# Rails At Denver



## WhoozOn1st (Sep 5, 2008)

This is a pictorial report, with explanatory captions on the majority of pics.

The first few frames were taken on 8-29-08 while killing time before moving to a new hotel in Denver.

Most of the rest of the shots are of the Denver light rail system at two stations: I-25/Broadway, and 10th & Osage, with a few interesting surprises (to me) for good measure; taken 8-31-08.

"Accidental Jackpot" is the topic subtitle because I was just joyriding on Sunday afternoon, and had no clue I was stumbling into a hotbed of light rail action. This ignorance is explained in some of the captions.

It's fair to say that I went hog wild on the photography, and perhaps the sheer quantity renders this report kinda over the top. But oh man, what a fun afternoon!

Rails At Denver

For a light rail system map, see the Denver RTD site: Denver RTD

NEXT (new topic): California Zephyr Blues.


----------



## the_traveler (Sep 5, 2008)

Great report and pictures! Thanks for sharing!



> ... as a practicing idiot ...


Just be sure you have you *ANR* card! :lol:


----------



## WhoozOn1st (Sep 5, 2008)

the_traveler said:


> Just be sure you have you *ANR* card! :lol:


What's ANR? Aerodynamic Noise Reduction?? I have no idea.


----------



## the_traveler (Sep 6, 2008)

*A*mtrak *N*erd *R*ewards!  (As per the counting miles thread!)


----------



## WhoozOn1st (Sep 6, 2008)

the_traveler said:


> *A*mtrak *N*erd *R*ewards!  (As per the counting miles thread!)


Guess I make a lousy foamer.

EDIT: Stay tuned for some fairly fun foaming in the upcoming Coast Starlight report, following California Zephyr Blues.


----------



## the_traveler (Sep 6, 2008)

WhoozOn1st said:


> the_traveler said:
> 
> 
> > *A*mtrak *N*erd *R*ewards!  (As per the counting miles thread!)
> ...


That qualifies you for *ANR+++++++*! :lol:


----------



## sky12065 (Sep 7, 2008)

WhoozOn1st said:


> the_traveler said:
> 
> 
> > Just be sure you have you *ANR* card! :lol:
> ...


Traveler, for his excellent story telling and photography I think WhoozOn1st should get the *ANR GOLD CARD*!


----------



## WhoozOn1st (Sep 7, 2008)

sky12065 said:


> for his excellent story telling and photography I think WhoozOn1st should get the *ANR GOLD CARD*!


Very kind words, and thank you, but I'm holding out for the platinum.


----------



## GG-1 (Sep 7, 2008)

WhoozOn1st said:


> sky12065 said:
> 
> 
> > for his excellent story telling and photography I think WhoozOn1st should get the *ANR GOLD CARD*!
> ...


How about a Pink one 

Aloha


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (Sep 8, 2008)

I guess the telegraph and Pullman labels inside the station are historical? (I seem to recall that telegraph service went away several years ago. Though I guess you can still catch a train with Pullman-built cars at that station.)

I donno if we can let you get away with claiming to have gone hog wild with the photography. You don't seem to have gotten us a complete set of pictures of all the routes that served Denver Union Station that were listed in the light rail tunnel. Those photographs are totally good enough to get the names of the routes and the years.

I like the buildings and water tower behind the flyover and approach too, and you framed them nicely. The glass block in the waiting area is also nice.

I'm very confused by that photograph of one train waiting for another to cross the diamond onto the flyover. Isn't the whole point of flyovers to prevent that type of conflict?

Why do they expect people to push a button on the outside to open the doors?

At one station (the one by the ski train equipment?) it looks like one of the light rail tracks uses wood ties and the other has concrete and no ties (concrete slab?). Why the inconsistency?

Are the light rail cars articulated? It seems like there's some sort of split at the middle of each of the two cars that make up the typical train.

