DOCSLIB.ORG

Transit Mode Primer

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Transit Mode Primer TRANSIT MODE PRIMER The Regional Tampa Bay Next is a program to modernize We’re committed to providing both financial and Tampa Bay’s transportation infrastructure and prepare technical support to our local partners in their pursuit for the future. FDOT is committed to a comprehensive of better transit services. To make a robust and reliable approach to transportation planning and development transit system a reality, the Tampa Bay community for an integrated, multimodal regional transportation must work together to reach a consensus on transit system. The program includes: improvement projects and develop a viable funding plan • Interstate Modernization to construct, operate and maintain the system. To get • Transit better transit services in our community, we must answer • Bicycle/Pedestrian Facilities one important question: Are we willing to pay for it? • Complete Streets • Transportation Innovation Transit Mode Characteristics • Freight Mobility Type of service provided: average distance of trip Tampa Bay’s complex transportation problems require Type of station: elevated, platform, shelter, on- comprehensive, multimodal solutions. With Tampa street, or park-and-ride Bay Next, FDOT’s interstate planning is fully integrated with transit planning. Spacing between stations: average distance between stations How can Tampa Bay make transit a Operating speeds: average operating speeds (miles reality? per hour); affected by the number of stations, weight of the vehicle, incline, and number and degree of turns Transit is a locally supported service and any major transit improvements would require investment from Capacity: optimal capacity measured in passengers the local community. When you look at successful per hour; assumes bus or train arrives at a station every transit models across the United States, you see local 10 minutes, except aerial cable transit (3 minutes) and communities prioritizing funding for transit systems. commuter rail (15 minutes) FDOT continues to be a funding partner for transit Corridor width: average width of corridor in feet; does services investing millions of dollars annually in the not include space for stations, may be wider at turns, Tampa Bay area. especially commuter rail Turning radius required: average turning radii; may This primer describes the transit modes have a significant impact on right-of-way needed dependent on the transit mode being discussed as part of Tampa Bay Next. Tampa Bay Next | Transit Modes Primer October 2017 | Page 1 Local bus service is provided by rubber tire vehicles on local streets. Buses run on deisel, LOCAL BUS gasoline, battery, or alternative fuel. Service is provided on a repetitive, fixed-schedule along a specific route. Stops are close together to deliver and pick up passengers as close to their destinations or origins as possible, resulting in lower average speeds. Fares are paid on-board and buses typically contain bicycle racks on the fronts of the vehicles. Type of Service: Operating 10-45 Local Bus Short distance trips Speeds: MPH Type of Station: 10-65 Express Bus On-street, shelter, or transit center Capacity: 256-960MPH Local Bus (passengers/hour) Spacing Between Stations: 10-45 320-880MPH BRTExpress in Mixed Bus Traffic Generally 1/10 mile to 1/4 mile Corridor 24 FT Local Bus Examples: Width: 320-96010-65 BRT (in mixed traffic) PSTA in Pinellas County, FL (pictured); HART MPH BRT in Dedicated Lane in Hillsborough County, FL; PCPT in Pasco Turning Radius 480-1,440 BRT in Dedicated Lane County, FL Required: 35-4424-2810-30 FT FT AutonomousExpress Solutions Bus 160-2,000+MPH Autonomous Solutions 10-15 250-2,000+24-28MPH FT HeritageHeritageBRT Streetcar Streetcar EXPRESS BUS Express Bus is a commonly used in urban areas and typically intended to run faster than local bus service between commuter destination points. Express buses 30-65do800-4,800 not ModernModern Streetcar Streetcar make as many stops as local bus service and often take routes that are quicker,MPH such BRT in Dedicated Lane 24-28400-7,200 FT Light Rail as freeways or dedicated toll lanes. Buses may operate out of park and ride lots20-60 and in some cases only run during rush hour in the peak direction. 