Orange Line Busway - Another SNAFU in the Making

On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 19:29:35 -0800, The Real Bev
> wrote:

>We've ridden the gold line in to Chinatown fewer than a dozen times. Twice we
>have observed a car trapped between the train and the barrier in South
>Pasadena.

Next time bring your camera!

On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 10:53:54 -0800, Robert Cote >
wrote:

>Speed differentials, asymetrical preferences, at grade and cross traffic
>are all well documented negative outcome safety issues. The Orange
>Crusher is indeed poorly designed FROM A SAFETY STANDPOINT.

Now there's a contrived name that will never stick. We already have
The Orange Crush (the junction of three VERY busy freeways that
handles probably 3 times the amount of traffic for which it was
originally designed, for those of you not familiar with SoCal), and
"The Orange Crusher" is just too similar.

Maybe the "Orange Juice Squeezer" or something?

On 10 Nov 2005 20:08:31 -0800, "Dave" > wrote:

>If they added even simple crossing gates like trains have, as I've
>heard suggested many times, it would reduce the risk to the average Joe
>Dumbass.

According to the news reports I've heard, there is actually an MTA
rule that PROHIBITS railroad-style crossing gates and signals unless
it's an actual railroad crossing. Allegedly they are working on having
this rule amended to allow the gates and signals.

>I do agree grade separation or grade separated rail is a better choice

No argument there. They don't even need to elevate the entire line -
just grade-separate the intersections.

On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 06:58:34 GMT, Merritt Mullen
> wrote:

>Think about it. 1. A single LRT train with a single operator, can carry
>twice the number of passengers as a BRT vehicle. 2. To have the same
>capacity, you must have twice as many BRT vehicles (and drivers on duty)
>crossing an at-grade intersection as LRT trains. 3. To have the same
>transit speed, intersections must be crossed at en route speed with signal
>preemption. Even if you could avoid accidents, that means the crossing
>would be closed to automobile cross traffic most of the time, effectively
>blocking the cross streets. 4. An electric LRT vehicle, while initially
>costing more, is cheaper to maintain and has a much longer service life
>than an internal combustion bus.

5. An LRT vehicle does far less damage to its ROW than even an empty
bus does to the pavement.

Scott en Aztlán wrote:

> On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 19:29:35 -0800, The Real Bev
> > wrote:
>
>>We've ridden the gold line in to Chinatown fewer than a dozen times. Twice we
>>have observed a car trapped between the train and the barrier in South
>>Pasadena.
>
> Next time bring your camera!

I had my camera, I just didn't have it ready. If I have it ready, it will
never happen again. Now I have to wonder which is the ethical position...

Restaurant recommendations:

(1) Chinese Friends Restaurant,
984 North Broadway, Los Angeles, CA 90012. Small place, Chinese clientele,
very good food, excellent selection.

(2) Sam Woo Cafe, 727 North Broadway, Los Angeles, CA 90012. Upstairs in a
multi-store complex on the jade-store end of the building. (Sam Woo seems to
be the Starbuck's of the Chinese restaurant industry.) A little cheaper.
Chinese clientele, but forks and ketchup are on the table and the soup seems
to be something like cream of mushroom with maybe pork bits. They also serve
American dishes, and I saw two Chinese girls eating tuna sandwiches on toast
and french fries. Food good, but cut in bigger pieces -- sign, according to
our Chinese friend, of less careful preparation. We've gone to both places
several times.

--
Cheers,
Bev
_|-_|-_|-_|-_|-_|-_|-_|-_|-_|-_|-_|-_|-_
When you stop bitching, you start dying.

In article >,
The Real Bev > wrote:

> Scott en Aztlán wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 19:29:35 -0800, The Real Bev
> > > wrote:
> >
> >>We've ridden the gold line in to Chinatown fewer than a dozen times. Twice
> >>we
> >>have observed a car trapped between the train and the barrier in South
> >>Pasadena.
> >
> > Next time bring your camera!
>
> I had my camera, I just didn't have it ready. If I have it ready, it will
> never happen again. Now I have to wonder which is the ethical position...

Just out of curiosity, how does a car get "trapped" between crossing
gates, or "between the train and the barrier"? I guess the explanation
might take a diagram, which would be difficult in a newsgroup.

