Sardines, anyone?

R3:

Good thought about SEPTA placing an add-on order for multilevel MU cars as a S4 replacement...
This may be a even better option over ordering cars that will add to the S5 type...

The entire RDG side power supply needs to be upgraded if there is any possibility of operating more RDG
side push pull trains when SEPTA gets their ACS64 locomotives. Remember it is the high electric current/
amperage draw that locomotives need - far higher then MU cars - that is the problem there and it will take
more then upgrading the Wayne Junction and Jenkintown substations for any added push pull trains over
and above the current RDG power system limitations which I believe are two trainsets at any given time in
full power and in full use (HEP,etc.) Deadhead trains to Fern Rock and the Jenkintown Layoff track are not
included as they are stored there daytime on weekdays.

MACTRAXX

MACTRAXX wrote:R3:

Good thought about SEPTA placing an add-on order for multilevel MU cars as a S4 replacement...
This may be a even better option over ordering cars that will add to the S5 type...

The entire RDG side power supply needs to be upgraded if there is any possibility of operating more RDG
side push pull trains when SEPTA gets their ACS64 locomotives. Remember it is the high electric current/
amperage draw that locomotives need - far higher then MU cars - that is the problem there and it will take
more then upgrading the Wayne Junction and Jenkintown substations for any added push pull trains over
and above the current RDG power system limitations which I believe are two trainsets at any given time in
full power and in full use (HEP,etc.) Deadhead trains to Fern Rock and the Jenkintown Layoff track are not
included as they are stored there daytime on weekdays.

MACTRAXX

The SL-V's and ACS64-s have regenerative braking which may help that issue to at least a minor degree. There was also a recent story about power banking that Septa is installing at several of its substations, hopefully including at least a couple on the Reading side, which should also allow for extra capacity.

Unfortunately, the '1 car short' scenario persists. More often that not this train is running with 4 cars.
It seems this will go on indefinitely. If it is what I had suspected about the altered schedule/service to isolate
airport line, with a net increase of trains on the rails, and they had to come up with them somewhere, then
this problem won't go away.

It still feels like they make the problem go away for a short time on the Warminster line, which means someone else is suffering the same fate elsewhere in the system when the 5 car set comes back to the Warminster line.

On a good note, the overcrowding seems to have gone down. Instead of sardines, its regular standing from front to back door with minimal elbow room. Truly it is an improvement over those first few weeks. And add in the fact that the universities
are back in session.

the SAD thing about that is, well, where did the sardines (I mean, people) go? Hopefully to the prior train, hopefully they did not loose passengers/revenue over this schedule change

bth8446 wrote:Unfortunately, the '1 car short' scenario persists. More often that not this train is running with 4 cars.
It seems this will go on indefinitely. If it is what I had suspected about the altered schedule/service to isolate
airport line, with a net increase of trains on the rails, and they had to come up with them somewhere, then
this problem won't go away.

It still feels like they make the problem go away for a short time on the Warminster line, which means someone else is suffering the same fate elsewhere in the system when the 5 car set comes back to the Warminster line.

On a good note, the overcrowding seems to have gone down. Instead of sardines, its regular standing from front to back door with minimal elbow room. Truly it is an improvement over those first few weeks. And add in the fact that the universities
are back in session.

the SAD thing about that is, well, where did the sardines (I mean, people) go? Hopefully to the prior train, hopefully they did not loose passengers/revenue over this schedule change

Maybe some of those passengers have been redistributed to trains that better fit their schedule than the train you're on. I know that is the case with some of my neighbors who commute daily.

I want to contribute meaningfully to this topic, but I keep coming back to the same things. Lack of modern robust physical plant (tracks, signals, stations, bridges etc), lack of modern robust & reliable vehicle fleets save for a few of the newer buses, lack of an integrated schedule which actually keeps in mind people using the system to get around and not simply A to B then B to a 9-5 weekdays, and finally the total lack of ANY foresight in terms of expansion or re-activation (or planning for weather/big events). I have my NJT complaints on my side of the river, but boy you folks in PA really need to be a bit more up in arms with how your tax dollars are being spent with SEPTA in my own personal opinion..

SEPTA is doing some work on the RDG side substations
http://septa.org/rebuilding/substation/overview.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

JeffK wrote:For individually-paid fares, the base fare + high transfer model biases a trip's cost more towards how many vehicles are needed than on how far you travel.

Maybe this has to do with chargebacks. The one time I watched a public hearing on discontinuing an NJ Transit bus line, they said that they did not get reimbursed for the lower revenue from rail riders' discounted connecting bus fares. I offered that maybe they could suspend the discounts on this bus line if it would save it from the chopping block, and they said they'd consider it.

loufah wrote:Maybe this has to do with chargebacks. ... The one time I watched a public hearing on discontinuing an NJ Transit bus line, they said that they did not get reimbursed for the lower revenue from rail riders' discounted connecting bus fares.

My 2¢ is that chargebacks probably aren't a significant factor for SEPTA. Transfer policies haven't really changed since the days of the PRT, long before the commuter rail lines were acquired. That would seem to say their continued existence is more a case of "we've always done it that way", reinforced by SEPTA's longstanding desire to preserve known revenue streams even if they're counterproductive.

JeffK wrote:

loufah wrote:Maybe this has to do with chargebacks. ... The one time I watched a public hearing on discontinuing an NJ Transit bus line, they said that they did not get reimbursed for the lower revenue from rail riders' discounted connecting bus fares.

My 2¢ is that chargebacks probably aren't a significant factor for SEPTA. Transfer policies haven't really changed since the days of the PRT, long before the commuter rail lines were acquired. That would seem to say their continued existence is more a case of "we've always done it that way", reinforced by SEPTA's longstanding desire to preserve known revenue streams even if they're counterproductive.

In general, charging for transfers tends to be a hallmark of agencies afraid of outcry over raising the base fare. The media don't help at all by generally only reporting the change in the base fare. Never mind that:

* raising the base fare and offering free transfers allows the network to be redesigned in ways that allow it to offer more service at a given level of expense (because the focus moves from being a one-seat from everywhere to everywhere network)
* if a one-seat ride is so preferable to a multi-seat ride, why is the fare lower for the one-seat ride?

JeffK wrote:For individually-paid fares, the base fare + high transfer model biases a trip's cost more towards how many vehicles are needed than on how far you travel.

Of course, with the possible eventual elimination of cash fares, this can all be changed, and SEPTA can just charge, say, 40 cents a mile on your NPT card regardless of the number of vehicles a passenger uses per trip.

loufah wrote:Of course, with the possible eventual elimination of cash fares, this can all be changed, and SEPTA can just charge, say, 40 cents a mile on your NPT card regardless of the number of vehicles a passenger uses per trip.

I agree completely except there doesn't appear to be anything remotely like distance-based fares on SEPTA's radar. Granted the Key is barely into its baby-steps phase but SEPTA's been firm that they'll continue with the base fare + transfer model. There hasn't even been serious consideration of offering timed transfers despite being common on other systems. Maybe I'm overly pessimistic but for years SEPTA's been openly reluctant to do anything that might affect known revenue streams. So far nothing in the Key points in a different direction.

Also I'm not sure how soon they could completely eliminate cash, although they can certainly minimize it. Presumably it won't be long before everyone has a credit/debit card or smart device (the "ShowMe" on Fringe?) However it seems to me that for the immediate future they'll have to accommodate some small number of visitors, casual users, etc. who won't have compatible electronic payment options.