Re: Light Rail Definition
David Bennetts (davibenn@pcug.org.au)
25 Apr 98 03:57:11 GMT
Jim Middleton <jim@lightrail.com> wrote in article
<3540B5A9.9E43B79D@lightrail.com>...
> I have compiled what I believe to be an accurate definition of "light
> rail", based upon threads in this and other news groups. You comments
> regarding this definition would be appreciated!
>
> http://www.lightrail.com/
>
>
>
> --
> Mail address:
> mailto:jim@lightrail.com
>
> ICQ: 10714248
>
> Home Page:
> http://www.lightrail.com/
>
It can be very hard to define light rail. Some statements in the
definition given are patently incorrect - 'light rail vehicles are
articulated' Not all are by any means, although this is a common modern
practice. The light rail vehicles built for Hong Kong for example are
rigid vehicles. 'Have operating cabs both ends' - many don't.
It is common practice both in US and Europe for light rail vehicles to only
have a cab at one end, loops being provided at terminii, and on some
occasions a 'wye' being used - San Francisco being one place which provides
them so that short workings are possible.
The Research Board definition is also wrong - many modern light rail
systems in fact use high platform loading, eg Kuala Lumpur and the Los
Angeles Blue and Green Lines, and Denver to name but a few. High loading
points were in use until recently on the Portland, Oregon system to comply
with the US legislation for people with disabilities, these have been
phased out with new low loading cars entering service. Some systems use a
combination of street and high platform loading - eg San Francisco's lines
run in a subway where there are underground stations with high platforms,
the lines fan out on a number of routes in the suburbs where loading is a
street level. A sliding panel covers the steps when platform loading is
used, a warning tone is sounded when the panel is operated on entering and
leaving the tunnel section.
David Bennetts
Canberra