M-1 Rail construction! Woodward Ave. South of Adams closes July 28

[Hermod]

But unlike the PM, this system can be expanded to serve a larger area.

We don't knw that. If and when they decide to create a regional light rail network, the technology, procedures, organization, trackwork, power, and equipment may or may not be compatible with M-1 rail. In other words, M-1 rail may well be an orphan and remain a linear people mover with people having to transfer to the regional LRT network.

[SpartanDawg]

We don't knw that. If and when they decide to create a regional light rail network, the technology, procedures, organization, trackwork, power, and equipment may or may not be compatible with M-1 rail. In other words, M-1 rail may well be an orphan and remain a linear people mover with people having to transfer to the regional LRT network.

I HATE the comparisons saying this is people mover 2.0 .. oh it's only 3.3 miles and people mover is 2.9 miles


The people mover is a ONE-WAY LOOP that really from edge to edge stretches maybe a mile and half apart. The new rail, if you go by that measurements is 6.6 miles since as a loop that's how much distance it would cover...

It covers a MUCH broader area and the three busiest, people-dense, and most successful neighborhoods in detroit.. it will absolutely trump the people mover ridership by quite a bit

[Bham1982]

It covers a MUCH broader area and the three busiest, people-dense, and most successful neighborhoods in detroit.. it will absolutely trump the people mover ridership by quite a bit

Even the boosters for the trolley don't make such a claim. Their ridership estimates are actually lower than the ridership estimates during construction of the People Mover.

Obviously downtown, with its density and events will generate more traffic than a transit line through the wastelands of the Cass Corridor.

[dtowncitylover]

Even the boosters for the trolley don't make such a claim. Their ridership estimates are actually lower than the ridership estimates during construction of the People Mover.

Obviously downtown, with its density and events will generate more traffic than a transit line through the wastelands of the Cass Corridor.

The projected ridership for the PM included the original system is was supposed to service. Once people realized the PM didn't go anywhere, ridership fell off then basically leveled. M-1 actually goes somewhere; going along a linear line through Detroit's three buiest neighborhoods is alot different from going in a circle anywhere.

And indeed the PM was built to be expanded, however the technology used was too costly and become irrelevent too quickly, and the fact the region was less cooperative than it is today also added to the PM failure.

[dtowncitylover]

We don't knw that. If and when they decide to create a regional light rail network, the technology, procedures, organization, trackwork, power, and equipment may or may not be compatible with M-1 rail. In other words, M-1 rail may well be an orphan and remain a linear people mover with people having to transfer to the regional LRT network.

That's not true at all. Cities across the globe are using the same technology and always upgrading the technology of streetcars. The PM could have been upgraded and expanded like in Miami, but then the monorail technology became obsolete because streetcars and light rail become the preferred option.

A streetcar system can be built for the city. We don't necessarily need the larger light rail vehicles. We can build a well connected streetcar system that can serve a potentially growing urban center and city. We could be the Melbourne of the Western Hemisphere. We don't have to be, but it's an option.

I think you're just scared that Detroit could be a transit dependent city and that the freeways you helped build will become obsolete.

[Hermod]

That's not true at all. Cities across the globe are using the same technology and always upgrading the technology of streetcars. The PM could have been upgraded and expanded like in Miami, but then the monorail technology became obsolete because streetcars and light rail become the preferred option.

A streetcar system can be built for the city. We don't necessarily need the larger light rail vehicles. We can build a well connected streetcar system that can serve a potentially growing urban center and city. We could be the Melbourne of the Western Hemisphere. We don't have to be, but it's an option.

I think you're just scared that Detroit could be a transit dependent city and that the freeways you helped build will become obsolete.

