Thursday, June 3, 2010
Back from the Dead
A lot has happened in a short amount of time with the planned commuter rail plan for Arnold/Greensburg.
The story first appeared here and has become significantly more complex in the mean time. Apparently, not only has AVR secured financing for the Arnold to Pittsburgh line, but they intend to move forward with it, and are at least exploring other options for its operation. i.e. potentially pursuing a River Line style (light) of operation vs. a WES or Tri Rail operation. (heavy).
I’m not sure what to think of this. If you read the AVR proposal they have their own ideas on implementation, and basically don’t care what Allegheny or Westmoreland County think.
I can see two perspectives on this:
-AVR is trying to grease the skids so to speak. They (as I am) are not impressed with the pace of the overall project while costs escalate and the Rte 28 project progresses. Because this news is so out of left field I would not be surprised if this is in fact the case. This is what I hope is really happening. In fact, I hope it works. We’re on our tenth year of talking about this, and I see this having the potential to go the way of every other transit project in Pittsburgh if action is not taken. (That place is no where)
- AVR is serious about this propsal. I REALLY hope that they aren't serious about their proposal. I say that because a light rail style of operation, whether diesel or electric severely limits its interaction with either a Greensburg line operation or Bill Peduto’s shuttle, or any other standard rail line for that matter. Currently, operations such as the River Line must be segregated, by time from heavy operations. Meaning, if light operations occur from 5 AM to 7PM for example, then no heavy trains can operate on that trackage during that time and visa verse. This is fine for the AVR tracks, but not good for tying in with the NS (Greensburg) or Amtrak/CSX (Peduto Limited). If the AVR gets their way, then their operation will be forced to be a stand alone operation, even if some other commuter operation would come to fruition. Basically, you would have yet another mode of operation that does not tie in well with any other operation. That greatly decreases the operation’s effectiveness and chances it could operate successfully. No word on whether they expect to receive operating subsidies, or whether they expect to be able to operate at a profit.
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
G 20 Journal
G20 in the East End
Thursday, May 28, 2009
DMU Update
I wanted to follow up to see if their have been any developments because this could have a significant impact on an commuter operation from New Ken to Pittsburgh. By this I mean, if no compliant DMU could be found, whoever would operate the service (WCTA or PAAC) would have to consider either:
#1: Buying new full trainsets consisting of a diesel and passenger cars. (This is bad because it costs alot of $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$)
#2: Scrounging up used trainsets or RDC cars ( This could be expensive in itself and the equipment would require at least an overhaul, if not a full re-build. Using old equipment could also lead to increased maintenance costs and decreased publich perception of any service).
This update comes via a post from Seattle Transit Blog from last month. In an article about the last Colorado DMU which was shipped to Alaska Railroad, they mentioned a company called "Value Recovery Group" which is supposedly interested in purchasing the remaining assets of the company and resuming operations. I sent the company a message via their website asking if the information on Seattle Transit Blog is correct or not. No answer yet, but I just posed the question.
Again, their are international players as well, but it's hard to find any real information on whether their current product lines could be made FRA compliant or not. Again, I think it would be great for potential operations around the U.S. and especially Pittsburgh if the proven designs built by Colorado Railcar could be resurrected and produced again. I will certainly post again on this subject as more information becomes available.
Thursday, March 26, 2009
My idea for Heavy Rail in the East End Part 7
Dispatching
As with all railroads, this plan would require the lines to be dispatched. Basically, a dispatcher is someone who prioritizes, and coordinates the movement of trains and the use of track by maintenance crews. The entire Greensburg Line is dispatched by Norfolk Southern, and a small portion of the New Ken to Hazelwood Line (From the Strip District to Hazelwood) is dispatched by CSX. The remaining portion of the New Ken to Hazelwood Line is owned by Carload Express (AVR) and is very lightly used and does not currently require the use of a dispatcher. Given the current situation there are several options for dispatching.
1. Use dispatching services of host railroads: This option would not require the Port Authority (or whatever regulatory body would govern the commuter service) to hire dispatchers or maintain the infrastructure that goes along with it. However, in this case, the devil's in the details. Both CSX and NS use their own separate rule book to govern their operations. That means that any time a train would move from the tracks of one railroad to the other, they would be required to change the rules that governed their movement on the fly. This can be done, but is cumbersome. Additionally, this means that our system would be subject to multiple rules (as I said, each Railroad has their own set of rules) Another concern is who would take over the responsibility of dispatching the line to New Kensington. I doubt that a railroad would take on that responsibility for free. As it stands now, NS dispatches most of the territory, and the additional territory could be assigned to them.
