The part about him recommending financial responsibility to another poster back in the StreetCar thread has me wondering.

Yeah, that was in reference to me and me saying I would be willing to bet my next paycheck that Orlando has more visitors than OKC. I am done responding to him/her since it is like arguing with a kid who wants to outside to play in the snow, only it is 100° out in July and he/she doesn't understand why there is no snow on the ground.

Yeah, that was in reference to me and me saying I would be willing to bet my next paycheck that Orlando has more visitors than OKC. I am done responding to him/her since it is like arguing with a kid who wants to outside to play in the snow, only it is 100° out in July and he/she doesn't understand why there is no snow on the ground.Yeah lol, I agree with you that there needs to be a smart and balanced approach coupled with being financially responsible. I would love a light-rail here, but I do now think a commuter rail would have to implemented first.

The Heartland Flyer would have significantly higher ridership numbers if it traveled to downtown Dallas rather than downtown Fort Worth. Dallas is much bigger and its DART light rail can get you to far more points of interest much quicker....

As it is now driving Dallas is much faster and comes with far more flexibility.

Yeah, that was in reference to me and me saying I would be willing to bet my next paycheck that Orlando has more visitors than OKC. I am done responding to him/her since it is like arguing with a kid who wants to outside to play in the snow, only it is 100° out in July and he/she doesn't understand why there is no snow on the ground.

I'm at fault. I assumed all of you "could keep up". And, I know, I over-shot some of you... So, The big picture is this: Before you spend 'real money' like 10's ofmillions of dollars on an "average product" that might have "some ridership", you may want to re-think this ACOG.

Warreng88...you missed the first point, you got caught up on the "paycheck" joke and it "threw" you. This is what we call "staying on point".

This entire dialogue is about Ridership. If the Finanacial Responsiblities are not looked at "UP-Front", then you may have a kinda neat train that runs from Norman to Edmond, but not just a real big HIT, w/ the consumers. You will have spent 10's of Millions of Dollars for an average product that "doesn't" connect w/ the consumers, thus they don't buy a ticket and ride the Diesel Train. And it won't even be open for business unitl 10 years. ...that is a long way to wait for an average product.

I remember when the streetcar first came out, people were wondering why anyone would do a downtown circulator (of sorts). How were people going to get down there to begin with? I would always suggest to take it from the other side: If we were to have rail from Edmond all the way to Norman and El Reno to MWC connecting at the Santa Fe Train Station, how would people get around once they got downtown? I think the streetcar is a great start to a solid transit system and with improved bus routes and commuter rail from the aforementioned areas, we could have something great in the next 15 years or so.

Conservatively speaking, what kind of timeline are we talking about for all these forms of transit? When will we see increased bus ridership, movement to purchase ROW for commuter rail, etc? I know the Adventure district and MWC has been talked about for a couple of years now. Theoretically, how long until we can see that moving forward?

just a note that there is a place for Light Rail and Commuter Rail in the OKC metro area ...

Denver is building 4 commuter rail lines in the next few years

the Gold line which is 11.2 miles .. has 8 stops and takes 25 min for the trip end to end

the East Line runs Downtown to DIA 22.8 miles 7 stops 35 min end to end ..

also the Northwest Rail line runs to Boulder/Longmont will be 41 miles and will run 61 min end to end ..

the North Metro Line will run from denver north 18.5 miles ..

I remember when the streetcar first came out, people were wondering why anyone would do a downtown circulator (of sorts). How were people going to get down there to begin with? I would always suggest to take it from the other side: If we were to have rail from Edmond all the way to Norman and El Reno to MWC connecting at the Santa Fe Train Station, how would people get around once they got downtown? I think the streetcar is a great start to a solid transit system and with improved bus routes and commuter rail from the aforementioned areas, we could have something great in the next 15 years or so.

Conservatively speaking, what kind of timeline are we talking about for all these forms of transit? When will we see increased bus ridership, movement to purchase ROW for commuter rail, etc? I know the Adventure district and MWC has been talked about for a couple of years now. Theoretically, how long until we can see that moving forward?

much of this ? will be answered in the next few years as the RTA gets formed (or doesn't) then a RTD gets established and we have a transit tax vote ..

