Metro wants study on a M Street subway tunnel

https://wtop.com/tracking-metro-24-7/20 ... n-tunnels/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The authority’s priority list describes the total project to realign Metro’s Blue Line as one that would bring a new Blue Line station in Rosslyn to allow more trains through on all three lines. While the station could be built separately at first, the long-term plan over coming decades would be to continue the tracks through a new tunnel under the Potomac River to Georgetown, where the line would turn along M Street toward Union Station. The new Rosslyn Station could have a connection allowing riders to walk between the Blue Line and Orange and Silver Line platforms.

Metro is also separately applying to NVTA for $94.7 million more to continue power upgrades that could eventually allow all Blue and Orange Line trains to be eight cars long at rush hour.

I'm going to guess that Georgetown is quite content without a metro station and without everything that comes with it.

They should cut the number of Orange Line trains, increase Blue Line service on the current route, and route the Silver Line via M Street instead. (Or if they reroute the Blue, at least increase the number of both Blue and Yellow trains.)

MCL: seems like they are either very for or very against.

For the price of the new Rosslyn station and tunnels that would connect to the existing railroad WMATA could procure enough rolling stock and make the traction power upgrades to exploit 75% of the capabilities of the signaling and train control system. Right now, with WMATA's convoluted operating rules and manual operations they are exploiting less then 50% of the capabilities of the signaling and train control system.

...MCL, back in the day with the original planning for Metro, Georgetown didn't want it then...and I bet, doesn't want it now...there was another line that should have been built, but wasn't...a line from the Pentagon down Columbia Pike to Bailey's Crossroad...if you look carefully as you ride from the Pentagon toward Pentagon City, you just make out the turn-out as you exit from the station that was to be part of the Columbia Pike...what might have been!!

charding wrote:...MCL, back in the day with the original planning for Metro, Georgetown didn't want it then...and I bet, doesn't want it now...there was another line that should have been built, but wasn't...a line from the Pentagon down Columbia Pike to Bailey's Crossroad...if you look carefully as you ride from the Pentagon toward Pentagon City, you just make out the turn-out as you exit from the station that was to be part of the Columbia Pike...what might have been!!

Not even true. The myth that Georgetown doesn't have a Metro stop because the residents were against it was debunked a long time ago.

The real reason Georgetown doesn't have a metro stop is more related to cost and the challenges of dealing with Georgetown's land profile and proximity to the river. These challenges are less relevant today because of better technology.

If granted, there needs to be a requirement that all future metro work include a third track. Not only does it give more options for rush hour and skip station but also for maintenance.

But I don't think Metro should be boring any new tunnels until they finish fixing what they have.

"charding"
...MCL, back in the day with the original planning for Metro, Georgetown didn't want it then...and I bet, doesn't want it now...there was another line that should have been built, but wasn't...a line from the Pentagon down Columbia Pike to Bailey's Crossroad...if you look carefully as you ride from the Pentagon toward Pentagon City, you just make out the turn-out as you exit from the station that was to be part of the Columbia Pike...what might have been!!

"Chris Brown"
Not even true. The myth that Georgetown doesn't have a Metro stop because the residents were against it was debunked a long time ago.

The real reason Georgetown doesn't have a metro stop is more related to cost and the challenges of dealing with Georgetown's land profile and proximity to the river. These challenges are less relevant today because of better technology.

Actually WMATA never formerly proposed an option to route the existing Blue, Orange and Silver line through Georgetown. The opponents were basically apposing ideas of the routing by folks outside the formal design process.

As to the Columbia Pike route, That line was never part of the Adopted Regional System. It was shown on the maps as future just like the Largo extension and Dulles route. And just like the Largo extension and Dulles route, provisions were built to accommodate their construction after the completion of the original planned system.

The tail tracks/yard leads beyond the terminal stations have provisions to allow the extension of all of the lines.

gprimr1 wrote:If granted, there needs to be a requirement that all future metro work include a third track. Not only does it give more options for rush hour and skip station but also for maintenance.

But I don't think Metro should be boring any new tunnels until they finish fixing what they have.

While that would be fantastic, its very unlikely due to cost and added construction time. The Silver Line was a golden opportunity to add a third track for express service and WMATA flushed it down the toilet. And this was for above ground tracks which are much cheaper to build than tunnels. Fat chance I say. But if we have different (less cheap) people in charge down the road it is still a possibility. Never say never.

You'll notice that even NYC has abandoned the third track for their newest Subway expansions in order to save money. If NYC isn't building express tracks anymore, DC has even less of a chance.

"Chris Brown"
. .The Silver Line was a golden opportunity to add a third track for express service and WMATA flushed it down the toilet. . .

How can you flush something down a toilet that was never considered as an option in the first place.

It has alway been my belief that those the who thought WMATA should have originally built the system with more then two tracks aren't seeing the big picture. Had WMATA stuck to the basic tasks necessary to operate and maintain the railroad, the Monday morning quarterbacks wouldn't be talking about express tracks and the M Street subway.

