Rail Transit

[Composite 2992]

Re: Rail Transit

One of the RFPs by Bombardier proposes steel on steel to support the weight of the train but a fourth rail (third is the power) uses linear induction to propel the train. There will be no electric motor noise since there is none to drive the train. So it's 1/2 maglev.

The advantage of linear induction propulsion with this type of system is that it also becomes the train's braking system. It's quieter, with fewer moving parts to maintain. It's possible to incorporate regenerative braking capability and improve the energy efficiency.

[sansei]

Re: Rail Transit

hi this is sansei and in response to tutusue,my sister say's it's quiet and in response to seeking penance.i wont say where my sister live's only she live's on the same planet we do.

i hope this may help you both with your thought's?

Well thank's for your time

[joshuatree]

Re: Rail Transit

The advantage of linear induction propulsion with this type of system is that it also becomes the train's braking system. It's quieter, with fewer moving parts to maintain. It's possible to incorporate regenerative braking capability and improve the energy efficiency.

Yes, another good point. You could reverse the field to brake the train as well. Though I think incorporating regenerative braking would be a great idea too. I read somewhere that the Hong Kong subway operator is reporting 20% energy savings on the trains themselves, not the stations, after refurbishing their cars with regenerative braking.

[salmoned]

Re: Rail Transit

The last mailer I received concerning rail was from "GoRailGo!". It cited 6 reasons to vote YES for rail:

1. Rail will create 11,000 new jobs on Oahu.
2. Rail is the most effective and inexpensive solution to Oahu's traffic (confirmed by five independent studies).
3. Rail's electric power is better for the environment.
4. Oahu will lose $900 million in federal funds to build rail if people vote "no."
5. Rail is the only solution that can be built now. All other alternatives will take years to study and fund.
6. It's estimated by UH economists that for every dollar we spend building rail, Oahu's economy will get two dollars back in return.

Can any sense be made of these 'reasons' to support rail? Each one is an outright lie and/or a very good reason NOT to support rail.

[Bobinator]

Re: Rail Transit

The last mailer I received concerning rail was from "GoRailGo!". It cited 6 reasons to vote YES for rail:

1. Rail will create 11,000 new jobs on Oahu.
2. Rail is the most effective and inexpensive solution to Oahu's traffic (confirmed by five independent studies).
3. Rail's electric power is better for the environment.
4. Oahu will lose $900 million in federal funds to build rail if people vote "no."
5. Rail is the only solution that can be built now. All other alternatives will take years to study and fund.
6. It's estimated by UH economists that for every dollar we spend building rail, Oahu's economy will get two dollars back in return.

Can any sense be made of these 'reasons' to support rail? Each one is an outright lie and/or a very good reason NOT to support rail.

Makes no sense, does it?

[escondido100]

Re: Rail Transit

i heard a news story on th eradio where sevral cities are considering this as an alternative to light rail, it has been around awhile but is more technologicaly and economicaly feasible now rather than then.http://www.vectus.se/eng_testbanan.html
Ithaca NY is seriously considering this and has commissioned a study to help them decide. from what i have read (just a little bit) it supposed to be cheaper and simpler than traditional light and heavy rail with many more conveniences to encourage ridership.
sounds interesting...... but probably spitting in the wind with this idea for HNL, given the administrations attitude for their little pet project.

[TuNnL]

Re: Rail Transit

A Maglev system running at relatively low speeds can be very quiet. The noise generated by a vehicle cutting through the air becomes the greatest source of noise, and that's not a trivial thing if you listen to the cars rushing by on the freeway.

The Maglev option was examined and rejected because of its limited track record. Pun sort of intended. The cost is also a factor.

Having the track as part of the electric motor that drives the train can dramaticaly drive up the overall cost. In a steel-wheeled system, a track is a much more basic steel rail. With Maglev or any linear-induction system, the track is a complex assembly that must be built to very tight tolerances.

Everyone had years to let their opinions be heard and counted.

Interestingly enough, though, community meetings on rail are still being held by the city — the most recent this afternoon in Kapolei. KHON-2’s Olena Rubin interviewed Frank Genadio, who those who keep up know, is a vocal maglev advocate. He once again gave his standard spiel that the city should allow maglev companies back into the process, despite the will of the voters who supported steel-on-steel.

More interesting, I thought, was Rubin’s interview with Salt Lake resident Thomas Strout. Strout traveled all the way to Kapolei to voice his opposition to the route going through the Salt Lake community. Since Strout makes it clear he is a rail supporter, it is further evidence that contrary to Ron Whitfield’s ill-informed opinion, area residents support eliminating City Councilman Romy Cachola’s Salt Lake detour, and replacing it with the original Airport route proposal.

[LikaNui]

Re: Rail Transit

Interestingly enough, though, community meetings on rail are still being held by the city — the most recent this afternoon in Kapolei.

And KGMB reported on the turnout for today's meeting. Ten people.
Only ten.

[GeckoGeek]

Re: Rail Transit

I'm a bit surprised this hasn't been talked about more. Sure seems lame to have the first functional rail line to be between East Kapolei and Waipahu.

[salmoned]

Re: Rail Transit

Yes, it IS lame. The obvious reason for the 'backward' build is that once the belly-aching about traffic disruption and cost overruns for the downtown section (if built first) starts to boil over, the 'political will' to continue the line past Pearl City will evaporate. In other words, when everyone sees that the most useful section is not relieving traffic or improving lifestyle, why continue to build the less useful section? Better to start with the least useful section, as it will create the least backlash, with the crescendo of disruption leading to the eventual 'relief' when construction is completed. That way, it will 'seem' as if traffic has been relieved by the absence of construction (it will not be relieved by rail passengers). Also, the obvious intention is to continue the construction through to UH Manoa and/or Waikiki, since these are more logical and reasonable endpoints (Why are we building and paying for a public transit system to benefit a privately owned shopping center?).

[GeckoGeek]

Re: Rail Transit

There's that aspect. Organizational behavior is such that once a segment is in the air, it will be completed no matter how lame. Otherwise it's an embarrassment to the organization. Of course a change in administration could soften that.

[joshuatree]

Re: Rail Transit

The two proposed rail yards will be around Waipahu and further out west so that's a detail that can't be overlooked. Proposing the Pearl City to downtown segment first really means Waipahu to downtown, a much longer route for a first phase. Possible. Maybe better to simply acquire all the required land parcels now when the real estate is in the buyer's favor.

[Random]

Re: Rail Transit

(Why are we building and paying for a public transit system to benefit a privately owned shopping center?).

Because some of us without a car prefer to shop at privately owned shopping centers.

[GeckoGeek]

Re: Rail Transit

Why are we building and paying for a public transit system to benefit a privately owned shopping center?.

Perhaps this is the answer.

[joshuatree]

Re: Rail Transit

Perhaps this is the answer.

Let's not forget property tax generated by the center. The higher the value, the more revenue the city receives. Whether you love or hate developers, it's a component of modern infrastructure.