HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1341  
Old Posted Jan 8, 2015, 6:24 AM
pseudolus pseudolus is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mission Terrace, SF
Posts: 191
[QUOTE=M II A II R II K;6866342]Proposed M-Market high frequency subway for SF Muni

http://newmunimetro.com/m-market/

I saw a link to this on streetblogs and thought it was interesting. I couldn't find any info on the website as to who was promoting this. Is Muni even considering this?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1342  
Old Posted Jan 8, 2015, 11:00 AM
CharlesCO's Avatar
CharlesCO CharlesCO is offline
Aspiring Amateur
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Lafayette, CA / Denver, CO
Posts: 234
[QUOTE=pseudolus;6867191]
Quote:
Originally Posted by M II A II R II K View Post
Proposed M-Market high frequency subway for SF Muni

http://newmunimetro.com/m-market/

I saw a link to this on streetblogs and thought it was interesting. I couldn't find any info on the website as to who was promoting this. Is Muni even considering this?
There's no way they're considering this if part of the plan involves buying low floor European-style trams, what with Muni writing a big check to Siemens for some new LRVs in the last few weeks.

It looks like the idea on that site is to divide the Muni Metro system into underground and at-grade sections, making for a higher capacity "M-Market" underground line from Embarcadero to West Portal, and then the other lines (which are reconfigured or replaced) force a transfer at Church, West Portal, or Balboa Park. I could see how this would really improve the service for people who are just traveling within the Market spine, but I could also see how this would result in poorer service for people going from the neighborhoods to downtown, which, in my opinion, is the bread and butter of Muni Metro.

It's an interesting idea, though I'm not really sold on it. I'd be curious to see how they came up with their cost estimates. They look extremely low to me when you compare them to the actual cost of the Central Subway. I can't tell whether this is a plan that would work or whether it's just another person with a copy Illustrator deciding to draw some pretty lines over the city without taking into consideration how people actually use transit.

It seems like the main complaint from this (not enough Market subway service) could be easily and cheaply solved with more S-Castro Shuttle service, and isn't Muni saying that they will be able to run the Siemens cars in bigger consists than the overweight Bredas??
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1343  
Old Posted Jan 8, 2015, 10:22 PM
northbay's Avatar
northbay northbay is offline
Another day in Paradise
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Cotati - The Hub of Sonoma County
Posts: 1,733
SMART's pilot set at the Transportation Test Center in Pueblo, CO

https://www.facebook.com/sonomamarin...type=1&theater
__________________
"I firmly believe, from what I have seen, that this is the chosen spot of all this Earth as far as Nature is concerned." - Luther Burbank on Sonoma County.

Pictures of Santa Rosa, So. Co.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1344  
Old Posted Jan 9, 2015, 2:39 AM
Busy Bee's Avatar
Busy Bee Busy Bee is online now
Exhale solutions.
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,122
It's so crazy to think that if the SMART project had been just a few years later, they could have procured lighter, cheaper and infinitely more attractive off the shelf DMUs due to the upcoming FRA deregulation/waiver.
__________________
Nothing useless can be truly beautiful. -W.Morris | Nothing Need be Ugly
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1345  
Old Posted Jan 10, 2015, 1:24 AM
northbay's Avatar
northbay northbay is offline
Another day in Paradise
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Cotati - The Hub of Sonoma County
Posts: 1,733
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busy Bee View Post
It's so crazy to think that if the SMART project had been just a few years later, they could have procured lighter, cheaper and infinitely more attractive off the shelf DMUs due to the upcoming FRA deregulation/waiver.
I personally find the trains good-looking (Japanese designed, and no, I'm not biased ). Is it a sure thing that the FRA will relax regulations once the deadline for PTC occurs? I've heard a lot of talk, but nothing concrete. On that note, momentum does appear toward that direction. It is frustrating that we may have gotten a better deal, but Measure Q passed in 2008. Enough time has passed already. If we were just starting to buy the trains now, I couldn't see it opening with the current schedule. But it just shows the stupidity of having the rules in the first place.
__________________
"I firmly believe, from what I have seen, that this is the chosen spot of all this Earth as far as Nature is concerned." - Luther Burbank on Sonoma County.

