System Track Schematic

Couldn't find a previous thread on this specific subject.

I have revised and updated the system track schematic based on the Phase II preliminary engineering drawings.

129 Mile Area Regional System Track Schematic

The labeling to a certain extent follows typical WMATA past practice. Because of the length of some of the train control zones, auxiliary train control rooms have been added. The train control rooms with the letter A in them are the auxiliaries. The N09A interlocking (Dulles East) is the interlocking that was east of the Dulles Airport station in subway from the FEIS. N96 (Dulles West) is the train control rooms I had previously labeled N97 Autopilot Drive. N97 is the Dulles Yard Lead junction west interlocking. N96A is the Dulles Yard Lead junction east interlocking. Because Dulles Yard is some distance from the mainline N98 is between the yard and the main line junction interlockings.

I am presently working on a more comprehensive version of the track schematic that will include signal and turnout numbers, chaining locations of passenger stations, interlockings and tunnel portals.

Other schematics:
106 Mile Area Regional System Track Schematic Existing system
139 Mile Area Regional System Track Schematic 2030 system, based on a proposal presented to the WMATA board on 04 24 2008. (Note this schematic does not show the revision made to the N route in 129 Mile Area Regional System Track Schematic linked to above.)
Baltimore Central Light Rail 29 Mile Track Schematic
Baltimore Metro 15.5 Mile Track Schematic

Thanks for taking the time to update and then post your schematics. Question on your 129 mile schematic for the Silver Line: are the tags for N92 Wolf Trap, N93 Chatham Ford Drive, etc placeholders for possible future in-fill station? or are they power sub-stations? I know providing for a future station at Wolf Trap was dropped from the Phase 1 plans, but I can see that someday there could be infill stations at Wolf Trap and Hunter Mill Rd. N95 Sunset Hill Road would be rather squeezed in though.

The 139 mile schematic is interesting; does give a view of what a Blue Line re-route through Georgetown and M St mike look like. Honestly, though I can't see an interline connector from the Red Line bypassing Farragut North to connect to the Orange/Silver/current Blue line before McPerhson Sq as ever getting built. Too disruptive to multiple active multiple lines to build for one. Same goes for connecting Orange/Silver to both the north and south bound new Blue Line at Rosslyn as well as adding cost to an already expensive Rosslyn project. An interline connector from the new Blue Line route through the core to the Yellow/Green would be useful to add route flexibility.

One thing I noticed is the conceptual Blue Line re-route has no pocket tracks. With WMATA looking to add pocket tracks to provide more flexibility for weekend service and unexpected equipment breakdown disruptions, a new Blue Line route through the core should provide at least 1 additional pocket track. Perhaps between Georgetown and Westend? Just an idea. A Metro system close to the 139 mile concept in the core, with extensions of the Orange Line at both ends (to Rt. 50 or Rt. 286 westward on I-66 and to Bowie in MD), Blue and/or Yellow line extensions in VA - combined with Purple Line expanded light rail and streetcar lines - would be a very cool transit system to have.

"afiggatt"

Thanks for taking the time to update and then post your schematics. Question on your 129 mile schematic for the Silver Line: are the tags for N92 Wolf Trap, N93 Chatham Ford Drive, etc placeholders for possible future in-fill station? or are they power sub-stations?

In a word, no. All of the descending RTUs form 98 to 91 are train control rooms that control the movement of trains in there respective areas. The length of the area a train control controls can only be so long. Don't know what the maximum length is, but I think some where between 5,500' 6,500'.

I know providing for a future station at Wolf Trap was dropped from the Phase 1 plans, but I can see that someday there could be infill stations at Wolf Trap and Hunter Mill Rd. N95 Sunset Hill Road would be rather squeezed in though.

The N95 Sunset Hill Road train control room and traction power substation is adjacent to the Celphone tower east of the VDOT maintenance yard on Sunset Hill Road, The N95 Hunter Mill train control room and traction power substation is roughly halfway between Hunter Mill Road and Difficult Run, a station at Hunter Mill Road be it east or west or at Hunter Mill Road would be in the N95 train control room area.

The 139 mile schematic is interesting; does give a view of what a Blue Line re-route through Georgetown and M St mike look like. Honestly, though I can't see an interline connector from the Red Line bypassing Farragut North to connect to the Orange/Silver/current Blue line before McPerhson Sq as ever getting built. Too disruptive to multiple active multiple lines to build for one. Same goes for connecting Orange/Silver to both the north and south bound new Blue Line at Rosslyn as well as adding cost to an already expensive Rosslyn project. An interline connector from the new Blue Line route through the core to the Yellow/Green would be useful to add route flexibility.

One thing I noticed is the conceptual Blue Line re-route has no pocket tracks. With WMATA looking to add pocket tracks to provide more flexibility for weekend service and unexpected equipment breakdown disruptions, a new Blue Line route through the core should provide at least 1 additional pocket track. Perhaps between Georgetown and Westend? Just an idea. A Metro system close to the 139 mile concept in the core, with extensions of the Orange Line at both ends (to Rt. 50 or Rt. 286 westward on I-66 and to Bowie in MD), Blue and/or Yellow line extensions in VA - combined with Purple Line expanded light rail and streetcar lines - would be a very cool transit system to have.

