Join the discussion on the following article:
TriMet to increase spending on rail infrastructure
By a stroke of coincidence, I rode a section of 30-year-old track just this morning. It seemed to me that on sections from Lloyd Center out to 42nd the train was truck hunting on corner sections where the track speed is 55 mph. The LRV lurched significantly from side to side once it hit about 40.
On the other hand, once we hit the newest section of the system to be built, the green line to Clackamas, the ride smoothed out and the operator ran at track speed without the lurching (Same LRV). Since the line from the Steel Bridge to the Gateway transit center is used by three separate branches, the traffic is heavy and has apparently taken its toll.
I do wonder if they got the unscheduled door opening issue solved?
By a stroke of coincidence, I rode a section of 30-year-old track just this morning. It seemed to me that on sections from Lloyd Center out to 42nd the train was truck hunting on corner sections where the track speed is 55 mph. The LRV lurched significantly from side to side once it hit about 40.
On the other hand, once we hit the newest section of the system to be built, the green line to Clackamas, the ride smoothed out and the operator ran at track speed without the lurching (Same LRV). Since the line from the Steel Bridge to the Gateway transit center is used by three separate branches, the traffic is heavy and has apparently taken its toll.
I do wonder if they got the unscheduled door opening issue solved?
Lets see benefits. Rail when you have enough people using it is cheaper then building freeways. A large number of power plants do use coal still. People in Portland can use a cheaper public transport so they have more money to spend on other things like hybrids built in Mississippi. And also have more money to waste on corn fed beef. The list goes on. As I’ve said numerous times when you have the density rail makes a lot more sense. The next time you go through Portland during the day cruise down I-84 which has a light rail line next to it and see all the people who ride. If your going to spend money on Interstates thru Wyoming where the money is needed the same barrel needs to help fund inner city rail where the density if use is cheaper then highways. Of course maybe we should raise the federal fuel use tax so it will cover all the costs of building roads in the entire country. Say 55 cents a gallon? No I do not think federal fuel taxes should be that high. The benefits of the interstate highway system funded by taxes(not just road use taxes) far exceed the cost. Bu the way Mr Guse why not start a thread in the Trains mag general discussion forum on your views? I would love the debate. Thx IGN
Remember what I said about what defines a troll? Or was I communicating about 6 levels above and beyond comprehension and need to dumb it down?
Answer this if you can, which I doubt. Why can’t Portland pay for its own maintenance? Why must the big socialist government in Washington pick up the slack? The rest of the country receives absolutely no benefit from Portland’s streetcars. No benefit to coal miners in Wyoming. No benefit to automotive workers in Mississippi. No benefit to corn farmers in Iowa. The list can keep going. Now here is the solution, which no socialist can provide. Raise the fares to cover operating costs, which would include maintenance. Any good operating plan would include setting money aside for maintenance, a concept foreign to socialism. On top of all that, the Constitution has no provisions for picking winners and losers in commerce. If it does, show me. The so-called Commerce Clause is there to eliminate tariffs between states, not impose them, which is what a subsidy is.
We all pay federal taxes. Therefor the Feds should contribute to states needs.
I sure wish MBTA track and trains were only 30 years old. Some Red Line subway cars are pushing 45.
Just like any other mode, rail needs to be maintained. I have no doubt some of these trolls are going to piss and moan about dumping more money into this rail “boondoggle”. This “boondoggle” has served the good people of the Portland very well.
@JEFFERY GUSE - If you’d rather no State money be spent on Portland’s infrastructure, I’m sure the citizens of Portland would be happy to negotiate a deal where in exchange for that they no longer pay State taxes.
I suspect they’ll be considerably better off, no longer having to subsidize roads to nowhere for suburban moochers.
I live more than a thousand miles east of Portland, and have visited that city many times, traveling by car, plane, and (with apologies to Mr. Guse), train. When arriving in Portland by either of the latter two modes, I have used Portland’s light rail system extensively. Therefore, contrary to the broad-brushed generalization by Mr. Guse, there are people who DO benefit from tax-supported transportation infrastructure in communities in which they do not live. I can also thank the local, state, and FEDERAL taxpayers, including me, for supporting (subsidizing?) infrastructure in other places as varied as Bristol City, Tennessee and Shaumburg, Illinois.