Orion VIII

King County Metro - Seattle, Washington

4,923 posts in this topic

It's interesting to think about how quickly Metro wants to phase out the D60LFs. I remember how they purchased 30 to use as a platform to compare mileage against the brand new 2600s, and reading initial grumblings in PDF reports on how inefficient the mileage was with the hybrids at first blush. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's also interesting how much Metro has embraced hybrid technologies... while most other agencies have experimented with the technology... and rejected it.  

On a related note, Metro is out with a report on the "Feasibility of Achieving a Carbon-Neutral or Zero-Emission Fleet"

It outlines three options to achieve that goal:

     1) Accounting approach - Offsets Metro's emissions by comparing them to the emissions that would be produced by driving personal vehicles. By this measure Metro would already be considered net carbon-neutral.

     2) Purchase carbon offsets - Metro would fund $445,000-$1.2m worth of projects that indirectly reduce greenhouse gases.

But both of those options aren't in line with the County's 2015 Strategic Climate Action Plan that calls for Metro to focus on efforts that directly reduce GHG emissions... which leaves you with:

     3) Transition to a zero-emission fleet powered by renewable energy - Metro would transition to a fleet of all-electric trolley and battery-electric buses.

The report believes Metro can transition to a zero-emission fleet by "as early as 2034, or by 2040 at the latest" at a cost of 6 percent more than using diesel-electric hybrids (2 percent higher if you faster in the "societal costs.")

The report points out that the vehicle and charging technology aren't quite there yet, but are improving quickly. They point to the need for a viable 60-foot articulated battery-electric bus, electric vans for the vanpool and smaller electric buses for Access (and presumably DART).

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Jaykob Walson said:

Off subject, but the shakeup a week ago had NO route deletions, I assume.

A rider alert is published before the shakeup. What did it say?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Jaykob Walson said:

Off subject, but the shakeup a week ago had NO route deletions, I assume.

No route deletions. The only significant changes for routes that go through South Bellevue Park and Ride and the 3 and 4 being rerouted to serve Seattle Pacific University. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Jaykob Walson said:

Off subject, but the shakeup a week ago had NO route deletions, I assume.

I don't think it's off topic at all...

Here's the info on the March shakeup: http://kingcounty.gov/depts/transportation/metro/schedules-maps/service-change.aspx

It was a relatively minor shakeup.

The only thing close to a route being deleted was that the portion of DART 907 between Black Diamond and Enumclaw was eliminated and replaced by a community shuttle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before the DSTT shut down to accommodate Central Link, one of the things I always read was that they couldn't use the rail tracks installed during the late 80's/90's because of the lack of insulated rails. 

I was doing a bit of searching and could find information about insulated rail joints but nothing specific about rails themselves. 

What made the original tracks unsuitable for the use of light rail?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, anonymous guy said:

What made the original tracks unsuitable for the use of light rail?

I thought it was the gauge.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Atomic Taco said:

I thought it was the gauge.

As I recall the rails were at the correct gauge, however they were uninsulated to prevent stray current from leaking into the ground around them, plus they had to lower the floor at the stations to accommodate level boarding of the LRVs. The tracks were put in as a well intended after thought in 1990 with no actual plans to use them.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had read the lack of insulated rail was a cost cutting measure - but the need to tear up the platform floors to accommodate the modern light cars makes the point moot (unless they actually did intend on creating that system to Snohomish County using 90s-era cars at some point).

It probably would have been a nightmare trying to cram the trolley and LRV catenary anyways. 

On another unrelated question, do the Seattle Streetcars and Central Link share the same rail gauges? Would there be any interoperability with Tacoma Link in the future?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, anonymous guy said:

On another unrelated question, do the Seattle Streetcars and Central Link share the same rail gauges? Would there be any interoperability with Tacoma Link in the future?

All three share the same gauge, but Central Link plus its extensions use 1500VDC whereas the two streetcars run 750VDC.  Interoperability wouldn't be possible unless you upgraded the substations.  Of course none of this takes in to account things like the turn radius.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Atomic Taco said:

All three share the same gauge, but Central Link plus its extensions use 1500VDC whereas the two streetcars run 750VDC.  Interoperability wouldn't be possible unless you upgraded the substations.  Of course none of this takes in to account things like the turn radius.