The 139 mile schematic was a quick and dirty project, the location of interlockings and type of interlockings was a best guess on my part. The A and C connection may end up using the existing outbound to outbound and use a shorter alignment for inbound to inbound.

My thinking on extensions is a little different then what has been proposed. I think the east end of the Orange should reach Bowie along a MD-450 Annapolis Road in a subway alignment, closer to where people actually live. Same applies to the west extension as well, VA I-66 to VA US-50 Lee Jackson Memorial Highway to Chantilly, the US-50 alignment would be in an open trench, the platforms in the stations would be under the left lanes of the highway. Some years ago I created plans, elevation and section for a twin platform open trench stations in the median of a surface arterial road. Forget about extending Blue line south, add a third CSX track and increase VRE service. Yellow line along VA US-1 Jefferson Davis Highway to main gate Fort Belvoir This one could be built one of 3 way elevated like Silver line along VA-7 Leesburg Pike, totally in subway or in subway with open trench stations in the median.

afiggatt wrote:Thanks for taking the time to update and then post your schematics.

Just wanted to echo this, thanks.

"afiggatt"

Thanks for taking the time to update and then post your schematics.

Sense making the opening post, I have made a correction to the Brentwood Yard schematics to reflect the fact that the common carrier railroad connection has been severed. I also updated to 2030 schematics to reflect the above change and the changes shown in the 129 map based on N Route Silver line preliminary engineering drawings.

"dcmike"

Just wanted to echo this, thanks.

I was told by one of the folk working in ROCS that an earlier versions of the 106 mile map was printed out and displayed in one of the offices adjacent to the Operation Control Center in the Jackson Graham Building.

You might want to spread the word around that both have been revised an updated.

Thanks for updating these schematics; I find them to be very useful.

The hypothetical stations at Oklahoma Avenue and River Terrace are very interesting to me after the recent discussions about the so-called problems that were identified when it was proposed to use thw D&G Junction pocket track to reverse the Silver Line service east-to-west. Could we see these stations built prior to the rest of a potential M Street Subway and the interlockings adjusted to provide a terminus for the Silver Line?

"TheOneKEA"
Thanks for updating these schematics; I find them to be very useful.

The hypothetical stations at Oklahoma Avenue and River Terrace are very interesting to me after the recent discussions about the so-called problems that were identified when it was proposed to use thw D&G Junction pocket track to reverse the Silver Line service east-to-west. Could we see these stations built prior to the rest of a potential M Street Subway and the interlockings adjusted to provide a terminus for the Silver Line?

The track layout at the potential River Terrace station is an idea of mine. The most likely option and I might add the least disruptive option would likely be simply placing platforms outside the 2 mainline tracks and not modifying any of the existing structure at all. The junction turnout for the M Street subway might require some modification to the existing structure to fit them between curve and the turnouts at the west of the pocket track.

The Oklahoma Avenue station is another story. The tangent between the tunnel portal and the curve is on to steep of a grade to simple place platforms next to the tracks. Maximum allowed grade in a station is .035%. My guess is they will do something similar to what was done to build the New York Avenue station. Build the new station adjacent to existing easement then cut in S curves to connect the track through the infill station to the existing tracks. The way I would do it is place the tracks on a temporary shoe fly on either side of the existing tracks, modify the grade in the existing tangent to accommodate the .035% grade through the infill station, build the 2 14' platform, remove the shoe fly then finish the rest station.

TheOneKEA wrote: The hypothetical stations at Oklahoma Avenue and River Terrace are very interesting to me after the recent discussions about the so-called problems that were identified when it was proposed to use thw D&G Junction pocket track to reverse the Silver Line service east-to-west. Could we see these stations built prior to the rest of a potential M Street Subway and the interlockings adjusted to provide a terminus for the Silver Line?

The Metro Momentum proposal for 2025 includes looking at building new pocket tracks and crossover to improve system flexibility. Extending the D&J unction pocket track, even if it would not be an inexpensive project, could be part of the program to provide more pocket tracks by 2025.

As for a Oklahoma Avenue station, the only infill station that is currently in development is Potomac Yards and that project has dragged on for many years. There were 3 possible infill stations that appeared to show promise in achieving good ridership numbers in the wrap-up of the Technical Advisory Group study presentations (posted on planitmetro): St. Elizabeth, Oklahoma Ave NE, Kansas Ave NW between Fort Totten & Takoma. The possible infill stations are not part of the Metro Momentum plan, so it looks like WMATA will leave it up to DC, the local communities, and developers to take the lead on infill stations in DC. Besides the technical issues Sand Box John discussed, a question for a Oklahoma Ave Metro station is whether the planned East-West streetcar line from Benning Road to H Street to Union Station to K Street would provide the transit connections the neighborhood needs.

