Orange Line - DFW Airport Rail Connection

[dfwcre8tive]

Anyone know why they chose to build SkyLink to cater for people who are just passing through, instead of for people who actually live in the area?


One of DFW's AAirlines wAAnted an improved AAirside connection to replAAce their AAging TrAAin.

[mjblazin]

Doesn't DFW have a phenomenal % of travelers "just passing through?" I think it might be 80+%. Someone on the forum has identified the precise term for that type in other threads. Another reflection of distribution is the almost complete absence of any facilities outside security at DFW.

[PuddinHead]

Doesn't DFW have a phenomenal % of travelers "just passing through?" I think it might be 80+%. Someone on the forum has identified the precise term for that type in other threads. Another reflection of distribution is the almost complete absence of any facilities outside security at DFW.

DFW was built and designed before 9-11 way before security prohibited non flyers from the airside so to speak. Some of us remember being able to wait at the gate with our families before leaving on trips both at DFW and Love Field too.

[aygriffith]

One of DFW's AAirlines wAAnted an improved AAirside connection to replAAce their AAging TrAAin.

You must never have been on the trAAm/trAAin when it was icy and it couldn't make it the inclines of its own ramps. It was slow and it didn't service all the terminals inside of security. I would argue that the employee mover version of it that was subsequentally shut down could have been avoided. Instead we got another Bus traveling through the catacombs of the Departures sublevel.

All in all it was slow and old and couldn't service the terminals it served consistantly.


Doesn't DFW have a phenomenal % of travelers "just passing through?" I think it might be 80+%. Someone on the forum has identified the precise term for that type in other threads. Another reflection of distribution is the almost complete absence of any facilities outside security at DFW.

The precise term for those of us who use DFW and aren't passing through is: O/D Travelers... Origin and Destination

[mjblazin]

DFW was built and designed before 9-11 way before security prohibited non flyers from the airside so to speak. Some of us remember being able to wait at the gate with our families before leaving on trips both at DFW and Love Field too.

It is sad to watch old movies that made the tearful goodbye at the gate as the staff is shutting the door more memorable. The plots of many action movies now look like fantasy to modern viewers, e.g., the search for villain at the gate and on the plane in Bullitt, one of the best. It's just not the same to say good bye and then have to remove your belt and shoes and properly display your bag of fluids while holding your boarding pass.

[darkblood]

It's just not the same to say good bye and then have to remove your belt and shoes and properly display your bag of fluids while holding your boarding pass.

How romantic. :rolleyes:

[rockinjohnnyg]

I can understand the want to have the Orange line go directly to the terminal, but at the same time I can see the need to have all three lines (Orange, Cotton Belt, T) meet at the same place. Is there any thought being given to a rail connection from the north end of the airport to the south to connect the Cotton Belt, etc. to the TRE and potentially HSR in the future? I don't think anything like this would be built as part of the current project, but I think there is a potential need for in the future for both airport passengers and those traveling to other parts of the Metroplex.

As far as having checked baggage inside security, I'm pretty sure that's never going to happen. Baggage claim is always located outside security (at least at every airport I've been to) for a reason. There's certain items that you can check, but are not allowed in the cabin whether it will fit or is convenient or not. Items include knives, larges bottles of liquid/shampoo, etc. If baggage claim was inside security, there would be nothing to prevent people from taking such items onto the plane.

[dfwcre8tive]

You must never have been on the trAAm/trAAin when it was icy and it couldn't make it the inclines of its own ramps. It was slow and it didn't service all the terminals inside of security. I would argue that the employee mover version of it that was subsequentally shut down could have been avoided. Instead we got another Bus traveling through the catacombs of the Departures sublevel.

All in all it was slow and old and couldn't service the terminals it served consistantly.



The Airtrans system was controversial from the start and was only built through a government grant program as a test for future systems. From the beginning it was too slow to provide flight connections and airlines didn't want to pay for its maintenance. Vought, the manufacturer, went through years of lawsuits with the airlines and DFW board over payments. With a max speed of 17mph, I'm glad DFW Airport decided to replace the system with the modern Skylink.

I don't think the old guideways could be used successfully in a new system to connect a rail station to terminals. However, the stations under the terminal could be reworked for a BRT type of system. But with all the room on the ground level roadway, that may be more work than it's worth.