I'm at fault. I assumed all of you "could keep up". And, I know, I over-shot some of you... So, The big picture is this: Before you spend 'real money' like 10's ofmillions of dollars on an "average product" that might have "some ridership", you may want to re-think this ACOG.

Warreng88...you missed the first point, you got caught up on the "paycheck" joke and it "threw" you. This is what we call "staying on point".

This entire dialogue is about Ridership. If the Finanacial Responsiblities are not looked at "UP-Front", then you may have a kinda neat train that runs from Norman to Edmond, but not just a real big HIT, w/ the consumers. You will have spent 10's of Millions of Dollars for an average product that "doesn't" connect w/ the consumers, thus they don't buy a ticket and ride the Diesel Train. And it won't even be open for business unitl 10 years. ...that is a long way to wait for an average product.That must of been a joke that didn't go your way, because I certainly didn't get, and it didn't seem like it was pushed to be so.

just a note that there is a place for Light Rail and Commuter Rail in the OKC metro area ...

Denver is building 4 commuter rail lines in the next few years

the Gold line which is 11.2 miles .. has 8 stops and takes 25 min for the trip end to end

the East Line runs Downtown to DIA 22.8 miles 7 stops 35 min end to end ..

also the Northwest Rail line runs to Boulder/Longmont will be 41 miles and will run 61 min end to end ..

the North Metro Line will run from denver north 18.5 miles ..

I didn't realize how dense Denver was until I looked it up. It is about the size of OKC area (not the whole metro) but on only 150 square miles versus 600+.

That must of been a joke that didn't go your way, because I certainly didn't get, and it didn't seem like it was pushed to be so.

Thank you. I am glad I wasn't the only one who didn't get it.

In the words of Michael Scott: "I love inside jokes. I'd love to be a part of one some day..."

much of this ? will be answered in the next few years as the RTA gets formed (or doesn't) then a RTD gets established and we have a transit tax vote ..

Will we possibly be looking at a county-wide tax for commuter rail to cover ourselves and the suburbs then look at more localized taxes (MAPS 4) to expand the more central aspects of transit?

I didn't realize how dense Denver was until I looked it up. It is about the size of OKC area (not the whole metro) but on only 150 square miles versus 600+.

the commuter rail goes way way outside of denver .. the line to longmont is 41 miles long

I'm at fault. I assumed all of you "could keep up". And, I know, I over-shot some of you... So, The big picture is this: Before you spend 'real money' like 10's ofmillions of dollars on an "average product" that might have "some ridership", you may want to re-think this ACOG.

Warreng88...you missed the first point, you got caught up on the "paycheck" joke and it "threw" you. This is what we call "staying on point".

This entire dialogue is about Ridership. If the Finanacial Responsiblities are not looked at "UP-Front", then you may have a kinda neat train that runs from Norman to Edmond, but not just a real big HIT, w/ the consumers. You will have spent 10's of Millions of Dollars for an average product that "doesn't" connect w/ the consumers, thus they don't buy a ticket and ride the Diesel Train. And it won't even be open for business unitl 10 years. ...that is a long way to wait for an average product.


I cannot tell you how many times I have had conversations with friends in Norman about how we wish we could hop on rail to go to downtown OKC and back.

College students would absolutely flock to this type of thing all the time.....along with most people. Ridership wouldn't be an issue.

Why use 'old' technology? Because it is a prove technology that we know works, is cost-effective to operate, has many suppliers, lends itself to cross-application, is easily scalable, has lots of supporting data demonstrating TOD and related development, is fast and reliable, and has a known cost structure - and if things don't work out, there are hundreds of systems around the world we can sell our stuff to on the secondary market. What more reasons do we need?

I cannot tell you how many times I have had conversations with friends in Norman about how we wish we could hop on rail to go to downtown OKC and back.

College students would absolutely flock to this type of thing all the time.....along with most people. Ridership wouldn't be an issue.

you will get your chance to ride it from Norman, but it will be in a minimum of 10+ years, per ACOG.

you will get your chance to ride it from Norman, but it will be in a minimum of 10+ years, per ACOG.

Is it your supposition that maglev could be built faster than commuter rail?

As for the Orlando maglev guy - he sounds a lot like this guy...

