015?
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Apr 7, 2011 7:41:25 GMT -8
It will be a nice maintenance facility but there will be no trains in it because Metro hasn't placed any orders yet or doesn't seem to have any intention to do so in the near future. Yikes. But cars and even houses can be built in 1 year when needed. Could Metro pick an "off-the-shelf", tested train design (like the same as a previous order) and get trains built in time for 2015? The trains need to be first designed to exact Metro specifications. There really aren't any off-the-shelve LRVs as LRVs are hardly standardized. Even if the length is a a few inches off, it wouldn't work. Of course, the platform height and train width are more critical. Then, there are the unique train-control systems. Once the design is completed, they need to build it and test it for a year. Then they need to go into production. The local-job program is complicating things a lot. This is reminding me the procrastination in Phase 1 (power lines etc.). If the contract is issued next year, I don't think three years will be enough to make these LRVs. I don't know what they will run on Expo Phase 2. I doubt their existing stock will be nearly enough.
|
|
|
Post by Transit Coalition on Apr 7, 2011 13:14:48 GMT -8
It will be a nice maintenance facility but there will be no trains in it because Metro hasn't placed any orders yet or doesn't seem to have any intention to do so in the near future. They can run a one round-trip train a day as in the Air Line days and store the single train in the huge maintenance facility overnight. Perhaps by 2017 they will receive the first batch of the new LRVs. LOL The train vehicle order is in process. It passed at the March Metro Board Meeting. There will be vehicles to provide service. It isn't like the Green Line, where we had the cars for 10 years before we needed them or the subway, where the fleet has a 25% spare ratio (industry standard is 10%).
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Apr 7, 2011 13:48:01 GMT -8
The train vehicle order is in process. It passed at the March Metro Board Meeting. There will be vehicles to provide service. It isn't like the Green Line, where we had the cars for 10 years before we needed them or the subway, where the fleet has a 25% spare ratio (industry standard is 10%). The 3/24/2011 Metro Board meeting? ( recap, agenda) I don't see it in there.
|
|
|
Post by thanks4goingmetro on Apr 7, 2011 13:52:27 GMT -8
It will be a nice maintenance facility but there will be no trains in it because Metro hasn't placed any orders yet or doesn't seem to have any intention to do so in the near future. Yikes. But cars and even houses can be built in 1 year when needed. Could Metro pick an "off-the-shelf", tested train design (like the same as a previous order) and get trains built in time for 2015? After following the Chevy Volt from concept car to production models sold at dealerships it takes more like 3 years or so to develop a new automobile platform and about $700 million. It's true that there's really nothing really standard about light rail vehicles except maybe some parts like electric motors can be reused, but otherwise every system has a train control system and unique platform heights, train widths, and clearances to maintain on rolling stock. I wonder if they will make improvements to the Breda design or move on to another maker, again?
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Apr 7, 2011 14:23:05 GMT -8
From the board-meeting presentation today, Phase 2 won't start design - build (LNTP won't be issued) until early May 2011. Don't know what is the hold-up but suspect usual bureaucracy. Expo board meeting April 7, 2011, audio
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Apr 7, 2011 17:56:16 GMT -8
The 3/24/2011 Metro Board meeting? ( recap, agenda) I don't see it in there. Maybe he means February
|
|
|
Post by carter on Apr 7, 2011 21:51:50 GMT -8
The 3/24/2011 Metro Board meeting? ( recap, agenda) I don't see it in there. Maybe he means FebruaryFrom page 13 is says this: v. LACMTA's procurment of 47 light rail vehicles for LACMTA's Eight rail system, including a portion of LACMTA oversight and consultant costs, spare parts, tools & special equipment, and carbuilder non-recurring costs,
and this on page 10 (ii) the light rail vehicles ("LRVs") to be procured by LACMTA which me needed for the LACMTA light rail system (the "LRV Project") (budget of $202,100,000 ); Not sure what to make of this, other than it's just a matter of placing the order.
|
|
|
Post by joshuanickel on Apr 7, 2011 21:57:42 GMT -8
The train vehicle order is in process. It passed at the March Metro Board Meeting. There will be vehicles to provide service. It isn't like the Green Line, where we had the cars for 10 years before we needed them or the subway, where the fleet has a 25% spare ratio (industry standard is 10%). The 3/24/2011 Metro Board meeting? ( recap, agenda) I don't see it in there. No it was actually October of 2010: www.metro.net/board/Items/2010/10_October/20101028RBMItem24.pdfEXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT AND AUDIT RECOMMENDED (4-0) and OPERATIONS COMMITTEE FORWARDED WITHOUT RECOMMENDATION: A. authorizing staff to issue a federally funded solicitation for a “Best Value” Light Rail Vehicle (LRV) procurement. The procurement will include 78 vehicles in the base order and options for additional vehicles as required for Measure R light rail projects; B. approving an increase in the life-of-project budget for CP#206035 – Light Rail Vehicle Procurement (P3010) of $160,910,000, from $174,500,000 to $335,410,000; C. approving the attached funding plan totaling $335,410,000 for the first 78 LRVs that includes the reprogramming of $21.9 million in federal funds which are anticipated savings from the procurement of P2550 light rail vehicles; and D. amending the FY11 budget to add one full-time equivalent (FTE) to Transit Operations to provide dedicated project management support and one FTE to Administrative Services-Procurement to provide dedicated project and contract administration support for the life of the capital project. It was also revised in January: www.metro.net/board/Items/2011/01_January/20110127RBMItem24.pdfIt says it the october staff report that the base order of 78 LRV's will be completed in 2015: Award of a contract to provide LRVs will take approximately one year from the date of Board approval of the solicitation. MTA has contacted a number of potential vehicle manufacturers to discuss schedule requirements. Based on their responses, it will take approximately 24-30 months to produce the first vehicle for our testing and acceptance. We will ask car makers to deliver four cars per month beginning in late 2013. This expedited schedule will result in complete delivery of the base order of 78 LRVs by end of 2015. So by the end of the year, Metro should be giving the contract to a company.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Apr 8, 2011 6:49:48 GMT -8
The RFP was issued in November 2010 and bids are due this Monday. They expect to award by October 31, 2011. link to RFP
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Apr 8, 2011 7:25:05 GMT -8
Ah yes, the October Metro meeting. I must have missed this item, given the other agenda items for that day -- namely, approval of the Westside and Regional Connector subways.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Apr 8, 2011 7:50:19 GMT -8
Procurement Status Report for RFP P3010 – New Light Rail Vehicles (LRV)
Staff has not received a response from the Federal Transit Administration concerning approval of the four unique solicitation elements that were approved by the Board for Local Jobs and Additional U.S. Component Content programs, a Metro managed DBE program, and local environmental rules for LRV production. In the absence of a formal response, staff will evaluate two alternate approaches: 1) an unconventional approach with the four items until May 31, 2011; and 2) a conventional path if no approval is obtained. The due date for all proposals remains April 11, 2011.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Apr 8, 2011 11:41:11 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Apr 8, 2011 13:51:56 GMT -8
I just read the bottom of the sign at Palms Station: CHEVIOT HILLS PIPELINE CO.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Apr 15, 2011 8:26:23 GMT -8
LOL I don't know who took these Expo Phase 2 pictures (not me). They are taken at the Motor Yard (segment in Palms just west of Motor Ave bridge). More are here.
|
|