LOS ANGELES | Transportation News & Discussion

[Busy Bee]

I'm just going to go out on a limb here and assume that 7 foot figure is the body of the carriage NOT the height from top of rail to roof. As a side not theres a Japanese joke buried somewhere in there.

Also it sure seems like you are forgetting that LIM trains have wheels. Sure they dont have a big motor at the center of the bogies to turn the wheels but that doesn't account for much difference in height. Maybe a LIM for the Munchkinland Railway.

[Busy Bee]

10.3ft height Osaka LIM train car vs 12ft height Los Angeles Breda Red line subway stock.

That's more like it. Okay so it's like 20 inches. Assuming no radical differences in other tunnel requirements like duct bank size you're looking at a moderately smaller tunnel diameter. Whether that translates to a radically less expensive construction cost, I am quite dubious.

[hughfb3]

Well, the LIM train seems to fit within the 12 foot diameter of the Elon Musk Boring Company tunnels by a few feet that cost roughly $10 million per mile that they built in Hawthorne and Las Vegas. The Boring Company has significantly reduced construction costs. Los Angeles’ 12’ Breda trains are just outside of that.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boring_Test_Tunnel

Imagine if we could use the boring company to build a subway with $10 million per mile costs in LA. It can be done right now with existing rolling stock and existing technology. They have the TBMs already right here in LA County.

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

Elon...is that you?

Wow, I’m not going to make a whole new post to address this, just going to edit this post. I have said nothing about Elon until now and have only been presenting facts about various ways in which LA can reduce costs and you have given no facts, just hearsay and speculation. I thank you for your question that had me question the measurements and I dug deeper and made adjustments. Cant we share information with one another? I gave you something just like you gave me something and rather than lean in and play and dig deeper, you tried to devalue my contribution by calling me Elon. All I’m looking and listen for is a way to expand our transit systems, save money, increase safety and pleasure in our experience of LA and our transit system and it’s been forums like these where I have created curiosity and wonder. We can’t even discuss facts without some kind of hit against one another? In-ter-est-ing!

[Busy Bee]

Elon...is that you?

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by hughfb3

Well, the LIM train seems to fit within the 12 foot diameter of the Elon Musk Boring Company tunnels by a few feet that cost roughly $10 million per mile that they built in Hawthorne and Las Vegas. The Boring Company has significantly reduced construction costs. Los Angeles’ 12’ Breda trains are just outside of that.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boring_Test_Tunnel

Imagine if we could use the boring company to build a subway with $10 million per mile costs in LA. It can be done right now with existing rolling stock and existing technology. They have the TBMs already right here in LA County.



Wow, I’m not going to make a whole new post to address this, just going to edit this post. I have said nothing about Elon until now and have only been presenting facts about various ways in which LA can reduce costs and you have given no facts, just hearsay and speculation. Is this not a forum where we can share information with one another? All I’m looking and listen for is a way to expand our transit systems and it’s been forums like these where I have created curiosity and wonder. We can’t even discuss facts without some kind of hit against one another or trying to devalue my contribution by calling me Elon. In-ter-est-ing!

About half the cost of underground metro systems are from the stations, depending on the platform lengths, station spacing, and station depth. There are also significant costs from the electrification and signaling (which is a major expense even for surface rail lines) as well as for ventilation and emergency provisions necessary for the large numbers of people in metro trains. Costs also vary greatly in relation to the ground and surface conditions. Some geological conditions are ideal to tunnel through while others are a nightmare.

Busy Bee may have been a bit flippant in their response, but it was only because we no idea how much - if any - Musk actually reduced tunnel construction costs though any sort of innovations. So assuming that he did can seem overly rosy toward the hype. The likelier scenario is that the costs involved in Musk's simple electric car tunnels in those particular locations has little to no implications for the cost of underground metro lines elsewhere and were cheap only because they were totally different things.

It's best not to get too shaken up over flippant online replies. These forums tend to lack the same etiquette and niceties we expect from face to face interactions. It shouldn't be seen as an attack or devaluation so much as people behave differently in different settings.

[hughfb3]

Thank you Nouvellecosse. I love to research and learn and share. Other than the double wide Barcelona stacked subway tunnels, Have you heard of any other innovations in station construction reducing costs that you can share?? Would love to research deeper

Thank you @busybee. I may have misinterpreted your tone and made your comment means something that may not have been so. Thank you for acknowledging

[Busy Bee]

Deciphering tone in written word is a long standing crisis of global proportions.

I was just goofing. Read the comment with Jerry Seinfelds voice.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by hughfb3

Thank you Nouvellecosse. Have you heard of any innovations in station construction reducing costs that you can share?? Would love to research deeper

There are a few examples of innovations such as with a line in Barcelona where the stations are included in the double height tunnels, with the inter-station tunnel sections having additional room that can be used for tunnel operations and storage. Apparently this reduced the overall cost despite the use of larger than usual tunnel diameters. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XXdOseO8adU

The widespread use of automation has also allowed for shorter trains and platforms which makes stations smaller, and modern metro systems tend to have wider stop spacing and therefore fewer overall stations compared to older systems. LA red/purple lines already have very wide station spacing for a metro, but its trains are longer than they need to be for the demand. Rather than 6 car trains, they could have been 3 car trains run at twice the frequency which I understand is only 12 trains per hour (tph) combined. Even at 24tph, the frequency could still be increased by over 40% to 34 tph to accommodate future demand.

