Route 15 Startup

By changing the classification, does that mean they've officially given up on restoring trolley service? If so, would it be possible to shift these cars to the 23 or the 56?

Yes that means no trolley on Rt 15. There are not enough cars to operate on the 23 (which is now designated as bus), and 56 is paved over. No way SEPTA's going to get money to restore the 56 after the 15 fiasco.

SEPTA MUST GO!

jfrey40535 wrote:Just something to add to the rumor mill.....I spoke with a 15 operator today and he's saying the route designation is changing back to BUS with the next schedule change in June, meaning it will no longer be classified as Trolley (or surface rail) with bustitution. So what did the $60 mil buy us?

This is also from the rumor. I dunno why these are two contrary rumors:

From a reliable source there are two options for route 15 and the
59th street standoff.

1. Install the special work and switches so the cars can go west and
go up 60th street. This must be approved in a meeting that is
upcoming. This takes 59th street out of the equation.SEPTA has the
swiches, special work, and manpower to do this job, the source says.

2. If this first option can not be done, run the cars out of Elmwood
depot, where the 10 is running from now.

June 12th, 2005, will be the start up date for route 15 trolley if
either of these two things happen.

I know we have all heard this before, but this time it sounds a
little more like it will happen.

From a reliable source there are two options for route 15 and the
59th street standoff.

1. Install the special work and switches so the cars can go west and
go up 60th street. This must be approved in a meeting that is
upcoming. This takes 59th street out of the equation.SEPTA has the
swiches, special work, and manpower to do this job, the source says.

2. If this first option can not be done, run the cars out of Elmwood
depot, where the 10 is running from now.

1. The SEPTA Board has told staff they will not pay for any special work and switches.

2. The SEPTA Board is most likely not willing to pay for the long pullout.

So based on what Clearfield said, it is more likely the 15 project will just be put on the shelf and inherit the status of the Newtown line, as being temporarily permenantly discountinued. In the meantime, us Rt 15 riders get to continue our wonderful rides on the diminishing Neoplan fleet.

Yet not a single politician is upset that taxmoney was spent on a now useless project...uggghhh

Yet not a single politician is upset that taxmoney was spent on a now useless project...uggghhh

You know, I have a hard time understanding that. I would think 60 million dollars apparently lost would have attracted the attention of even our traditionally useless local politicians. It's things like this that make me glad the state legislature wants an audit of SEPTA. I really hope this one results in heads rolling (and more trolleys and trains rolling ).

jfrey40535 wrote:So based on what Clearfield said, it is more likely the 15 project will just be put on the shelf and inherit the status of the Newtown line, as being temporarily permenantly discountinued. In the meantime, us Rt 15 riders get to continue our wonderful rides on the diminishing Neoplan fleet.

Yet not a single politician is upset that taxmoney was spent on a now useless project...uggghhh

Now there's a plan....re-gauge the PCC II's and use THEM on the Newtown line.

jfrey40535 wrote:the 15 project will just be put on the shelf and inherit the status of the Newtown line, as being temporarily permenantly discountinued.

I don't see anyone other than we railfans complaining that the line isn't running. The riding public isn't complaining. The politicians aren't complaining. And oh by the way, this was a 96 million dollar project.

Maybe we should drink from the same poisoned well they drink from, get back in our cars, and drive.....

Exactly Clearfield, and its very true as there have been numerous front page stories in several papers regarding the failure of SEPTA and the 15, and to date I have not heard a single politician other than Nutter talk about the line.

Unfortunately, the audit really didnt uncover the problems at SEPTA. All the audit did was show that no exec at SEPTA was funneling money out to build their Ivory tower out in the hills.

We could all fire up our pens and write to the papers again, but its doing no good. Everyone agrees SEPTA needs dedicated funding, although that is a battle in itself, but we still hear no one saying that SEPTA needs to be reorganized.

A bit off topic, but what needs to happen is SEPTA to have their responsibility for planning revoked and make them solely responsible for day-to-day operations. Anotherwords, someone has to force them to do things, otherwise they won't get done.

So for $96 million, we bought a couple of trolley buffs some neat cars to ride in on their fantrips. That's all these things have been used for to date.

I should also mention that all of the operators are anti-trolley too, and I'm sure they've had some sort of influence on this project as well. They love driving buses.

Wow. I've heard of waste, but this is insane.

So will the wires come down and the platforms be ripped up? And if so, what will THAT cost?

