Re: Getting a vintage tram system going in Melbourne, and TAN: San Francisco again
Peter D. Ehrlich
Thursday, December 6, 2001 3:25 PM
In a message dated 6 Dec 2001 @ 0107 PDT, "IS Edit" <[email protected]>
wrote (responding to Bill Bolton):
R.T.'s point is well taken. The original plan for Muni Metro called for
truncating all bus lines back at Van Ness to force riders onto the subway.
When the riders proved how ridiculous that was by staying on the buses even
after the K, L and M lines went underground, the beancounters said "Duh. How
come?" The reason was that Market Street needed the continuation of the
capacity to augment the subway. It still does, and the F line contributes
to this.
Don't forget, also, that F-Line cars pull out and pull in over the J-Church,
where they mix pole cars with pan cars on the J line and pull-outs/pull-ins
to and from the N line, which are 2-car trains. And F cars run in revenue
service on the J.
Milantram
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Quit now for Great
American Smokeout
http://us.click.yahoo.com/0vN8tD/9pSDAA/ySSFAA/DiTxlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
wrote (responding to Bill Bolton):
Bill,
If the K, L & M lines had not been put in subway, there would have been no
need for the F line on Market Street since they also ran along that street.
The F line actually augmented Market Street tram capacity. And it had the
effect of taking many shorthaul passengers off the "thru" cars which is just
perfect.
In the case of a W class tram on Swanston Street and St Kilda Road, the Ws
would be doing their fair share of the task. We're talking about operating
several existing, working lines with Ws not running a toy service for
gunzels. A bit of colour or style on the street.
Bob Murphy
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Bolton" <[email protected]>On Wed, 05 Dec 2001 19:42:28 -0800, Peter wrote:I'd like to relate the experience we had in San Francisco.
What do you think would have happened had the Market St tracks not
been available for a heritage trolley operation that did not impact
normal MUNI streetcar traffic operation sin any significant way? It
seems to me that was an absolutely essential element in enabling all
that has transpired since on heritage trolley operation in San
Francisco.
Cheers,
Bill
Bill Bolton
Sydney, Australia
R.T.'s point is well taken. The original plan for Muni Metro called for
truncating all bus lines back at Van Ness to force riders onto the subway.
When the riders proved how ridiculous that was by staying on the buses even
after the K, L and M lines went underground, the beancounters said "Duh. How
come?" The reason was that Market Street needed the continuation of the
capacity to augment the subway. It still does, and the F line contributes
to this.
Don't forget, also, that F-Line cars pull out and pull in over the J-Church,
where they mix pole cars with pan cars on the J line and pull-outs/pull-ins
to and from the N line, which are 2-car trains. And F cars run in revenue
service on the J.
Milantram
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Quit now for Great
American Smokeout
http://us.click.yahoo.com/0vN8tD/9pSDAA/ySSFAA/DiTxlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/