Passenger Trains > "Calif.'s Metrolink hits record ridership for FY2019"

https://www.metro-magazine.com/rail/news/735256/calif-s-metrolink-hits-record-ridership-for-fy2019?utm_source=email&utm_medium=enewsletter&utm_campaign=20190814-NL-MET-Rail-BOBCD190808007&omdt=NL-MET-Rail&omid=1004629432&oly_enc_id=1128C8761401C7V

LAUS is one bustling terminal these days.  Especially with the bus terminal at the far end of the tunnel and the Light rail to Pasadena and Arcadia, and the subway down wilshire and to North Hollywood.   And like 160 Metrolink/Amtk arrivals or departures a day now...

Meanwhile..traffic in LA just AWFUL, and i guess ppl just are getting fed up with it.    Ther are a dozen freeway accidents every day, and ppl are getting tired of have to to leave home an hour earlier in the AM, cause they never know how long it will take to get anywhere.   The metrolink trains are much more reliable timewise...

Nearly 12 million boardings; this is good news!

John Acosta
Palm Springs, CA

Don't tell Duna, he'll just say it's "fake news".

PHall Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Don't tell Duna, he'll just say it's "fake news".



Nope. The ridership numbers are what they are. I don't think they are fake. Contrast to many here who think the FRA data is inherently "bad" or at best useless (Only ridership increases are real).

I use Metrolink or the Gold Line when it makes sense. Sometimes it does, like if my destination is within walking distance of the destination station.

I'n not against all rail systems or projects, just the ones that make zero (or less) sense. Like the SCRRA Perris extention. On the other hand, it makes sense to extend the Gold Line to Montclair where more parking can be constructed.

Let's try to keep it real and not put words in other people's mouths.

I think in the present day of passenger rail - "Only ridership increases are real" is a true statement.
At least, they are all that matter to Politician who fund all the rail passenger service in the U.S. (not just L.A.)

Politicians don't care - and probably don't understand - other measurements like seat miles, train miles, or occupancy ratios.

But show him nice ridership increases - like 12 million riders on Metrolink -  and he gets it immediately.  And is much more likely
to support funding.

Sure, these other measurements have value - but "Ridership" is the one that counts with the man who wrights the funding checks.



 

I always used Metrolink heading to LA when I lived in Lancaster, would I do it again if I moved back, you bet, that traffic sucks and as a kid it didn't take me long to figure out why my dad hated (and still does) driving to LA!

Duna Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Nope. The ridership numbers are what they are. I
> don't think they are fake. Contrast to many here
> who think the FRA data is inherently "bad" or at
> best useless (Only ridership increases are real).
>
> I use Metrolink or the Gold Line when it makes
> sense. Sometimes it does, like if my destination
> is within walking distance of the destination
> station.
>
> I'n not against all rail systems or projects, just
> the ones that make zero (or less) sense. Like the
> SCRRA Perris extention. On the other hand, it
> makes sense to extend the Gold Line to Montclair
> where more parking can be constructed.
Mr Duna...I just think ur line in the sand is too conservative,.   I believe in public projects that are not cash flow positive, or even close, if they are not too expensive (we would differ on that line) especially if the  emphastructure is already there and just needs an upgrade.   I support the Perris Valley line, and my question is...if the ridership increase considerably over the next 5 years, does that retroactively make it a good idea.  SOmetimes u have to do things when u can. 
OTOH, I do not support the CAHSR, as it is being done in a political fashion, and as much a creat jobs project as anything else IMHO. 
I would have supported a tunnel, or whatever "higher speed rail line, built between  Santa Clarita and BFL.  Thats what needed the most, right now.  But its also the most expensive part of the whole prohect.  So they decided to go for the cheap, least needed part 1st, figuring they could use that to leverage the rest of the system.

