Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
I calculated a few and added to that list, will try to add more later if I get time.
Light Rail Line by Average Speed
38 Denver (Alameda-Littleton)
38 Los Angeles (Green Line)
26 Denver (Downtown-Littleton)
25 Seattle
24 Baltimore
24 Los Angeles (Blue Line)
24 Salt Lake City
21 Dallas (Red Line)
21 San Diego (All Lines)
19 Dallas (Blue Line)
19 Los Angeles (Expo)
I was expecting Seattle to be a little faster since people on this site constantly talk it up to how rapid transit its like.
I calculated a few and added to that list, will try to add more later if I get time.
Light Rail Line by Average Speed
38 Denver (Alameda-Littleton)
38 Los Angeles (Green Line)
26 Denver (Downtown-Littleton)
25 Seattle
24 Baltimore
24 Los Angeles (Blue Line)
24 Salt Lake City
21 Dallas (Red Line)
21 San Diego (All Lines)
19 Dallas (Blue Line)
19 Los Angeles (Expo)
I was expecting Seattle to be a little faster since people on this site constantly talk it up to how rapid transit its like.
Well, Seattle is going to be a different animal once more future lines currently under construction open in the early 2020's, it's just not there yet. The existing line is is a subway in the urban core (U-District to the Stadiums), slow and on the ground through the SODO industrial area, tunneled under Beacon Hill, and then a long slow crawl through South Seattle down MLK. It picks up speed on the elevated tracks through Tukilla down to Sea-Tac Airport.
What's under currently construction with the Sound Transit 2 project is a continuation of the subway from the U-District to Northgate and then elevated track parallel to I-5 up to Lynnwood. Another line out to Bellevue and Redmond is under construction that line is going to be majority grade separated with a subway tunnel under downtown Bellevue. Once these lines open up it will put Seattle transit ahead of the curve, as by then most of its light rail will essentially function like an HRT metro system.
This is years off but ST3 project will be a full system build out. This will include a new subway line through downtown Seattle and the remainder of the line will be majority grade separated between West Seattle to Ballard. ST3 also includes extensions of the north/south spine down to Tacoma and up to Everett and another line from Kirkland to Issaquah. Once that's all done, Seattle will be in the ranks of having some of the best transit in the country but construction of these lines are late 2020's and with others well into the 2030's on their timelines.
But once the Northgate and Bellevue lines open within the next 3-5 years, Seattle will have a much better light rail system than what currently exists.
Last edited by Champ le monstre du lac; 04-11-2018 at 11:41 AM..
I calculated a few and added to that list, will try to add more later if I get time.
Light Rail Line by Average Speed
38 Denver (Alameda-Littleton)
38 Los Angeles (Green Line)
26 Denver (Downtown-Littleton)
25 Seattle
24 Baltimore
24 Los Angeles (Blue Line)
24 Salt Lake City
21 Dallas (Red Line)
21 San Diego (All Lines)
19 Dallas (Blue Line)
19 Los Angeles (Expo)
I was expecting Seattle to be a little faster since people on this site constantly talk it up to how rapid transit its like.
Average speed on its own is not really a great indicator of how much like rapid transit it is - more commuter-oriented lines like the two Denver ones are always going to be faster. The thing with Seattle's system is that - as one example - a potentially 30-40 minute drive (Downtown to the U District during the peak periods) takes 8 minutes via the light rail subway. It also has more underground and elevated stations in dense, congested areas, which is less common with light rail as well.
Average speed on its own is not really a great indicator of how much like rapid transit it is - more commuter-oriented lines like the two Denver ones are always going to be faster. The thing with Seattle's system is that - as one example - a potentially 30-40 minute drive (Downtown to the U District during the peak periods) takes 8 minutes via the light rail subway. It also has more underground and elevated stations in dense, congested areas, which is less common with light rail as well.
When you go rather deep into lower density areas, like Seattle's light rail line does, it kind of is actually as that's one of the main advantages of rapid transit; its faster.
Well, Seattle is going to be a different animal once more future lines currently under construction open in the early 2020's, it's just not there yet. The existing line is is a subway in the urban core (U-District to the Stadiums), slow and on the ground through the SODO industrial area, tunneled under Beacon Hill, and then a long slow crawl through South Seattle down MLK. It picks up speed on the elevated tracks through Tukilla down to Sea-Tac Airport.
What's under currently construction with the Sound Transit 2 project is a continuation of the subway from the U-District to Northgate and then elevated track up parallel to I-5 up to Lynnwood. Another line to out Bellevue and Redmond is under construction that line is going to be majority grade separated with subway tunnel under downtown Bellevue. Once these lines open up it will put Seattle transit ahead of the curve as by then most of its light rail will essentially function like an HRT metro system.
