HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Feb 27, 2017, 10:01 PM
mfastx mfastx is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
That doesn't make any sense. Why would per mile ridership be lower if there were one line? If anything, per mile ridership will drop as secondary corridors are developed.

Light rail can carry hundreds of thousands of riders, easy. There's no way in hell Miami is going to have millions of rail riders.
Overall systemwide per mile ridership might go down, but if the original central line has additional lines feeding into it, then ridership over the original stretch will go up. A good comparison is here in DC, the original stretch that opened has vastly more ridership over that same stretch now that the system is complete. Rail transit in general has increasing returns as a greater portion of the region is connected.

Quote:
Originally Posted by electricron View Post
Why? Light rail trains can run in multiple units, so these trains can be as long as heavy rail trains. They are usually just as wide as just as tall, so their capacity could be the same per train.
The only physical attributes that make them different at all is how they pick up their electricity, heavy rail usually using third rail while light rail usually using overhead catenary.
So it's how they are operated that causes system capacity differences. With light rail having stations at grade in central business districts, station platform lengths, and therefore train lengths, are usually limited to city block lengths, 300 to 400 feet. Heavy rail operation off grade, under or above grade, train lengths are not limited to city block sizes. But light rail trains can operate off grade too. So I repeat again, light rail trains can be as long as heavy rail trains, and can have the same system capacity.
If you're gonna build light rail to have the same capacity as heavy rail, then why not build heavy rail? I'm not aware of a light rail system that has similar, or even close to, the capacity of a typical heavy rail system. Can you name an example?

That's not true, as I said before, heavy rail can run more frequent headways due to being totally grade separated, faster average speed, longer cars and longer trains. You said it right there, light rail platforms are frequently limited by city block size. The only light rail system I can think of off the top of my head that comes close to what you're describing is St. Louis, and their platforms/trains are much shorter.

Besides, this is a theoretical discussion. If Miami chose light rail (which we now know they didn't for the most part), what makes you think they would construct it the way you're describing?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Feb 27, 2017, 10:21 PM
electricron's Avatar
electricron electricron is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Granbury, Texas
Posts: 2,865
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by mfastx View Post

If you're gonna build light rail to have the same capacity as heavy rail, then why not build heavy rail? I'm not aware of a light rail system that has similar, or even close to, the capacity of a typical heavy rail system. Can you name an example?
MBTA, Green Line (light rail) vs either Red, Orange, or Blue Lines.
http://www.mbta.com/uploadedfiles/do...Edition(1).pdf
Some data that should surprise you.......FY 2013 data.....
Green Line daily ridership 227,645
Red Line daily ridership 272,684
Orange Line daily ridership 203,406
Blue Line daily ridership 63,225

The Green Line, Boston's light rail line, stands up very well against Boston's other heavy rail lines individually.
That's just one city, all that you asked for.

And by the way, heavy rail reaches a capacity limit, the shorter the headways the shorter the trains. There's a reason why most heavy rail trains are limited to six cars. Start adding more cars and the headway must go up. It's the terminus station setup that limits headways to around 2 minutes; time for passengers to alight and board the train, and time for the operator to switch ends and cabs. The longer the train, the longer it takes the driver to switch ends and cabs.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2017, 1:16 AM
lrt's friend lrt's friend is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,203
Quote:
Originally Posted by electricron View Post
MBTA, Green Line (light rail) vs either Red, Orange, or Blue Lines.
http://www.mbta.com/uploadedfiles/do...Edition(1).pdf
Some data that should surprise you.......FY 2013 data.....
Green Line daily ridership 227,645
Red Line daily ridership 272,684
Orange Line daily ridership 203,406
Blue Line daily ridership 63,225

The Green Line, Boston's light rail line, stands up very well against Boston's other heavy rail lines individually.
That's just one city, all that you asked for.

And by the way, heavy rail reaches a capacity limit, the shorter the headways the shorter the trains. There's a reason why most heavy rail trains are limited to six cars. Start adding more cars and the headway must go up. It's the terminus station setup that limits headways to around 2 minutes; time for passengers to alight and board the train, and time for the operator to switch ends and cabs. The longer the train, the longer it takes the driver to switch ends and cabs.
Automatically controlled trains eliminate this problem.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2017, 2:22 AM
Mikemike Mikemike is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 971
So do multiple tail tracks. Or branching. Or operation modes where a new operator takes over the train at the terminus.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2017, 3:18 AM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
atomic
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 12,604
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eightball View Post
^^^ interesting, sounds like they have no clue at the moment. The reference to LA's system in the article is off, only the light rail is street running. The heavy rail portion of the system is not street running whatsoever
Just a shot in the dark, but I think they might be referring to Expo Line with that LA comment. West of Flower, there is no "street running" in mixed traffic, the line operates in its own exclusive median with flyovers at major intersections and grade crossings at minor ones.