Also, Mr Duna, if u complain about rail spending, u need to be outraged at CALTRANS highway spending. SO much of it is "make jobs for our workers stuff.  They make up highway code, and they go around telling everyone that they need to do all this work to get things up to the "current standards", when THEY MADE UP THE STANDARDS.  Its a total sham.   The idiots came thru our town and ripped out trees in the center divider of 101, to put in different trees.   And any time they have to fix any small piece of road, they have to resurface  miles to either side of it.   They go around to small towns and tell them what the "Have to have" whether they want it or not.   They are just AWFUL, and HUG money wasters.  Much more so than any rail project, IMHO

I'd like to start using Metrolink, but the station near my house (Via Princessa) is served by the Felony Flyer.   Any truth to the name in 2019 or have things improved?

Passenger increases are definitely a great thing, but they need to be taken in context.  What's the fare, for example?

A free service will get more ridership than a service which costs $10 for the same ride.

Amtrak played that game years ago with rock bottom fares, two cents a mile fares, etc. Didn't end well, and Congress micro-managed new rules on discounting.

Great.....now can Metrolink start double tracking portions of their lines to increase capacity? How about 1/2 hour headways duing the rush inbound/outbound? How about thinking of the future in electric traction? 

I can’t wait to ride in and out of Redlands.  I have my fingers crossed that it will not be a dog that the Perris line is.  

I have long wondered about the "back story" that obviously took place during the discussions  amongst the "higher echelon" people at SCRRA about the need for the PVL. It starts out in the middle of nowhere and takes over two and a half hours to reach Union Station. I doubt that many people ride the train from South Perris to Union station. Obviously the terminal at South Perris was costly with full time security, running maintenace, extra track work, and more than ample parking!
I was told by one of the electricans working in Highgrove when the line was in the latter stages of construction that the PVL was considered  to be Phase 1!  I am not surprised that SCRRA chose to extend the line out of Perris. It is not a good location to tight up trains and few people choose to leave their cars parked at the station!



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 08/15/19 11:28 by TomPlatten.

Tom, in the beggining I thought it would be great to extend all the way into the depot at Hemet.   Now I’m not so sure about throwing good money after bad.  Would the increase in ridership justify the cost?   Similar to the discussion of weekend service (especially folks wanting to see your pretty new locomotive.) 

John, the PVL will not do the museum any good unless and until it runs on the weekends. There is good bus service to Perris because I have used it several times to get to the museum. Once the Perris connection is made, I might be able to hitch a ride to the Museum--if I live that long.

Duna Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Let's try to keep it real and not put words in
> other people's mouths.

Let's hope so! (laugh)

Excerpt from the article:

This milestone marks five years in a row of ridership increases on the Metrolink system. The rise in ridership is in stark contrast to a trend of declining or flat ridership in public transportation nationwide.

I know you went through great lengths to tell TO members the significance of the decline in public transportation usage several months ago. So PHall in his snarky way remembered that.

ronald321 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Politicians don't care - and probably don't
> understand - other measurements like seat miles,
> train miles, or occupancy ratios.
>
> But show him nice ridership increases - like 12
> million riders on Metrolink -  and he gets it
> immediately.  And is much more likely
> to support funding.
>
> Sure, these other measurements have value - but
> "Ridership" is the one that counts with the man
> who wrights the funding checks.

I think that's a naive assessment of how our politics function today.

There have been some examples of politicians making promises, and they actually funded projects that got completed, solving problems and keeping promises, regardless of corruption, cost overruns and other misdeeds beneath the surface. Locally here in NorCal, the formation of Amtrak California, some BART extensions including SFO Airport access, Caltrain "Baby Bullet" trains, to name a few examples.

Metrolink's current "growth" was a result of policy from that era, more than two decades ago. It's not the same today. The "integrity" (or what was left of it two decades ago) is completely gone now. Don't count on the politicians to help Metrolink based on "ridership." Their demand for votes and money are far more blatant, and as CA HSR shows, they don't even care if the project is completed as promised.

Way back in ancient times, the directors of public authorities were selected by the BOND HOLDERS, and confirmed by the governor.

It was expected that financial discipline would result in timely repayment.

Posted from Android

Fizzboy7 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'd like to start using Metrolink, but the station
> near my house (Via Princessa) is served by the
> Felony Flyer.   Any truth to the name in 2019 or
> have things improved?
I've ridden this route several times over the years and have never had any issues.
Occasionally there has been 1 or 2 noisy passengers but nothing too extreme.  I have no idea if they were felons or ex-felons.