-Urban

Clearfield wrote:I don't see anyone other than we railfans complaining that the line isn't running. The riding public isn't complaining. The politicians aren't complaining. And oh by the way, this was a 96 million dollar project.

Good point, Bob. You'd think that City Council would be the ones to make a stink, since SEPTA is running noisy, smoky buses instead of quiet, clean (faster too) streetcars (cue up the activists who blame childhood asthma on racism rather than more vigilant diagnosis), but instead Council is one of the obstacles to getting the streetcars running.

[expletive] baffling....

Clearfield wrote:I don't see anyone other than we railfans complaining that the line isn't running. The riding public isn't complaining.

Sad to say, as I noted in a long-ago thread, the vast (or is that half-vast?) unwashed majority now lump all transit vehicles into one category labelled "bus"(*). The only things they see as a trolleys are the tarted-up buses run by firms with such mis-names as TrolleyWorks. They are so used to seeing diesel-fuming buses that the pollution issue doesn't loom large. The megabucks down the tubes are nebulous to most people; if it isn't a line item in their personal budget they aren't going to care either.

Generic ignorance runs from the huge to the trivial. People don't seem to be worked up over billions in corporate welfare (can we spell Halliburton?), don't give a half a hoot about studying math or physics, even think there's real gold in a Sac dollar. Mencken was right.

(*)See the exchange I had with an otherwise highly educated co-worker about the "36 bus" running along side the subway ... whimper....

Sad to say, as I noted in a long-ago thread, the vast (or is that half-vast?) unwashed majority now lump all transit vehicles into one category labelled "bus"(*).

If that's truly the case, then how come the subway-surface lines get so much ridership? I'm pretty sure no bus lines in the city get their ridership.

Part of the problem I think is in what Rendell said, to paraphrase, "transit riders have no consituency." The regular riders have little political power, for the most part, and are probably so used to SEPTA being lousy that they don't bother to try and do anything about it. It's the same with the corporate welfare or failing schools. The people losing out have no power, and a lot of people just accept it as the way it is, a messed up, corrupt system that doesn't directly affect too many people for something to change.

PARailWiz wrote:If that's truly the case, then how come the subway-surface lines get so much ridership? I'm pretty sure no bus lines in the city get their ridership.

Once the cars are underground, they have the clear advantage of speed. But out of the tunnels, the lack of transit-only lanes mires the trolleys in the same traffic as any other surface vehicle. For those parts of the routes, and any others that are - or should I say were - fully above ground, what I have oberved is that most Philadelphians don't seem to care what powers the vehicle so long as it gets them to their destination.

That's not to say it has to be that way, as the situation in SF illustrates. The streetcars there are so popular that when SF Muni tried to augment service with buses (there being no extra trolleys to run) riders would pass up the buses and still wait for the trolleys. It's all a matter of perception.

Part of the problem I think is in what Rendell said, to paraphrase, "transit riders have no consituency." The regular riders have little political power, for the most part, and are probably so used to SEPTA being lousy that they don't bother to try and do anything about it. It's the same with the corporate welfare or failing schools. The people losing out have no power, and a lot of people just accept it as the way it is, a messed up, corrupt system that doesn't directly affect too many people for something to change.

100% correct. "Been down so long I don't know what up looks like" seems to be the theme song of most SEPTA riders.

PARailWiz wrote:

Sad to say, as I noted in a long-ago thread, the vast (or is that half-vast?) unwashed majority now lump all transit vehicles into one category labelled "bus"(*).

If that's truly the case, then how come the subway-surface lines get so much ridership? I'm pretty sure no bus lines in the city get their ridership.

They get their ridership because they're trunk-haul routes to Center City. Bus routes of this type (think 33 or 48) do well too.

And yes, there are several bus lines that have more riders than the subway-surface routes, which all do about 11,000 boards/day (except 34, which is 10,000).

Rte Boards/day
23 19,200
C 17,700
47 16,000
18 15,700
33 15,000
52 13,600
G 12,000
17 11,500
60 11,100
10 11,100

Straight boards/day isn't all that useful a productivity indicator, because it's highly dependent on the nature of the route. Trunk-haul routes do well, especially where there's no subway competition like 17 and 33. C, 23, and 47 are very long routes that turn over several loads, and routes like 52 and 60 are key feeder routes that have passengers coming from and going to the subway. 18 has characteristics of both.

By comparison, the 46 gets less than 5,000 boards, but still does better on cost-effectiveness than most of the above routes.