QVqVdQYC44Y

http://www.businessinsider.com/orlando-building-mag-lev-train-2012-12


In June, Beth Kassab of the Orlando Sentinel article argued the hidden costs of the train include the donation of valuable right-of-way to AMT. She also pointed out Morris has received $20 million federal funding for maglev projects in Florida's Volusia County and at Old Dominion University in Virginia, neither of which came to fruition.

As of 2007, Old Dominion was still working on its train, but without the participation of AMT. According to the Student Voice, the university's newspaper, "Financial and technical difficulties arose. The company had a hard time financing the project...The Maglev currently belongs to the University and is being considered a research project."

Regarding the Volusia project, Morris said, "it was an embryonic test track" that "did everything it was supposed to do, and it was a success."

Since some get confused on the whole light rail vs. commuter rail...here is a good write up of how to tell the two apart: Comparison of 'Rail' transit modes (http://www.trainweb.org/kenrail/Rail_mode_defined.html)

My belief is our first step is obviously commuter rail. It is something that can be done now and we can work with BNSF to implement it on their lines. They have the experience operating a line for the Metra in Chicago and could easily bring that here. JTF has put together a good map of where to go, I also did a Google Maps version over existing lines on where a network could run. Get that up and going first and then start looking at implementing Light Rail with in the OKC city limits.

Since Light Rail would require a separate build out of new lines regardless, we should direct it to areas of town that don't have existing rail lines to work with. This is going to be anywhere North of I-40 and west of I-35.

The thing with any mass transit system is it has to go from an area of density to another area of density and OKC doesn't have a lot of those areas. You can't just run a light rail track down Classen and NW Exp and expect people to go ride it just because it is there. All riders on mass transit need to be pedestrians at both ends which means both ends need to be walkable.

Is it your supposition that maglev could be built faster than commuter rail?

As for the Orlando maglev guy - he sounds a lot like this guy...

QVqVdQYC44Y

Orlando Building Mag-Lev Train - Business Insider (http://www.businessinsider.com/orlando-building-mag-lev-train-2012-12)

I would be ok with a commuter rail that is ready in 2 years..and runs for 10 /15 years. Then Phase in the LIght Rail beginning in 8 - 10 years. But, the ACOG received their data from USR and their estimated date for Commuter Rail being Up-An-Running, was 10 years if you started today.

This is why my position is "if we a having to wait, so long for a commuter rail in OKC, then let's get started on the Light Rail.

This project, OKC Metro Rail will take a long-time even if (everyone agrees w/ zero issues). 10 + years is a very probable timeline.

So I ask again - do you think maglev can be up and running faster than commuter rail?

The Heartland Flyer would have significantly higher ridership numbers if it traveled to downtown Dallas rather than downtown Fort Worth. Dallas is much bigger and its DART light rail can get you to far more points of interest much quicker....

As it is now driving Dallas is much faster and comes with far more flexibility.

Agree with this one. There really isn't much reason to not continue to Dallas Union Station on the TRE right of way unless it is a matter of refueling the locomotives and servicing facilities for the coaches..

The thing with any mass transit system is it has to go from an area of density to another area of density and OKC doesn't have a lot of those areas. You can't just run a light rail track down Classen and NW Exp and expect people to go ride it just because it is there. All riders on mass transit need to be pedestrians at both ends which means both ends need to be walkable.o

Absolutely. Norman / Moore / OKC / North OKC / Edmond. Sure, light rail will need it's own area of function.

Second Line... Yukon / Mustang / OKC / MWC / Choctaw area.

The thing with any mass transit system is it has to go from an area of density to another area of density and OKC doesn't have a lot of those areas. You can't just run a light rail track down Classen and NW Exp and expect people to go ride it just because it is there. All riders on mass transit need to be pedestrians at both ends which means both ends need to be walkable.

that is why you put park and ride stations on the end of the lines .. (and smaller lots in the middle of the lines) ...

look at the RTD-dener route maps .. .. basically ever line (light rail and commuter rail) ends with a park and ride

RTD (http://www.rtd-denver.com/FastracksMap.shtml)

So I ask again - do you think maglev can be up and running faster than commuter rail?

I think you could have a North line of 10 miles & South LIne 10 miles working simultaneously. 5th - 7th years w/ the second 10 mile segment in 7th - 10th years.

