Add some more cars!
I've been riding BART for well over 20 years and am getting fed up along with many others. I take the 0532 train out of Pleasant Hill (PH) and since the change went into effect on 9/14/09 usually it is standing room only or a couple of seats available by the time the train reaches PH. If I can get the to handicap seating I go there but at times seniors or others with disabilities have the seat however if when I do get a seat I now constantly have a rear front end directly in my face and I find that to be disgusting! A five car train with people heading into work as well as the airport(s) (good luck getting your suitcase through the train door) is ridiculous and driving my car and/or carpooling is looking better and better to me.
»
- dorit49's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Nobody ever promised you
Nobody ever promised you wouldn't have to stand.
If you don't like it, get a car.
I do own a car - you might
I do own a car - you might want to reread the reason for my comments. I only use the senior/disability seating as I do have a disability requiring the seating in the first place. My biggest problem is that I do not like having a rear or frontal area directly in my face.
The funny thing bart_blows,
The funny thing bart_blows, is that when BART was in the planning and construction stages in the early 1970's, they DID promise everyone a seat into SF. That is why the trains are designed with so much seating, as opposed to NYC subways, which are designed mainly for standing riders. People who have been around since that time still think that sitting is part of the deal (not that I agree with it!).
While we're on the subject of service cutbacks, not only has BART gone from 15 to 20-minute frequencies and shortened some trains, they have now removed most of the SF/24th Street trains that run from Concord in the evening reverse commute (PBP line). These trains turnaround in SF and serve the normal commute out of SF, so if you're finding more crowded trains in the evening or less trains overall, this is the reason.
Sadly, they just REDUCED the
Sadly, they just REDUCED the overall amount of cars on trains.
Saving $$ and all that
Reduce fares, concessions
Reduce fares, concessions from employees, reduce service for a 200 mil deficit. To pay for a 500 mil people mover to airport. Which may get cancelled. Think of all the money they got.
How much (approx) saving can
How much (approx) saving can be achieved by running a 5 car train vs a 7-8 car train?
1) Both require one TO
2) They run the same distance
The amount of electric power is probably the only saving and I am curious to know, how much is saved by reducing each car?
They also don't have to
They also don't have to clean/maintain cars that are not in service.
A shorter train takes less time to clean & repair than a longer one.
It seems to be a daily thing
It seems to be a daily thing that the early morning 5-car PBP to SFO trains are full by Pleasant Hill and ends up being impossible to get on or get a seat anywhere else down the line. Not sure why the number of cars in some of the early morning trains were reduced to half of their commute length. I agree that some bean counter thought it would be a savings (I guess) to run shorter trains 15 or 30 minutes later and save car hours (again, I guess). But for those patrons who use the system regularly it can be a very frustrating experience, especially going into a new schedule, expecting a 9 or 10-car train and suddenly seeing a 5-car train arrive, full. Fill out a comment card from the station agent. I wish I had more to say.
By just using gross numbers
By just using gross numbers from the annual report, 75 percent of BART's expense is labor and 25% is "stuff" - parts, materials, electricity, etc. About a third of that 25 (or roughly 8 % of the total) is electricity.
Of the labor, TO's make up ten percent of the labor force, and mechanics who maintain cars make up 20 percent. Or, overall, 7 and 14 percent, respectively. Yes, about 29 percent of BART money goes to something (and someone) that moves, and 71 percent to what (and who) stands still. Of course, these are all ballpark figures.
Indeed, adding cars does not affect the cost of the TO. But adding 20 percent more cars means an incremental increase of electricity and an incremental increase of shop time (cars get preventive maintenance every 800 hours, or so). A totally ballpark figure is 6 percent per car. Add two cars, increase expense 12 percent. Three cars = 18 percent.
Of course these are totally ballpark figures, but a good idea of the impact of each component in the cost of a train.
I would think the savings
I would think the savings would come from decreased maintenance. If a car isn't used as often, it isn't going to require as much maintenance (or as many people to maintain it). BART staffing has gotten very lean lately. For the most part, people who leave (and there were a large number of them during the last contract negotiation) aren't being replaced.
They cut the 12:09 and then
They cut the 12:09 and then fucking show up with a five car train last night. Standing room only at midnight. Some woman had her feet on the seats taking up two additional seats besides blocking the isles with her friggin luggage and I made her take her dam feet off so two more passengers could sit down.
Last Thursday night. Our T.O. called for BPD assist to get the weirdo off of the last train at Macarthur, no BPD ever came to assist or answered her call.
Yeah, I feel real secure with BPD after that.
The last train late every single night last week or there's some hold up on the way home. I don't get it; we pay a fortune for this sardine can system and the service always is just worse, never better.
11:59 also late almost every night.
BPD responds to the call BUT
BPD responds to the call BUT train control makes the decision to move the train IF the officer responding is going to be more than a few minutes.(for non violent, non medical just normal weirdos) WEIRDO not doing anything other than talking to themselves or such usually doesn't rate a train being delayed 5 min or more.
They take the call further up the line most times.
shouldn't BPD officers be
shouldn't BPD officers be stationed at Macarthur waiting for the last train??? It is the largest transfer station in the system, and with only a few trains running, there shouldn't be many other issues to deal with at that time of night. I still don't understand why the last train (or two) are subject to so many delays, especially at Macarthur. What makes that train subject to police searches most every night, while any given train at any time of the day has just as many, if not more, potential weirdos present? To me it's just more post-911 posturing by police. Using the Bush/Cheney model - you gotta keep people scared!
Well, I believe the Mac
Well, I believe the Mac nightly sweeps are PRE 911. I could be wrong.
The reason They do it at Mac is ..ALL the running trains go through that station.
All actions of BART Police
All actions of BART Police come from their dispatch as I understand it. Outside of officers and substations through out the system, it is BPD Dispatch that will tell train control where to hold the train. Operators assist by reporting things to central, but depending on the nature of the report and severity. Example, a smelly, homeless guy cannot be considered a priority and could be taken care of at the end of the line. While a panhandler or someone scribbling graffiti would be more of a priority.
Returns explanation is better
Returns explanation is better worded and better detailed.Spot on
BART PD dispatching probably
BART PD dispatching probably seems nonsensical at first glance because the scene of the crime travels a lot faster than the cop can.