Can Amtrak Directly Serve San Francisco?

[cpotisch]

The most efficient way to run a subway line is to run it as a separate independent railroad with its own rolling stock and own maintenance shops. A lot of new lines are built that way these days.

Interestingly, that's exactly how the NYC Subway rolls.

 

[jis]

Interestingly, that's exactly how the NYC Subway rolls.

Actually, many of the newer systems treat each line as a separate railroad. Even the London Underground Tube Lines operate more or less that way. That is somewhat different from NYCTA.

 

[cpotisch]

Interestingly, that's exactly how the NYC Subway rolls.

Actually, many of the newer systems treat each line as a separate railroad. Even the London Underground Tube Lines operate more or less that way. That is somewhat different from NYCTA.

Oh, I see. Misread "subway line" as "subway system".

I am surprised that that is most efficient, though. Why not have a shared equipment pool for all the lines (assuming they're compatible), such that if a consist goes out of order and they need to swap it out, they don't need to find cars from that specific pool?

 

[jis]

I see. I misread "subway line" as "subway system". I am surprised that that is most efficient, though. Why not have a shared equipment pool for all the lines (assuming the equipment is compatible), such that if a consist goes out of order and they need to swap it out, they don't need to find cars from that specific pool?

It takes too much bureaucracy which costs too much money and creates a more interdependent and tightly coupled system of resource allocation, which is exponentially harder to manage. It is much easier to manage a large number of small to medium loosely coupled system than a giant tightly coupled system. This has been the foundational principle of the internet for example, and has considerable evidence that supports it.

 

[cirdan]

The most efficient way to run a subway line is to run it as a separate independent railroad with its own rolling stock and own maintenance shops. A lot of new lines are built that way these days.



In an ideal world and with unlimited cash and unlimited political support, I agree. But beggars can't always be chosers.

 

[cirdan]

Oh, I see. Misread "subway line" as "subway system".

I am surprised that that is most efficient, though. Why not have a shared equipment pool for all the lines (assuming they're compatible), such that if a consist goes out of order and they need to swap it out, they don't need to find cars from that specific pool?

I think actually they do.

Maybe the passenger trains are alloctaed to a given line for a longer period just because it is easier that way, especially if every line has a separate storgae and (light) maintenance yard. Different lines may also have different demand profiles in terms of train lengths and maybe also comfort (on a long line that meaners out into the deep suburbs it may make sense to have a higher percentage of seated accomodation than on a short line handling heavy crush loads, maybe also differing top speeds). There may also be incompatibilities that have historical reasons, or changes get rolled out on a line by line basis over several decades as the rolling stock reaches its life span.

But on the other hand, things like engineering trains are typically too costly for every ine to keep its own set and these will thus be shared between lines. Or are maybe even owned by an outside contractor and brought in on demand.

 

[cpotisch]

I think actually they do.

I don't think so. It's not rare to see the "wrong" kind of car on a route (such as an R46 on the G or an R160 on the R), which means that the equipment clearly isn't totally isolated for each line.