Bright Idea for SEPTA: Regional Rail Lite

From Philadelphia Magazine:

http://www.phillymag.com/news/2014/01/3 ... d-transit/

Is there any support for this proposal?

The magazine fails to explain the tremendous costs associated with train control infrastructure necessary for such a scenario to be fail-safe.

We don't live in Germany, and the U.S. isn't willing to make proper resource commitments for real safety measures. PTC is even controversial here.

PTC may be controversial, but its mandated and WILL happen. I'd be surprised if standards are slacked before PTC is in place though.

The prospect is exciting though; being able to run off-the-shelf European models or light rail vehicles does give a shot in the arm to unversed branches and off-peak possibilities.

My impression of PTC is that it's questionable benefit for high cost. In other words it's unlikely to prevent enough accidents to justify the expense of installing it and the resulting slow operation due times it errs on the side of caution and makes trains stop.
Mixing light and heavy equipment sounds like it would have to make whatever your safety system is even more sensitive.

While the cost to benefit of PTC is certainly questionable, the ball is already rolling and it will be installed nation-wide.

That being said, the ability to mix lighter-weight equipment in on the national rail network will be a benefit that was likely not factored into PTC's cost-benefit and will certainly make it more of a positive for passenger operators.

I feel the biggest ameliorating bang for buck of PTC would be to be able to mix light passenger rail with traditional heavy freight rail. PTC will probably, again my opinion based on my limited knowledge of what PTC means, not do so well mixing light passenger rail with heavy passenger rail.

This concept was done in the early 1980s, with RDCs in Newtown service with non-FRA crews (Transit Division).

Not exactly. The Newtown branch was temporary separated by bumpers. AFAIK Fox chase to reading terminal and newtown rapid transit trains never shared trackage.

I'd only support this if there were provisions for electrification expansion & use of silverliners at some point.

What they really need to do, if the tunnel is such a problem, is add ventilation, so they no longer have the excuse.

But hey, at least this is better than shutdown crisis headlines!

Everyone: Good thought - BUT...

This proposal would first require that all Center City-bound passengers transfer to electric MU trains to access Market East
and Suburban Stations - the "One-Seat Ride" would therefore be lost and would discourage some passengers...

Second-SEPTA RRD is electrified throughout - why lose the EMU's that you now have in favor of DMU's? - Then you would be
more susceptible to oil price flunctuations among other things...

What DMU's would be good for is to restore service to routes that were cut in the early 80s: Lansdale-Allentown and maybe Norristown on W depending on how NS will co-operate with SEPTA...

Elwyn-West Chester would be another idea-but since it is a former electrified line EMU's should be used if at all...

In closing NPT is going to "transitise" fare collection and this proposal can be just be another bid to "transitise"
SEPTA RRD...

MACTRAXX

Well if Euro DMUs are on the table, maybe Euro DEMUs are too? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SNCF_Class_B_82500" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If Bombardier can make a fully high-floor version of the B 82500s with retractable steps, then they'd be a great fit for restoring service to Reading, Quakertown, Newtown and Bethlehem. They have to have a railcar that can platform at the Center City RRD stations, as well as any other Regional Rail station with full high platforms. The off-the-shelf versions of the B 82500/B 81500 cars are set up for low-platform boarding only.

That said, I think this is a bright idea. There are Regional Rail lines that run entirely within Philadelphia that technically serve as "surrogate" subway lines because for a variety of (non-)reasons, subway lines were never built in those parts of the City. But they run on standard commuter rail frequencies (20-30 minutes peak, 1-2 hours off-peak) and cost significantly more than a ride on a local bus. That's not frequent enough. You have nearby bus routes, some of which are bursting at the seams and throngs of people transferring from buses to the Broad Street line at Erie and Olney. The City's Regional Rail routes are under-served and they shouldn't be. And now, thanks to the upcoming implementation of PTC, they don't have to be under-served.

#5 - Dyre Ave wrote:If Bombardier can make a fully high-floor version of the B 82500s with retractable steps, then they'd be a great fit for restoring service to Reading, Quakertown, Newtown and Bethlehem. They have to have a railcar that can platform at the Center City RRD stations, as well as any other Regional Rail station with full high platforms. The off-the-shelf versions of the B 82500/B 81500 cars are set up for low-platform boarding only.