Of course, Expo also had the advantage of being a former Pacific Electric line back in the day, so there was already a rail-friendly right of way just waiting to be resurrected. That might actually work for the South Dade extension (former rail line) or the West Corridor (active rail line and/or expressway). For the North Corridor, I have no idea how they build it at grade. It would simply be too disruptive. I think it'll have to be all or mostly elevated.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2017, 4:43 AM
Quixote's Avatar
Quixote Quixote is offline
Stay in Yo Lane
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 5,531
Quote:
Originally Posted by mfastx View Post
If you're gonna build light rail to have the same capacity as heavy rail, then why not build heavy rail? I'm not aware of a light rail system that has similar, or even close to, the capacity of a typical heavy rail system. Can you name an example?
Edmonton's LRT system can run 5-car trains, the capacity of which is certainly equivalent to the standard 6-car, 450-foot HRT trains here in LA.

Video Link
__________________
"I'm an LA guy, can't help it." -- Tiger Woods

"The power of imagination makes us infinite." -- John Muir
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2017, 4:50 PM
mfastx mfastx is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by electricron View Post
MBTA, Green Line (light rail) vs either Red, Orange, or Blue Lines.
http://www.mbta.com/uploadedfiles/do...Edition(1).pdf
Some data that should surprise you.......FY 2013 data.....
Green Line daily ridership 227,645
Red Line daily ridership 272,684
Orange Line daily ridership 203,406
Blue Line daily ridership 63,225

The Green Line, Boston's light rail line, stands up very well against Boston's other heavy rail lines individually.
That's just one city, all that you asked for.

And by the way, heavy rail reaches a capacity limit, the shorter the headways the shorter the trains. There's a reason why most heavy rail trains are limited to six cars. Start adding more cars and the headway must go up. It's the terminus station setup that limits headways to around 2 minutes; time for passengers to alight and board the train, and time for the operator to switch ends and cabs. The longer the train, the longer it takes the driver to switch ends and cabs.
Heh, thought you would say Boston. I went to BU so I definitely know the Green Line. It's extremely slow but yes it carries a ton of people. When I lived there, many folks complained and wished it were more like the other lines (aka heavy rail). There are many ways I would improve it but it is a success.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quixote View Post
Edmonton's LRT system can run 5-car trains, the capacity of which is certainly equivalent to the standard 6-car, 450-foot HRT trains here in LA.

Video Link
Very cool. Honestly I think a light rail system would be appropriate for Miami. My original comment was just me expressing frustration at the fact that the original line would likely never reach its ridership potential if they changed modes. Light rail, with a few exceptions, usually doesn't generate the same ridership, I was hoping that Miami would fully build out the system as originally intended, it's such an asset that they have a single HRT line in the first place.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2017, 8:36 PM
lrt's friend lrt's friend is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,203
Quote:
Originally Posted by mfastx View Post
Heh, thought you would say Boston. I went to BU so I definitely know the Green Line. It's extremely slow but yes it carries a ton of people. When I lived there, many folks complained and wished it were more like the other lines (aka heavy rail). There are many ways I would improve it but it is a success.



Very cool. Honestly I think a light rail system would be appropriate for Miami. My original comment was just me expressing frustration at the fact that the original line would likely never reach its ridership potential if they changed modes. Light rail, with a few exceptions, usually doesn't generate the same ridership, I was hoping that Miami would fully build out the system as originally intended, it's such an asset that they have a single HRT line in the first place.
I am not understanding the logic with the bolded comment. It is not the type of train that affects ridership. It is the design and location of the route as well as the frequency of the trains. Heavy rail could mean one train a day with miniscule ridership while light rail could mean a train every 2 minutes and enormous ridership. On the other hand, if you run LRT every half hour, you will get much lower ridership than running heavy rail at subway frequencies.

Our city is opening a new LRT line in 2018 and I am expecting daily ridership of at least 250,000 per day from day one.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2017, 10:21 PM
mfastx mfastx is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by lrt's friend View Post
I am not understanding the logic with the bolded comment. It is not the type of train that affects ridership. It is the design and location of the route as well as the frequency of the trains. Heavy rail could mean one train a day with miniscule ridership while light rail could mean a train every 2 minutes and enormous ridership. On the other hand, if you run LRT every half hour, you will get much lower ridership than running heavy rail at subway frequencies.

Our city is opening a new LRT line in 2018 and I am expecting daily ridership of at least 250,000 per day from day one.
The differences between light rail and heavy rail are simply the design of the train. There is no "end all, be all" to the classifications. In most cases here in the US, the design of light rail systems is conducive to less ridership than heavy rail systems. The point of "light rail" is to have a less expensive rail transit option. Light rail is frequently mixed with city streets which reduce its speeds and train lengths.