2. Create a separate dispatching system: For my two cents this is the better option. As I said, the system would have to purchase the infrastructure to dispatch and pay people to do it, however, from an operations perspective this is much more efficient. This way, there would be no transition "between rulebooks", and one unified rulebook of choice could be chosen (i.e. a train going from New Ken to Hazelwood would not have to transition to an entirely set of operating rules part way through the trip). Additionally, for the case of the current NS owned parts, freight trains that would operate on the line during off-peak hours could be dispatched by Port Authority dispatchers, and operate under their (Port Authority's) rules. Additionally, the sparse freight traffic on the AVR portions of the system, again could be dispatched by Port Authority dispatchers.
Signaling
Signals are used (not unlike traffic lights) to govern movement of trains (when to go, when to stop, when to slow down and prepare to stop). They are, an EXTREMELY expensive infrastructure cost, both in initial investment, and in maintenance. Many lightly trafficked lines do not use signaling, however, for an operation such as the one I have been proposing, signaling of the route is a must.
The good news is, part of the job is done. All of the NS controlled track is already signaled, and a small portion of the CSX (from Hazelwood to the Strip) is signaled. However, the entire line to New Kensington is not. Signaling would have to be installed along this track. Luckily for us, we don't have to look any further than the Pittsburgh Technology Center. Union Switch and Signal (a division of Ansaldo) is located there and their bread and butter is building signaling systems for railroads. What better than to get a more or less local company to provide the signaling for the project?
Vehicles
This is where things get a little sketchy. Vehicles would be the biggest question mark for the project. Thus far, the plan has called for the use of DMU's (Diesel Multiple Units), basically single, self propelled rail vehicles, that can operate singly in tandem. These are a less expensive option to a regular "train" consisting of a locomotive and cars.
The problem with DMU's was that they have, for the most part, been unable to meet FRA (Federal Railroad Administration) crash worthiness. As a result, most current operations, like New Jersey's Riverline, and San Diego's Sprinter, have extreme restrictions and cannot operate anywhere close to freight trains, because the vehicles they use are considered to be "Light Rail" vehicles (Think The "T").
A company called Colorado Railcar Company built a demonstration DMU that toured the U.S. in 2004 (including a stop in Oakmont). This was the first DMU to be FRA compliant, meaning it could operate inter-mixed with freight train traffic. That was the good news. The bad news came in the end of 2008 when the economy and delays on orders caused Colorado Railcar to go out of business, and with it went the primary vehicle option for heavy rail commuter service in the East End. Like I said, there are options, the Port Authority could purchase rail vehicles that are considered to be "Light Rail". Siemens Transportation and Bombardier both make such vehicles, but that would preclude any freight trains from operating anywhere near these things, and that would make NS in particular, a lot less likely to go along with this plan.
In my mind, the best option is to wait and see. There are a number of fledgling commuter systems in the U.S. that had pinned their hopes on Colorado Railcar, meaning the demand is there. If the demand is there, someone will be there, sooner or later to answer that demand, whether it be a start up company or one of the international players. Another potential answer is after market modifications to current designs. One of the most promising is a heavy rail vehicle currently in use in Australia, and built by Bombardier, called the VLocity. Being the Mechanical Eng, I mean History Major that I am, I was unable to find out how this vehicle stands up to FRA crash regulations. Of the types of vehicles I was searching, however, it is certainly the heaviest and most robust.
This post is certainly looking ahead, we have not moved beyond the study to find out if we want to study this option study. In a way that could be good, because there are many obstacles, and many operational questions that need answered. I just hope this project isn't too young to miss the pro-transit/anti-car wave that is slowly gripping the nation.
My Idea for Heavy Rail in the East End Part 6
This line operates on the same principal as the Blue and Gold Lines. There are no trains operating opposite of the peak direction, i.e. all morning trains are inbound trains and all evening trains are outbound trains.
There are eight trains per rush hour with two trains per hour, departing 15 minutes apart. I staggered starting locations for each train. Four trains will depart and/or terminate in Greensburg, and four trains will depart and/or terminate in Pitcairn due to infrastructure reasons. West of Pitcairn, under the operational plan I proposed, this service would have nearly exclusive use of both tracks. East of Pitcairn, however, the proposed service would be sharing right of way with Norfolk Southern. Additionally, I don't know how much demand for service would come from east of Pitcairn. If adding Greensburg as a stop for the other four trains was feasible and worth while, it could be done pretty easily.