10-45MPH Light Rail 600-4,500+MPH LocalCommuter Bus Rail 30-6030-40 FT Autonomous Solutions Type of Service: Operating 1,000-6,000+10-65MPH CommuterExpressHeavy BusRail Rail Medium and long distance trips Speeds: MPH 256-960 Local Bus 50-80800-6,000+ Elevated Rail Type of Station: 10-45MPH24-40 FT HeavyHeritage Rail Streetcar Capacity: BRT in Mixed Traffic On-street, shelter, or park and ride 320-880MPH ExpressLocal Bus Bus (passengers/hour) 600-2,400+24 FT High Speed Rail Spacing Between Stations: 40-70 10-65MPH Elevated Rail 320-960MPH24-40 FT BRTBRTModern in (inDedicated mixed Streetcar traffic) Lane Varies, generally more than 5 miles Corridor 320-1,200 Aerial Transit Examples: Width: 90-15024-28 FT Express Bus 10-30480-1,440MPH HighBRT Speed in Dedicated Rail Lane Tampa to Orlando Megabus (pictured); 400-2,400MPH AutonomousWater Ferry Solutions 40 FT Light Rail Tampa, FL; St. Petersburg, FL; Orlando, FL Turning Radius 160-2,000+10-45 Autonomous Solutions 24-2810-15MPH FT AerialBRT Transit Required: 44 FTMPH Heritage Streetcar 250-2,000+40- Heritage Streetcar Average speed information based on project examples and provided by the American Public Transit Association; Vehicle25-35 seated100 FT Commuter Rail capacity based on manufacturer specifications, references available upon request; Corridor width and turning radii30-65MPH based on projectWater Ferry examples as provided by the Federal Transit Administration and manufacturer specifications, references available 24-28uponMPH800-4,800 request. FT ModernModernBRT Streetcar inStreetcar Dedicated Lane 40- 20-60400-7,200100 FT LightHeavy Rail Rail MPH Light Rail 30-40 FT Autonomous Solutions 600-4,500+ Commuter Rail Tampa Bay Next | Transit Modes Primer October 201730-60 | Page40- 2 MPH 100 FTCommuterElevated Rail Rail 1,000-6,000+ Heavy Rail 24-40 FT Heritage Streetcar 50-80 Heavy Rail 800-6,000+MPH 100 Elevated Rail FT High Speed Rail 40-70 600-2,400+MPH24-40 FT ElevatedHighModern Speed Rail RailStreetcar 320-1,20090-15030 FT AerialAerial Transit Transit MPH High Speed Rail 40 FT Light Rail 400-2,400 Water Ferry 10-45Not MPHApplicable AerialWater Transit Ferry 40- 100 FT Commuter Rail 25-35 MPH Water Ferry 40- 100 FT Heavy Rail 40- 100 FT Elevated Rail 100 FT High Speed Rail 30 FT Aerial Transit Not Applicable Water Ferry Bus Rapid Transit has specialized design, branding, services, and infrastructure BUS RAPID TRANSIT that improve quality of service and reduce delay. Vehicles may be given priority at 10-45 intersections. Off-board ticketing, low floor vehicles, and multiple doors allowMPH for faster Local Bus boarding. This service aims to combine the capacity and speed of rail with the flexibility, 10-65 lower cost, and simplicity of a bus. MPH Express Bus Type of Service: Operating 10-45 24 FT BRTLocal in Mixed Bus Traffic Short and medium distance trips Speeds: MPH 256-960 Local Bus Type of Station: 10-65 BRT in Dedicated Lane On-street, shelter, or platform Capacity: 320-880MPH Express Bus (passengers/hour) 24-28 FT Express Bus Spacing Between Stations: 320-96010-30 AutonomousBRT (in mixed Solutions traffic) 1/4 mile to 3 miles Corridor MPH 24-28 FT BRT Examples: Width: 480-1,44010-15 BRT in Dedicated Lane Los Angeles, CA (pictured); Las Vegas, NV; MPH Heritage Streetcar Charlotte, NC Turning Radius 160-2,000+ AutonomousBRT in Dedicated Solutions Lane Required: 44-7524-2830-65 FT FT Modern Streetcar 250-2,000+MPH Heritage Streetcar 20-60 BUS RAPID TRANSIT 10-45800-4,80030-40MPH FT LocalLightModernAutonomous RailBus Streetcar Solutions Bus Rapid Transit in a dedicated lane has the same characteristics as Bus MPHRapid IN DEDICATED LANE Transit, but vehicles run in their own lane dedicated to buses. This allows the30-60400-7,200 vehicles Light Rail 10-65MPH Commuter Rail to bypass congestion and makes the service more reliable and the travel time24-40MPH to FT ExpressHeritage Bus Streetcar 600-4,500+ Commuter Rail destinations more competitive compared to personal vehicles. 