And the loading gauge is different as well. the "streetcar" type trams are much narrower than the LRVs, and the ADA frowns upon large gaps in the platforms.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Metro ready to expand late-night bus service after King County Council approval

March 27, 2017

Summary

Bus passengers traveling after 1 a.m. will have expanded late-night service under legislation approved Monday by the King County Council. It is the first major expansion of “Night Owl” bus service in 40 years.

Story

King County Metro, in partnership with the Seattle Department of Transportation, will expand late-night bus service this fall to meet growing demand from late-night and early-morning workers, as well as those enjoying nightlife and traveling off-hours to the airport.

The plan, unanimously approved as part of the 2017 service package legislation submitted by Executive Dow Constantine, will take effect on September 23 with Metro’s semi-annual service change.

Executive Constantine and Seattle Mayor Ed Murray announced the plan in February. It invests about 11,000 annual service hours, 8,800 of which are funded by the City of Seattle, and replaces current Night Owl routes 82, 83, and 84 by adding late-night trips to existing all-day routes

The City's investment includes:

  • Two additional late-night round trips on each of the following routes: 3, 5, 11, and 70, serving neighborhoods such as Capitol Hill, Central Area, Eastlake, Fremont, Green Lake, Phinney Ridge, Queen Anne, and University District. Other routes already provide late-night service to areas such as South Seattle and West Seattle.
  • Additional late-night service on routes 65 and 67 serving Northeast Seattle areas such as Lake City, Seattle Children's Hospital, and Northgate for the first time.
  • Cross-town (non-downtown) connections through added service on routes 44 and 48, creating a grid pattern that expands late-night bus travel options without having to go through downtown and diversifying travel options to, from, and through the University District.

Metro’s investment includes:

  • Additional late-night service at about 2 a.m. on Route 120 serving Delridge, White Center and Burien.
  • Hourly all-night service on the RapidRide C, D, and E Lines, which currently operate all night but with less than hourly frequencies.
  • Extend Route 124 from Tukwila to Sea-Tac Airport after 1 a.m., increasing transit options for travelers and workers.
  • Added time to allow bus drivers adequate restroom breaks.

Late-night Metro ridership increased 20 percent in the last five years. This proposal more than doubles the City of Seattle's investment in late-night bus service, through the City's voter-approved Seattle Transportation Benefit District.

Metro and SDOT sponsored a public outreach process last year that drew more than 4,500 responses and identified better late-night transit options for:

Workers in jobs with late-night or early-morning work shifts such as health care and many segments of the service industry.

  • Travelers and workers heading between downtown to Sea-Tac Airport after 1 a.m.
  • People enjoying Seattle's nightlife, including music and arts venues.
  • Low-income and vulnerable populations.
  • Metro and SDOT will conduct additional outreach prior to the service change to inform riders of the changes.

Metro and its partners invest about $7.7 million for all bus routes system-wide between midnight and 5 a.m. This proposal increases that total by $730,000, with $500,000 from the City of Seattle.

http://www.kingcounty.gov/depts/transportation/news/2017/20170327 Night_owl_approved.aspx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone have any info on why the 7200's out of South base don't have their engines turning off when they stop seems to be something that I've noticed in the last few days

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/30/2017 at 8:36 PM, David Brown said:

Anyone have any info on why the 7200's out of South base don't have their engines turning off when they stop seems to be something that I've noticed in the last few days

edit: misread the question. Perhaps the HybriDrive E can be tuned to operate like the standard HybriDrive system.

Or there could be kinks in the system that prevents the coach from triggering the instant engine stop function. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

King County Metro will purchase up to 73 battery-electric buses from Proterra at a cost of up to $55 million, starting with 20 buses totaling $15.1 million.

So they are buying 20 more, with options up to 73. I wonder how/where they will deploy them, and what they will keep as an additional spare ratio to cover situations where a battery bus would not work so well.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, busdude.com said:

King County Metro will purchase up to 73 battery-electric buses from Proterra at a cost of up to $55 million, starting with 20 buses totaling $15.1 million.

So they are buying 20 more, with options up to 73. I wonder how/where they will deploy them, and what they will keep as an additional spare ratio to cover situations where a battery bus would not work so well.

 

They will stay at Bellevue Base, and are anticipated for service starting in March 2018 with the extra 20 (all 23) in service by Sept 2018.  The coincides with the arrival of the 100 LF Gilligs to the same base.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now