DENVER | Transportation Thread

[trubador]

So I forgot the post this yesterday, but as you guys already know a van was hit by a train on the a-line. The full details are still coming out but it may be a combo of the gates not coming down in time and the driver ignoring the flagger to stay off the tracks.

Well yesterday at 5:30AM, I was driving south on Peoria and just after I crossed the A-line (via the new flyover) I noticed a test train coming up the 225 line. It gets close to the peoria station and the gates never come down, so the train has to stop short of 33rd, where I expected the gate. I think they may be having more gate problems then they are letting on and we may see even longer delays for the Gold and R line, until these issues are sorted out, especially with the accident yesterday morning.

[Sam Hill]

How many months is it going to take for RTD to figure out how to get a fucking gate to come up and down?

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by trubador

So I forgot the post this yesterday, but as you guys already know a van was hit by a train on the a-line. The full details are still coming out but it may be a combo of the gates not coming down in time and the driver ignoring the flagger to stay off the tracks

Nah, it sounds as if the dude wanted to die. So of course that falls on RTD to provide an absolute fool-proof way to prevent such stupidity.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by Sam Hill

How many months is it going to take for RTD to figure out how to get a fucking gate to come up and down?

Well it is the private sector trying to do so retroactively- because Denver Transit Partners engineers fucked up to begin with.

[mr1138]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

Nah, it sounds as if the dude wanted to die. So of course that falls on RTD to provide an absolute fool-proof way to prevent such stupidity.

If you ask the folks over on DenverFugly, they'll say that it was gross incompetence to design a system with any at-grade crossings at all.

[DUPio]

The R line is set to open next Friday the 24th per CU Anschutz Chancellor

[Cirrus]

Originally Posted by mr1138

If you ask the folks over on DenverFugly, they'll say that it was gross incompetence to design a system with any at-grade crossings at all.

If they'd like to come up with the extra several billion dollars it would take to fix that system-wide, I'm all for it. Hell, we could just do the A line for maybe a hundred million.

[mr1138]

Originally Posted by Cirrus

If they'd like to come up with the extra several billion dollars it would take to fix that system-wide, I'm all for it. Hell, we could just do the A line for maybe a hundred million.

I totally agree. Not entirely sure why I threw that out there, guess I just needed to get it off my chest, and to an audience that understands the nuance of the situation. Part of me wants to stop following their page, but another part of me is always interested what the peanut gallery is saying, even if it makes me mad. The comments yesterday about the death were absolutely appalling and completely uninformed. Somehow one person wanted to blame it all on corrupt real estate development handouts and property taxes (I didn't even bother really trying to follow his logic).

I would also love a system with no at-grade crossings and all the bells and whistles. But somehow, I don't think screaming and yelling that the government is a bunch of corrupt idiots that can't ever do anything right is the correct way to achieve that outcome.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by Cirrus

USDOT

Sorry for the slow response; things got a little crazy. Great post which even I could understand and appreciate.


mojiferous, Sam Hill
Re: comments on new I-70 Blvd:

FunctionForm... Great Insights.
One of my favorite angles for debate whether politics, sports or whatever is that "Context is Everything." And if you're not looking at all the moving parts and how they interact then your argument is likely flawed. Some neglect or intentionally ignore the potential for unintended consequences and sometimes don't care if others are inconvenienced or left out if it furthers their own narrow agenda.

Originally Posted by EngiNerd

Smokey Hill road in Aurora and Ridge Road in Arvada are diagonal for the same reason.

That i didn't know - or else I forgot.

In any case it was fun to read all the comments and discussion. Lot of smart people 'round here.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by trubador

Well yesterday at 5:30AM, I was driving south on Peoria and just after I crossed the A-line (via the new flyover) I noticed a test train coming up the 225 line. It gets close to the peoria station and the gates never come down, so the train has to stop short of 33rd, where I expected the gate. I think they may be having more gate problems then they are letting on and we may see even longer delays for the Gold and R line, until these issues are sorted out...

