35 MPH on the Red Line: A Way Around It

[WMATAGMOAGH]

So Metro has finally explained the rationale behind the 35 MPH speed restriction on the Red Line:  It is a "volume control" device to reduce delays at the start of the crash zone, where the maximum speed is even lower.  So instead of subjecting the entire line to slow speeds, I wonder why they don't run trains in 2 sections:

1.  Shady Grove to Rhode Island Avenue
2.  Farragut North to Glenmont

Such an arrangement would have fairly normal headways on section 1, while section 2 would have fewer trains (and maybe all 8 car trains).  Both sections have convenient turnback points that don't block the main line, Brentwood Yard and the Farragut North pocket.  It does mean that there is no one seat ride from stations on the B Route to Dupont Circle, but I don't see that as being the end of the world.  What do others think?

DISCLAIMER:  I left the US about an hour after the crash, so I haven't been on the Red Line since the incident occurred.

[Sand Box John]

Seems to me running the line in a normal configuration at reduced speed makes more sense. The schema you suggest requires coordination of trains at the short turn terminals. There also is the issue of the additional wear and tear on trains and interlockings.

[79MetroExtraMD]

The 35 MPH restriction has been lifted and all lines will resume their regular speeds with exception of the crash site where speeds will be reduced to about 5-10 MPH.

[WMATAGMOAGH]

The 35 MPH restriction has been lifted and all lines will resume their regular speeds with exception of the crash site where speeds will be reduced to about 5-10 MPH.

There were only 30 trains on the Red Line this morning with a 9 minute headway and lots of crowding.  Not exactly back to normal as you seem to imply.

Seems to me running the line in a normal configuration at reduced speed makes more sense. The schema you suggest requires coordination of trains at the short turn terminals. There also is the issue of the additional wear and tear on trains and interlockings.

Additional wear and tear on the interlockings is a weak argument IMO but I can understand it.  As for additional wear and tear on the trains, what difference would it make if the trains are short turned as I suggest or not?  Based on my reading of Dr. Gridlock's most recent blog post, it sounds like short turns might improve things, especially on the western half of the line.

My original disclaimer still applies.