urbanSTL

Charlie brennan had a representitive from metrolink on this morning... I only caught the end of the interview, but he said they are planning on spruceing and brightening up the DT stations possibly with some "art in motion" lighting similar to whats currently in the CC stations.

bpe235 wrote:Charlie brennan had a representitive from metrolink on this morning... I only caught the end of the interview, but he said they are planning on spruceing and brightening up the DT stations possibly with some "art in motion" lighting similar to whats currently in the CC stations.

I think they first need to fix all the bad signage at the downtown locations. Eastbound to "College" still all over the Stadium, 8th/Pine and Convention Center Stations? How about westbound to "Lambert Main" at the same stations? How do I get to Shrewsbury/I-44?

Is intradowntown riding still free from 11 a.m. until 1 p.m.? If not, one possible reason for the demise might be the "you must have a ticket to enter the platform" signs that appear(ed) before the sign telling riders that it was free at lunchtime.

^ there definitely won't be any benefit to park & ride in 2008. I'm sure, however, that it'll get plenty of use in 2009.

^When Eager doesn't work, there is alternate access to the garage from Dale.



And just as Shrewsbury I-44 gets use from nearby neighborhoods and communities, likely more such use than long-distance motorists actually getting off I-44, I imagine the Brentwood I-64 park'n'ride will largely serve residents of mid-County who don't even need to get on I-64. That is to say, there is no direct access from I-44 to the Shrewsbury station, yet it is the busiest station on the new alignment. With Brentwood now having over twice as many parking spots, I can see Brentwood soon surpassing Shrewsbury as the busiest station on the new extension.

I don't think either of you are grasping the logistics here. When 40 closes from 170 inward in 2009, there will be at most two through lanes (if they realign it all the way from the Brentwood exit) to handle a gazillion cars exiting 40 inbound. (I suspect most of those cars will by then be coming in on other E-W roads or alternating to 44 and 70.)



I wasn't pointing out Eager today to illustrate poor westbound access; I was merely pointing out what a total disaster westbound Eager is currently given minimal disruption (closing of the Hanley wb ramp to 40).



That garage is, unfortunately, already poorly accessible for park 'n' ride. Now, you might hypothesize that Brentwood or some other municipality will put on extra manual traffic control to facilitate the situation. For a real-world example of the likelihood of that, sit in the Whole Foods parking lot between 4 and 6 p.m. and watch what happens at the Brentwood/Eager/170 clusterfork in the road.

Is intradowntown riding still free from 11 a.m. until 1 p.m.? If not, one possible reason for the demise might be the "you must have a ticket to enter the platform" signs that appear(ed) before the sign telling riders that it was free at lunchtime.

Its free from Lacledes Landing to Union Station, weekdays from 11:30 am until 1:30 pm.

July 4th was akin to choas for the trains.



People shouted at one another and were very rude, but who wouldn't when nothing but full trains arrive from Laclede Landing at a packed Stadium station.



It seems more people then past years opted for Metrolink than driving to attend the Ball game and Fair STL, but capacity revealed that:



We need longer platforms, longer trains, and a national expansion of mass transit to essentially beef up our systems to closer match Chicago, DC, or SF.



After waiting at Stadium and seeing five trains full bypass, we rode to Illinois and rode back without any more wait.



Busdad, will you post the ridership for July 4th and also for this first week of July. I bet we hit over 100,000.

hey, what's the max capacity of a 2 car train?

Doug wrote:Capacity during rush hour is high enough to warrant at least more frequent trains.

They couldn't gain much more frequency. Forest Park to Emerson Park already runs at 5 minute intervals during rush hour. According to Busdad the most they could tighten to is 3 3/4 minutes between trains. So all they could really pick up a 75 seconds and thus 4 more trains an hour.



From another thread, a response from Busdad.

"Has Metro operated less than five minute intervals?"