Black Line Outbound Schedule (Part 6)
Station | Outbound | Outbound | Outbound | Outbound |
Greensburg | 500P | -- | 600P | -- |
Irwin | 447P | 502P | 547P | 602P |
Pitcairn | 436P | 451P | 536P | 551P |
Braddock | 425P | 440P | 525P | 540P |
Wilkinsburg | 416P | 431P | 516P | 531P |
East Liberty | 410P | 425P | 510P | 525P |
Downtown | 400P | 415P | 500P | 515P |
Station | Outbound | Outbound | Outbound | Outbound |
Greensburg | 700P | -- | 800P | -- |
Irwin | 647P | 702P | 747P | 802P |
Pitcairn | 636P | 651P | 736P | 751P |
Braddock | 625P | 640P | 725P | 740P |
Wilkinsburg | 616P | 631P | 716P | 731P |
East Liberty | 610P | 625P | 710P | 725P |
Downtown | 600P | 615P | 700P | 715P |
Black Line Inbound Schedule (Part 6)
Station | Inbound | Inbound | Inbound | Inbound |
Greensburg | 0530A | -- | 0630A | -- |
Irwin | 0544A | 0600A | 0644A | 0700A |
Pitcairn | 0555A | 0611A | 0655A | 0711A |
Braddock | 0606A | 0622A | 0706A | 0722A |
Wilkinsburg | 0615A | 0631A | 0715A | 0731A |
East Liberty | 0621A | 0637A | 0721A | 0737A |
Downtown | 0630A | 0646A | 0730A | 0746A |
Station | Inbound | Inbound | Inbound | Inbound |
Greensburg | 0730A | -- | 0830A | -- |
Irwin | 0744A | 0800A | 0844A | 0900A |
Pitcairn | 0755A | 0811A | 0855A | 0911A |
Braddock | 0806A | 0822A | 0906A | 0922A |
Wilkinsburg | 0815A | 0831A | 0915A | 0931A |
East Liberty | 0821A | 0837A | 0921A | 0937A |
Downtown | 0830A | 0846A | 0930A | 0946A |
Greensburg Line Schedule Reasoning (Part 6)
60MPH – 5280 Feet per minute
45 MPH- 3960 Feet per minute
35 MPH – 3080 Feet per minute
30 MPH – 2640 Feet per minute
Greensburg to Irwin
8.87 Miles or 46833.6 Feet
@ 5280 Feet per minute, it will take 8.8 minutes to get from Greensburg to Irwin. Add two minutes to get up to track speed, and 2 minutes to slow down and it will take 12.8 minutes to get from Greensburg to Irwin
1 Minute Irwin Station Stop
Irwin to Pitcairn
5.9 Miles or 31,152 Feet
@ 5280 Feet per minute, it will take 5.9 minutes to get from Irwin to Pitcairn. Add two minutes to get up to track speed, and 2 minutes to slow down, and it will take 9.9 minutes to get from Irwin to Pitcairn.
1 Minute Pitcairn Station Stop
Pitcairn to Braddock
5.76 Miles or 30,412.8 Feet
@5280 Feet per minute it will 5.76 minutes to get from Pitcairn to Braddock. Add two minutes to get up to track speed, and 2 minutes to slow down, and you have 9.76 minutes to get from Pitcairn to Braddock.
1 Minute Braddock Station Stop.
Braddock to Wilkinsburg
3.78 Miles or 19958.4 Feet
@3960 Feet per minute, it will take 5 Minutes to get from Braddock to Wilkinsburg Add two minutes to get up to track speed and 1 minute to slow down, and you have 8 minutes to get from Braddock to Wilkinsburg.
1 Minute Wilkinsburg Station Stop.
Wilkinsburg to E. Liberty
1.63 Miles or 8612.4 Feet
@ 3960 Feet per minute, it will take 2 minutes to get from Wilkinsburg to E. Liberty. Add two minutes to get up to track speed and one minute to slow down, and you have 5 minutes to get from Wilkinsburg to E. Liberty.
East Liberty to Grant St. Multi-Modal Terminal
4.11 Miles or 21,701 Feet
@ 3960 Feet per minute, it will take 5.48 minutes to get from East Liberty to Grant Street Multi-Modal Terminal. Add two minutes to get up to track speed, and 1 minute to slow down, and it will take 8.48 minutes to get from East Liberty to Grant Street Multi-modal terminal.
