# Looks like Washington Metro wants to cut its way to...?



## MARC Rider (Nov 1, 2016)

Fare increases, elimination of bus lines, reduced metrorail service...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/dr-gridlock/wp/2016/10/30/metro-general-manager-paul-wiedefelds-budget-includes-fare-increases-service-reductions/

Seems to imply that we don't need a good level of serves because of declining ridership. But ridership will continue to decline if fares go up and service decreases.

Obviously, this requires a political solution, that is more funding from Virginia and Maryland. I wonder if EPA and DOT would put some pressure on the region, as cutting Metro service would, it seems to me, interfere with the region's air quality goals under transportation conformity parts of the Clean Air Act.

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/air_quality/conformity/

Here's a summary of why Metro staff thinks they need shorter hours of system operation:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/dr-gridlock/wp/2016/10/31/metro-makes-case-for-more-track-work-hours/

I can't evaluate the technical merits of their arguments, but there are numerous rail transit systems around the world that operate around the clock. How are they able to do it and the Washington Metro can't?


----------



## Bob Dylan (Nov 1, 2016)

The main reason Metro can't operate correctly and is in such Trouble is made up of two parts, Corruption and Incompetence compounded by a combination of Political Interference and Neglect!

I'm Shocked! Shocked! that this doesn't also apply to Amtrak, No wait---


----------



## OBS (Nov 1, 2016)

TOOOO Funny!!!


----------



## Thirdrail7 (Feb 25, 2019)

MARC Rider said:


> Here's a summary of why Metro staff thinks they need shorter hours of system operation:
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/dr-gridlock/wp/2016/10/31/metro-makes-case-for-more-track-work-hours/
> 
> I can't evaluate the technical merits of their arguments, but there are numerous rail transit systems around the world that operate around the clock. How are they able to do it and the Washington Metro can't?


Well, whether or not you agree with Metro's positions (which I do), the FTA is not too keen on restoring the late night hours on the Metro. Here is their threat:

FTA threatens to withhold $1.6B from region, including Purple Line funding, if Metro restores late-night service

https://www.washingtonpost.com/transportation/2019/02/14/fta-threatens-withhold-b-region-including-purple-line-funding-if-metro-restores-late-night-service/?noredirect=on&amp;utm_term=.3e96f00e67a4



> “We’re staring down the barrel of a calamity for the system,” Metro board member David Horner said, briefing the panel on a memo in which the FTA spelled out the potential consequences of a reversion to the previous hours.
> 
> The FTA said its federal funding for the region hinges on an approval process for the Metrorail Safety Commission, which must be federally certified by April 15. Metro’s potential decision to revert to its old hours could hobble that process, FTA said, because its staff would need to review its budget allotments to Metro to ensure they properly align with the transit agency’s safety needs under the new hours. FTA would also need to revisit some of Metro’s previously closed corrective actions “if they were closed based on WMATA’s performance under the current operating hours,” the FTA said.
> 
> “Although, [Metro’s] Board of Directors sets Metrorail’s service hours, this is an important safety matter,” an FTA spokesman said in an email, stressing as much by underlining the final six words in the text. “The FTA’s approval of [Metro’s] proposed use of Federal funding for its Fiscal Year 2020 budget would also be delayed to ensure that funds will be used to address safety needs that may arise based on the changes in service hours."


----------



## LookingGlassTie (Feb 25, 2019)

I'm all for passenger/rider safety, but I don't fully understand why the FTA is taking such a hard line on this.   

I agree, Metro is in a quandary; either alienate its rider base or the FTA (most likely both).   But does it have to be that way?


----------



## daybeers (Feb 26, 2019)

The FTA is _way_ out of line here in my opinion. There's no way, at least I hope, that the FTA can legally withhold funding for an entirely separate Maryland state project because the Washington Metro wants to extend its hours, and it's not happy about it.


----------



## jis (Feb 26, 2019)

daybeers said:


> The FTA is _way_ out of line here in my opinion. There's no way, at least I hope, that the FTA can legally withhold funding for an entirely separate Maryland state project because the Washington Metro wants to extend its hours, and it's not happy about it.


Is being "legal" still important for the current administration :lol: ?


----------



## John Bredin (Feb 26, 2019)

It sounds to me that FTA is, at least partially, providing political cover for Metro's own stance vs. its board & local politicians. Metro can't say "no" to its own board, but it can point to the FTA and say its hands are tied.  

While I can understand the politicians wanting the restoration of late-night service, it sounds to my (layman's, admittedly) ears that running trains in those hours throws away valuable repair windows. Which are even more valuable when your equipment is in such a bad state of repair as Metro's is.  :blink:  The CTA can run 24 hour service on its Red and Blue Lines, but its equipment isn't failing like Metro's is. (I'm purposely avoiding using NYCTA as an example).

The board and politicians insisting on restoring late-night service without regard for safety reminds me a little of the general in this derailment. Modane 1917.


----------



## LookingGlassTie (Feb 27, 2019)

John Bredin said:


> It sounds to me that FTA is, at least partially, providing political cover for Metro's own stance vs. its board & local politicians. Metro can't say "no" to its own board, but it can point to the FTA and say its hands are tied.
> 
> While I can understand the politicians wanting the restoration of late-night service, it sounds to my (layman's, admittedly) ears that running trains in those hours throws away valuable repair windows. Which are even more valuable when your equipment is in such a bad state of repair as Metro's is.  :blink:  The CTA can run 24 hour service on its Red and Blue Lines, but its equipment isn't failing like Metro's is. (I'm purposely avoiding using NYCTA as an example).
> 
> The board and politicians insisting on restoring late-night service without regard for safety reminds me a little of the general in this derailment. Modane 1917.


Hmmm that sheds a little more light on the situation.


----------



## Anderson (Mar 1, 2019)

The real issue here, frankly, is that there's no practical "middle option" of (for example) limited-but-present late-night service (say, every 15 minutes) that can mostly use one track while the other track is worked on (or, alternatively, being able to route people around out-of-service track segments).  I understand why that's generally not practical, but it is still an issue and it does affect the utility of the system.


----------



## John Bredin (Mar 1, 2019)

Anderson said:


> The real issue here, frankly, is that there's no practical "middle option" of (for example) limited-but-present late-night service (say, every 15 minutes) that can mostly use one track while the other track is worked on (or, alternatively, being able to route people around out-of-service track segments).  I understand why that's generally not practical, but it is still an issue and it does affect the utility of the system.


I don't know if single-tracking is practical on Metro, but the CTA single-tracks for track work on the 24-hour Blue and Red lines.


----------



## Thirdrail7 (Mar 1, 2019)

Anderson said:


> The real issue here, frankly, is that there's no practical "middle option" of (for example) limited-but-present late-night service (say, every 15 minutes) that can mostly use one track while the other track is worked on (or, alternatively, being able to route people around out-of-service track segments).  I understand why that's generally not practical, but it is still an issue and it does affect the utility of the system.


The problem is foul time. Just because one track is out of service, you often need to encroach into the foul of a nearby track.  Now, you have to wait for trains to clear the remaining track. You constantly interrupt your work window.


----------

