Portland, Oregon: TriMet Westside Express Service

pdxstreetcar wrote:anyhow shuttle buses were out today... the fast 27 minute rail trip from wilsonville to beaverton was supposed to take 55 minutes by shuttle bus except the bus i was on took 75 minutes... a passenger suggested the driver go into the parking lot of hall/nimbus station which wouldnt have been a bad idea except for the tight 90 degree turn required to leave the parking lot which was clearly not designed for a 40 ft bus, had to then back out of the parking lot the full length of it very slowly. fortunately we had a driver that knew how to operate the bus well (plus helpful passengers) because backing a bus in that skinny parking lot is definitely not easy. meanwhile while we are in reverse we see the northbound train enter and leave the station. the one that left wilsonville 30 minutes after we did.

When I rode WES on "opening day" on Jan 30 there was quite a line at Beaverton so I took the shuttle bus back and the same thing happened, and no one actually got on or off the bus at Hall/Nimbus anyway. I would've thought after that Trimet would've told drivers not to enter that "parking lot" that is really more of an alley with diagonal parking on one side. On the other hand, if they had a wider exit, which there is room for, a full length bus would have no problem getting out. Our driver almost did it. His mirrors vs the fence seemed to be a lot of the problem.

pdxstreetcar wrote:a passenger suggested the driver go into the parking lot of hall/nimbus station which wouldnt have been a bad idea except for the tight 90 degree turn required to leave the parking lot which was clearly not designed for a 40 ft bus, had to then back out of the parking lot the full length of it very slowly.

I do not own a large vehicle but I've driven in a few new TriMet lots (two WES, one Yellow Line MAX) and they are CRAMPED.

If you drive anything larger than a Mini or Honda Fit or Chevrolet Aveo...anything larger than a sub-compact, watch it.

I'm shocked that the Operator even got the bus INTO the parking lot - and all the way to the end. (However it does not surprise me that TriMet, once again, doesn't have a SOP written up for this. Heck, if I were TriMet I wouldn't have even bothered with a bus shuttle, I'd just tell people to take the 76 - which serves four of the five stations (the fifth is accessible by SMART 2X which stops at Tualatin P&R which the 76 also serves)...or just set up a "76E" route that runs the regular 76 route, but only major stops.

almost everyone on the bus got on in wilsonville, only 2-3 at most en route. wilsonville is where i got on. and many of which were making the 1X/wes connection. also could have waited 30 minutes later and caught the WES train, most figured it was best to get on something moving asap and the buses were standing by. i imagine most passengers at tualatin, tigard and hall/nimbus did opt for the 76/78.

it wasnt really a problem getting in the lot since it was near the end of the service day and the lot was virtually empty.

they definitely need some signage warning about this size limitation. even if its not a bus, someone for some reason might have a trailer or a small truck that they bring into the lot.

A sign at a building supply dealer in Tigard adjacent to the P&W Oregon Electric District where WES runs...

http://www.oregonlive.com/news/index.ss ... _trim.html
http://blog.oregonlive.com/commuting/20 ... ns_in.html

TriMet is in the process of purchasing two 56-year-old diesel trains "as spares" for Westside Express disruptions like the ones that have hit the Wilsonville-to-Beaverton commuter rail this year, including one Wednesday morning.
TriMet will pay $75,000 each for two used DMU rail cars, which include both the engine and passenger seating on each unit, from Alaska Railroad. Both were made by the Budd Company in 1953. By contrast, the three powered cars and one trailer currently operating on the line and were purchased new from now-defunct Colorado Railcar Manufacturing for $5 million each.
"We expect them to arrive later this year," said pokeswoman Bekki Witt, "but they will not be ready for revenue service until next year. ... They will be used as spares."

I've raised the question elsewhere, but I'd like to know just how TriMet expects to comply with the crashworthiness regulation with the Budd RDCs. 49CFR238 clearly states that a waiver from this reg exists ONLY for the car AND the route and that any grandfathering of equipment is the same.

So, the cars were perfectly legal in service on the Alaska RR having been grandfathered in - but once the RDCs left Alaska, they require a waiver or cannot run in non-excursion service. And the waiver is out of the question (else TriMet would not have been bound to the Colorado Railcar DMUs, either) since P&W refuses to time-separate freight trains.

wigwagfan wrote:I've raised the question elsewhere, but I'd like to know just how TriMet expects to comply with the crashworthiness regulation with the Budd RDCs. 49CFR238 clearly states that a waiver from this reg exists ONLY for the car AND the route and that any grandfathering of equipment is the same.

So, the cars were perfectly legal in service on the Alaska RR having been grandfathered in - but once the RDCs left Alaska, they require a waiver or cannot run in non-excursion service. And the waiver is out of the question (else TriMet would not have been bound to the Colorado Railcar DMUs, either) since P&W refuses to time-separate freight trains.

I think there's an FRA office in Vancouver that you could ask your question to.

wigwagfan wrote:I've raised the question elsewhere, but I'd like to know just how TriMet expects to comply with the crashworthiness regulation with the Budd RDCs. 49CFR238 clearly states that a waiver from this reg exists ONLY for the car AND the route and that any grandfathering of equipment is the same.

Uh, weren't the Budds built *after* the current (i.e. antique) "crashworthiness" regulations went into effect, and weren't they built to run on FRA-regulated lines? I don't think there will be any problems whatsoever. They ran Budd RDCs on Syracuse's OnTrack, mixed with freight -- I don't think they needed to get a waiver for that.