50-80 256-9602410-45MPH FT HeavyLocalLocal Rail Bus Bus 1,000-6,000+MPH BRTHeavy in MixedRail Traffic 24-40 FT Modern Streetcar Type of Service: Operating 320-88040-70 Express Bus 800-6,000+10-65MPH BRTElevatedElevated in Dedicated RailRail Lane Short and medium distance trips Speeds: 24-28MPH FT Express Bus 320-960 BRT (in mixed traffic) 600-2,400+90-15040 FT Light Rail Type of Station: 10-30MPH HighHigh Speed Speed RailRail On-street, shelter, or platform Capacity: MPH Autonomous Solutions (passengers/hour) 24-28480-1,440 FT BRTBRT in Dedicated Lane 320-1,20010-45 Aerial Transit Spacing Between Stations: 10-15MPH 40- Aerial Transit 160-2,000+MPH 100 FTHeritageAutonomousCommuter Streetcar Solutions Rail 1/4 mile to 3 miles Corridor 400-2,400 Water Ferry Width: 24-2825-35 FT BRT in Dedicated Lane Examples: 250-2,000+30-65MPH WaterHeritage Ferry Streetcar MPH 40- Modern Streetcar Eugene, OR (pictured); Los Angeles, CA; 100 FT Heavy Rail Cleveland, OH; Boston, MA; Orlando, FL Turning Radius 800-4,800 Modern Streetcar 20-6030-40 FT Autonomous Solutions Required: 44-75MPH FT Light Rail 400-7,20040- Light Rail Average speed information based on project examples and provided by the American Public Transit Association; Vehicle seated100 FT Elevated Rail capacity based on manufacturer specifications, references available upon request; Corridor width and turning radii30-60
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 10 – Eurocruise - Porto Part 4 - Heritage Streetcar Operations
    10 – Eurocruise - Porto Part 4 - Heritage Streetcar Operations On Wednesday morning Luis joined us at breakfast in our hotel, and we walked a couple of blocks in a light fog to a stop on the 22 line. The STCP heritage system consists of three routes, numbered 1, 18 and 22. The first two are similar to corresponding services from the days when standard- gauge streetcars were the most important element in Porto’s transit system. See http://www.urbanrail.net/eu/pt/porto/porto-tram.htm. The three connecting heritage lines run every half-hour, 7 days per week, starting a little after the morning rush hour. Routes 1 and 18 are single track with passing sidings, while the 22 is a one-way loop, with a short single-track stub at its outer end. At its Carmo end the 18 also traverses a one-way loop through various streets. Like Lisbon, the tramway operated a combination of single- and double- truck Brill-type cars in its heyday, but now regular service consists of only the deck-roofed 4-wheelers, which have been equipped with magnetic track brakes. Four such units are operated each day, as the 1 line is sufficiently long to need two cars. The cars on the road on Wednesday were 131, 205, 213 and 220. All were built by the CCFP (Porto’s Carris) from Brill blueprints. The 131 was completed in 1910, while the others came out of the shops in the late 1930s-early 1940s. Porto also has an excellent tram museum, which is adjacent to the Massarelos carhouse, where the rolling stock for the heritage operation is maintained.
    [Show full text]
  • January–June 2005 · $10.00 / Rails To
    January–June 2005 · $10.00 / Rails to Rubber to Rails Again, Part 1: Alabama–Montana Headlights The Magazine of Electric Railways Published since 1939 by the Electric Railroaders’ Association, Inc. WWW.ERAUSA.ORG Staff Contents Editor and Art Director January–June 2005 Sandy Campbell Associate Editors Raymond R. Berger, Frank S. Miklos, John Pappas Contributors Edward Ridolph, Trevor Logan, Bill Volkmer, Columns Alan K. Weeks 2 News Electric Railroaders’ Compiled by Frank Miklos. International transportation reports. Association, Inc. E Two-Part Cover Story Board of Directors 2008 President 18 Rails to Rubber to Rails Again Frank S. Miklos By Edward Ridolph. An extensive 60-year summary of the street railway industry in First Vice President the U.S. and Canada, starting with its precipitous 30-year, post-World War II decline. William K. Guild It continues with the industry’s rebirth under the banner of “light rail” in the early Second Vice President & Corresponding Secretary 1980s, a renaissance which continues to this day. Raymond R. Berger Third Vice President & Recording Secretary Robert J. Newhouser Below: LAMTA P3 3156 is eastbound across the First Street bridge over the Los Treasurer Angeles River in the waning weeks of service before abandonment of Los Angeles’ Michael Glikin narrow gauge system on March 31, 1963. GERALD SQUIER PHOTO Director Jeffrey Erlitz Membership Secretary Sandy Campbell Officers 2008 Trip & Convention Chairman Jack May Librarian William K. Guild Manager of Publication Sales Raymond R. Berger Overseas Liason Officer James Mattina National Headquarters Grand Central Terminal, New York City A-Tower, Room 4A Mailing Address P.O.
