# Southern Maryland Light Rail



## jis (May 26, 2022)

State funds to match federal funds for starting design work on the Southern Maryland Light Rail project have been released









Light rail is planned for southern Maryland - Railway Track and Structures


Light rail is planned for southern Maryland as officials celebrate first $5 million of federal funding for the project that will feature 13 stops.




www.rtands.com


----------



## joelkfla (May 26, 2022)

jis said:


> State funds to match federal funds for starting design work on the Southern Maryland Light Rail project have been released
> 
> 
> 
> ...


"...once light-rail trains start running alongside Rte. 301 they would share tracks with CSX."

Is that possible? Did he mean to say share ROW? (Unless they're planning one of these weird diesel-powered LRV's.)


----------



## jis (May 26, 2022)

Here's another article:









Light rail to Southern Maryland? That ‘choo-choo train will be rolling soon’ - WTOP News


Southern Maryland is no longer the sleepy, sparsely populated region it used to be, and that’s why local, state and federal lawmakers gathered in La Plata to tout millions to get the future Southern Maryland Rapid Transit Project on track and moving.




wtop.com





I wonder if there would be any freight traffic left on the Pope's Creek Branch once the power station is decommissioned. Its primary traffic has been coal for the power plant. I also wonder whether "run along" means on a track parallel to the CSX track on the same ROW or something else.

The choice of mode - BRT vs. LRT has apparently been quite a nosebleemdwith LRT holding sway at present. Here is a quick review of what went on...









Light rail project needs public support, residents told at meeting


The political will for a light rail line serving Southern Maryland through Charles County is in place, and what’s needed now is for the public to come out in strong




www.somdnews.com


----------



## Metra Electric Rider (May 26, 2022)

LRT can share track and I seem to have a vague, very vague, recollection of this being involved here, but I can't remember where I heard that.


----------



## blueman271 (May 26, 2022)

I think the River Line and whatever Conrail is called these days share track in NJ.


----------



## Deni (May 26, 2022)

blueman271 said:


> I think the River Line and whatever Conrail is called these days share track in NJ.


Yeah, but if I remember correctly it is scheduled so that the light rail ends its day (I think earlier than it probably should) and the freight only runs at night. But I could be remembering that wrong. I think there were also some cumbersome standards for the light rail cars because of running on a freight line.


----------



## MikefromCrete (May 26, 2022)

It's called temporal separation. Light rail runs during a designated time, freight runs at its designated time. Never at the same time.


----------



## joelkfla (May 26, 2022)

blueman271 said:


> I think the River Line and whatever Conrail is called these days share track in NJ.


That's diesel-powered.


----------



## Deni (May 27, 2022)

MikefromCrete said:


> It's called temporal separation. Light rail runs during a designated time, freight runs at its designated time. Never at the same time.


Temporal separation sounds like a time-space continuum problem in Star Trek.


----------



## cirdan (May 27, 2022)

Metra Electric Rider said:


> LRT can share track and I seem to have a vague, very vague, recollection of this being involved here, but I can't remember where I heard that.



Doesn't this happen in San Diego for example, where there are freight customers who are served by switching cars via the (electrified) LRT tracks?

Of course back in the day if you look at the history of the Pacific Electric for example, it was quite a common thing. 

Maybe it's a stretch to refer to the South Shore Line as LRT, but that line still sees quite a lot of freight.


----------



## MARC Rider (May 27, 2022)

Metra Electric Rider said:


> LRT can share track and I seem to have a vague, very vague, recollection of this being involved here, but I can't remember where I heard that.


The Baltimore Northern Central light rail line used to share track with a Conrail branch. I believe the freight trains only ran late at night when there was no light rail service.


----------



## Mystic River Dragon (May 27, 2022)

Deni said:


> Yeah, but if I remember correctly it is scheduled so that the light rail ends its day (I think earlier than it probably should) and the freight only runs at night.



Some of us who live on the RiverLine route think it runs too late at night!

But the first train in each direction in the morning is later than ideal for early commuters.

A tiny branch line comes off the main line and goes through my town. I can hear a small freight train going back and forth to a cement factory a few miles away.

This is always around 2:00 or 3:00 in the morning, so I have never seen it, but I can hear the horn.


----------



## joelkfla (May 27, 2022)

I just wonder whether building catenary high enough to allow for double-stack intermodals would require a pantograph that might be difficult for an LRV to handle.


----------



## Mystic River Dragon (May 27, 2022)

joelkfla said:


> I just wonder whether building catenary high enough to allow for double-stack intermodals would require a pantograph that might be difficult for an LRV to handle.



When I’ve taken the RiverLine, I’ve seen a few freight trains on sidings—but always very short and no double-stacks.

So perhaps there were some rules from the beginning about size and height limits?


----------



## jis (May 27, 2022)

joelkfla said:


> I just wonder whether building catenary high enough to allow for double-stack intermodals would require a pantograph that might be difficult for an LRV to handle.


The standard height of catenary on the NEC is already high enough for operating double stacks and autoracks (Plates H and K) under them. But there is an enduring railfan myth that this somehow is a problem. 