Obviously not all systems are created equal but the intent behind choosing to go with light rail means you would like to spend less money and have a design that allows the trains to mix with street traffic. Of course not all light rail systems are like this but most are. All else being equal, heavy rail typically has more ridership simply due to (usually) longer trains and it operating in its own ROW which allows for more frequent headways and faster service. Here is the Wikipedia quote:

"In North America, the American Public Transportation Association defines a heavy rail system as an electric railway with the capacity to handle a heavy volume of traffic.[1] The term is often used to distinguish it from light rail systems, which usually handle a smaller volume of passengers.

In North America, heavy rail can also refer to rapid transit, when referring to systems with heavier passenger loadings than light rail systems,[1] but distinct from commuter rail and intercity rail systems. It is characterized by high-speed, passenger rail cars running in separate rights-of-way from which all other vehicular and foot traffic are excluded.[8]

Such passenger rail cars are almost always electrically driven, with power either drawn from an overhead line or an electrified third rail."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2017, 4:00 AM
eleven=11 eleven=11 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,000
http://www.miamitodaynews.com/2017/0...heduled-tests/
new rail cars coming this year, what year did that transportation TAX pass vote?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2017, 5:19 AM
bobdreamz's Avatar
bobdreamz bobdreamz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Miami/Orlando, FL.
Posts: 6,866
Quote:
Originally Posted by eleven=11 View Post
http://www.miamitodaynews.com/2017/0...heduled-tests/
new rail cars coming this year, what year did that transportation TAX pass vote?
November 2002
__________________
Miami : 40 Skyscrapers over 500 + ft. | 152 + meters | 16 U/C !
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Mar 15, 2017, 2:54 PM
dave8721 dave8721 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Miami
Posts: 2,780
http://www.miamitodaynews.com/2017/0...ea-rapid-tran/

Quote:
Mayor broaches new taxes for Strategic Miami Area Rapid Tran

Mayor Carlos Gimenez has asked Miami-Dade commissioners if they might consider raising countywide millage or assessing another half-percent sales tax to help fund the Strategic Miami Area Rapid Transit (SMART) plan.
In November, commissioners directed the mayor to analyze using tax increment financing (TIF) to help fund the plan and infrastructure near the planned American Dream Miami Mall, the mayor wrote in a March 7 memo.
“TIF financing is one of many possible alternatives that can be used to fund future capital projects as well as operational and maintenance costs of the SMART plan,” Mr. Gimenez wrote.
As discussed at Commission Chair Esteban Bovo Jr.’s Policy Council last week, Miami-Dade is still refining expense assumptions for the SMART plan, the mayor explained. “Preliminary capital cost estimates greatly surpass the estimated net present value of the current 40-year Transit and PTP [People’s Transportation Plan] pro-forma developed for fiscal 2016-17 and the estimated operating cost to implement the new and existing system and maintain it in a state of good repair will create a substantial budgetary gap in the PTP pro-forma.”
The mayor said given that SMART plan needs will probably exceed incremental revenue generated by any TIF district, the county “may want to consider enhancing the revenues available by dedicating a higher mileage rate and/or assessing another half penny for transportation purposes.”
Traditionally, Mr. Gimenez said, governments have used TIF districts to encourage economic development in distressed areas. However, he noted, state statute does allow creation of TIF districts for transportation.
The mayor concluded that TIF districts should be considered as part of a larger approach for revitalizing neighborhoods and attracting development in conjunction with alternative transportation options.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Mar 15, 2017, 3:57 PM
orulz orulz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 532
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila View Post
It appears that Miami-Dade officials are actually considering the possibility of extending Metrorail at grade. That way they don't need to build new maintenance facilities, train new staff, etc for a totally new light-rail technology.

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/loca...120723273.html

Technically, I'm not sure how the details would work... But the heavy-rail vehicles do need to run on their own right-of-way, so for e.g. the North Corridor, Metro would either need to eliminate lanes on NW 27th Ave to create a median, or widen the roadway by about 30 feet and eliminate most left turns. Businesses and residents won't be happy, and this will virtually shut down pedestrian activity along the corridor since you can't cross. Possibly the rail line would include flyovers at busy intersections to avoid congestion.

It's also unclear how officials plan to deal with the hazards of third-rail on the ground, especially in a flood-prone place like Miami. Possibly they will need to build the new sections with overhead wire, but that requires retrofitting the whole train fleet. Or they could add overhead wire to the existing network, but that's also costly and might require the replacement of station canopies.
Just to update, the alternative under consideratoin for at-grade extensions of metrorail would use 'hybrid' rolling stock that can be powered by both overhead wire and third rail. The example given is the Blue Line in Boston. Not clear is whether existing trains would be retrofitted, or whether new rolling stock would be acquired. Probably the cost of new rolling stock will be balanced against the cost of whatever canopy retrofits would be required.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted May 21, 2017, 4:06 AM
bobdreamz's Avatar
bobdreamz bobdreamz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Miami/Orlando, FL.
Posts: 6,866
County Preparing Metromover Extension To Miami Beach & Wynwood

By TNM Staff on May 17, 2017

Plans for the Beach Link corridor have been updated by the county.