Pictures of Santa Rosa, So. Co.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1346  
Old Posted Jan 10, 2015, 2:36 AM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is online now
vertical
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: unconventionally bicoastal
Posts: 10,861
^ They've already purchased non-compliant vehicles for eBART. I don't think eBART is subject to FRA regs though, since it's not connected to the mainline rail network.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Busy Bee View Post
It's so crazy to think that if the SMART project had been just a few years later, they could have procured lighter, cheaper and infinitely more attractive off the shelf DMUs due to the upcoming FRA deregulation/waiver.
Maybe. Buy America isn't going away for Federal projects, though - foreign manufacturers would still need to set up operations here to comply, and due to the general low demand in America for new railcars, the country can only support so many rail factories. Austin, San Diego and NJ bought imported Stadler trains entirely using local funding, so Buy America didn't apply (they also got waivers from FRA for non-compliant equipment).

On the other hand, deregulation could allow Siemens, Bombardier, and Nippon Sharyo to build their off-the-shelf European railcars in their existing American factories, with minor changes. Alstom has a facility in the US, but they don't seem to bid on much except for refurbishments sadly.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...

Last edited by ardecila; Jan 10, 2015 at 2:54 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1347  
Old Posted Jan 10, 2015, 2:45 AM
Busy Bee's Avatar
Busy Bee Busy Bee is online now
Exhale solutions.
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,122
__________________
Nothing useless can be truly beautiful. -W.Morris | Nothing Need be Ugly
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1348  
Old Posted Jan 10, 2015, 9:35 AM
CharlesCO's Avatar
CharlesCO CharlesCO is offline
Aspiring Amateur
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Lafayette, CA / Denver, CO
Posts: 234
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila View Post
Alstom has a facility in the US, but they don't seem to bid on much except for refurbishments sadly.
It's worth mentioning as well that Alstom was the other major bidder for the BART Fleet of the Future contract and even proposed manufacturing the cars at a new facility in the Bay Area, though they obviously were not selected as Bombardier was able to undercut their cost by a significant margin.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1349  
Old Posted Jan 10, 2015, 3:23 PM
Busy Bee's Avatar
Busy Bee Busy Bee is online now
Exhale solutions.
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,122
That article linked by Ardecila is worth a read if anyone has not already. Here it is:

http://systemicfailure.wordpress.com...s-stadler-dmu/
__________________
Nothing useless can be truly beautiful. -W.Morris | Nothing Need be Ugly
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1350  
Old Posted Jan 10, 2015, 6:55 PM
Folks3000 Folks3000 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 71
http://www.contracostatimes.com/cont...mtrak-transfer

"OAKLAND -- A former BART director sees a tantalizing opportunity to speed up some commutes between San Francisco and communities along Amtrak's Capitol Corridor.

Bob Allen, the transit system's District 5 representative from 1974 to 1988, proposes a transfer station at Seventh Street in Oakland where BART's transbay line crosses over the Union Pacific tracks that carry Amtrak trains.

"From a transfer station there, 16 or more (BART) trains per hour would reach four BART/Muni downtown San Francisco stations in six to 10 minutes," Allen said."



This would be so awesome!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1351  
Old Posted Jan 14, 2015, 2:44 AM
fflint's Avatar
fflint fflint is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 20,319
Muni has announced they'll be purchasing an additional 40 new Siemens light rail vehicles, on top of their current order of 175.

This is fantastic news--it will allow for more reliable service than today, and likely better service frequencies as well. Our current problem with the Breda fleet is that whenever they require maintenance--and it happens way too frequently--we don't have enough trains to replace them. The newer, bigger fleet will make a huge difference.
__________________
Under construction right now in San Francisco: over 6,700 housing units and 5,400,000 square feet of commercial space.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1352  
Old Posted Jan 14, 2015, 3:42 AM
CharlesCO's Avatar
CharlesCO CharlesCO is offline
Aspiring Amateur
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Lafayette, CA / Denver, CO
Posts: 234
Woo hoo! These new trains are going to be great.
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:53 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.