[electricron]

The Airtrans system was controversial from the start and was only built through a government grant program as a test for future systems. From the beginning it was too slow to provide flight connections and airlines didn't want to pay for its maintenance. Vought, the manufacturer, went through years of lawsuits with the airlines and DFW board over payments. With a max speed of 17mph, I'm glad DFW Airport decided to replace the system with the modern Skylink.

I don't think the old guideways could be used successfully in a new system to connect a rail station to terminals. However, the stations under the terminal could be reworked for a BRT type of system. But with all the room on the ground level roadway, that may be more work than it's worth.

I'm going to disagree. I believe the old guideways could be upgraded to support the new Skylink trains. The row already exists, structures are in place. Replacing the sharper curves with wider curves should increase vehicle speeds. Replacing the old signal and controls with new electronics is possible, possibly matching the new Skylink equipment.
I'm not suggesting using the old guideway as is. Changes will have to be made. Never-the-less, I believe it'll cost far less to make improvements in the old guideway than building another all-brand-new system. Not only could the old guideway support train passengers, but will also return service to the remote parking lots. With both the old and new guideways in place and operational, we all will have more choices.
I also believe it'll cost DFW less in O&M to refurbish the old guideway than building a new complicated system and facility for security and baggage handling at a new train inter-modal facility.

[aygriffith]

I'm going to disagree. I believe the old guideways could be upgraded to support the new Skylink trains. The row already exists, structures are in place. Replacing the sharper curves with wider curves should increase vehicle speeds. Replacing the old signal and controls with new electronics is possible, possibly matching the new Skylink equipment.
I'm not suggesting using the old guideway as is. Changes will have to be made. Never-the-less, I believe it'll cost far less to make improvements in the old guideway than building another all-brand-new system. Not only could the old guideway support train passengers, but will also return service to the remote parking lots. With both the old and new guideways in place and operational, we all will have more choices.
I also believe it'll cost DFW less in O&M to refurbish the old guideway than building a new complicated system and facility for security and baggage handling at a new train inter-modal facility.

I think they'd have to drasically widen it, the old TrAAins were half the width of the Skylink cars.

[electricron]

Really?
From http://www.voughtaircraft.com/heritage/special/html/sairt6.html
The 51 AIRTRANS vehicles are: 21-ft. long, 7-ft. wide, and 10-ft. high. It has an empty weight of 14,000 lbs. The system was designed for a nominal operating speed of 25 ft./s (17 mph). A higher speed would not significantly reduce the trip time because of the many station stops. Also, because of the many curves, both laterally and vertically, a higher speed would have reduced the ride quality.

From http://www.seattle.gov/transportation/docs/Appendix8tp.pdf and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skylink
Skylink trains run every couple minutes and travel at speeds around 35–37 mph (56–60 km/h). Sixty-four Skylink trains are in service at DFW. This design car parameters are: 39’ 3” long, 9’ 4” wide, 11’ 1” high (a four car train is 157’ long), empty weight 28600 lbs., maximum operating speed of 50 mph with a typical operating speed of 35 mph.

So, the Skylink is 9'4'' wide vs AirTrans 7' wide. It's wider, but not twice as ride. Most of the older guideway is at grade level, it wouldn't cost an arm & a leg to widen it. Just knock down one vertical wall, add 2'4", then build a new vertical wall. Note, I have already admitted some work will be needed on the old guideway. Besides, Bombardier's Innovia isn't the only people mover system around today. A corporation would make a 7' wide people mover if asked.

[dfwcre8tive]

So would you suggest reinstalling a one-way system, or creating new stations and guideways to provide a bi-directional system? That was one of the greatest weaknesses of the old system.

[electricron]

So would you suggest reinstalling a one-way system, or creating new stations and guideways to provide a bi-directional system? That was one of the greatest weaknesses of the old system.

Yes, it was, yet 750 million passengers rode the old single guideway in the past.
Worse yet, there's only room for single track light rail and commuter rail at the location between terminals A & B, if they're going to use the old guideway for rail right-of-way. I wonder if both Dart and the T will be able to squeeze double tracks at the stations?

[Hannibal Lecter]

Really?
From http://www.voughtaircraft.com/heritage/special/html/sairt6.html
The 51 AIRTRANS vehicles are: 21-ft. long, 7-ft. wide, and 10-ft. high. It has an empty weight of 14,000 lbs. The system was designed for a nominal operating speed of 25 ft./s (17 mph). A higher speed would not significantly reduce the trip time because of the many station stops. Also, because of the many curves, both laterally and vertically, a higher speed would have reduced the ride quality.That was the design. The did later increase the top operating speed to around 30MPH.

