PHLSpecial wrote: ↑Fri Apr 09, 2021 9:23 am
Is cost the main reason why you can't run RR trains to the mall? I would think RR trains would provide more connections than the NHSL.
It’s a combination of cost, practicality, and operational models.
Yes, I agree 100% that a one-seat ride would be preferable, but using the RRD would have a lot more downsides:
• RRD is heavy rail while the NHSL/P&W is an interurban line at its core. Most of the extension (yes, spelled correctly
) will be elevated. It’s already a challenge to shoehorn the planned trestles into existing development. An RRD option would force them to be larger and more disruptive. The line would also need overhead catenary rather than third rail, again more visually disruptive as well as more expensive.
• Because some RRD routes share tracks with freight service, the whole network is subject to more operational rules than the NHSL. Each train would require both an engineer and conductor which increases labor costs.
• The NHSL's operating model is to provide (comparatively) frequent service throughout the day using single- or two-car consists. That’s better suited to the needs of suburban retail and light-office complexes than the RRD practice of larger trains carrying more people to denser urban areas, but less often. Of course the big unknown here is how RRD service might/will change post-pandemic.
For some reason nobody seems to be interested in addressing the transfer at 69th Street. I’ll grant that it's been that way for over 100 years and thousands do it every day, but I wonder why there isn’t some long-term plan to make it more convenient. Maybe if more funding flows to transit long term (and a BIG "if") passenger flow through the terminal could be streamlined and given more protection from the elements ...?
Requiem for it's/its, your/you're, than/then, less/fewer. They were once such nice words with such different meanings...