According to Miami Today, county officials told a committee last week that the Beach Link corridor could have at least 10 stops. Possibilities include:

Washington Avenue
Meridian Avenue
7th Street
10th Street
14th Street
Lincoln Road
Miami Beach Convention Center
Museum Park
On the Miami side, there would be seven other stops that have not yet been determined, with the line running up to Wynwood.

An extension of the Metromover system is the top option being considered, with the advantage of leveraging the existing system and being separated from traffic (Miami Beach residents have previously voiced opposition to an elevated rail line).

Miami-Dade Mayor Carlos Gimenez recently released a document listing all potential stops at county-owned parcels along the rail projects planned as part of the multi-billion SMART transit plan.

Just one county-owned parcel is listed along the Beach Corridor route – American Airlines Arena. The property is leased by the Heat.



http://www.thenextmiami.com/county-p...beach-wynwood/
__________________
Miami : 40 Skyscrapers over 500 + ft. | 152 + meters | 16 U/C !
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted May 22, 2017, 1:21 AM
N830MH N830MH is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 1,847
Don't we have any news about metrorail expansion? Where they will be build? How about go to Aventura Mall?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted May 22, 2017, 5:18 AM
bobdreamz's Avatar
bobdreamz bobdreamz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Miami/Orlando, FL.
Posts: 6,866
Quote:
Originally Posted by N830MH View Post
Don't we have any news about metrorail expansion? Where they will be build? How about go to Aventura Mall?
Metrorail expansion plans has been covered in this thread already on the first page.
I even posted a map on post # 13 as reference.

As for transit to Aventura :

On the 13.5-mile northeast corridor from downtown Miami to Aventura, an undetermined number of stations will be built, probably with public-private partnerships.
“Brightline is building the downtown station for this corridor and we will have potential stations in Midtown, on Northwest 79th Street, in North Miami, North Miami Beach and Aventura,”


http://www.miamitodaynews.com/2017/0...-stops-picked/

Brightline already has this route covered so I don't see a extension of Metrorail up to Aventura.
__________________
Miami : 40 Skyscrapers over 500 + ft. | 152 + meters | 16 U/C !
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2017, 3:58 AM
eleven=11 eleven=11 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,000
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Aug 31, 2017, 2:26 AM
N830MH N830MH is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 1,847
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Sep 1, 2017, 12:58 PM
wanderer34's Avatar
wanderer34 wanderer34 is offline
SWING DOWN AND CARRY US..
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,053
The Metromover plan to extend to Miami Beach is a great idea, but expanding the Metrorail to not only Miami Beach, but all the way to Bal Harbour is an even better and more feasible long term plan if you want the Miami region to grow. Reason being that Miami, Miami Beach, and other cities and towns have densities of 10k per square mile, and the Metromover is really more of a small capacity transit system. The Metrorail is a large capacity, heavy rail system and considering that Miami-Dade County as well as the cities of Miami, Miami Beach, and its environs have constantly grown, the city and the county have to find ways to make sure that smart growth is being applied to greater Miami.

Also, Metrorail does have the potential to be a major rail system with the like of the MBTA and BART, and a third line would help that system since a heavy rail transit line would do wonders for Miami Beach and communities like Bal Harbour. The Metromover can be expanded to Miami communities like Edgewater and Wynwood. A 9-mile Metromover expansion to Miami Beach sounds like a waste of money to me and upgrading to heavy rail, whether it's a line going all the way to Bal Harbour, or a spur to South Beach, would greatly help especially during the weekends where everybody is out in the clubs and bars until the wee hours in SoBe!
__________________
PHILLY JUMP https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0IyKMqA4P1E

Last edited by wanderer34; Sep 1, 2017 at 1:11 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Sep 28, 2017, 2:53 AM
N830MH N830MH is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 1,847
Mayor finds money to reduce waits for Metrorail cars and reverse other cuts

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/loca...175692226.html

Quote:
Facing political pressure and passenger fury, Miami-Dade Mayor Carlos Gimenez on Wednesday announced a $13 million plan to reverse cuts to Metrorail and stave off further reductions in bus service in the county’s cash-strapped and increasingly unreliable transit system.

In a memo to county commissioners, Gimenez said he accepted demands that transit cuts be fixed before the board approves the mayor’s proposed $7.4 billion budget for the fiscal year that begins Sunday. A final vote is scheduled for Thursday evening, after a public hearing that begins at 5 p.m.
Hopefully they will be final vote by tomorrow evening. We shall see what happen tomorrow or so.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 8:45 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.