[fflint]

I recall reading the Indian guage was chosen because the trains would be traveling a maximum 80mph--far faster than any existing metro at the time--and would allow for better stability at high speed, especially in turns.

Anyway, we are all simply assuming EMUs on standard-guage track would be cheaper than current standards, and if that is true, I can see the argument for lower costs. The eBART line in the far East Bay will be using DMUs, and since that is the very edge of the system it makes sense--but it might not make sense in the core. I can see an argument for keeping the existing standards.

Extensions utilizing existing standards and fleets would allow for flexibile route configurations (e.g. a line that runs from Ocean Beach to Bay Point) that would not be possible with an entirely separate system. Also, with two incompatible railroads, riders who start their journey on one system but wish to exit on the other will necessarily be forced to make unnecessary and time-wasting transfers.

Retaining existing standards would also allow BART to continue sending any of the reserve consists (about 40 on any given weekday) to any route when and where needed--that flexibility would be lost with two incompatible fleets.

Failing to retain existing standards would also require BART to build entirely new and very expensive storage yards and garages, and staff them with their own separate (but equally well-paid) crews. Is there land available for entirely new yards and garages in the pricy Bay Area? How much would such construction and land acquisitions cost? Would these costs eliminate the assumed savings of running a separate EMU railroad?

Also, does anyone have data on how many passengers EMUs can carry? Currently, a crush-load ten-car BART consist can carry 2,000 riders. Can EMUs match that capacity?