[JCL]

Does anyone have any further news on this? The original article said the RTC would have more details in a couple of weeks. I've called the RTC contact number and they say there are no public meetings scheduled or any other way for a member of the public to peek in on what they're doing. I also cannot find anything further on the NCTCOG website... The suspense is getting to me!

So, I'm having a hard time understanding all the connections. Exactly what is the RTC's role here? It sounds like they come together and make a recommendation and present it to DART, then DART's board holds the final decision.

Example: the RTC tells DART they have determined that moving the transfer point north outside of the airport would be better overall for the region. Then DART promptly ignores that recommendation in order to please their paying customer (city of Irving). Seems like a waste of the RTC's time. So does the RTC actually have any power (or the NCTCOG in general) to enforce their decisions?

[tamtagon]

^My impression is that the chain of command wont be established until the State Legislature makes a decision about how regional transit groups can fund themselves....

[electricron]

RTC, a part of NCTCOG, is a planning organization, controlling the purse strings for Federally funded projects ensuring environmental goals are acheived, they rarely build anything.

Dart will build what they and DFW Airport wants.

[JCL]

Ah so theoretically if DART ignores their recommendation, the RTC (and thus NCTCOG) could hold back part of the funding for the line?

[electricron]

Ah so theoretically if DART ignores their recommendation, the RTC (and thus NCTCOG) could hold back part of the funding for the line?

The only reason why RTC/NCTCOG can hold back Federal money is if the project doesn't get environmental clearance. That's why they have the pursestrings in the first place, to ensure environmental laws are followed.

Exactly where the train stations are built aren't going to effect the environmental clearances much. Dart, T, DFW, and RTC are trying to figure out how to make the train stations more efficient, not more environmental friendly.

RTC would like to eliminate all the buses at DFW Airport. Of course, that's impossible unless the Skylink tram goes everywhere, which it doesn't.

For speed between connecting flights, a two way air side system is desirable. You don't need that same speed for passengers originating and terminating their flight itineraries at DFW on the land side. A one way loop, like the old tram, is sufficient. That's why I recommended reusing it. Placing the new train stations near the north remote parking lot could access the old trams. HSR and TRE trains stations could be built near the south remote parking lot. All that's required is to build the old tram to the new International terminal to complete the loop, ie, make it complete.

Upgrading the old tram to newer technology could be done. I believe far cheaper than running a fleet of buses forever providing the same service.

[saxman66]

The idea of extending the Skylink up north is a great concept but I think a logistical nightmare. Electricron is right in having to rebuild the old Airtran on the land side to transfer passengers to their respective terminals. If there was a checkin desk at the northside station, you'd have to have all airlines there. AA would of course have a desk there, but what about the smaller ones. Do you really think Midwest that has one gate, one small ticket counter would really want to open another ticket counter at the northside station only for a few passengers. I don't think they would. Otherwise those passengers needing to check bags will have to take a bus to Terminal E or take the new Airtran if it were built again.

Even in the original design, The T and DART going into A and B. How do passengers needing to get to Terminal E (or not taking AA) get there without take another shuttle bus? If they have bags or need to check bags, they certainly can't walk into Terminal A or B and take the Skylink down. Can't pass security with checked bags in hand. I guess the only way is to take a bus unless they get some sort of land side Skylink going.

[JCL]

I don't really have a comment on how this will affect the way the airport interfaces with rail... I'm not sure what's best in that case... any scenario poses it's own challenges that are different from the others. However, from the perspective of a Grapevine resident, moving the transfer point to a place farther north that would be accessible to those living outside the airport excites me. For a few years, I've been pouring over DART/NCTCOG/T documents on the vision of this whole thing excited about the way transit is going...

Make no mistake, even if the transfer point is placed in the heart of the airport, I'm still excited and feel we will be much better off than we are now. But how much better would it be for those living outside the airport to have a park and ride that would service the orange line/sw2ne/cotton belt to plano all in one spot (and possibly bus service to these areas in the future).

Having said that though, if doing what benefits the residents hampers the effectiveness of getting to the airport, I would say that servicing the airport is more important than servicing us to benefit the system as a whole... Can't we have our cake and eat it too in this situation?