It won't happen if we don't get started.

Most of those are on the commuter rail plan. Are you suggesting it would be faster and cost less to build maglev to Mustang than it would to improve the existing rail line to Mustang and put a commuter train on it?

that is why you put park and ride stations on the end of the lines .. (and smaller lots in the middle of the lines) ...

look at the RTD-dener route maps .. .. basically ever line (light rail and commuter rail) ends with a park and ride

RTD (http://www.rtd-denver.com/FastracksMap.shtml)

It is increasingly shown that park and ride lots are only causing sprawl to spread faster. We are trying to solve the problems of sprawl, not make it spread faster. If people already choose to live 20 miles from work won't they eventually decide they can live 20 miles from the park and ride lot. All of the people on Georgia 400 north of the MARTA North Springs station did exactly that.

Now that is not to say that a mixed-use transit station couldn't also have a large parking garage for those who want to live a long ways away and drive.

If you are going to build something - build something that can generate revenue and ridership, not a parking lot in isolation.

http://www.ushsr.com/images/632_Del_Mar_TOD.jpg

Most of those are on the commuter rail plan. Are you suggesting it would be faster and cost less to build maglev to Mustang than it would to improve the existing rail line to Mustang and put a commuter train on it?

I did not say it would be Less expensive. But the timeline for commuter is at 10 + years. The timeline for the maglev line to Norman to Edmond would be somewhat equal in time.

I did not say it would be Less expensive. But the timeline for commuter is at 10 + years. The timeline for the maglev line to Norman to Edmond would be somewhat equal in time.

And what do you base that on? Plus, using the technology you quoted we would have a system with a top speed of 50 mph vs 'old' technology with a top speed of 120mph (although most likely topping out at 79mph). Would you rather go from Norman to downtown OKC at 50 mph or 79 mph?

Now that is not to say that a mixed-use transit station couldn't also have a large parking garage for those who want to live a long ways away and drive.

If you are going to build something - build something that can generate revenue and ridership, not a parking lot in isolation.

http://www.ushsr.com/images/632_Del_Mar_TOD.jpg

agree with some of your post. you would try to have as much TOD as possible ... however early on parking is very important to build ridership and to reduce traffic

And what do you base that on? Plus, using the technology you quoted we would have a system with a top speed of 50 mph vs 'old' technology with a top speed of 120mph (although most likely topping out at 79mph). Would you rather go from Norman to downtown OKC at 50 mph or 79 mph?

1. I base that on Engineering / Design / Contracting / Contruction / ( typical construction cycle). Now, I think the question you need to ask is this "what is the speed rating that this Light Rail is approved for?" This could be placed in the Highest Speed Rating ( Flat land & no curves...straight from Norman to Edmond.).
2. The technology MAGLEV produces speeds over 300 mph. We may only want to authorize speeds to 150 pmh.
3. No, Orlando is using this technology, but does not need the High Speed Rating w/ curves / etc. , thus only having a 50 mph. rating.

Why can't light rail go faster, I don't understand that. If maglev tech can really go that fast, that's friggin awesome

Rail will NEVER reduce traffic. It never has and study after study shows that it doesn't. In fact, I am not aware of a study anywhere that concludes rail removes congestion and in fact, park and ride lots increase traffic on the road leading to the train station while latent demand back-fills the empty spots on the interstate from the cars now going to the park and ride lot so we actually end up with more congestion, not less. People will always chose to voluntarily spend hours in traffic for any number of reasons.

Rail will NEVER reduce traffic. It never has and study after study shows that it doesn't. In fact, I am not aware of a study anywhere that concludes rail removes congestion and in fact, park and ride lots increase traffic on the road leading to the train station while latent demand back-fills the empty spots on the interstate from the cars now going to the park and ride lot so we actually end up with more congestion, not less. People will always chose to voluntarily spend hours in traffic for any number of reasons.

Exactly. If anything rail is going to open it up to allow to avoid having to build new lanes of interstate every so often to keep up with traffic. It also gives more opportunities to people that don't travel by car right now.

The trick to a rail network work we almost have to ensure we have a very good network from the state. Thankfully most of the lines are done and we can do that with commuter rail.