The Denver light rail cars sort of remind me of MBTA Green Line cars, but it looks like they're longer and wider and have an extra set of doors on each side.

How does the wheelchair ramp work? It looks like it doesn't meet the height of the bottom of the doors.


----------



## WhoozOn1st (Sep 8, 2008)

GG-1 said:


> How about a Pink one  Aloha


That better be a reference to my leftist politics, and nothing else. HAHA!!

I'll deal with Weber tomorrow.


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (Sep 13, 2008)

WhoozOn1st said:


> tomorrow.


promises, promises, promises...


----------



## WhoozOn1st (Sep 27, 2008)

Joel N. Weber II said:


> WhoozOn1st said:
> 
> 
> > tomorrow.
> ...


Sorry, Dude. Due to a lethal combination of busyness, laziness, and interim events, I neglected to address the issues you raised. I'll give it a belated go, with apologies for being so slow.

On the flyover confusion, my guess (no expert) is that a number of considerations probably made the diamond (photo 32 in Rails At Denver) a more practical option for a merge/diverge of several lines so close to the station, the design of which in turn may have been driven by land availibility.

Usually all doors open, but if they don't, the pushbutton on the outside to open them is a sort of backup. There are pushbuttons inside as well, and this feature is not uncommon in light rail equipment.

At 10th & Osage, the concrete right of way (photo 90) is so that people can easily get across to the center platform. I see this as a double-edged sword: easy access, but safety hazard of people in a hurry (or just stupid) crossing in front of an arriving train. Situation is similar at I-25/Broadway (photo 42). With three tracks, and three platforms, concrete ROW between the 1st and 2nd, and 2nd and 3rd, platforms, but exposed roadbed beyond the third.

Yes, cars are articulated, as is most light rail equipment nowadays. Three trucks: one at each end, and one at the hinge point.

As for the handicapped ramps (photo 31), a mechanism extends a loading platform from the floor level of the light rail car to the ramp for RO-RO (roll on, roll off) boarding and egress.


----------



## caravanman (Sep 27, 2008)

Thanks for the pics. It was nice to see the historic train routes on the sign boards.. I didn't notice them on my visit, guess I was too conserned about rejoining the Zephyr!

I am interested in your "panoramic" shots, is this a setting on your camera, or will picasa create panoramic pics?

I was under the impression that I was being stalked by a ghostly black blob on my last photo trip.. but it turns out that I need a new camera..

Any recomendations for a varsatile mid price compact digital camera?

Ed B)


----------



## WhoozOn1st (Sep 27, 2008)

caravanman said:


> I am interested in your "panoramic" shots, is this a setting on your camera, or will picasa create panoramic pics?I was under the impression that I was being stalked by a ghostly black blob on my last photo trip.. but it turns out that I need a new camera..
> 
> Any recomendations for a varsatile mid price compact digital camera?
> 
> Ed B)


Ed, I suspect that the shots you refer to as "panoramic" are merely the result of my cropping. Wide but not tall, right? No setting on the camera, or in Picasa; just wide angle, then in editing eliminate extraneous stuff to zero in on the subject.

I'm not really a techno guy when it comes to cameras, though I certainly appreciate the fine results techno guys get with high octane hardware. I'm using a 2004 vintage Kodak DX6490, which I selected primarily for ease of use (EDIT: Kodak EasyShare software is a breeze, too.) and its 10X optical zoom (most mid-price digitals offered only 3X optical zoom at the time). Shooting from a moving train, as I often do, doesn't allow time for fiddling with niceties, and even in automatic mode I've been known to curse a serious blue streak over shots missed or bungled. Editing is even worse: "Well dash my wig and whiskers, I thought I had that one!!" Forum decorum prevents my use of an accurate quote, but you get the idea.

The only recommendation I can really make is that you select a camera you'll be comfortable with. All the bells and whistles mean nothing if you're not at ease using them. To this end, if you carefully consider exactly how you'll be using the camera the choice becomes fairly easy when you survey the market.

