Regarding the R6 Extension project...why not keep going?

[John]

It would be sweet if the R6 could be extended to Reading and
Wyomissing under catenary, with high-frequency service throughout the
day. I read the study posted on their website, and everything points
to the service terminating at 30th Street in Philadelphia. It got me
thinking - it's pointed west toward Thorndale, so why not keep going?

An express service to and from Philadelphia, then local from Thorndale
to Lancaster, and possibly even Harrisburg, would be cheap and almost
a no-brainer. The extension could be considered an entirely new "R"
service on SEPTA - the "R4" to Lancaster and Harrisburg?

I'm sure Amtrak is doing a great job with the Keystone Service from
New York and Philadelphia to Harrisburg, but they're also charging
Amtrak prices and not making the more-closely-spaced, commuter-type
service that the area is growing into. A rail authority which would
also include Lancaster and Dauphin Counties as well as the proposed
Berks, Montgomery, and Chester Counties makes a lot of sense. Temple
University would have an inexpensive connection between its Harrisburg
and Main campuses, with easy connections to Tyler School of Art and
Ambler. Harrisburg International Airport could function as a relief
airport for Philadelphia with an inexpensive platform outside the
terminal area.

There are a lot of advantages to keeping the R6 Extension moving past
30th Street Station. Unifying all of the counties in southeastern and
south-central Pennsylvania is but one of them. I hope this proposal
can be considered if the full electrification to Reading and
Wyomissing moves forward with funding.

[art clemons]

It would be sweet if the R6 could be extended to Reading and Wyomissing
under catenary, with high-frequency service throughout the day. I read
the study posted on their website, and everything points to the service
terminating at 30th Street in Philadelphia. It got me thinking - it's
pointed west toward Thorndale, so why not keep going?
An express service to and from Philadelphia, then local from Thorndale
to Lancaster, and possibly even Harrisburg, would be cheap and almost a
no-brainer. The extension could be considered an entirely new "R"
service on SEPTA - the "R4" to Lancaster and Harrisburg

I'ld love to see the R6 go to Reading et al too, of course it might be
nice if the R6 continued on past 30th St to Bala Cynwd and Overbrook
too.

The real problem for Septa isn't the planning, it's getting the funds to
build and operate any additional service. Rail service is expensive to
operate, every passenger mile is subsidized a great deal more than every
passenger mile is on the bus and light rail divisions of Septa (I use a
Trailpass so I'm not exactly free of the subsidy myself) and unless some
new form of subsidy is found, such operation just isn't in the cards in
the next 20 years.

[Shawn Hirn]

Post by art clemons

It would be sweet if the R6 could be extended to Reading and Wyomissing
under catenary, with high-frequency service throughout the day. I read
the study posted on their website, and everything points to the service
terminating at 30th Street in Philadelphia. It got me thinking - it's
pointed west toward Thorndale, so why not keep going?
An express service to and from Philadelphia, then local from Thorndale
to Lancaster, and possibly even Harrisburg, would be cheap and almost a
no-brainer. The extension could be considered an entirely new "R"
service on SEPTA - the "R4" to Lancaster and Harrisburg

I'ld love to see the R6 go to Reading et al too, of course it might be
nice if the R6 continued on past 30th St to Bala Cynwd and Overbrook
too.
The real problem for Septa isn't the planning, it's getting the funds to
build and operate any additional service. Rail service is expensive to
operate, every passenger mile is subsidized a great deal more than every
passenger mile is on the bus and light rail divisions of Septa (I use a
Trailpass so I'm not exactly free of the subsidy myself) and unless some
new form of subsidy is found, such operation just isn't in the cards in
the next 20 years.

I agree. I would also like to see the Broad Street subway extended north
to Route 1 or even better, to Route 73. While I am at it, I would also
like to see the Frankford El extended to the Franklin Mills. I am not
holding my breath waiting for either of those two projects to happen
though.

[Der Tschonnie]

Post by Shawn Hirn

Post by art clemons

It would be sweet if the R6 could be extended to Reading and Wyomissing
under catenary, with high-frequency service throughout the day.  I read
the study posted on their website, and everything points to the service
terminating at 30th Street in Philadelphia.  It got me thinking - it's
pointed west toward Thorndale, so why not keep going?
An express service to and from Philadelphia, then local from Thorndale
to Lancaster, and possibly even Harrisburg, would be cheap and almost a
no-brainer.  The extension could be considered an entirely new "R"
service on SEPTA - the "R4" to Lancaster and Harrisburg

I'ld love to see the R6 go to Reading et al too, of course it might be
nice if the R6 continued on past 30th St to Bala Cynwd and Overbrook
too.  
The real problem for Septa isn't the planning, it's getting the funds to
build and operate any additional service.  Rail service is expensive to
operate, every passenger mile is subsidized a great deal more than every
passenger mile is on the bus and light rail divisions of Septa (I use a
Trailpass so I'm not exactly free of the subsidy myself) and unless some
new form of subsidy is found, such operation just isn't in the cards in
the next 20 years.  

I agree. I would also like to see the Broad Street subway extended north
to Route 1 or even better, to Route 73. While I am at it, I would also
like to see the Frankford El extended to the Franklin Mills. I am not
holding my breath waiting for either of those two projects to happen
though.