Just a reminder that this is apples to oranges as the R LIne is light rail like the W Line which hasn't had any crossing issues (that I'm aware of) as opposed the the commuter rail they're struggling with.

Originally Posted by wong21fr

Well it is the private sector trying to do so retroactively- because Denver Transit Partners engineers fucked up to begin with.

It would seem so; btw DTP is ofc the private sector.

Emails Show Tension Between RTD, Feds Over A, B Lines
FEB 8, 2017 BY NATHANIEL MINOR - CPR
Fun read but a lot of it is immaterial. What caught my attention started with this:

Lehner, the former FRA official, also took issue with RTD fashioning itself as a pioneer of positive train control technology. He wrote that RTD’s claim that it will “influence direction of passenger rail safety” throughout the U.S. was “inaccurate.” RTD’s projects, and others like it, represent less than 1 percent of the approximately 60,000 miles of track that federal law requires to have PTC, Lehner concluded.

And even more interesting:

Expert Says Technology Is ‘Pretty Simple Stuff

An expert on positive train control agreed that RTD has overstated its importance, especially when the agency says it’s the first agency to build positive train control into a new commuter rail line.

"The reality is very few commuter train lines are being built,” said Jeffrey Peters, a postdoctoral fellow at Stanford who wrote a report on positive train control for the Congressional Research Service in 2012.

And the finale:

And Peters added that RTD building their positive train control system into new lines should make their project easier, not harder.

“That should work much more smoothly than a retrofit where the original system is not designed for the technology in the first place,” Peters said.

Amtrak and European commuter lines have used positive train control with relatively few problems, Peters noted.

"It's absurd. This is pretty simple stuff,” he said, adding that the technologies that make up positive train control have been around a “long time.”

[PLANSIT]

^ You left out the main difference in the A-line's PTC. And it's the the primary cause of most of the problems.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by PLANSIT

^ You left out the main difference in the A-line's PTC. And it's the the primary cause of most of the problems.

The wi-fi gate crossing is what you're talking about, I assume?

As for the article- I'm totally confident that all commuter rail lines in the US will have PTC implemented as directed by the FRA.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by PLANSIT

^ You left out the main difference in the A-line's PTC. And it's the the primary cause of most of the problems.

Yes, yes I did; actually I forgot. I intended to add some narrative qualification but got in a hurry due to my NBA/Nuggets evening game/blogging.

So to complete my assignment I'll forgo the narrative for this:

Denver Transit Partners, RTD’s contractor and operator of the train lines, said they used the wireless system because it is needed to ensure constant warning times.

“The traditional alternatives to the wireless crossing activation system to achieve constant warning times do not work on electrified railroads. Constant warning times were a contract requirement from RTD,” DTP spokeswoman Nadia Garas said in a statement.

After the FRA expressed concerns, DTP recently hired an independent consultant, HNTB, to review the wireless system. The consultant concluded the wireless system is the “most appropriate technology” available to meet contract and regulatory requirements, Garas said.

https://www.cpr.org/news/story/email...over-a-b-lines

[trubador]

yes I understand that the technologies are different but to me this is a public perception issue. An average person won't know or care about the different gate technologies. If an R gate fails, especially after the accident on the A line, the media will run with the story.

[TakeFive]

^ Gotcha, good point.

The Train is a success.
That would be the Ski Train.

[mojiferous]

Originally Posted by trubador

yes I understand that the technologies are different but to me this is a public perception issue. An average person won't know or care about the different gate technologies. If an R gate fails, especially after the accident on the A line, the media will run with the story.

The perception problem is mostly among certain members of the anti-RTD-spending public who dance with glee when the words "safety", "regulations" and "budget" are mentioned. They think that problems or delays in a multi-billion-dollar project are immediately due to incompetence or fraud and don't know or want to know about the complexity of planning and building something of this scale. They insist on calling the gates coming down too soon a "failure", which implies that they don't work at all, instead of a "failure to meet regulations", which implies that the gates need adjustment and aren't about to let you run into a train...