1. I base that on Engineering / Design / Contracting / Contruction / ( typical construction cycle). Now, I think the question you need to ask is this "what is the speed rating that this Light Rail is approved for?" This could be placed in the Highest Speed Rating ( Flat land & no curves...straight from Norman to Edmond.).
2. The technology MAGLEV produces speeds over 300 mph. We may only want to authorize speeds to 150 pmh.
3. No, Orlando is using this technology, but does not need the High Speed Rating w/ curves / etc. , thus only having a 50 mph. rating.

You quoted a price for a system that is only designed to go 50 mph, but only reached 17 mph in testing, and gets free right of way access. How much would a maglev that speeds along at 300 mph and has to acquire right of way cost per mile?

Also, OKC is not trying to implement light rail. I have not heard a single point in any position of authority in the entire state of Oklahoma utter the word light rail, let alone actually propose it.

Rail will NEVER reduce traffic. It never has and study after study shows that it doesn't. In fact, I am not aware of a study anywhere that concludes rail removes congestion and in fact, park and ride lots increase traffic on the road leading to the train station while latent demand back-fills the empty spots on the interstate from the cars now going to the park and ride lot so we actually end up with more congestion, not less. People will always chose to voluntarily spend hours in traffic for any number of reasons.

JTF ...you will appreciate this: 391,000 Customers ride this each day. 143 Mil. people ride each year.

High Volume | Central Japan Railway Company (http://english.jr-central.co.jp/about/highvolume.html)

Just think, those 391,000 people are not on the highways sitting in traffic. Risking their lives in the ODOT Highway Death Traps.

JTF ...you will appreciate this: 391,000 Customers ride this each day. 143 Mil. people ride each year.

High Volume | Central Japan Railway Company (http://english.jr-central.co.jp/about/highvolume.html)

Just think, those 391,000 people are not on the highways sitting in traffic. Risking their lives in the ODOT Highway Death Traps.

No one in Japan risks their life on ODOT Highways. Just sayin'.

You quoted a price for a system that is only designed to go 50 mph, but only reached 17 mph in testing, and gets free right of way access. How much would a maglev that speeds along at 300 mph and has to acquire right of way cost per mile?

Also, OKC is not trying to implement light rail. I have not heard a single point in any position of authority in the entire state of Oklahoma utter the word light rail, let alone actually propose it.

This is how "ideas" get sidelined. Ex. ACOG here two options of Rail ..1. Light Rail estimate $3 Billion , when they hear that they freeze on site. Now the next alternative is only $30 / $50 mil... Then all of sudden, that idea is the BEST idea. It is called sticker shock. This is a great tool to use when you represent AMTRAK.

No one in Japan risks their life on ODOT Highways. Just sayin'.

Hoya, you have no clue to the subject JFT and i were discussing. Please read first, then comment. Try again, because what you said was "well just not anywhere close to intelligent".

JTF ...you will appreciate this: 391,000 Customers ride this each day. 143 Mil. people ride each year.

High Volume | Central Japan Railway Company (http://english.jr-central.co.jp/about/highvolume.html)

Just think, those 391,000 people are not on the highways sitting in traffic. Risking their lives in the ODOT Highway Death Traps.

You aren't helping your case. You are among people who want rail for the most case, but you aren't being realistic.

Here is my idea for a regional rail/transit solution: Weather Spotlight | OKC Commuter Rail (http://www.weatherspotlight.com/?page_id=513)

The vast majority of that network is on existing lines - at least for the commuter rail lines (all the colored lines). Brown/Tan are BRT or street car lines. My idea is also for the full build out. I would imagine a system that doesn't include the various extensions (Mustang-Lawton, Noble-Pauls Valley, Downtown-Shawnee) would be what we need very close to launch to make it viable for people.

You aren't helping your case. You are among people who want rail for the most case, but you aren't being realistic.

Here is my idea for a regional rail/transit solution: Weather Spotlight | OKC Commuter Rail (http://www.weatherspotlight.com/?page_id=513)

The vast majority of that network is on existing lines - at least for the commuter rail lines (all the colored lines). Brown/Tan are BRT or street car lines. My idea is also for the full build out. I would imagine a system that doesn't include the various extensions (Mustang-Lawton, Noble-Pauls Valley, Downtown-Shawnee) would be what we need very close to launch to make it viable for people.
Excellent work!