Continuing the R6 to Bala Cynwyd or Overbrook is logistically smart.
The trainsets I expect the operating authority will purchase will be
designed for long-haul runs, with restrooms and similar amenities.
Running the service only a few miles further would really defeat the
purpose of the extension out of 30th Street when places like
Coatesville and Lancaster would benefit from frequent service.

As for extending the BSL and MFSL to the proposed destinations - if we
could find a way to do it, I'd hop on that concept in a jiffy. Since
we have the ability to link the BSL with the ex-Reading at Fern Rock,
a more likely northern terminus would be Jenkintown-Wyncote. No need
to buy land, and the trackage is already in place. Power collection
would be an issue - retrofitting existing BSL trainsets? New dual-
mode AC/DC trainsets for extension service? Questions for greater
minds than mine. I'm looking at major land acquisition issues, not
the smaller capital costs of the trainsets themselves. If SEPTA is
putting high-platform stations on the Doylestown line, then the
stations from Fern Rock to Jenkintown-Wyncote should be low-cost.

John

[art clemons]

Post by Der Tschonnie
As for extending the BSL and MFSL to the proposed destinations - if we
could find a way to do it, I'd hop on that concept in a jiffy. Since we
have the ability to link the BSL with the ex-Reading at Fern Rock, a
more likely northern terminus would be Jenkintown-Wyncote. No need to
buy land, and the trackage is already in place. Power collection would
be an issue - retrofitting existing BSL trainsets? New dual- mode AC/DC
trainsets for extension service? Questions for greater minds than mine.
I'm looking at major land acquisition issues, not the smaller capital
costs of the trainsets themselves. If SEPTA is putting high-platform
stations on the Doylestown line, then the stations from Fern Rock to
Jenkintown-Wyncote should be low-cost.

Theoretically the BSL could have been extended down Roosevelt Boulevard.
There is apparently even provision for said extension near the station
for Erie. The biggest impediment is the suburban component of Septa's
board which opposes any such expansion because of cost. One indication
of a feasibility study from the past is:

http://www.svmetro.com/projects/roosevelt-blvd.php

One advantage of high-platform stations is the ability to accomodate
those of us who are handicapped and I don't think the higher platforms
cost all that much more to implement. Building them however would
require shutting down the station for an extended period of time.

[Der Tschonnie]

On Feb 24, 9:21 am, art clemons <***@aolSPAM.com> wrote:

<snip>

Post by art clemons
One advantage of high-platform stations is the ability to accomodate
those of us who are handicapped and I don't think the higher platforms
cost all that much more to implement.  Building them however would
require shutting down the station for an extended period of time.

Art -

I'm all for high-platform stations for the same reason I'm for low-
platform buses: it shouldn't be a chore to get into or out of a
transit vehicle. With today's technology, I can't believe we couldn't
prefabricate interlocking formed concrete units and drop them in at a
low-level platform during a long weekend. They could be curved to
meet the original position of the track and their interlocking could
be covered with non-slip material.

Note that I've never heard of pre-formed concrete being used for rail
platforms, but it's used in homes and the technology is not complex.
We've been making concrete for decades, if not longer, so the science
to it is down pat.

I'll check out the URL for the Roosevelt Boulevard extension.
Thanks. I had heard it mentioned in conjunction with the Sears
building, but not with the SVM. Glad to see it's being considered a
little bit. Also, I can understand how NIMBYs like the idea of
separation of an "urban" transit system from a "suburban" system.
Single rides from poor neighborhoods to wealthy ones can cause (do you
have to say "unfounded" when you use the word) paranoia.

John

[art clemons]

Post by Der Tschonnie
I'm all for high-platform stations for the same reason I'm for low-
platform buses: it shouldn't be a chore to get into or out of a transit
vehicle. With today's technology, I can't believe we couldn't
prefabricate interlocking formed concrete units and drop them in at a
low-level platform during a long weekend. They could be curved to meet
the original position of the track and their interlocking could be
covered with non-slip material.

As for dropping preformed Concrete, that's likely but it also assumes the
base the Concrete is dropped on is solid, many of the stations in
question likely require tearing up what's there, then laying a base to
drop concrete on.

In 2006, I broke my ankle, I actually developed a real liking for the
buses with real steps when leaving a bus because the drop wasn't so far
and I've noticed that many elderly folks only leave by the front door of
the buses to avoid the same problem. Kneeling buses are useful but they
also have a downside with the long drop to the curb or even worse street
if the bus doesn't kneel.

[Der Tschonnie]

On Feb 24, 9:21 am, art clemons <***@aolSPAM.com> wrote:

<snip>

One other note, as an infrequent user of the Gold Line in Pasadena, a
light-rail line which runs in the median of the busy I-210 Foothill
Freeway, I *strongly* encourage all readers to have any new median-
aligned rail lines and stations have rubberized asphalt laid over the
riding surface 100 yards before and after the beginning and end of the
passenger platform.

The sound of radial tires on concrete at platform level is damaging to
hearing. Cal-OSHA (the California state equivalent to OSHA) would
require ear protection if employees were required to spend full shifts
on the platforms of freeway-median stations. For people unlucky
enough to just miss a train when traffic is moving briskly, the noise
is inescapable and the MTA, Gold Line Construction Authority, and
CalTRANS have done nothing to mitigate it. Protect yourselves.

John