How can I become a 'fly on the wall' during these RTC proceedings? I WANT TO KNOW, THE SUSPENSE IS KILLING ME :)

It's a *GREAT* time to be a Grapevine resident... We have a pro-transit mayor and I've read just the other day that he is starting to make moves to get us representation in the high speed rail mix:

http://www.grapevinecourier.com/news/story/3333.html


The council discussed joining the Texas High Speed Rail Corporation, which is trying to build a high-speed railroad called the Texas T-Bone that would link Austin, Houston and San Antonio with Dallas/Fort Worth Airport. The city of Grapevine’s cost would be $12,500 a year, Grapevine officials said.

"It’s not a lot of money and we get some representation, and it ends at our doorstep," Tate said.

The council will consider joining the Texas High Speed Rail Corporation at a future meeting, probably in April, Grapevine officials said.

My ultimate dream would be a mega transit center where sw2ne/orange line/cotton belt/and the DFW airport terminus of the high speed rail would all stop. This transit center would have lots of park and ride, bus service to Grapevine/Coppell (when they rejoin DART)/and possibly even Flower Mound. This transit center would be a destination unto itself (sort of like a Hauptbahnhof in a large German city) and would be built northwest of the airport entrance off of 121/114...... :Banana09:

Ah, I can dream can't i?

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2271/2425224638_bd39a9217b.jpg

[aygriffith]

Upgrading the old tram to newer technology could be done. I believe far cheaper than running a fleet of buses forever providing the same service.

Since the old TrAAin and Employee Shuttle has closed for various reason durring different construction projects they have torn up old parts of the track or poured concrete over them so they could move front end loaders and construction vehicles up and over the tracks.

Not so much outside of the terminal areas but inside the terminals the track areas have taken a beating since closure. There would have to be a certain amount of investment just to get the guideways back to clear and constructed at some terminals.

And again while they haven't capitalized on it, the Airport sold/leased that lower level station space to Pappa's restaurants in A & C for construction on a restaurant at some point in time. From the original articles there was supposed to be construction to extend the platform/station space out into the old guideway so there would be more room for dining space. I don't know if that is still happening due to there being problems with the airport having covered the entrance/exits to the old stations with new retail since closure.

[electricron]

I like the idea of a transit center at DFW, not in Grapevine.

[JCL]

http://www.wfaa.com/video/index.html?nvid=349777

I'm not trying to start a flame war... I just want to understand... The talk is about the trains going 'directly to the airport' between A/B... how then would I step off the train and get to terminal E?

[LH_Newbie]

http://www.wfaa.com/video/index.html?nvid=349777

I'm not trying to start a flame war... I just want to understand... The talk is about the trains going 'directly to the airport' between A/B... how then would I step off the train and get to terminal E?

You'd check into your flight, go through security and hop on the TrAAin to get to the correct terminal...

EDIT: Just saw on the news what you were referring to. Yeah, it would be stupid to have a stand alone DART terminal that you have to take a bus to get to the airport... that's just retarted.

[mjblazin]

It's worked fine Between the T and Logan Airport in Boston for over 25 years, probably longer. As long as the bus continuously operates, travelers don't have an issue. It's the Dallas catch a bus to catch a bus to catch a train process that deters usage.

[JCL]

You'd check into your flight, go through security and hop on the TrAAin to get to the correct terminal...


So, in other words you would have to make a transfer.

In other other words, the train stopping between A/B isn't going 'directly to the airport' either.

[PuddinHead]

It's worked fine Between the T and Logan Airport in Boston for over 25 years, probably longer. As long as the bus continuously operates, travelers don't have an issue. It's the Dallas catch a bus to catch a bus to catch a train process that deters usage.

Then this "Bus System" approach should be fine for Love Field's people mover too.

[mrowl]

http://www.wfaa.com/video/index.html?nvid=349777

I'm not trying to start a flame war... I just want to understand... The talk is about the trains going 'directly to the airport' between A/B... how then would I step off the train and get to terminal E?

I am confused also...

The story mentions the that Orange line would terminate north of the airport with the Cotton Belt, and a People Mover "similar to SkyLink" would be built to connect to DFW.

I don't see any problem with this plan.

But...

The county commissioner mentions a shuttle that would be used to move passengers to DFW....

Which is it???

[JCL]

The county commissioner mentions a shuttle that would be used to move passengers to DFW....



It's my impression that he is upset because he percieves the rail isn't going 'directly to the airport'... my argument is that in essence stopping between A/B isn't going 'directly to the airport' either (i.e. you have to transfer). I think he is just throwing the word 'shuttle' out there as an all encompassing term meaning 'getting passengers from the station to the gate'.

