by SemperFiSep11
I figured this topic was good enough to generate many (very angry and passionate) webpages from people who tend to be less than informed on rail transit, so why shouldn't it be good enough for us to kick around?
The appeal of the Metro, in my opinion, is the unanimity of its' aesthetics and equipment as well as the ease of its' use. Taking a time tested success of heavy metro and trying to integrate some sort of politically charged light rail line will end up bringing about things such as the much fabled Silver Line in Boston (bus line mascarading as transit).
Currently the Metro has no grade crossings and complete interchangability of equipment. Bringing in one line that is different (and perhaps two with this Anacostia Line) will require entire new maintenance facilities as well as personell. Furthermore, as we have seen in my home state of New Jersey, often times light rail vehicles are placed second in order to cars at lighted grade crossings. I used to ride the Newark Subway once a week just for fun, but now I hate it. I can literally walk between the new end of the line and Franklin Avenue (old end of line) faster than the LRV goes due to some wonderfully timed grade crossings.
This problem we seem to be having with the routing through a country club brings about several good issues on both sides. The right of eminant domain is necessary for the public good, no doubt. However, we have seen this right abused by our government and, though we support rail to the fullest, we should be wary of any governmental seizure of property (even if it is from country clubbers).
Another little known fact (which my lovely wife pointed out after learning it from an operator of a Metro train) was that the Metro was designed so that any two points on the system were accessible through one transfer at the most. Putting in the Purple Line in any form will make that no longer true. I don't know if this really matters to a lot of people, but it remains a fact.
The unanimity of the Metro system has lead to its' mass appeal from both Americans (who desire transit) and foriegn visitors (who are used to effective transit). While any extension of rail is better than bus, why not do it right? Why not make the Purple Line a heavy line? The Metro is one of the few systems in the country that people are unafraid to transfer trains on. Let's not take a chance with light rail, in my opinion. We might just kill a good thing.
Off the topic but another good point concerning all mass transit is the issue of making money. I have heard on many of the forums here that mass transit cannot make money so stop asking. In my opinion, those poeple are wrong. The problem with mass transit is that it is not priced to make money. Is it $1.50 a ride now? Does anyone have any idea what the actual value of the trip into the government district in Washington is? Fuel, depreciation, time, parking? Stop this insanely low pricing of our services. Charge what the market will bear. Maybe a couple fewer people will ride it but then we can get rid of the argument about rail not making money. I'd pay $3.00 a ride to get to the Dpeartment of Agriculture at rush hour. Heck, I'd pay $4.00-$5.00! It beats sitting in traffic!
The appeal of the Metro, in my opinion, is the unanimity of its' aesthetics and equipment as well as the ease of its' use. Taking a time tested success of heavy metro and trying to integrate some sort of politically charged light rail line will end up bringing about things such as the much fabled Silver Line in Boston (bus line mascarading as transit).
Currently the Metro has no grade crossings and complete interchangability of equipment. Bringing in one line that is different (and perhaps two with this Anacostia Line) will require entire new maintenance facilities as well as personell. Furthermore, as we have seen in my home state of New Jersey, often times light rail vehicles are placed second in order to cars at lighted grade crossings. I used to ride the Newark Subway once a week just for fun, but now I hate it. I can literally walk between the new end of the line and Franklin Avenue (old end of line) faster than the LRV goes due to some wonderfully timed grade crossings.
This problem we seem to be having with the routing through a country club brings about several good issues on both sides. The right of eminant domain is necessary for the public good, no doubt. However, we have seen this right abused by our government and, though we support rail to the fullest, we should be wary of any governmental seizure of property (even if it is from country clubbers).
Another little known fact (which my lovely wife pointed out after learning it from an operator of a Metro train) was that the Metro was designed so that any two points on the system were accessible through one transfer at the most. Putting in the Purple Line in any form will make that no longer true. I don't know if this really matters to a lot of people, but it remains a fact.
The unanimity of the Metro system has lead to its' mass appeal from both Americans (who desire transit) and foriegn visitors (who are used to effective transit). While any extension of rail is better than bus, why not do it right? Why not make the Purple Line a heavy line? The Metro is one of the few systems in the country that people are unafraid to transfer trains on. Let's not take a chance with light rail, in my opinion. We might just kill a good thing.
Off the topic but another good point concerning all mass transit is the issue of making money. I have heard on many of the forums here that mass transit cannot make money so stop asking. In my opinion, those poeple are wrong. The problem with mass transit is that it is not priced to make money. Is it $1.50 a ride now? Does anyone have any idea what the actual value of the trip into the government district in Washington is? Fuel, depreciation, time, parking? Stop this insanely low pricing of our services. Charge what the market will bear. Maybe a couple fewer people will ride it but then we can get rid of the argument about rail not making money. I'd pay $3.00 a ride to get to the Dpeartment of Agriculture at rush hour. Heck, I'd pay $4.00-$5.00! It beats sitting in traffic!
Last edited by Jeff Smith on Mon Jul 18, 2016 4:17 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Reason: <BUMP>