However, I would argue that underground metro systems in dense urban areas are already extremely cost effective in terms of the number of passenger miles of travel they can provide for the investment. If we want to reduce overall transportation costs, we could just shift some funds away from automobile infrastructure and direct them toward transit while shifting development patterns to increase density. In other words, transit construction funding is more a political problem rather than a technical problem. It isn't that it's too expensive, but rather that as a society we need a better understanding of what is and isn't good value for money so that we stop thinking transit infrastructure is too expensive.

[numble]

Originally Posted by hughfb3

Well, the LIM train seems to fit within the 12 foot diameter of the Elon Musk Boring Company tunnels by a few feet that cost roughly $10 million per mile that they built in Hawthorne and Las Vegas. The Boring Company has significantly reduced construction costs. Los Angeles’ 12’ Breda trains are just outside of that.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boring_Test_Tunnel

Imagine if we could use the boring company to build a subway with $10 million per mile costs in LA. It can be done right now with existing rolling stock and existing technology. They have the TBMs already right here in LA County.



Wow, I’m not going to make a whole new post to address this, just going to edit this post. I have said nothing about Elon until now and have only been presenting facts about various ways in which LA can reduce costs and you have given no facts, just hearsay and speculation. I thank you for your question that had me question the measurements and I dug deeper and made adjustments. Cant we share information with one another? I gave you something just like you gave me something and rather than lean in and play and dig deeper, you tried to devalue my contribution by calling me Elon. All I’m looking and listen for is a way to expand our transit systems, save money, increase safety and pleasure in our experience of LA and our transit system and it’s been forums like these where I have created curiosity and wonder. We can’t even discuss facts without some kind of hit against one another? In-ter-est-ing!

Citation needed for the $10 million per mile tunneling cost. In Las Vegas, they built two 0.8 mile tunnels for $52.5 million, over 3x your $10 million/mile claim. The cost of pure subway tunneling by current contractors isn’t much more than the Boring Company tunneling costs, especially when you account for the tunnels being double the size and the fact that U.S. safety standards require cross passages between the tunnels to be mined every 800 feet.

https://investors.tutorperini.com/pr...t/default.aspx

[Busy Bee]

Is there a tunneling thread in the Transportation forum? If not there should be. I think theres a lot of interest in all aspects of tunneling to keep a good conversation going.

My 2¢

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by numble

Citation needed for the $10 million per mile tunneling cost. In Las Vegas, they built two 0.8 mile tunnels for $52.5 million, over 3x your $10 million/mile claim. The cost of pure subway tunneling by current contractors isn’t much more than the Boring Company tunneling costs, especially when you account for the tunnels being double the size and the fact that U.S. safety standards require cross passages between the tunnels to be mined every 800 feet.

https://investors.tutorperini.com/pr...t/default.aspx

Well, the Musk tunnel cost also includes 3 stations. Two of them are at-grade with ramps down to the tunnel, but there is a third mid-line station that is an underground box. Also every construction project has a significant amount of overhead, so the longer your tunnel the lower the unit cost per mile.

I think Musk's costs probably are close to $10M/mile for pure tunneling, this is comparable to what water agencies pay for tunnel construction (sewers, aqueducts etc). But Las Vegas also let him off the hook in terms of code compliance to NFPA-130 and other codes that transit agencies must follow for subway systems. Not every city will give Musk a pass on these life safety codes, even if they probably should re-evaluate those codes for cost-effectiveness.

[SFBruin]

If tunneling can be done for cheaper, that would be great.

Elon Musk's innovation (or development, I guess) seemed to involve using cars underground, rather than any new type of tunneling method or approach.

I don't see how that's relevant to a mass transit system.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by SFBruin

If tunneling can be done for cheaper, that would be great.

Elon Musk's innovation (or development, I guess) seemed to involve using cars underground, rather than any new type of tunneling method or approach.

I don't see how that's relevant to a mass transit system.

No, supposedly the innovation involves modifications to the TBM itself to make it run faster, and with fewer people.

Or maybe TBMs of this diameter have always dug faster than larger ones + with smaller crew, and Musk is just taking credit for the idea of using smaller tunnels for transportation and not just water/sewer. It's hard to separate the hype from the reality...

[SFBruin]

Oh, well I lack the expertise to evaluate anything related to tunneling technology.

If he can build tunnels up to spec for cheaper than existing contractors, and with a proven track record, then that would be great.

[canucklehead2]

London deep tube trains could also fit using existing 3/4 rail tech or LIM. Either way I approve of cheaper rail-based options... Cars in tunnels? Not so much despite how cool they look.

[jmecklenborg]

Originally Posted by SFBruin

If he can build tunnels up to spec for cheaper than existing contractors.