The media hasn't been great at clarifying any of this and like to make it seem like RTD is making everyone unsafe - for example in that CPR article they say that the gates "don't open and close at the right time" (insinuating danger!), and that Amtrak and European trains use PTC (quoting a Stanford postgrad even!) But they don't mention that the Northeast Corridor was an existing line that only has limited road crossings in Delaware, and that they are using PTC to control speed and prevent collisions with other trains - the timing on those crossings was already established and may still rely on a non-PTC system. And when was the last time a brand new commuter rail system was built with at-grade road crossings in Europe? They don't have the same regulations, etc. etc.

Point is, it's easier to sell a scary article about the dangerous A-Line crossings than it is to write an article explaining how an engineering quagmire like this happened and why it's so hard to fix.

The Post just posted this: http://www.denverpost.com/2017/02/16...llision-video/ and it's pretty clear that the gates were down well before the van drove out there and that the driver essentially aimed for the train.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by trubador

yes I understand that the technologies are different but to me this is a public perception issue. An average person won't know or care about the different gate technologies. If an R gate fails, especially after the accident on the A line, the media will run with the story.

The truly frustrating part of this is that the A line gates did not fail, they performed as expected, and the incident is almost certainly a suicide (the guy stopped in the road and drove forward into the intersection only when the gates began to drop) that could not have been prevented save the intersection being entirely grade-separated.

Even then, the asshole could have just run through a fence and driven down the tracks.

[PLANSIT]

Many of you know that Denver Moves: Transit is well underway. This will be the City of Denver's first transit master plan. One of the first things tasks within the planning process is to gather and analyze existing conditions. Denver Moves: Transit has put together a nice little State of the System Report highlighting all kinds of transit-related information in Denver.

Denver Moves: Transit

State of the System Report

A reminder of what Denver Moves: Transit is:

WHAT IS DENVER MOVES: TRANSIT?

The Denver Moves: Transit plan will create a 20-year local transit vision and implementation plan for Denver. Denver Moves: Transit seeks to move more people more efficiently on our existing street network even as we continue to grow and develop as a city by taking the following actions:

• Convening community conversations to understand the existing transit system and how, together,
• we can make it even better for all Denver residents, employees, and visitors
• Working closely with the community and stakeholders to identify citywide needs, values, and a
• shared vision for transit
• Analyzing transit opportunities, costs, and potential trade-offs, using data and community input
• Defining transit priorities for new and enhanced transit services, areas that need better access to
• transit, and programs that make it easier to ride transit
• Reallocating street space to prioritize transit and support moving more people
• Identifying opportunities to use technology to improve transit reliability and legibility
• Exploring shared mobility options to serve lower density neighborhoods and employment areas
• Improving bicycle and pedestrian connections and other first/last mile options to key
• transit corridors
• Identifying parking and land use policies that support efficient and convenient transit service
• Establishing phased implementation strategies to prioritize local transit improvements

Of interest:

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by PLANSIT

Many of you know that Denver Moves: Transit is well underway. This will be the City of Denver's first transit master plan. One of the first things tasks within the planning process is to gather and analyze existing conditions. Denver Moves: Transit has put together a nice little State of the System Report highlighting all kinds of transit-related information in Denver.

Denver Moves: Transit

State of the System Report

Great post; May I recommend...

that after clicking on the first link, scroll/drop down to the 2nd section where the the links are provided and instead of loading the "State of the System Full Report" which is Bigley long try the "Executive Summary" which is plenty long and a good overview. Then to the right you can pick from more bite-sized options.

By mere chance, last night I happen to read the Executive Summary and Chapter 6: Governance and Funding Best Practices which you might guess I enjoyed as it gave a nice bullet point overview of three cities: Seattle, Los Angeles and Minneapolis.

[PLANSIT]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

Great post; May I recommend...

that after clicking on the first link, scroll/drop down to the 2nd section where the the links are provided and instead of loading the "State of the System Full Report" which is Bigley long try the "Executive Summary" which is plenty long and a good overview. Then to the right you can pick from more bite-sized options.

Nah, I'm good. I want to provide the link to entire document.