If you studied the history of streetcars and the history of the electric interurban systems, you would find that it was very common to end up with networks in which parts are not compatible with other parts. either the systems had to transfer passengers at the points where incompatibility could not be easily solved or they had to create Rube Goldberg solutions where the car had a pantograph for AC running, trolley poles for DC running and to be compatible with slot rail pickup in areas adverse to overhead wires. I don't know how easy it would be to obtain a copy, but the book on interurbans in America by Hilton and Due has some fascinating discussions of varied technologies even in something as simple as an electric car. It is a scholarly book [[expansion of Hilton's PHD dissertation) rather than a coffee table book like ost books on railroads and streetcars.

You know, I truly like paddlewheel steamboats, but I can point out the flaws with having commercial passenger service from Monroe to Detroit without being accused of hating boats.

[dtowncitylover]

If you studied the history of streetcars and the history of the electric interurban systems, you would find that it was very common to end up with networks in which parts are not compatible with other parts. either the systems had to transfer passengers at the points where incompatibility could not be easily solved or they had to create Rube Goldberg solutions where the car had a pantograph for AC running, trolley poles for DC running and to be compatible with slot rail pickup in areas adverse to overhead wires. I don't know how easy it would be to obtain a copy, but the book on interurbans in America by Hilton and Due has some fascinating discussions of varied technologies even in something as simple as an electric car. It is a scholarly book [[expansion of Hilton's PHD dissertation) rather than a coffee table book like ost books on railroads and streetcars.

You know, I truly like paddlewheel steamboats, but I can point out the flaws with having commercial passenger service from Monroe to Detroit without being accused of hating boats.

Hermod, thanks for the suggestion. I might just check it out.

However, I don't think we live in a day where a transit agency would build a system so haphazardly.

[Hermod]

Hermod, thanks for the suggestion. I might just check it out.

However, I don't think we live in a day where a transit agency would build a system so haphazardly.

But, exactly that may be happening. M1 Rail is being designed to optimized the M1 rail route. If the system gets expanded by a regional authority, they may well have different ideas about center running versus street running versus dedicated right-of-way. They may favor different methods of current collection with continuous wire/third rail/slot rail and may well eschew the battery pack and intermittent charging. It may very well be that when a regional system is achieved that M1 rail may be a "maverick" in the system with incompatible equipment, methods, and logistics for replacements and parts.

[professorscott]

But, exactly that may be happening. M1 Rail is being designed to optimized the M1 rail route. If the system gets expanded by a regional authority, they may well have different ideas about center running versus street running versus dedicated right-of-way. They may favor different methods of current collection with continuous wire/third rail/slot rail and may well eschew the battery pack and intermittent charging. It may very well be that when a regional system is achieved that M1 rail may be a "maverick" in the system with incompatible equipment, methods, and logistics for replacements and parts.

What an astonishing issue to be fussing over in 2014! Rest assured, nobody in any position of authority is even remotely considering implementing any rail transit along Woodward, beyond the M1 termini. The only thing under study - and that's all it is, a study - is a BRT system which can be implemented regardless of how M1 works. It will take years to get that up and running, if it is decided to do so. I said before, and I'll repeat, I simply can't imagine under the current situation how even that would be in operation any time before 2019. Now, if the ridership on that is very high and someone begins to contemplate changing it over to light rail, then the whole process starts all over again and you're looking at implementation of light rail in the mid 2020s or later. If M1, or later the RTA, decided to simply extend the existing system for some distance, it could be done in the same timeframe, but it's not sensible to run streetcars as far as Pontiac. Royal Oak, sure; Pontiac, no.

Also, the tracks will match the gauge of every single streetcar and LRT system built in North America over the last 30 years. I believe they will be using 115 lb. rail which is sufficient for any vehicle you could imagine running over it. And as to the concern about overhead wire vs. the lack of it, it is completely feasible to run off-wire and on-wire trains on the same tracks. Amtrak, in the northeast corridor, runs diesel and electrified locomotives on the same track.

But this is 2014 and absolutely the only two transit projects with any chance of happening in the next few years are M1 Rail and "MI Train", the Ann Arbor commuter rail, and those will have no difficulty interacting with each other.