    [Show full text]
  • Portuguese Trams Imported by Gales Creek Enterprises
    Volume 25 Issue 1 Spring 2020 Reminder to members: Please be sure your dues are In This Issue up to date. 2020 dues were due Jan 1, 2020. If it has Portuguese Trams – Richard Thompson ……………..…..…………….…1 been longer than one year since you renewed, go to Oregon Electric Railway Historical Society News…………………………2 Willamette Shore Trolley Update – Dave Rowe …………………..……..12 our website: oregontrolley.com and download an Donation Request ……………..…………………………………..…..……14 application by clicking: Become a Member. Portuguese Trams It has been 25 years since the OERHS departed Glenwood, yet the following story should be of interest to Imported by Gales Creek newer members because a Portuguese streetcar joined the collection at Powerland in 2006. Porto No. 210 (renumbered Enterprises (1974-1993) 201 before arrival) is not a part of the Trolley Park story, of course, but it is similar to the streetcars that were kept there. Richard Thompson Car 210 was one of a series built during 1938-45 to replace the Brill and St. Louis Car Company classics. A sense of familiarity might also come from the fact that vintage Beginning in 1974, Gales Creek Enterprises (GCE), Portuguese trams share a kinship with our beloved Council headed by Oregon Electric Railway Historical Society Crest cars 503 and 506. (OERHS) co-founder Paul Class, provided at least 70 vintage streetcars to launch trolley operations in a half-dozen American cities. In the process Paul almost single-handedly started what we now call the “heritage streetcar” movement. His company imported many streetcars from Australia and Brazil, but the largest part of that pioneering effort involved trams from Portugal.
    [Show full text]
  • BSRA 2015-03-07 Entertainment Report
    BSRA Entertainment Report for March 7, 2015 LONG FORM (for historical record) Entertainment Report for March 7, 2015 March 7, 2015. The Bachelders' NRHS Convention Adventure, Part 1. Leonard Bachelder and his wife Nancy attended the 2013 NRHS convention in Alaska, turning this into a 6-week trip through Alberta, British Columbia, Yukon Territory, and Alaska. Len started us off in Calgary, Alberta, showing us the C-Train Transit Mall. The C-Train begain operating in 1981, and has been expanded several times since. The downtown Transit Mall consists of 7th Avenue with high-level platforms that are usually offset by a block on opposite sides for space reasons. The Transit Mall is entirely within the 7th Avenue Free Fare Zone, and is shared by both C-Train routes (the South and Northwest lines, forming route 201, and Northeast and West lines, forming route 202). As Len also showed us, Calgary Transit buses use the Transit Mall, but not the station platforms. Current rolling stock types are Siemens-Duewag U2 (#2001 - #2083, delivered from 1981 through 1984, and of which 80 of the original 83 remain in service), Siemens SD-160 Series 5 and 6 (#2201 - #2272, delivered from 2001 through 2006), and Siemens SD-160NG Series 8 (#2301 - #2338, delivered in 2007). Len showed us examples of all of these classes of cars. The C-Train also has car #2090 which was made from the remaining good sections of wrecked U2 cars #2019 and #2027, and experimental cars #2101 - #2102 (AC versions of the U2s, originally #3001 - #3002) which also served as demonstrators in Edmonton, but have been retained in revenue service in Calgary (not MU-compatible with the DC motored U2s, so inserted into the middle of SD-160 trains).