That said, I think this is a bright idea. There are Regional Rail lines that run entirely within Philadelphia that technically serve as "surrogate" subway lines because for a variety of (non-)reasons, subway lines were never built in those parts of the City. But they run on standard commuter rail frequencies (20-30 minutes peak, 1-2 hours off-peak) and cost significantly more than a ride on a local bus. That's not frequent enough. You have nearby bus routes, some of which are bursting at the seams and throngs of people transferring from buses to the Broad Street line at Erie and Olney. The City's Regional Rail routes are under-served and they shouldn't be. And now, thanks to the upcoming implementation of PTC, they don't have to be under-served.

Whuuuuuuut?

NorthPennLimited wrote:

#5 - Dyre Ave wrote:If Bombardier can make a fully high-floor version of the B 82500s with retractable steps, then they'd be a great fit for restoring service to Reading, Quakertown, Newtown and Bethlehem. They have to have a railcar that can platform at the Center City RRD stations, as well as any other Regional Rail station with full high platforms. The off-the-shelf versions of the B 82500/B 81500 cars are set up for low-platform boarding only.

That said, I think this is a bright idea. There are Regional Rail lines that run entirely within Philadelphia that technically serve as "surrogate" subway lines because for a variety of (non-)reasons, subway lines were never built in those parts of the City. But they run on standard commuter rail frequencies (20-30 minutes peak, 1-2 hours off-peak) and cost significantly more than a ride on a local bus. That's not frequent enough. You have nearby bus routes, some of which are bursting at the seams and throngs of people transferring from buses to the Broad Street line at Erie and Olney. The City's Regional Rail routes are under-served and they shouldn't be. And now, thanks to the upcoming implementation of PTC, they don't have to be under-served.

Whuuuuuuut?

Care to elaborate? What didn't I make clear?

#5 - Dyre Ave wrote:If Bombardier can make a fully high-floor version of the B 82500s with retractable steps, then they'd be a great fit for restoring service to Reading, Quakertown, Newtown and Bethlehem. They have to have a railcar that can platform at the Center City RRD stations, as well as any other Regional Rail station with full high platforms. The off-the-shelf versions of the B 82500/B 81500 cars are set up for low-platform boarding only.

That said, I think this is a bright idea. There are Regional Rail lines that run entirely within Philadelphia that technically serve as "surrogate" subway lines because for a variety of (non-)reasons, subway lines were never built in those parts of the City. But they run on standard commuter rail frequencies (20-30 minutes peak, 1-2 hours off-peak) and cost significantly more than a ride on a local bus. That's not frequent enough. You have nearby bus routes, some of which are bursting at the seams and throngs of people transferring from buses to the Broad Street line at Erie and Olney. The City's Regional Rail routes are under-served and they shouldn't be. And now, thanks to the upcoming implementation of PTC, they don't have to be under-served.

What's interesting is that a Zone 1 Monthly Trailpass is only $10 more a month than the Monthly Transpass, yet the ticketed fare is more than twice that. If all stations that are within city limits could be Zone 1 Stations with a Ticketed Fare of $3, I'd imagine we would see more intra-city riders which would certainly justify more intra-city service. This would probably be the best bang for the buck out of any sort of "expansion in service" that would lengthen any line further out into the exurbs.

MACTRAXX wrote:Everyone: Good thought - BUT...

This proposal would first require that all Center City-bound passengers transfer to electric MU trains to access Market East
and Suburban Stations - the "One-Seat Ride" would therefore be lost and would discourage some passengers...

Second-SEPTA RRD is electrified throughout - why lose the EMU's that you now have in favor of DMU's? - Then you would be
more susceptible to oil price flunctuations among other things...

What DMU's would be good for is to restore service to routes that were cut in the early 80s: Lansdale-Allentown and maybe Norristown on W depending on how NS will co-operate with SEPTA...

Elwyn-West Chester would be another idea-but since it is a former electrified line EMU's should be used if at all...

In closing NPT is going to "transitise" fare collection and this proposal can be just be another bid to "transitise"
SEPTA RRD...

MACTRAXX

a dual mode would be a better fit for allentown-bethlehem service, just change modes at lansdale. Same goes for reading. DMU as noted would be great for wayne jct-newtown, kennett sq-30th st, and maybe even dover to wilmington. what would such a consideration do for, say, service to new hope which is a small place that wouldn't need a larger trainset like allentown? would it make it feasible?