The trains can technically operate 3 3/4 minutes apart and actually closer as long as they are on separate track circuits. Each circuit spans about 3 3/4 minutes based upon the planned speed. So if you are in circuit one and another train is in another circuit, they can technically be quite close together. However once the following train enters the same track circuit as the first train, it will immediately obtain a signal to slow down or stop. The published schedule is provided as a tool to help the train operators maintain a consistent interval.



We have operated trains using manual control for short periods of time, but not the entire rail road. If the North-South Street car line was build using true street running, we would probably need to operate without automatic train control or in manual mode. Metro truly enjoys the speed with safety that automatic train control permits and would hate to abandon that lightly.

BTW: I have yet to see a train in the morning or evening rush hour so full you couldn't get on. Post baseball/football/hockey game traffic and VP is the only time I've seen the trains jam packed.

SMSPlanstu wrote:July 4th was akin to choas for the trains.



People shouted at one another and were very rude, but who wouldn't when nothing but full trains arrive from Laclede Landing at a packed Stadium station.



It seems more people then past years opted for Metrolink than driving to attend the Ball game and Fair STL, but capacity revealed that:



We need longer platforms, longer trains, and a national expansion of mass transit to essentially beef up our systems to closer match Chicago, DC, or SF.



After waiting at Stadium and seeing five trains full bypass, we rode to Illinois and rode back without any more wait.



Busdad, will you post the ridership for July 4th and also for this first week of July. I bet we hit over 100,000.

My understanding is that Metro ran trains on 10 minute intervals after the fireworks. If that's the case they could have added another train to the mix to help ease the frustrations of people wanting to get home. However, I don't think it's necessary to extend platforms for what's essentially a two day event. They need to work on shortening the waits for trains.

brickandmortar wrote:

SMSPlanstu wrote:July 4th was akin to choas for the trains.



People shouted at one another and were very rude, but who wouldn't when nothing but full trains arrive from Laclede Landing at a packed Stadium station.



It seems more people then past years opted for Metrolink than driving to attend the Ball game and Fair STL, but capacity revealed that:



We need longer platforms, longer trains, and a national expansion of mass transit to essentially beef up our systems to closer match Chicago, DC, or SF.



After waiting at Stadium and seeing five trains full bypass, we rode to Illinois and rode back without any more wait.



Busdad, will you post the ridership for July 4th and also for this first week of July. I bet we hit over 100,000.

My understanding is that Metro ran trains on 10 minute intervals after the fireworks. If that's the case they could have added another train to the mix to help ease the frustrations of people wanting to get home. However, I don't think it's necessary to extend platforms for what's essentially a two day event. They need to work on shortening the waits for trains.

We parked on top of the Arch garage to watch the fire works last night. We got a front row seat to the chaos as the top of the garage is the same level as the Laclede's Landing platform. I was timing the trains and they were running at 6 to 8 minute intervals. They could have easily cranked that down to 4 or 5 minutes and moved more people quickly.



If you want to see a cluster-f go to Chicago on July 3rd when they have the big fireworks downtown. Traffic still gridlocked at 1:30am and every train away from the loop jam packed 'til that time too.

I'm from Atlanta, GA and am familiar with the rapid transit system we have there. I'll be visiting St. Louis and thinking about moving there to work at a university. I have a few questions about Metrolink.



First, do they have restrooms at their stations/stops along the lines? They do at many of the Atlanta rapid transit stations and they often open them just for rush hours.



Second, do the trains run pretty continuously, or are they more like real rail trains that have a set and standard schedule that they don't deviate from?



From the pictures, the trains look very short and not very subway-like so I'm trying to get a handle on how useful they might make living outside the city.



Thanks.

To answer your first question, if memory serves me correctly, the elevators always smelled like pee.

For the second question: doesn't matter. Like all trains, it's going to be pulling away as you run down the stairs to the platform. So I guess it's kind of like a set schedule.

Finally, whatever answer would get you to move INTO the city is the one I would insert here.