    [Show full text]
  • Bring Back the Streetcars : a Conservative Vision of Tomorrow's
    Bring Back the Streetcars! A Conservative Vision of Tomorrow's Urban Transportation by Paul M. Weyrich and William S. Lind .... Free~• Foundation This study of public transportation by the Free Congress Research and Education Foundation was underwritten by the private sector Business Members of the American Public Transportation Association. The views expressed are those of the authors. Public Transportation Partnership for Tomorrow Washington, DC June 2002 BRING BACK THE STREETCARS! A Conservative Vision of Tomorrow’s Urban Transportation A Study Prepared by the Free Congress Research and Education Foundation By Paul M. Weyrich and William S. Lind The Free Congress Foundation 717 Second Street Washington, DC 20002 (202) 546-3000 June 2002 Contents Executive Summary 1 Introduction: What’s Right with This Picture? 3 Bring Back the Streetcars! 6 The Context: Restoring Our Cities and Building New Towns 6 What Is a Streetcar? 9 Vintage and Heritage Streetcars 12 Who Else Is Doing It? 13 What Does It Cost? 18 Three Case Studies: 21 Dallas, Texas 21 Memphis, Tennessee 24 Portland, Oregon 28 Conclusion 32 Appendices: 34 Appendix I: Getting Started 34 Appendix II: The Gomaco Trolley Company 37 Appendix III: Resources 39 Notes 40 E xecutive Summary For more than half a century, the context in which public transport operated was suburbanization. But recently, that has begun to change. Urban downtowns are reviving, and new towns are being built to traditional patterns. Not only can streetcars serve these non- suburban areas, they need streetcars in order to flourish. Streetcars – which we define as rail transit vehicles designed for local transportation, powered by electricity received from an overhead wire – differ from both buses and Light Rail.
    [Show full text]
  • BSRA 2015-08-01 Entertainment Report
    BSRA Entertainment Report for August 1, 2015 LONG FORM (for historical record) Entertainment Report for August 1, 2015 August 1, 2015. San Francisco's F Line. Peter Ehrlich has been an operator on San Francisco's F Line until 2005, and has operated heritage and modern streetcars, and even buses. Tonight, he presented San Francisco's famous F Line, America's most successful heritage streetcar line, with the digital slideshow being accompanied by handouts of the F Line's streetcar roster and route map. The Market Street Railway is a private booster organization that supports the F Line, but does not run it; it has offices in the Flood Building (which we got to see later in the show). It is not cirectly related to the Market Street Railway Company of 1857 - 1944, although it is named after this transit company. San Francisco's Municipal Railway (MUNI) runs the F Line, and is also responsible for maintining the streetcars, and charges the same fare for riding on them (the only MUNI vehicles that charge a different fare are the cable cars). As Peter's first images showed us, the F Line began official operation on September 1, 1995, with a 20 streetcar parade led by the Blackpool "boat tram" (built in 1934) that the F Line had at the time; however, much work had already been done to establish it by this time, for it was an outgrowth of the San Francisco Historic Trolley Festivals that started in 1983 to serve as a replacement tourist attraction while the cablecar system was shut down for major overhaul from 1982 - 1984.
    [Show full text]
  • US Manufacture of Rail Vehicles for Intercity
    ! "#$#!%&'()&*+(,-!.)!/&01! 2-30*1-4!).,!5'+-,*0+6! 7&44-'8-,!/&01!&'9! ",:&'!;,&'40+! ! ! !"#$%&'"()$*+"!+$%,-*-" ! ! %&,*6!B.C-?!$&.,0!;.D(.D&?!E,04+-'!F(:&6?! <('-!=>?!=@A@! &'9!G&,6!G-,-))0! ! H.'+,0:(+0'8!HGGH!,-4-&,*3-,I!;&10!;,088! ! ! ! ! ./0/"1$+&2$34&5'"62"7$*%"#')*3%'-"265"8+4'53*4,"9$--'+:'5"7$*%"$+;".5<$+"=5$+-*4" This research was prepared on behalf of Apollo Alliance with support from the Rockefeller Foundation and Surdna Foundation. The authors would like to thank Matt Mayrl of the Apollo Alliance for comments on early drafts. Many thanks also to the following reviewers: Doug Bowen, Chandra Brown, Nora Friend, Ruggero Golini, Dennis Harwig, Hatsuhiko Kageyama, Mike Mekhiche, Richard Moss, Matthew Palilla, Mike Pracht, Maryanne Roberts, Robin Stimson, and Chuck Wochele. Errors of fact or interpretation remain exclusively with the authors. We welcome comments and suggestions. The lead author can be contacted at [email protected]. List of Abbreviations APMs Automated People Movers ARRA American Recovery and Reinvestment Act CNR China North Locomotive and Rolling Stock Industry Group CSR China South Locomotive and Rolling Stock Industry Group DMUs Diesel Multiple Units EMUs Electric Multiple Units EMD Electro Motive Diesel EWI Edison Welding Institute FRA Federal Railroad Administration FTA Federal Transit Administration HSR High Speed Rail IAMAW International Association of Machinists IBEW International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers LRT Light Rail Transit NAICS North American Industry Classification System OEM Original Equipment Manufacturer PRIIA Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 UNIFE Union des Industries Ferroviaires Européennes U.S. PIRG Federation of State Public Interest Research Groups Photo Permissions: Cover photo by Dave Wilcox (2008), Tostie14, (2005) and Doug Beghtel (2009) © June 22, 2010.