In fact TriMet probably bought the Budds *because* they are FRA-compliant DMUs. I expect they will need little if any work to update to modern (i.e. almost unchanged) regulations. On the other hand they may need quite a bit of work to keep them running, what with parts not being manufactured, and all.

neroden wrote:

wigwagfan wrote:I've raised the question elsewhere, but I'd like to know just how TriMet expects to comply with the crashworthiness regulation with the Budd RDCs. 49CFR238 clearly states that a waiver from this reg exists ONLY for the car AND the route and that any grandfathering of equipment is the same.

Uh, weren't the Budds built *after* the current (i.e. antique) "crashworthiness" regulations went into effect, and weren't they built to run on FRA-regulated lines? I don't think there will be any problems whatsoever. They ran Budd RDCs on Syracuse's OnTrack, mixed with freight -- I don't think they needed to get a waiver for that.

In fact TriMet probably bought the Budds *because* they are FRA-compliant DMUs. I expect they will need little if any work to update to modern (i.e. almost unchanged) regulations. On the other hand they may need quite a bit of work to keep them running, what with parts not being manufactured, and all.

You do have interesting point. OnTrack as I recall did not operate with any waivers from the FRA to my knowledge.

neroden wrote:Uh, weren't the Budds built *after* the current (i.e. antique) "crashworthiness" regulations went into effect, and weren't they built to run on FRA-regulated lines? I don't think there will be any problems whatsoever. They ran Budd RDCs on Syracuse's OnTrack, mixed with freight -- I don't think they needed to get a waiver for that.

Nope. 49CFR238.203 went into effect on November 8, 1999. Some 37 years after the last RDC rolled off the factory floor.

The RDCs were legal on Sycrause OnTrack as that system began operations in 1994, five years before the crashworthiness regulation took effect. Likewise they are legal on TRE and Alaska RR. But when the equipment moves to another route, the law states that the grandfathering clause goes away...

neroden wrote:In fact TriMet probably bought the Budds *because* they are FRA-compliant DMUs. I expect they will need little if any work to update to modern (i.e. almost unchanged) regulations. On the other hand they may need quite a bit of work to keep them running, what with parts not being manufactured, and all.

Paragraph 4(d) of the law states:

(d) Grandfathering of non-compliant equipment for use on a specified rail line or lines —(1) Grandfathering approval is equipment and line specific. Grandfathering approval of non-compliant equipment under this paragraph is limited to usage of the equipment on a particular rail line or lines. Before grandfathered equipment can be used on another rail line, a railroad must file and secure approval of a grandfathering petition under paragraph (d)(3) of this section.

Having read various DMU project summaries, consistently the Budd RDC is indicated as a non-compliant DMU. Further, it's not a "simple modification" to meet this requirement. Probably a good reason why Industrial Rail's RDC rebuilds have not taken off as they are limited to the non-US market, and there's not exactly a huge market for RDCs in Canada and Mexico. Maybe Cuba might want them...

Before grandfathered equipment can be used on another rail line, a railroad must file and secure approval of a grandfathering petition under paragraph (d)(3) of this section.

I don't necessarily read the FRA will not approve RDCs on other rail lines, just that the FRA asks for another request for a grandfathering petition.... which I bet TriMet will be submitting soon....

TriMet has a history with the FRA and FTA with WES trains, I don't think TriMet will have much trouble with the request considering P&W freight trains using the tracks have PTC. Although I expect the FRA will want the same PTC equipment installed on the RDCs too.

Likewise, DCTA is planning on using DART's TRE RDCs in 2011 and 2012 while waiting on Stadler GTWs to be built. That's also using existing grandfathered equipment on a new, different line. But DCTA is also submitting waivers for temporal separation because their track has at most one freight train a day.

Asking for waivers isn't new, but one can't rely upon the FRA to grant one as soon as you like.

For some reason, I kept on thinking that 49CFR238.20 went into effect in 1991 for some reason....but that makes more sense now Mr. Wigwagfan.

But I think an inquiry to the FRA's Vancouver office might be worth a try.

electricron wrote:Asking for waivers isn't new, but one can't rely upon the FRA to grant one as soon as you like.

TriMet made a HUGE deal that getting a waiver was a non-starter when it went with the Colorado Railcar DMU - since P&W refused to give up freight train access during WES operations (time of day separation). They said at the time (and in discussions with TriMet's project manager at the time) that the FRA wouldn't even consider a waiver if one was requested.

So I'd like to know why all of a sudden TriMet thinks the situation is different. After all if the waiver was possible TriMet could have saved taxpayers $60 million, opened the WES line on time instead of several months late, and had enough cash left over for surplus equipment. Not to mention that at the time WES vehicles were being procured, the State of Oregon had seven RDCs that were available - five of which owned by government agencies; D.F. Barnhardt is listing two RDCs at less than $30K a pop (in repairable condition) as well, and Ozark Mountain Railcar has a former RDC converted into a commuter coach for $50K in good condition.

AgentSkelly: I'm going to be asking the Vancouver folks shortly. I want to get their take on it.

The Budd RDC cars are scheduled to arrive at the Wilsonville maintenance facility on Saturday, November 14th (coming northbound from Albany). I guess the first thing planned is to move them over to the Wilsonville WES platform and take measurements for modifications to be made.

I'll be grabbing pictures on Monday and getting them posted to my Flickr account.

It appears that TriMet is also making some improvements to the spur at the Wilsonville maintenance facility also. It's hard to tell exactly what they're doing, but it appears that they are adding dirt and ballast next to the southernmost spur. Maybe they're adding additional tracks for storage or maintenance...