For what it is, it's damn reliable. You can get from downtown to the airport in what, half an hour? And the length of the trains...well, let's see how long it takes for someone to come up with a "size doesn't matter" comment. Not counting that last sentence.

My understanding is that Metro ran trains on 10 minute intervals after the fireworks. If that's the case they could have added another train to the mix to help ease the frustrations of people wanting to get home. However, I don't think it's necessary to extend platforms for what's essentially a two day event. They need to work on shortening the waits for trains.

Metro operated 10 minute frequency on all branch ends on both July 3rd and July 4th. This means that the trains operated five minute frequency between Emerson Park and Forest Park. I am responsible for rail scheduling and we were maxed out track circuit wise in a practical sense on the 3rd and 4th.



I worked at Laclede's Landing on July 3rd for the entire evening loading the front end of the westbound trains. Train spacing certainly averaged five minutes. I don't remember a single significant gap of any consequence. Dwell times at the Landing often exceeded 60 seconds. (compared to normal 20 second dwells.)



Any observed deviation in the five minute frequency was caused by longer dwell times when loading trains to capacity, dealing with strollers, disabled customers and people trying to squeeze on one more person. A few trains had to sit at the Landing for a minute or so fully loaded waiting for the train in the next track circuit to move west. A few trains came into a station three minutes after the other left, but couldn't leave until the 3.75 minute spacing was achieved.



We could not have added any more trains within the core on July 3rd and 4th. We ran seven trains in a row to Scott operating at five minute spacing. To achieve this, we pulled three new trains out westbound from 29th Street to maintain westbound flow.



However, the problem we had eastbound was timing the peak. The baseball games are not predictable and the fireworks ended earlier than we anticipated. You can theoretically operate 3.75 minute apart, but in a practical sense, you can't really get trains closer than five minutes with the kinds of loads we had. Even with the five minute frequency to Scott, train operator has to wait on the tracks with passengers waiting for a slot to open up.



We would like to have added three more eastbound trains to permit 14 Scott trains in a row at five minute frequency. The eastside passengers just jammed the Emerson trains and reportedly one group of passengers temporarily refused to get off the train turning into Emerson. They wanted to be taken to Scott which would have really hurt the westbound capacity. However, we did not have any more train operators. Westbound demand was definitely higher than the eastbound demand.





On the 4th, I understand one train operator had to take an emergency personal (bathroom break) causing two trains to operate out of order. This resulted in two Shrewsbury trains in a row and then two Lambert Trains. This caused havoc at Forest Park. Other than avoiding this, there was really nothing that could be done westbound to run more frequency for a sustained period of time.



If you want to run more capacity than five minute in the core, we would have to improve track circuits to 90 seconds (like it is between Forest Park and Emerson. And you would also have to add additional terminal points. (The Airport can't handle more that 7.5 minute frequency without going to a drop back driver operation. That would have been tough to do with the intensity of the demand of the 3rd and 4th. We ran a drop back operation in 2001 to get adequate restroom breaks at Lambert Airport when we ran 7.5 minute headways. To make drop backs work takes a lot of strict supervision to make sure no one leaves even a minute late.



With 90 second track circuits, you could perhaps run trains three minutes apart in the core, but even a minor delay of two minutes would result the following train being automatically shut down to maintain spacing. With 3 minute frequency, you have a really high probability of trains getting out of order through the forest park junction. To recover from this, you need a third track and terminals which can handle more than two trains at a time. In fact with frequencies under 7.5 minutes into a terminal point we would need to switch to drop back operation or have this third loading because you will have three trains at the terminal point in many circumstances.



The only possible capacity solution that wouldn't result in that sort of problem with our 200 foot platforms, which can't easily be expanded, is to add a unpowered middle section to these cars. This sort of car is being constructed for Houston (I think). It adds about 35 seats and perhaps 65 standee spaces. You add one set of doors I think. So maybe you could push peak capacity up by about 100 riders if this could be done.



Next year, St. Clair County Transit will fund and Metro will construct another turnback at Fairview. This will permit five minute frequency in Illinois all the way to Fairview which should dramatically reduce the Emerson Park problem.



