11-29-2023, 07:00 AM
(11-29-2023, 03:01 AM)tomh009 Wrote:(11-27-2023, 11:15 AM)neonjoe Wrote: From what it sounds like the operation/runs expenses per period are pretty much set within the contract. Likely the best way to expand capacity without changing the contract would be double length trains, but this also involves capital costs.
Not fixed as such: they can get more service but it will cost more.
Running double trains will require 13-14 additional train sets, plus the station construction; reducing headways to 7.5 minutes would probably only require four or maybe five more. In addition to the cost difference, reducing the headways can be done more quickly as there is no construction, and we only need to wait for a handful of trains. Getting another 13-14 trains would surely take much more than two years.
While double trains might only need one driver, their operational and maintenance costs would still be higher, too.
The other thing they could do, as we've discussed here (and as RM Transit has pointed out), is run a more efficient system...and by that I mean, shorter end to end trip times, thereby decreasing the number of trains and operators needed to handle a given service frequency.
But sadly I don't see that happening.