"afiggatt"
The Metro Momentum proposal for 2025 includes looking at building new pocket tracks and crossover to improve system flexibility. Extending the D&J unction pocket track, even if it would not be an inexpensive project, could be part of the program to provide more pocket tracks by 2025.

I have a different opinion about the alleged need to improve the D&G pocket track. The stated reason is, operators would not be able to get their 8 car trains into and out of the pocket track without delaying through trains, is in my opinion a smoke screen. The D&G pocket track is the same length and has the same angle and type of turnouts that are in the pocket tracks at Mount Vernon Square, Farragut North and Grosvenor. WMATA's knee jerk reason for not using the D&G pocket track to turn Silver line trains there is based totally on fear. Fear of a derailment on the elevated. The same fear was used to convert the National Airport pocket track in to a crossover that is long enough to hold an 8 train after a derailment happened north of the station back in the 1990s.

As for a Oklahoma Avenue station, the only infill station that is currently in development is Potomac Yards and that project has dragged on for many years. There were 3 possible infill stations that appeared to show promise in achieving good ridership numbers in the wrap-up of the Technical Advisory Group study presentations (posted on planitmetro): St. Elizabeth, Oklahoma Ave NE, Kansas Ave NW between Fort Totten & Takoma. The possible infill stations are not part of the Metro Momentum plan, so it looks like WMATA will leave it up to DC, the local communities, and developers to take the lead on infill stations in DC. Besides the technical issues Sand Box John discussed, a question for a Oklahoma Ave Metro station is whether the planned East-West streetcar line from Benning Road to H Street to Union Station to K Street would provide the transit connections the neighborhood needs.

An infill station at St. Elizabeth makes zero sense. the Congress Heights station abuts the east campus of the property. Build an entrance on the north end of the station that would have the top of the escalators and elevators inside to property of the east campus of St. Elizabeth. The walking distance from this new entrance to the west campus would be on par with the walking distances to the middle and west side of the NIH campus at the Medical Center station.

Sand Box John wrote: The track layout at the potential River Terrace station is an idea of mine. The most likely option and I might add the least disruptive option would likely be simply placing platforms outside the 2 mainline tracks and not modifying any of the existing structure at all. The junction turnout for the M Street subway might require some modification to the existing structure to fit them between curve and the turnouts at the west of the pocket track.

Interesting; I thought the track layout was part of the proposal that was submitted in 2008.

If there is any funding left after the completion of the Silver Line, but insufficient funding to build the M Street Subway, I would spend it on the pocket track at Eastern Market and use that to terminate the Silver Line service instead. It will probably already be used to reverse late-running services in order to balance westbound demand from L'Enfant Plaza towards Rosslyn, so it might as well become the permanent terminus. I really believe that Metro will find out the hard way that the scheduling of train crew for those long runs between VA-772 and New Carrollton will be difficult.

Latest version of the 129 mile system track schematic, the revision only reflect the changes of the RTU labels based on Final RFP Amendments for Phase II of the Dulles Corridor Metrorail Project.

I have revised and updated the system track schematics, they are now being hosting at flickr.com/photos/sandboxjohn/sets/72157639124106325/

The reason for the hosting change is because Verizon is discontinuing the hosting of subscribers web pages on 02 15 2014, the reason why I am using flickr.com instead picasaweb.google.com is because picasaweb.google.com does not support the rendering of images greater the 1600 X 1600.

WMATA 106 Mile Area Regional System Track Schematic
WMATA 129 Mile Area Regional System Track Schematic
WMATA Comprehensive 129 Mile Area Regional System Track Schematic
WMATA 139 Mile Proposed 2030 Area Regional System Track Schematic
WMATA 140 Mile Proposed 2040 Area Regional System Track Schematic
WMATA 140 Mile Proposed 2040 Area Regional System Track Schematic, My Version

Links to them can also be found in my Introduction page at cambronj.blogspot.com

Just posted your flicr link in the WMATA Links Segment of this forum. Nice stuff, as always...

Sand Box John,

I noticed a few errors on your 129-mile comprehensive system schematic and wanted to let you know. You have the chain marker for A07 (Tenleytown) listed as 200+00 - it should be 260+00. Also, your schematic of B99 (Brentwood Yard) seems to have the track labels reversed at both exit points - B2 should be above B1.

Thanks for all of your excellent schematic drawings... I've been referencing them for years.

"Ken.Adams"
Sand Box John,

I noticed a few errors on your 129-mile comprehensive system schematic and wanted to let you know. You have the chain marker for A07 (Tenleytown) listed as 200+00 - it should be 260+00. Also, your schematic of B99 (Brentwood Yard) seems to have the track labels reversed at both exit points - B2 should be above B1.

Thanks for all of your excellent schematic drawings... I've been referencing them for years.

Must have miss your post or forgot about it when you made it. Corrections made.

WMATA Comprehensive 129 Mile Area Regional System Track Schematic

All of the other track schematic are now hosted at https://picasaweb.google.com/. . ./TrackSchematics