[SeaToby]

DFW already has a people mover linking all of the terminals presently. DART and the T wish to build regional rail, or light rail and link it with another station along the north leg of the people mover. At least that is what I understand. Right of way exists to build both rail lines and a station.

[cowboyeagle05]

I get it the commissioner is just learning what we were already discussing here on the forum thats its just not that easy to run a DART train to DFW and magically everyone can catch a train to Dallas or Fort Worth without much thought.

Its mostly an interfacing issue, how do we make it easy to connect every terminal to this one joint DART and T station and keep it simple. Just putting a station between A/B still does not solve the issue he is talking about cause people can not get their luggage at Terminal D and then get on the People Mover to get to Terminal A/B to catch the train due to the security issue.

The only other option that might soothe him is multiple joint stations that connect to each section of terminals but ultimately could increase the train time within DFW by a large amount and create a significant increase in cost having to build at least three station to make that idea work.

What was that plan that also included a DART connection from the South of the Airport later on. If this plan is till be considered maybe a alternative could be this.

Two DFW train stations one built as the Orange line in between A/B making a direct connection for those two terminals with some short bus from the three other terminals not ideal to say the least but is ok at best. Then move forward with a South Airport station that would sit in between the remaining three terminals with some kind of direct pedestrian connection. This south airport station would connect to DART through a line being planned to enter through the south end of the Airport. This south airport line would connect to the DFW airports planned Mixed-use shopping stuff on the south end as well making that project more valuable connected through Mass transit. Course what the line does after it leaves the airport is beyond me. Normally I would just say build a DART line along the TRE but I am unsure the complications of this plan not to mention how long it would take to get any of it done.

Having one DART station at the Airport is not ideal considering the traffic of people that use the airport and I am sure DART wants to build more than one station but just not all at once.

[JCL]

The only other option that might soothe him is multiple joint stations that connect to each section of terminals but ultimately could increase the train time within DFW by a large amount and create a significant increase in cost having to build at least three station to make that idea work.



Do you mean have three stations along International Parkway, one between A/B, one between C/D and one next to E? That still wouldn't take you straight to your gate and you would have to transfer to something that would go from International Parkway to the gate.

[electricron]

Having one DART station at the Airport is not ideal considering the traffic of people that use the airport and I am sure DART wants to build more than one station but just not all at once.

I agree with you. Here's an idea I just formed. Instead of placing the train stations at the north end of Terminals A & B, place the station at the south end of Terminals A & B, which would also be located at the north ends of Terminals C & D. Then you'll be within walking distance to four of DFW's five terminals. At least use the connecting skybridges that exist already.

http://www.visitingdc.com/images/dfw-airport-parking.jpg

They could also use 4 old AAtrain people mover vehicles with 4 short branch lines to move passengers back and fourths from the train stations to each of these 4 terminals. You wouldn't even need to use the old AAtrain vehicles at all with so short branches, you could use golf cart vehicles on the old AAtrain guideways.

That still leaves the problem on how to connect to Terminal E. I believe a more centrally located train station within DFW is the better solution.

[darkblood]

I agree with you. Here's an idea I just formed. Instead of placing the train stations at the north end of Terminals A & B, place the station at the south end of Terminals A & B, which would also be located at the north ends of Terminals C & D. Then you'll be within walking distance to four of DFW's five terminals.

http://www.visitingdc.com/images/dfw-airport-parking.jpg

They could also use the old AAtrain people mover vehicles with 4 short branch lines to move passengers from the train stations to these 4 terminals. At least use the connecting skybridges that exist already. You wouldn't even need to use the old AAtrain vehicles at all with so short branches, you could use golf cart vehicles on the old AAtrain guideways.

That still leaves the problem on how to connect to Terminal E. I believe a more centrally located train station within DFW is the better solution.

That's a good idea. We could have one station servicing those four terminals, and another station on the south end of Terminal E to service that. Afterwards the line could continue south and connect to the Centrepoint station.

One thing we could do, since Irving is complaining so much about having a direct line to the airport, is have the Orange line run up to the TOD neighborhood just north of the airport. Then the Orange line runs down through DFW and stops at the stations, and continues onto Centrepoint station.

[JCL]

Electricron,

I have to admit, that's a pretty good idea... I've been operating under the assumption that transit riders would want to be taken straight (or at least close - within 10 gates) to their gate. It would be a bit of walking but it would solve the transfer issue (except going to E)...