    [Show full text]
  • (Second Draft) Heritage Trolley / Streetcar Infrastructure Standards J
    Introduction/Statement of Purpose (Second Draft) Heritage Trolley / Streetcar Infrastructure Standards J. Schantz - September 2007 Foreword This standard for Vintage / Heritage Trolley and Modern Streetcar track and overhead infrastructure is the second major component of a set of recommended practice documents covering Vintage / Heritage Trolley technology, and is the first extended to include modern streetcars. As this standard was being prepared, there were about two dozen heritage trolley or modern streetcar operations around the United States, with many more in the planning stages. All of them use electric propulsion and operate on rail typically in a mixture of street and private right of way configurations.The vehicles, be they heritage or modern, are usually lighter and lower speed than light rail vehicles so are suited to a simpler infrastructure than their larger counterparts. The rail transit industry and various engineering or self-regulatory groups have been steadily generating standards covering many technical aspects of rail infrastructure and the related electrification. However, some aspects of these standards are not ideal for the operating environment of heritage or modern streetcars. For this reason the APTA Heritage Trolley and Streetcar Subcommittee has created this standards document to outline concepts appropriate for streetcar lines built in an urban public transit environment. It is the intention of this standard to focus on design level practices, leaving many engineering aspects of preferred designs to the detailed standards prepared by groups such as the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE )and American Railway Engineering and Maintenance of Way Association (AREMA). This subcommittee and other APTA entities are working closely with these groups on development of detailed infrastructure standards.
    [Show full text]
  • Midsize Cities on the Move
    (Inside front cover) December 2012 Midsize Cities on the Move A Look at the Next Generation of Rapid Bus, Bus Rapid Transit, and Streetcar Projects in the United States Acknowledgements We would like to thank The Rockefeller Foundation for supporting this research. We also wish to thank the review panel members for their helpful comments and suggestions: Sarah Jo Peterson, Urban Land Institute; Dennis Hinebaugh, National Bus Rapid Transit Institute; Kathy Nothstine and Brett Schwartz, National Association of Development Organizations; Jeff Hiott, American Public Transportation Association; Roger Millar, Smart Growth America; David Westendorff , Mid-Sized Cities Policy Research Institute, University of Memphis; and Leslie Wollack, National League of Cities. We are thankful for the refl ections and participation of staff from transit agencies, cities, and metropolitan planning organizations that contributed to this report. This report was written by Sarah Kline and Sasha Forbes, and edited and formatted by John Hughes, with contributions from Elizabeth Wampler, Jeff Wood and Irving Pham. Midsize Cities on the Move 3 Contents Acknowledgements2 Introduction6 Methodology7 What is a Midsize City?9 Three Types of Midsize Cities9 Midsize City Characteristics10 Supporting Economic Revitalization: Stark Area Regional Transit Authority, Canton, OH12 A Look at Midsize Regions13 Transit Investments14 Overview of Rapid Bus and Bus Rapid Transit14 Overview of Streetcars17 Planning and Implementation of Transit Projects20 Players and Partnerships 20 Transit
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Manufacture of Rail Vehicles for Intercity Passenger Rail and Urban Transit
    U.S. Manufacture of Rail Vehicles for Intercity Passenger Rail and Urban Transit A Value Chain Analysis Marcy Lowe, Saori Tokuoka, Kristen Dubay, June 24, 2010 and Gary Gereffi Contributing CGGC researcher: Tali Trigg U.S. Manufacture of Rail Vehicles for Intercity Passenger Rail and Urban Transit This research was prepared on behalf of Apollo Alliance with support from the Rockefeller Foundation and Surdna Foundation. The authors would like to thank Matt Mayrl of the Apollo Alliance for comments on early drafts. Many thanks also to the following reviewers: Doug Bowen, Chandra Brown, Nora Friend, Ruggero Golini, Dennis Harwig, Hatsuhiko Kageyama, Mike Mekhiche, Richard Moss, Matthew Palilla, Mike Pracht, Maryanne Roberts, Robin Stimson, and Chuck Wochele. Errors of fact or interpretation remain exclusively with the authors. We welcome comments and suggestions. The lead author can be contacted at [email protected]. List of Abbreviations APMs Automated People Movers