I think you'll have fun in the search, and probably learn a few things along the way.


----------



## MrFSS (Sep 27, 2008)

caravanman said:


> Thanks for the pics. It was nice to see the historic train routes on the sign boards.. I didn't notice them on my visit, guess I was too concerned about rejoining the Zephyr! I am interested in your "panoramic" shots, is this a setting on your camera, or will picasa create panoramic pics?
> 
> I was under the impression that I was being stalked by a ghostly black blob on my last photo trip.. but it turns out that I need a new camera..
> 
> ...


Ed - my suggestion is this for whatever you buy. Get one where you can set the shutter speed. I have learned that if you can increase the shutter to at least 1/250 of a second that it will eliminate a lot of the blur. I have one that when I set the shutter speed it automatically adjusts for the light at that particular shutter speed. Just my 2-cents worth!


----------



## GG-1 (Sep 27, 2008)

WhoozOn1st said:


> caravanman said:
> 
> 
> > Any recomendations for a varsatile mid price compact digital camera?
> ...


Aloha

As Patrick (Whooz) will soon see I went beyond the Basics, but what he just said above is the most important part of choosing a camera. Specs and recommendations are important, but nothing is better than handling and trying a camera. You will never take good pictures if you are uncomfortable with the camera, still or video, digital or film, is the same while handling the camera.

Try it before you buy.


----------



## MrFSS (Sep 27, 2008)

GG-1 said:


> Try it before you buy.


With that in mind, *HERE* is an excellent place to customize your search. Fill in the blanks and it will give you a list of cameras that meet your criteria.


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (Oct 3, 2008)

caravanman said:


> Any recomendations for a varsatile mid price compact digital camera?


I think the single most important feature for a camera to have is that it be small enough and light enough for you to be able to easily take it with you everywhere you're going to want to take pictures. A camera that will work correctly in 10% more photographic situations if you happen to have it with you that is so big and heavy that you only have it with you for 5% of the opportunities you have to take pictures is not actually going to increase the total number of good photographs you get. You need to figure out what that take everywhere size really means for you; I'm happy enough with a Canon camera that's big enough to have two AA batteries inside it (plus a watch battery to maintain the time settings while the AA batteries are replaced), but I'm sure there are people who would think that camera is too big to take everywhere.

You might also think about whether exposure to precipitation is going to be an issue. My camera lives in a pouch on my belt which provides some protection, and in the winter that pouch tends to be covered by my coat. That's been adequate to keep the camera functioning for the whole time I've had it (about 15 months), even though it doesn't advertise any water resistance features. But there are occasional rainy days when I've wanted to be able to take pictures and haven't; I did come across a fairly cheap waterproof disposable camera on Amazon (I think made by Fuji) that seemed to get good reviews a while back, and perhaps someday I'll buy one of those and try it out.

I think the particular camera I got goes a bit wider on the wide angle end of the zoom range than most, and I think that has been a nice feature to have. I still haven't figured out how to get good images showing the interior of a Viewliner roomette with what wide angle range I do have, though.

The other downside of zoom lenses (which are probably pretty much unavoidable on modern compact digital cameras) is that the aperture doesn't open as far as the aperture on a prime lens, which causes them to lose light, which then has to be compensated for with slower shutter speeds.


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (Oct 3, 2008)

MrFSS said:


> Ed - my suggestion is this for whatever you buy. Get one where you can set the shutter speed. I have learned that if you can increase the shutter to at least 1/250 of a second that it will eliminate a lot of the blur. I have one that when I set the shutter speed it automatically adjusts for the light at that particular shutter speed. Just my 2-cents worth!


At least with the camera I have, a lot of photographic situations don't have anywhere near enough light to work decently at 1/250 sec, unfortunately.

Taking pictures of subjects that are relatively far away from a moving train will probably also work better than taking photographs of things right next to a moving train.


----------