So one more time, it is not a problem it is already done every day on the NEC between Wilmington and Baltimore. 

LRV pantographs are actually simpler than high speed pantographs and there is absolutely no problem with catenary high enough for Plate H and Plate K..

Incidentally, the catenary on the NEC is not even the highest catenary used in the world. There are lines with 24-25' high catenary and more are being built in some places to allow for higher vertical loading gauges for freight.


----------



## railiner (May 27, 2022)

MikefromCrete said:


> It's called temporal separation. Light rail runs during a designated time, freight runs at its designated time. Never at the same time.


The ultimate “temporal separation”?






Whittier Tunnel, Transportation & Public Facilities, State of Alaska







dot.alaska.gov


----------



## Ziv (May 27, 2022)

jis said:


> State funds to match federal funds for starting design work on the Southern Maryland Light Rail project have been released
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I live in southern Anne Arundel County and when I saw this I was surprised. I haven't heard one word about it. Then I saw that it was going to run down 5 to 301... I bet LaPlata is hoping to get an extension down the road.
My little burg of Deale is too sparsely populated (and way out there just East of Rte 2) to deserve light rail but I was hoping for a minute there!
I am kind of surprised that there isn't a push to reconnect DC, Annapolis and Baltimore with light rail. But I think the southern end (are the tracks going north from Linthicum what is left of the old B&A line?) of the Baltimore and Annapolis rails were pulled up in the mid 80's but I am not sure of that. I believe that is when the RR bridge over the Severn was condemned.


----------



## jis (May 27, 2022)

Ziv said:


> I live in southern Anne Arundel County and when I saw this I was surprised. I haven't heard one word about it. Then I saw that it was going to run down 5 to 301... I bet LaPlata is hoping to get an extension down the road.
> My little burg of Deale is too sparsely populated (and way out there just East of Rte 2) to deserve light rail but I was hoping for a minute there!
> I am kind of surprised that there isn't a push to reconnect DC, Annapolis and Baltimore with light rail. But I think the southern end (are the tracks going north from Linthicum what is left of the old B&A line?) of the Baltimore and Annapolis rails were pulled up in the mid 80's but I am not sure of that. I believe that is when the RR bridge over the Severn was condemned.


Frankly, I was a little surprised when I came across it too. I had no idea that all this was going on in Southern Maryland.


----------



## Ryan (May 27, 2022)

jis said:


> I wonder if there would be any freight traffic left on the Pope's Creek Branch once the power station is decommissioned. Its primary traffic has been coal for the power plant.


Basically no, and Morgantown's shutting down this year. Pope's Creek will be long dead before light rail ever comes to fruition.


----------



## west point (May 27, 2022)

I would think the only problem of higher CAT is the cross level. Might take shorter intervals for surfacing the track than otherwise needed. Maybe only have some test equipment that would spot locations that a surface machine could go from locations to locations.


----------



## George Harris (May 28, 2022)

For a map:
https://ggwash.org/images/made/images/posts/_resized/image1_1_1020_1320_90.jpeg
Would seem logical to extend the WMATA line to Andrews AFB and make the transition from Metro to light rail there. Would seem like a good idea to extend the WMATA line to Andrews with or without the Southern Maryland Light Rail.

As to wire height: Other than when involving the railroad, the wire should be 16 feet above the track, or thereabouts. Where on the railroad, the wire should be 23 feet above the track or thereabouts. 

The whole issue of wire height and offsets can be solved in the pantograph and arms supporting it. The arms supporting the pantograph contact bar would need to be longer in order to reach 7 feet higher. Can be done. The contact bar itself should probably be longer as well with the additional length based on the assumed angle of sway of the car plus deviation in cross level in the track. Again, no biggie. Calculate out what is needed and do it. The whole arrangement will be somewhat heavier, hence need stouter springs. again, can be done. 

Consideration needs to be made for required offset from the railroad to platforms. Again, this has been done elsewhere.

Without reading the whole report (I don't hate myself that much), one question is how much street running, if any. This can have an effect on wheel wear and even the preferred wheel profile. As close to none, the better. 

The "temporal" or in less fancy words limitations on operating times of the railroad and transit so as to maintain time separation can easily be handled. Assuming this is a one train or so a day branch the easiest is to have the freight outside the normal transit times with the transit system defining the times. If there is a need to run a train during the transit operating time, then this could probably be done by providing a gap in transit car times for the trains with the train setting there waiting its turn, not with a "hey we are going to have a train through here sometime or other" from the railroad. It is usually better that the transit system own the railroad. This piece of track should be upgraded for comfort of the transit passengers, but with tie spacing and rail, and structures if any, based on freight railroad axle loadings, which would probably mean closer tie spacing and possibly heavier rail that the rest of the transit system. 

Track centers: If there will be two tracks on the railroad portion, track centers should be 20 feet, possibly 22 feet to provide required railroad clearance with poles between the tracks. If it is decided to use outside poles, meaning one on each side of the section, then centers can be 14 to 16 feet.

There are no insurmountable problems or even significant difficulties with this project when it comes to light rail and freight on the same track.


----------