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Gold and Blue Lines Outbound Schedule (Part 5)
Station | Outbound | Outbound | Outbound | Outbound |
New Kensington | 450P | 511P | 550P | 611P |
Oakmont | 437P | 458P | 537P | 558P |
Washington BLVD | 427P | 448P | 527P | 548P |
Lawrenceville | 417P | -- | 517P | -- |
Oakland | 407P | -- | 507P | -- |
Hazelwood | 400P | -- | 500P | -- |
East Liberty | -- | 440P | -- | 540P |
Downtown | -- | 430P | -- | 530P |
Station | Outbound | Outbound | Outbound | Outbound |
New Kensington | 650P | 711P | 750P | 811P |
Oakmont | 637P | 658P | 737P | 758P |
Washington BLVD | 627P | 648P | 727P | 748P |
Lawrenceville | 617P | -- | 717P | -- |
Oakland | 607P | -- | 707P | -- |
Hazelwood | 600P | -- | 700P | -- |
East Liberty | -- | 640P | -- | 740P |
Downtown | -- | 630P | -- | 730P |
Gold and Blue Lines Inbound Schedule (Part 5)
Station | Inbound | Inbound | Inbound | Inbound |
New Kensington | 0530A | 0600A | 0630A | 0700A |
Oakmont | 0544A | 0614A | 0644A | 0714A |
Washington BLVD | 0554A | 0624A | 0654A | 0724A |
Lawrenceville | -- | 0634A | -- | 0734A |
Oakland | -- | 0644A | -- | 0744A |
Hazelwood | -- | 0651A | -- | 0751A |
East Liberty | 0602A | -- | 0702A | -- |
Downtown | 0611A | -- | 0711A | -- |
Station | Inbound | Inbound | Inbound | Inbound |
New Kensington | 0730A | 0800A | 0830A | 0900A |
Oakmont | 0744A | 0814A | 0844A | 0914A |
Washington BLVD | 0754A | 0824A | 0854A | 0924A |
Lawrenceville | -- | 0834A | -- | 0934A |
Oakland | -- | 0844A | -- | 0944A |
Hazelwood | -- | 0851A | -- | 0951A |
East Liberty | 0802A | -- | 0902A | |
Downtown | 0811A | -- | 0911A |
Arnold/New Kensington Schedule Reasoning (Part 5)
45 MPH- 3960 Feet per minute
35 MPH – 3080 Feet per minute
30 MPH – 2640 Feet per minute
Blue Line
New Kensington to Oakmont
7.2 Miles or 38,016 Feet
@ 3960 Feet per minute, it will take 9.6 minutes to get from New Ken to Oakmont. Add two minutes to get up to track speed, and one minute to slow down and it will take 12.6 minutes to get from New Ken to Oakmont.
1 Minute Oakmont Station Stop
Oakmont to Washington BLVD
4.45 Miles or 23,496 Feet
@ 3960 Feet per minute, it will take 5.93 minutes to get from Oakmont to Washington BLVD. Add two minutes to get up to track speed, and 1 minute to slow down, and it will take 8.93 minutes to get from New Ken to Oakmont.
1 Minute Washington BLVD Station Stop
Washington BLVD to Lawrenceville
4.93 Miles, or 26,030.4 Feet
@3960 Feet per minute it will take 6.57 minutes to get from Washington BLVD to Lawrenceville. Add two minutes to get up to track speed, and 1 minute to slow down, and you have 9.57 minutes to get from Washington BLVD to Lawrenceville.
1 Minute Lawrenceville Station Stop.
Lawrenceville to Oakland
3.18 Miles or 16,790.4 Feet
@2640 Feet per minute, it will take 6.36 Minutes to get from Lawrenceville to Oakland Add two minutes to get up to track speed and 1 minute to slow down, and you have 8.36 minutes to get from Lawrenceville to Oakland.
1 Minute Oakland Station Stop.
Oakland to Hazelwood
2.33 Miles or 12,302.4
@ 3080 Feet per minute, it will take 4 minutes to get from Oakland to Hazelwood. Add two minutes to get up to track speed and one minute to slow down, and you have 7 minutes to get from Oakland to Hazelwood.
Gold Line
New Kensington to Oakmont
7.2 Miles or 38,016 Feet
@ 3960 Feet per minute, it will take 9.6 minutes to get from New Ken to Oakmont. Add two minutes to get up to track speed, and one minute to slow down and it will take 12.6 minutes to get from New Ken to Oakmont.
1 Minute Oakmont Station Stop
Oakmont to Washington BLVD
4.45 Miles or 23,496 Feet
@ 3960 Feet per minute, it will take 5.93 minutes to get from Oakmont to Washington BLVD. Add two minutes to get up to track speed, and 1 minute to slow down, and it will take 8.93 minutes to get from New Ken to Oakmont.
1 Minute Washington BLVD Station Stop
Washington BLVD to East Liberty
3.05 Miles or 16,104 Feet
@3960 Feet per minute, it will take 4.06 minutes to get from Washington BLVD to East Liberty. Add two minutes to get up to track speed, and 1 minute to slow down, and it will take 7.06 minutes to get from Washington BLVD to East Liberty.
1 Minute East Liberty Station Stop.
East Liberty to Grant St. Multi-Modal Terminal
4.11 Miles or 21,701 Feet
@ 3960 Feet per minute, it will take 5.48 minutes to get from East Liberty to Grant Street Multi-Modal Terminal. Add two minutes to get up to track speed, and 1 minute to slow down, and it will take 8.48 minutes to get from East Liberty to Grant Street Multi-modal terminal.