Now just think about the challenge of adding a Westport extension if it is tied into the current alignment. We have been doing a lot of thinking about how to add to the system without causing massive disruption to our current operating system that is probably going to average 85,00 boardings a day and maybe 100,000 per day within five years. The scheduling and operating control problems are huge.



Sorry this is sort of unorganized. This is a complicated topic and really requires more careful thought, but I thought I would add my perspective.

Busdad, Thanks for the insight into the complexities of managing the train system!



What is popularly considered to be the best run light rail/metro system in the world? What makes them the best? What kind of car spacing can they achieve and how do they do it? Has Metro studied "best case" examples of other cities?

Wow



I knew it was complex with many possible scenarios like those that happened, but having them occur is still surprising.



I am interested in the "what ifs" for adding additional lines to Westport and Florissant. Because I bet we would have to seek Federal funding to essentially double the rails at the core stations or Forest Park through Downtown. San Francisco seeks to drill another tunnel underneath the Bay to double capacity for the next 50years. What are the doubling capacity scenarios Metro is faced with and their costs?



I seems realistic to build all envisioned lines for Metro by 2050 with the liklihood of drastic changes in fuel and car costs as well as other factors

East St. Louis to Alton

East St. Louis to Collinsville or Edwardsville

North - South City

Florissant

maybe Ferguson or Northeast STL County

Westport

South County extension



All of these lines would cause a great burden on the core such that we may need a doubling of the service to the core like parallel tracks along Olive/Lindell or Delmar. < Better serve Midtown and CWE

John DeGraw wrote:I'm from Atlanta, GA and am familiar with the rapid transit system we have there. I'll be visiting St. Louis and thinking about moving there to work at a university. I have a few questions about Metrolink.



First, do they have restrooms at their stations/stops along the lines? They do at many of the Atlanta rapid transit stations and they often open them just for rush hours.



Second, do the trains run pretty continuously, or are they more like real rail trains that have a set and standard schedule that they don't deviate from?



From the pictures, the trains look very short and not very subway-like so I'm trying to get a handle on how useful they might make living outside the city.



Thanks.

Here's a better answer for you.



1. Currently none on the Metro Stations have bathrooms except for the aforementioned elevators. There will be bathroom facilities at the new multimodal station (Civic Center) when that opens up later this year/early next year.



2. The trains run on a schedule. There are basically two lines that run together in a central core through the city. In the core the headways are around five minutes during rush hour, eight to ten minutes off-peak. On the outer branches it is ten minutes during rush hour and around fifteen to twenty off-peak.



As far as using Metro as a commuter option there are plenty of free park-and-ride stations along the entire route. And while Metro certainly does not have the eight car trains you'll find in Chicago, the trains are rarely over capacity to the point that you have to wait for the next one, except for special events such as Fair St Louis.

Somewhat tangential to SMSPlanstu's comment, the Bay tunnel proposal was spawned directly from population predictions for the next 50 years, and especially the geographic distribution of those populations. BART, the agency that oversees the heavy rail commuter lines, is banking on 11 million people in the bay area in the next 30 years, only 800,000 of which will live in the city. Their extensions will run pretty far-almost 40 miles from the city, and add 2 lines.

I think that Metro is kind of like a hybrid of Bay area transit systems: the geographic reach of BART, and the technology of Muni. And as far as wait times, Metro's much closer to BART. Muni, the rail system in San Francisco proper, has an abominable on time performance record. Some people wait 30 minutes for a Muni train in the peak of rush hour, when they're scheduled at 7 minute intervals.

SMSPlanstu wrote:
All of these lines would cause a great burden on the core such that we may need a doubling of the service to the core like parallel tracks along Olive/Lindell or Delmar. < Better serve Midtown and CWE

It seems as though we'll have to get creative with how these lines intersect. Why not leave them separate with transfer stations? A north/south line in the city wouldn't need to run on any existing track.