Oh, and by the way, I can count all the heavy rail transit systems in North America that have express tracks on one hand.

Sand Box John wrote:"Chris Brown"
. .The Silver Line was a golden opportunity to add a third track for express service and WMATA flushed it down the toilet. . .

How can you flush something down a toilet that was never considered as an option in the first place.

It has alway been my belief that those the who thought WMATA should have originally built the system with more then two tracks aren't seeing the big picture. Had WMATA stuck to the basic tasks necessary to operate and maintain the railroad, the Monday morning quarterbacks wouldn't be talking about express tracks and the M Street subway.

Oh, and by the way, I can count all the heavy rail transit systems in North America that have express tracks on one hand.

Whether express tracks were considered or not is irrelevant. The opportunity was still there and it was not exercised.

Even without express tracks, WMATA could still have built a 3rd track in the system to make it easy to route trains around track work, emergencies, break-downs and other delays. It would also allow for the system to be able to run 24 hours.

Even if WMATA did proper maintenance over the years, a 3rd track would lessen the impact of maintenance and other issues. There is no denying that.

If WMATA did proper maintenance over the years, there would be no impact to lessen....

"Chris Brown"
Whether express tracks were considered or not is irrelevant. The opportunity was still there and it was not exercised.

Even without express tracks, WMATA could still have built a 3rd track in the system to make it easy to route trains around track work, emergencies, break-downs and other delays. It would also allow for the system to be able to run 24 hours.

Even if WMATA did proper maintenance over the years, a 3rd track would lessen the impact of maintenance and other issues. There is no denying that.

Maintenance, maintenance and more maintenance would have rendered your argument moot. A third track would have added an additional maintenance burden that would have been unnecessary had the railroad and rolling stock been rigorously maintained. It is my belief that the 24 hour service argument falls into the category as the express track argument. Like express tracks I can count all the agencies in North America that operate 24 hour service on all or part of the heavy rail transits system on one hand.

The only hindsight tweaks I would have made is the placing of at least one #10 turnout interlocking between every station, the interlocking where the track centers are greater then 16' would have no S curves between the frogs of the turnout pairs, #14 turnouts with matching equilateral Y turnouts on the inbound end of all pocket tracks, again with no S curves between the turnout pairs, #18 turnouts in the junctions not directly adjacent to stations (C&D, C&J, K&M), #16 turnouts in the interlocking used to crossover trains at terminal stations, (the interlocking south of the terminal station at Owings Mills on the Baltimore Metro is fitted with #16 turnouts).

Chris Brown wrote:
Even without express tracks, WMATA could still have built a 3rd track in the system to make it easy to route trains around track work, emergencies, break-downs and other delays. It would also allow for the system to be able to run 24 hours.

I proposed a middle passing track at the outdoor stations. Think pocket track al-al Silver Spring etc. Yes, this implies higher speed interlockings, and dual platforms.

It would allow two service improvements:

a) In normal operations, you can have skip-station express service. Local trains would be held briefly on the platform to allow the express to pass it.

This is important because as the system expands outward, total travel time becomes more of an issue to the ridership. I suspect the Silver Line ridership to IAD will fall short of promises because it will take too long for many air passengers. (And once you get to the Not Really Dulles station, you still have a journey ahead.)

b) Trains seldom break down while under way; they fail at station stops. Traditionally, it's doors and brakes that get them pulled.

With a passing track, a out of service train will NOT back up the system from end to end; following trains will just skip past that station. The line keeps going, (Shanghaied passengers will get off at the next station, and backtrack.)

MCL1981 wrote:If WMATA did proper maintenance over the years, there would be no impact to lessen....

False.

Accidents and problems still happen no matter how well maintenance is performed.

Also, the very act of maintenance requires a track to be down. That downtime limits or eliminates service on that track until the maintenance is complete. With a third track, service is never interrupted for any reason unless two tracks are down at once. I don't think you thought this through well.

Sand Box John wrote:"Chris Brown"
Whether express tracks were considered or not is irrelevant. The opportunity was still there and it was not exercised.

Maintenance, maintenance and more maintenance would have rendered your argument moot. A third track would have added an additional maintenance burden that would have been unnecessary had the railroad and rolling stock been rigorously maintained. It is my belief that the 24 hour service argument falls into the category as the express track argument. Like express tracks I can count all the agencies in North America that operate 24 hour service on all or part of the heavy rail transits system on one hand.

Three points:

1. Maintenance would not make my argument moot. See my response above to MCL1984

2. The third track extra maintenance burden would be a wash because you would get the benefit of uninterrupted service in return.

3. You being able to count all the agencies in North America that operate 24 hour service on one hand is not an argument. I'm talking about how Metro in DC could be better. I don't care what other transit systems in the rest of the country are doing or not doing. Irrelevant.