Merritt

In article >,
Scott en Aztl?n > wrote:

> On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 10:53:54 -0800, Robert Cote >
> wrote:
>
> >Speed differentials, asymetrical preferences, at grade and cross traffic
> >are all well documented negative outcome safety issues. The Orange
> >Crusher is indeed poorly designed FROM A SAFETY STANDPOINT.
>
> Now there's a contrived name that will never stick. We already have
> The Orange Crush (the junction of three VERY busy freeways that
> handles probably 3 times the amount of traffic for which it was
> originally designed, for those of you not familiar with SoCal), and
> "The Orange Crusher" is just too similar.
>
> Maybe the "Orange Juice Squeezer" or something?

It they had been thinking ahead, the MTA would have saved the name "Orange
Line" for a line that actually went towards Orange County. They are soon
going to run out of colors anyway, and have to start using some other
designation.

Merritt

Scott en Aztlán wrote:

>On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 10:53:54 -0800, Robert Cote >
>wrote:
>
>>Speed differentials, asymetrical preferences, at grade and cross traffic
>>are all well documented negative outcome safety issues. The Orange
>>Crusher is indeed poorly designed FROM A SAFETY STANDPOINT.
>>
>>
>Now there's a contrived name that will never stick. We already have
>The Orange Crush (the junction of three VERY busy freeways that
>handles probably 3 times the amount of traffic for which it was
>originally designed, for those of you not familiar with SoCal), and
>"The Orange Crusher" is just too similar.
>
>Maybe the "Orange Juice Squeezer" or something?
>
I know it is nowhere close to including the word "Orange" and thus does
not do much to remind one of the line itself, but how about "Silver
Bubble Bus"? Those vehicles look like either Mickey Mouse or some Walt
Disney Animation artist designed them.

Merritt Mullen wrote:

>In article >,
> Scott en Aztl?n > wrote:
>
>>n Thu, 10 Nov 2005 10:53:54 -0800, Robert Cote >
>>wrote:
>>
>>>peed differentials, asymetrical preferences, at grade and cross traffic
>>>are all well documented negative outcome safety issues. The Orange
>>>Crusher is indeed poorly designed FROM A SAFETY STANDPOINT.
>>>
>>>
>>Now there's a contrived name that will never stick. We already have
>>The Orange Crush (the junction of three VERY busy freeways that
>>handles probably 3 times the amount of traffic for which it was
>>originally designed, for those of you not familiar with SoCal), and
>>"The Orange Crusher" is just too similar.
>>
>>Maybe the "Orange Juice Squeezer" or something?
>>
>>
>It they had been thinking ahead, the MTA would have saved the name "Orange
>Line" for a line that actually went towards Orange County. They are soon
>going to run out of colors anyway, and have to start using some other
>designation.
>
>Merritt
>
>
They are already have numbers for each line, including the Orange, Red,
Blue and Green Lines. It is just that we don't always see them in wide
use. Look in the timetable section on the website; I think you will
find them there.

Robert Cote wrote:

>In article >,
> Pierre A Plauzoles > wrote:
>
>>[responding to;]
>>
>>
>>>"It's very unnerving," Freedman said of the intersection. "It's so
>>>confusing for your eyes to see lights all over the place. It's really
>>>poorly designed."
>>>
>>... poorly designed ..."? Let's get real here -- NOW!! The busway?
>>No. It is not the system that is poorly designed. Rather, it is the
>>degree of attention certain drivers are paying to what is around them
>>that is poorly designed. Nothing more, nothing less. The busway was
>>designed with technology that has been in use for decades all over
>>southern California, in fact, in every large city (and even many smaller
>>cities) in the country.
>>
>>
>Speed differentials, asymetrical preferences, at grade and cross traffic
>are all well documented negative outcome safety issues. The Orange
>Crusher is indeed poorly designed FROM A SAFETY STANDPOINT. The MTA
>knew it, made a tough decision and got caught making the wrong decision.
>I can't prove it but I'm confident that part of the reasoning included
>the rationalization that accidents would advance an agenda for
>overpasses and eventual rail. The clue will be when the first "safety"
>grade separation is done and the approaches are limited to 2%.
>
>
Sorry. The same conditions exist in very similar stuations elsewhere,
and I have not heards of any adverse reults. Is it that the press has
taken on the Orange Line in order to discriminate against ir? Not
likely enough for me to think of it. That is journalism too yellow for
me to think in those terms. I think it is more likely that they had
their minds on the vociferous (and unreasonable) opposition of the last
several years and decided to adopt an "I told you so" attitude with
thinking something along the lines of "OK, here is your baby bottle.
Now drink!" Somepeople can only learn the hard way. Unfortunately,
accidents are part of "the hard way" in cities around the world.