You aren't helping your case. You are among people who want rail for the most case, but you aren't being realistic.

Here is my idea for a regional rail/transit solution: Weather Spotlight | OKC Commuter Rail (http://www.weatherspotlight.com/?page_id=513)

The vast majority of that network is on existing lines - at least for the commuter rail lines (all the colored lines). Brown/Tan are BRT or street car lines. My idea is also for the full build out. I would imagine a system that doesn't include the various extensions (Mustang-Lawton, Noble-Pauls Valley, Downtown-Shawnee) would be what we need very close to launch to make it viable for people.

Venture... JTF had said that ALL studies show that congestion / traffic will Never lessen because of rail. I demonstrated how a country ( Japan ) uses rail. Now, this is not a study, but a company that makes billions every year on ridership.

Yes, i am very realistic. I see that "gap" that exists from today, to tomorrow. But I also know, that if start on this path of "commuter rail", just because someone says "we already have a few pieces of the puzzle in place", that doesn't mean we should put all our eggs in that basket.

This reminds me of Torea but with a constantly blowing whistle (train horn)...

This reminds me of Torea but with a constantly blowing whistle (train horn)...

OK, glad you could make it. Maybe you could shed some light on the ACOG direction? ....anything?.....

This is a great tool to use when you represent AMTRAK.

What in the world does Amtrak have to do with future Okc metro commuter rail? Answer nothing

What in the world does Amtrak have to do with future Okc metro commuter rail? Answer nothing

Better yet, what does Amtrak have to do with MAGLEV or Japan?

I have to admit, this whole Amtrak reference has me confused. Other than the Heartland Flyer to Ft Worth and a possible extension to Wichita or maybe Tulsa, I don't know how Amtrak factors in to OKC rail. Also, did I get accused of working for Amtrak?

Maybe because Amtrak ran a commuter line or two around Chicago years ago? Amtrak was the operator for VRE until Veolia won the contract. I don't understand it otherwise.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mr3esEOaVQE

You aren't helping your case. You are among people who want rail for the most case, but you aren't being realistic.

Here is my idea for a regional rail/transit solution: Weather Spotlight | OKC Commuter Rail (http://www.weatherspotlight.com/?page_id=513)

The vast majority of that network is on existing lines - at least for the commuter rail lines (all the colored lines). Brown/Tan are BRT or street car lines. My idea is also for the full build out. I would imagine a system that doesn't include the various extensions (Mustang-Lawton, Noble-Pauls Valley, Downtown-Shawnee) would be what we need very close to launch to make it viable for people.

Combining that with Cuatro's expanded streetcar network and modern bus service would put OKC near the top of the heap for transit in cities our size.

Combining that with Cuatro's expanded streetcar network and modern bus service would put OKC near the top of the heap for transit in cities our size.

Very much so. If I get board one day I might play around and make some fake schedules to figure out fleet size and a rough estimate on costs to build out. Oh I need a winter storm soon...

I did not say it would be Less expensive. But the timeline for commuter is at 10 + years. The timeline for the maglev line to Norman to Edmond would be somewhat equal in time.

Can it interact with normal rail? I doubt the rail companies that own the track will want to give up there existing lines, may not be thrilled about selling land near the line with the chance inperpetuity to have a parallel track they can not use and rule out expansion if demand picks up and if it can not switching downtown will be a nightmare.

The 10+ in this case is more political and budgetary. If we had the political will, were flush enough with cash and none of the railroads or government agencies had any objection you could probably have a line up less than a year, mostly delayed by getting the paperwork approved. Granted the more amenities at the stops probably would add some time, but when the Heartland Flyer started some only had a temporary platform that looked like you could put up in less than a week.

I have to admit, this whole Amtrak reference has me confused. Other than the Heartland Flyer to Ft Worth and a possible extension to Wichita or maybe Tulsa, I don't know how Amtrak factors in to OKC rail. Also, did I get accused of working for Amtrak?

JTF...no I'm not saying you work for AMTRAK. Just using YOU in the third person. When I speak of AMTRAK, I am referring to the "HEAVY DIESEL ENGINE" group we have today, that want to keep us in the dark ages, and keep things the same, ex. ( BNSF)

Can it interact with normal rail? I doubt the rail companies that own the track will want to give up there existing lines, may not be thrilled about selling land near the line with the chance inperpetuity to have a parallel track they can not use and rule out expansion if demand picks up and if it can not switching downtown will be a nightmare.