ARRA American Recovery and Reinvestment Act CNR China North Locomotive and Rolling Stock Industry Group CSR China South Locomotive and Rolling Stock Industry Group DMUs Diesel Multiple Units EMUs Electric Multiple Units EMD Electro Motive Diesel EWI Edison Welding Institute FRA Federal Railroad Administration FTA Federal Transit Administration HSR High Speed Rail IAMAW International Association of Machinists IBEW International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers LRT Light Rail Transit NAICS North American Industry Classification System OEM Original Equipment Manufacturer PRIIA Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 UNIFE Union des Industries Ferroviaires Européennes U.S. PIRG Federation of State Public Interest Research Groups Photo Permissions: Cover photo by Dave Wilcox (2008), Tostie14, (2005) and Doug Beghtel (2009) © June 22, 2010.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 4 – Passenger Rail Systems
    The Texas Department of Transportation anticipates issuing an amendment to this report in early 2014 to reflect recent CHAPTER FOUR – PASSENGER RAIL developments on important rail initiatives in the state. Chapter 4 – Passenger Rail Systems To improve the coordination of the planning, construction, operation and maintenance of a statewide passenger rail system in the State of Texas, S.B. 1382 (Section 201.6012- 6013, Transportation Code), an act passed by the 81st Texas Legislature and approved by the governor on June 19, 2009, requires TxDOT to prepare and update annually a long-term plan for a statewide passenger rail system. The plan must include the following information useful for the development of the vision, goals, and objectives for the passenger rail system for Texas: • A description of existing and proposed passenger rail systems; • Information regarding the status of passenger rail systems under construction; • An analysis of potential interconnectivity difficulties; • Ridership projections for proposed passenger rail projects; and • Ridership statistics for existing passenger systems. This chapter provides the information required by Section 201.6012-6013, Transportation Code, plus additional information pertinent to understanding the challenges, issues, and opportunities for developing passenger rail services in Texas. Passenger rail services are divided into six categories in this chapter and are defined as follows: • High-speed rail is defined as rail operating at speeds of at least 150 mph non- stop or with limited stops between cities. • Intercity passenger rail is defined as rail serving several cities operating at slower speeds than high speed over long-distances with more frequent stops. • Commuter and regional rail is defined as rail primarily serving work commuters between communities in an urban area or region.
    [Show full text]
  • Lrt News Transportation Research Board
    Lrt news Transportation Research Board Vol. 22, No. 1 May 2011 Washington, DC LRT news Contents On the Internet! Message from the Editor: The “Corner”, p. 2 LRT News is published exclusively on the Internet. The table of contents lists each San Francisco Municipal Transportation Authority Third article by page number, or you can scroll Street Rail Project Phase 2 Enters Final Design, p. 3 down to read the entire newsletter. To receive LRT News, please bookmark the Standing Committee Newsletter page at Sacramento Light Rail System Expansions, p. 11 http://www.trb.org/Publications/ PubsStandingCommitteeNewslet- Trolleys in Lady Liberty’s Back Yard: Enhancing Mobility , ters.aspx. Environment and Experience for Liberty State Park Visitor, p . 15 The Transportation Research Board is one of six major divisions of Streetcar Project Progress Report Table, p. 18 the National Research Council, which serves as an independent advisor to the federal government and others on scien- tific and technical questions of national importance. The National Research Council is jointly administered by the National Academy of Sciences, the Na- tional Academy of Engineering, and the LRT News is published intermittently by the Transportation Institute of Medicine. The mission of the Research Board to disseminate information on new develop- Transportation Research Board is to pro- ments in light rail transit planning, technology, and opera- vide leadership in transportation innova- tions. The newsletter also reports on new studies, completed tion and progress through research and research, and current literature. Jack W. Boorse, editor. Dr. information exchange, conducted within Gregory L. Thompson, Chair, TRB Light Rail Transit Com- a setting that is objective, interdiscipli- mittee.
    [Show full text]