This is years off but ST3 project will be a full system build out including a new subway line through downtown Seattle and the majority will be grade separated on the remainder of the line from West Seattle to Ballard. ST3 also includes extensions of the north/south spine down to Tacoma and up to Everett and another line form Kirkland to Issaquah. Once that's all done, Seattle will be in the ranks of having some of the best transit in the country but construction of these lines are late 2020's and with others well into the 2030's on their timelines.
But once the Northgate and Bellevue lines open within the next 3-5 years, Seattle will have a much better light rail system.
Yes I'm aware, pretty much every time Seattle's light rail is brought up there is always a few people with that "just you wait and see" spiel.
Location: northern Vermont - previously NM, WA, & MA
10,749 posts, read 23,813,296 times
Reputation: 14660
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vincent_Adultman
Average speed on its own is not really a great indicator of how much like rapid transit it is - more commuter-oriented lines like the two Denver ones are always going to be faster. The thing with Seattle's system is that - as one example - a potentially 30-40 minute drive (Downtown to the U District during the peak periods) takes 8 minutes via the light rail subway. It also has more underground and elevated stations in dense, congested areas, which is less common with light rail as well.
Though I find it great that Denver built out the FasTacks project with lots of new rail mileage, it's mostly a park and ride system with little connectivity around Denver's urban nodes (Capital Hill, Highlands, Cherry Creek, Broadway, Colorado Blvd, etc.). The new R line along I-225 through Aurora is recording paltry numbers of around 40 boardings per hour (https://denver.streetsblog.org/2017/...er-full-buses/). I bet the system as a whole would increase ridership if it had more connections to get around the city of Denver itself instead of all being funneled into Union Station and downtown. Seattle started prioritized urban rail construction, a lot more expensive but more beneficial in the long run. Denver built its corridors along the cheaper ROW's first.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sav858
Yes I'm aware, pretty much every time Seattle's light rail is brought up there is always a few people with that "just you wait and see" spiel.
It's always been that way. They waited until the mid to late 2000's to finally get their act together and start building new rail tracks. The last failed proposal was when I was living there in 2001 they wanted to expand the touristy Space Needle monorail out to West Seattle and Ballard. I voted yes for it because the mentality was.... yes, just build something for god's sake after many failed proposals that came before it. Such as the "Boeing is in stagnation, so no don't build out a well federally funded HRT system for our future, give it to Atlanta instead" chapter in the 70's
Last edited by Champ le monstre du lac; 04-11-2018 at 11:11 AM..
When you go rather deep into lower density areas, like Seattle's light rail line does, it kind of is actually as that's one of the main advantages of rapid transit; its faster.
Which low-density areas? Are you talking about the portion between Rainier Beach and S 200th? Because that's the section of the existing line where the average speed is significantly higher. Seattle's light rail makes hay in the congested areas - Link nearly doubled its ridership (an increase of ~35K riders per day) by adding only 2 new underground stations - that's unheard of for light rail. And within the next 5 years you're going to have subway/elevated extensions to more congested areas which will likely lead to more large jumps in ridership. Again, it comes down to how competitive rail is compared to driving. Crawling through downtown Portland, Denver, or San Diego on at-grade light rail is not the same as cruising through a subway tunnel.
Which low-density areas? Are you talking about the portion between Rainier Beach and S 200th? Because that's the section of the existing line where the average speed is significantly higher. Seattle's light rail makes hay in the congested areas - Link nearly doubled its ridership (an increase of ~35K riders per day) by adding only 2 new underground stations - that's unheard of for light rail. And within the next 5 years you're going to have subway/elevated extensions to more congested areas which will likely lead to more large jumps in ridership. Again, it comes down to how competitive rail is compared to driving. Crawling through downtown Portland, Denver, or San Diego on at-grade light rail is not the same as cruising through a subway tunnel.
The Philly light rail lines are generally not very fast but do make it underground from 40th to 13th street in the core. They have some underground, some dedicated row, and some street running aspects. good news is they also allow you to transfer onto faster subway lines in a few places, with some underground direct connections
Also the Boston Green lines while painfully slow underground in the core can move pretty quick further afield
I'll say the same about the T in Pittsburgh, it goes frustratingly slow winding around the curving tracks of the subway portions downtown and the north side. but the portions away from the core that are above ground can move a lot faster.
at least the underground portions have no slowing down or stopping at grades or crossings though, as some places happens in above ground sections.
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.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