The 10+ in this case is more political and budgetary. If we had the political will, were flush enough with cash and none of the railroads or government agencies had any objection you could probably have a line up less than a year, mostly delayed by getting the paperwork approved. Granted the more amenities at the stops probably would add some time, but when the Heartland Flyer started some only had a temporary platform that looked like you could put up in less than a week.

Yes, the 10+ years is the timeline for this. When you include railroads into the dicussion, it gets delayed and pushed way back. Their not real warm when it comes to change.

When you build w/ LIght Rail , it provides far more flexiblity in location(s) ( use existing ODOT Highway R.O.W. ). In OKC's location, we have a built in advantage that other may not be able to take advantage of. We already have a somewhat ( straight line from Norman to OKC. OKC to Edmond. ) and the area is realatively flat.

We don't have to go over large hills / winding roads / ...or a city that has been here since 1785 ( like a Boston or Philadelphia) and has a lot a special considerations in layout. This drives the cost up a great deal. Our layout is clean. Design is simple. 95% of the runs are straight. This will make our ( unit cost per mile, much less).

JTF...no I'm not saying you work for AMTRAK. Just using YOU in the third person. When I speak of AMTRAK, I am referring to the "HEAVY DIESEL ENGINE" group we have today, that want to keep us in the dark ages, and keep things the same, ex. ( BNSF)

Can you provide a picture of what you mean by 'Heavy Diesel Engine' because I picture this when you say that. This is something a freight railroad would use.

http://photos.wikimapia.org/p/00/00/92/46/57_big.jpg

But most new non-electric commuter rail systems use these MPXpress Commuter Locomotives made by MotivePower.

http://static.pwrs.ca/product_images/159270_1.jpg

Yes, they both burn diesel but comparing them is like comparing a dump truck to a BMW 535d.

Can you provide a picture of what you mean by 'Heavy Diesel Engine' because I picture this when you say that. This is something a freight railroad would use.

http://photos.wikimapia.org/p/00/00/92/46/57_big.jpg

But most new non-electric commuter rail systems use these MPXpress Commuter Locomotives made by MotivePower.

http://static.pwrs.ca/product_images/159270_1.jpg

Yes, they both burn diesel but comparing them is like comparing a dump truck to a BMW 535d.

chuggggga..... chugggggga....chuggggga..... I don't see any resemblance to any BMW. Yes, that is what I am referring to. Large / Heavy / Diesel..this one just has a "modern" paint job to look "quicker".

Can you provide a picture of what you mean by 'Heavy Diesel Engine' because I picture this when you say that. This is something a freight railroad would use.

http://photos.wikimapia.org/p/00/00/92/46/57_big.jpg

But most new non-electric commuter rail systems use these MPXpress Commuter Locomotives made by MotivePower.

http://static.pwrs.ca/product_images/159270_1.jpg

Yes, they both burn diesel but comparing them is like comparing a dump truck to a BMW 535d.

It would be cool it we could get something like this and run it on LNG or a CNG diesel Hybrid. I know we experimented with something like that on the heartland flyer, never heard how that turned out.

I don't think there is any way we will even see CNG on passenger trains. Union Pacific is testing CNG on freight trains but the reality is - CNG can go boom in a crash and diesel doesn't.

n/m

It would be cool it we could get something like this and run it on LNG or a CNG diesel Hybrid. I know we experimented with something like that on the heartland flyer, never heard how that turned out.

The Heartland Flyer experiment was a biodiesel blend (80/20).

Amtrak trials first cow-powered train | Environment | theguardian.com (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2010/apr/26/amtrak-cow-train-biodiesel)

http://www.amtrak.com/ccurl/3/444/ATK-11-140%20Heartland%20Flyer%20biodiesel%20results%20re leased.pdf

http://www.technewsdaily.com/images/i/000/000/427/iFF/beef-amtrak-100506-02.jpg?1348086743

For the love of Pete - I have to stop reading stuff like this. Having to listen to people this uniformed is one reason I got out of City Planning.