He can't. He has no new technology. They've barely built any TBMs. Meanwhile 20+ companies you've never heard of crank out hundreds if not over 1,000 each year.


Musk doesn't build profitable cars or own a profitable car company, either. He succeeded in turning perennially dorky electric cars into a status symbol for insecure people. I remember going to a 4th of July parade in 2017 and a Tesla car club came down the road and got booed.

[hughfb3]

The 4 newest lines constructed from scratch in Japan's two biggest cities have incorporated LIM trains. Tokyo’s Toei Subway system [L12]; not to be confused with Tokyo Metro, and Osaka Metro's newest subway lines [L7,L8] and their people mover [Nankō Port Town Line] have all gone to fully automated LIM for their propulsion systems. Japan arguably has the best, most efficient Subway systems in the World and this is the technology that they've chosen for all their newest lines.

To alleviate confusion, the Tokyo Metro is a separate system from the Toei Subway System. Tokyo Metro is run by the Federal Government in cooperation with the Metropolitan government and doubles as a commuter rail sharing track with other commuter lines while the Toei Subway is locally owned & operated and is strictly a metro subway. There is something to be learned from the world’s most efficient subway networks in a country that values technology and reliability.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osaka_Metro
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toei_Subway
The B1M has a cool video on the efficiency of Tokyo's Metro system.

I just went through the 380 page Technical Proposal and found some cool things in the Sepulveda Transit Partners P3 Proposal to Metro... The Bechtel led one for the Sepulveda Pass. Looks like they are on the innovative tunneling and station building concepts, like using a single bore option that’s somewhere between a double and single bore with innovative ways to incorporate stations but not as bulky as the Barcelona single bore. Can we call it Split bore?? Also, they are looking at LIM as one of the propulsion systems.










Bringing up the question, at 10.3ft height and 8.16ft width Osaka LIM train car vs 12ft height and 10 ft width Los Angeles Breda Red line subway stock, will these LIM trains fit into the standard 12ft diameter tunnels bored for other uses such as water pipes and Boring company used for tunnels. Seems like Bechtel might think so

[SFBruin]

Originally Posted by jmecklenborg

He can't. He has no new technology. They've barely built any TBMs. Meanwhile 20+ companies you've never heard of crank out hundreds if not over 1,000 each year.

Great. I'll shut up about him, then.

[hughfb3]

In Today's news...

Metro took a major step forward on the West Santa Ana Branch Transit Corridor (WSAB) project with today’s Board of Directors selection of Los Angeles Union Station as the terminus and approval of the Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA): Slauson/A Line (Blue) to Pioneer Station (14.8 miles, 9 stations) with the Maintenance and Storage Facility located in the City of Bellflower. The LPA will be advanced as part of the analysis in the Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR), expected for Metro Board certification in winter 2022. The project’s groundbreaking is anticipated in 2023-25

Metro chose Union Station as the terminus of the West Santa Ana Branch Transit Corridor over the Financial District. It will have its own tracks running elevated and parallel to the A (blue) Line until it goes underground just before the 10 FWY as it heads into downtown. That's 31 at grade crossings and 40 grade separated crossings from streets, freeways, to freight rail crossings. Out of the 12 stations, 6 are grade separated, 3 above/3 below and the remaining 6 at grade.

LA needs fast transit and grade separation is a way to go... why choose light rail if we need speed over long distances. Portland, San Diego, Dallas know how to do "Light Rail" right with multiple at grade loops and lines converging through the downtown areas, creating a vibrant streetlife..., but is this the workable solution for every new line in LA if we are putting them all underground or above our heads? This is already looking like it will be one of the most grade separated light rail lines ever. With all of these grade separations, is it worth even doing "light rail" for this line?

Inglewood is already gathering money for a people mover to their stadiums and venues. The technologies that the Sepulveda Pass Partners are looking at are designed from inception to be low(er) impact when elevated... like the Vancouver Skytrain, Osaka L7 or similar tech that already doubles as a people mover as evidenced in a smaller version at JFK airport. What I would love to see is some regional longer term planning with all these projects tied together with the Sepulveda pass using the same technology as the Inglewood People mover and unifying the lines through the harbor subdivision and West Santa Ana Branch into a Y junction to finish the connection to the financial district. Maybe charging a higher fee for express services to downtown from LAX and special event services to Forum/Sofi/Intuit/YouTube Theater to help pay for it. and yes, I am aware of the Rail to River plan for part of the harbor subdivision. Also of note, originally the gateway cities, Glendale, Santa Clarita were championing the Eco Rapid Transit Orangeline Plan which was supposed to be an elevated Maglev line along West Santa Ana Branch because they all wanted fast express services to DTLA... ie, they wanted completely grade separated, frequent, fast transit. Light Rail is a compromise from what they were advocating for years for. I like this plan better

[llamaorama]

I always thought that segment of the blue line that runs at street level south of downtown should be replaced with a tunnel goes straight thus shortening the distance instead of making an L shape.

Should’ve done the financial district alignment and used that to achieve the reroute.