U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > San Francisco - Oakland
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-15-2013, 11:54 AM
 
Location: West Coast Wanderer
12,932 posts, read 11,149,115 times
Reputation: 6215

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by DocGoldstein View Post
BART as a whole just needs to modernize. These noisy tin cans need to be more like the Metrolink trains in Los Angeles. Modern, plenty of comfortable seating, even small table areas to put your laptop down to do work, and rest rooms! Though I'm sure some West Oakland drug addict would find a way to turn the bathrooms into a drug lounge for those long trips across the Bay. Maybe not a good idea.
I don't think BART could ever do that. For starters it's based on an older design like New Yorks or Chicagos. Also I believe BART is much more heavily used. In fact, I remember years ago when they took seats out of the cars near the doors in order to accommodate more people with standing room. What's killing BARt right now is that it's still a 1970's system operating in a 21st century Bay Area. Having a heavy rail system is a good idea in such a densely populated area but in todays bay area, it's service, both frequency and coverage is too limited, especially within the urban core.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-15-2013, 11:55 AM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
10,408 posts, read 13,957,719 times
Reputation: 5571
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocGoldstein View Post
It doesn't matter how much it recovers when it's capital shortfall is in the BILLIONS as compared to the millions. BART hasn't been able to cover its expenses for decades, that's why the trains are so noisy, smelly, and outdated.
Actually it does as it affects service operations. Perhaps if Metrolink actually had money to run more trains, especially in the middle of the day, they might actually have decent ridership for a system it's size.

Again where is your source for your information anyways?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2013, 11:59 AM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
10,408 posts, read 13,957,719 times
Reputation: 5571
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocGoldstein View Post
Do you have calculations to back up that claim based on amount of trains, routes, and operating history?
Do you have calculations for your claims about safety on BART trains?

Considering no one has ever died on a BART train from an accident as far as I can tell it's clear Metrolink is more dangerous. More deaths in a younger system that runs far less trains, it's not hard to ballpark the math there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2013, 12:00 PM
 
Location: West Coast Wanderer
12,932 posts, read 11,149,115 times
Reputation: 6215
Unless I missed something, why are we comparing Metrolink to BART? It would be better compared to Caltrain.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2013, 12:00 PM
 
Location: Lafayette, CA
2,518 posts, read 1,795,017 times
Reputation: 590
Quote:
Originally Posted by sav858 View Post
Actually it does as it affects service operations.
Do you have proof of this? Would an increase to 64% be enough to run more trains during the day? How many more?

I'd like to see proof of this in REAL calculations, just not assumptions based on random guessing. Until then, I have to disregard your point entirely.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2013, 12:02 PM
 
Location: Lafayette, CA
2,518 posts, read 1,795,017 times
Reputation: 590
Quote:
Originally Posted by sav858 View Post
it's not hard to ballpark the math there.
If it's not hard to do the math, then you should do it instead of guessing.
Otherwise you're just making assumptions which really have no use in this conversation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2013, 12:03 PM
 
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
25,306 posts, read 33,063,874 times
Reputation: 10724
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocGoldstein View Post
BART Capital Budget shortfall: $7.5 BILLION Dollars
Metrolink Capital Budget shortfall: $11.74 Million Dollars

You were saying?
LOL...NOPE. BART does NOT have a shortfall.
http://www.bart.gov/docs/financials/...ART_Budget.pdf

If you are referring to unfunded expansion projects, that's how these things work.


#sophomoric
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2013, 12:04 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
10,408 posts, read 13,957,719 times
Reputation: 5571
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocGoldstein View Post
Do you have proof of this? Would an increase to 64% be enough to run more trains during the day? How many more?

I'd like to see proof of this in REAL calculations, just not assumptions based on random guessing. Until then, I have to disregard your point entirely.
It's not an assumption, I work in Transportation Planning. The more operating money a system has the more it service it can provide. It's a pretty simple concept to understand. When operating budgets have to be cut guess what happens to service? It's cut as well! Now think about when the opposite happens.....

I don't work for BART so I can't give you an exact number or calculation but if you want to pretend that this isn't the general rule for all public transit agencies then go ahead. I'm not shocked you would disregard basic transit planning principles.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2013, 12:05 PM
 
Location: Lafayette, CA
2,518 posts, read 1,795,017 times
Reputation: 590
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gentoo View Post
What's killing BARt right now is that it's still a 1970's system operating in a 21st century Bay Area. Having a heavy rail system is a good idea in such a densely populated area but in todays bay area, it's service, both frequency and coverage is too limited, especially within the urban core.
I can agree with this.

I would still like to see improvements to BART trains in terms of safety, and overall accessibility. Seeing someone with crutches, or a wheel chair travelling on BART just seems like a nightmare.

The tables would be nice, but even a more modern design that isn't so noisy, is that too much to ask? Travelling under the transbay tube can actually cause hearing loss.

Noise on BART: How bad is it and is it harmful? - SFGate

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2013, 12:09 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
10,408 posts, read 13,957,719 times
Reputation: 5571
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocGoldstein View Post
If it's not hard to do the math, then you should do it instead of guessing.
Otherwise you're just making assumptions which really have no use in this conversation.
Deaths on-board from accidents since service began:
BART: 0
Metrolink: at least 36 people (2 accidents that I am aware of (25+11))

Year service began
BART: 1972
Metrolink: 1992

People that have died per year on average since service began
BART: 0
Metrolink: 1.8


Go ahead and keep ignoring all the facts and figures you want, it doesn't change reality despite whatever "reality" you may live in.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2011 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > San Francisco - Oakland
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top