Proposed Metro doomsday cuts

[mrpete]

MD MTA is similar. Cuts to MARC and DC commuter bus always get modified due to their riders being more politically savvy than riders in B'more. IMO folks in B'more may scream and holler but just resign themselves to taking it in the gut. Whereas MARC riders will push every button, pull every string to minimize their pain and usually succeed because they know how to do it and the political powers that be will listen to them, not necessarily because their argument is substantively stronger but because it is presented more "professionally" with "reasoned" emotion instead of free floating anger. I.e., what worked in the 60's doesn't now.

However, the point is, most TA's are supported by sales taxes, property taxes or gas taxes, all of which have tanked in the past year for obvious reasons. Fares cannot be raised to make up the difference although doing so may play well with the more conservative among us. Transit funding worldwide is at a tipping point regardless of political system as a result of the economic crisis.

Most European countries and many in Asia long ago adopted policies favoring transit over roads, imposing heavy automotive fuel taxes, among others, to pay for those policies, that supported government operated TA's. However during the past ten years or so, most of those TA's have begun to be more cost conscious and have begun to privatize, contract out, their operations, particularly in the UK and Germany with varying degrees of success and efficacy.

Remember this: Transporting humans is an EXPENSIVE enterprise regardless of planes, trains, buses or boats. If airlines did not carry freight under the floor there would be very few of them operating today. Even in the heyday of the railroads, passenger profits were marginal at best. Hauling the freight pays!! Freight does not need to be pampered and does not sue!

[Perry]

My AGM for Transit just returned from a trip to South America and with many of the transit systems there, there is no subsidy at all, the entire system is paid by fares.  Just mention a 5 cent fare increase and everyone starts to cry foul in this Country.   South America also found a way to incorporate transit as its primary mode of transportation with BRT lanes that have been around since the early 70's which we're just sort of waking up and trying to build in the US.  Transit is unfortunately fighting a losing battle against the private auto and the developers are not helping. 

[mrpete]

While neither politically acceptable or correct does anyone believe that fares should not be static but instead rise incrementally over time, based on not only the need to cover rising expenses but also tied to implementing improvements and service expansion?

And tie this to sharing financial and system performance information with the public, even down to individual route performance. Many TA's already share system financial and operations info with the public. Does it make any difference in public perception of transit's value or no difference at all?

[Perry]

Do what Portland does and tie it to inflation.  The only drawback is that it creates a headache from a marketing point of view, but at least it could be a 'fair' way to raise fares.  They should index the fuel tax with inflation too....

To me, people expect transit to do what they want, when they want and that money is no object.  But, to tell you the truth, the general public only thinks of what they don't have and does not understand the fiscal impact of extending a route, starting a new route or adding service.  They think it all fits nicely into the package funds they receive or pay taxes for in the first place.  It doesn't matter that a public transit system is fighting with every other public service out there for the same small amount of funds.

It is asking too much for people to actually be rational and not try to rile up people on other websites with a one-sided view only to draw the ire of Joe Public Transit Rider.  It wouldn't make big news otherwise.

[WMATAGMOAGH]

Trimming frequencies, fine.  30 minute headways in the evenings?  I don't see that going over well or even happening.  That said, I like the Red Line restructuring proposal, the 2.5 minute headways really haven't worked out in my opinion, and also think that they can reduce service on the rails prior to 7 AM, demand doesn't warrant true rush hour headways until about that time anyway based on my experiences.  I also think closing some of those station entrances during off hours and cutting out underutilized sections of the bus system are good ideas.  But the trains need to come at least every 20 minutes during the evenings in order to be attractive to choice commuters IMHO. 

Anyone know if running fewer longer trains would save money?  I'm thinking run fewer TPH at rush hours but make them all 8 cars long.

[Perry]

If the rails have to be electrified the whole time, then I don't know if there is a difference between running 1 train per hour or 10.  Fewer cars used equals lower maintenance costs I would assume. 

[Tritransit Area]

Do what Portland does and tie it to inflation.  The only drawback is that it creates a headache from a marketing point of view, but at least it could be a 'fair' way to raise fares.  They should index the fuel tax with inflation too....

To me, people expect transit to do what they want, when they want and that money is no object.  But, to tell you the truth, the general public only thinks of what they don't have and does not understand the fiscal impact of extending a route, starting a new route or adding service.  They think it all fits nicely into the package funds they receive or pay taxes for in the first place.  It doesn't matter that a public transit system is fighting with every other public service out there for the same small amount of funds.

It is asking too much for people to actually be rational and not try to rile up people on other websites with a one-sided view only to draw the ire of Joe Public Transit Rider.  It wouldn't make big news otherwise.

Perry, the costs of expanding and running service would easily be covered if they just stopped paying all of those overpaid management officials so much money!

/ end sarcasm

You are quite right...it's a shame that the public has this mentality towards public transit agencies.

[Perry]

Since I'm not one of those I won't take offense to it. :-)

[WMATAGMOAGH]

If the rails have to be electrified the whole time, then I don't know if there is a difference between running 1 train per hour or 10.  Fewer cars used equals lower maintenance costs I would assume. 

So if running fewer, longer trains ultimately results in a net decrease in the number of cars on the railroad, I think my idea would have some potential.

[WayneNYC]

If the rails have to be electrified the whole time, then I don't know if there is a difference between running 1 train per hour or 10.  Fewer cars used equals lower maintenance costs I would assume. 

I don't know either, but I always thought that more cars in a train meant more electricity being used???

[WMATAGMOAGH]

Wayne, you are right but I would imagine if the net number of cars being used was ultimately lower, the costs would go down.

[btconet]

I would expect that 6 8-car trains over a time period would be cheaper to operate than 8 6-car trains over that same period, simply due to a lower labor cost to haul the same number of people. 

There may be a switching cost to assemble 8 car trains if they are not to be utilized across the day, but that may already exist as it is.

[WayneNYC]

I would expect that 6 8-car trains over a time period would be cheaper to operate than 8 6-car trains over that same period, simply due to a lower labor cost to haul the same number of people. 

There may be a switching cost to assemble 8 car trains if they are not to be utilized across the day, but that may already exist as it is.

Yup - I think that was always an issue with NYCTA.  Years ago, they'd routinely shorten trains during off-hours, especially the overnight trains.  I could see where they could be a problem.  On my home line (The D), if you went to the station around 6:30-7:00 AM, you'd see the last of the over-nights trains coming N/B with 6 cars.  Once they reached 205th Street, they'd have to get 4 cars added as it used full length trains from early AM to late PM hours.  Then in the late evenings as trains pulled into terminals, if it was staying out overnight, they take off 4 cars.  I guess they felt it wasn't worth the manpower, time and an so on to shorten trains.