Still, operating three rail lines (each double tracked?) in this close proximity would still be a rather tight squeeze shoehoring all those between Intl Pkwy.

[JCL]

Wait,

I'm looking on the map... to take a train to a station in the middle of A/B/C/D and if your gate is all the way at the extreme opposite end of A, that's quite a trek... loaded down with bags? I don't know...

[darkblood]

Wait,

I'm looking on the map... to take a train to a station in the middle of A/B/C/D and if your gate is all the way at the extreme opposite end of A, that's quite a trek... loaded down with bags? I don't know...

We need more funky moveable sidewalks!

[saxman66]

Wait,

I'm looking on the map... to take a train to a station in the middle of A/B/C/D and if your gate is all the way at the extreme opposite end of A, that's quite a trek... loaded down with bags? I don't know...

It is a trek, but as long you're flying on AA, you're all set. It doesn't matter which ticket counter you check in at or check your bag. Just check in and go into security and take the Skylink to your gate. The problem will be with every other airline out of Terminal E. I [use to] fly Delta a lot and Terminal E is just kind of isolated from the rest. No skybridge or anything.

I like the idea of bringing the station the station further south in between ABC and D. Some sort covered walkway to E with moving sidewalks and such. Does anyone think the "13th Station" concept will come back into play? It was planned to be between Terminals D and 'F'. But was scrapped for the A/B concept. Or how about two stations as said before. One on the north side around A and B and another near the south side near C D and E.

I agree the county commissioner that busing is people from Grapevine is pretty stupid. DFW will have to extend the Skylink to Grapevine and bring it down all down the center along International Pkwy or use old Airtran ROW.

[JCL]

Just check in and go into security and take the Skylink to your gate.

In other words, transfer.

My whole deal is if you have to transfer, then where that transfer happens can move.

[downtownguy25]

that's quite a trek... loaded down with bags? I don't know...

Who travels any more with loads of bags. I cant remember the last time my friends or I have checked a bag. Esp now with none elite travelers being charges to check bags.

[JCL]

DFW will have to extend the Skylink to Grapevine and bring it down all down the center along International Pkwy or use old Airtran ROW.

One straight line extension a mile or two north vs. three (double tracked?) lines all coming south into the airport... quite a bit of redundancy there.

[electricron]

One straight line extension a mile or two north vs. three (double tracked?) lines all coming south into the airport... quite a bit of redundancy there.

The present scheme is to use the old AAtrain people mover ROW along each side of International Parkway. DART light rail trains along the east side, and regional rail DMU trains along the west side. There's plenty of room for at least single track under all the overpasses, and plenty of room for double tracks at the train stations on either side.

http://www.tsbyrne.com/images/aviation1.jpg

You could knock down the walk distance significantly if just sections of the AAtrain could be restored to service. Here's a rough sketch.

Terminal B <--------->..Train...<-------->Terminal A
Terminal D <-------->.Stations.<-------->Terminal C
.................................................. ..Terminal E
Note: <----> is one AAtrain (multiple cars) going back and fourths along the 4 individual single track guideways to Terminals A,B,C,&D. At 20 mph speeds, they could make a round trip for a mile distance in 6 minutes, for a half mile distance every three minutes.

I'm suggesting you will not need all of the existing AAtrain guideways, just a 1,000 to 2,000 feet in all four directions from the centrally placed train stations.

Terminal E could be access temporarily by using shuttle buses, by building a new permanent overhead Skytrain, or a new overhead tram directly to it, like you see at carnivals and amusement parks.

[JCL]

DART light rail trains along the east side, and regional rail DMU trains along the west side. There's plenty of room for at least single track under all the overpasses, and plenty of room for double tracks at the train stations on either side.


If double tracked, that would be six total tracks (2 orange line, 2 sw2ne, 2 cotton belt to plano). My point is that it would be less track miles to run one skylink extension 1 mile north than to run six tracks the extra mile south to A/B.

[electricron]

If double tracked, that would be six total tracks (2 orange line, 2 sw2ne, 2 cotton belt to plano). My point is that it would be less track miles to run one skylink extension 1 mile north than to run six tracks the extra mile south to A/B.

At most, it'll be four tracks, 2 for light rail along the east side, and 2 for regional rail on the west side. Both Cotton Belt regional trains, from FW and C can share the same tracks. I believe for a distance of a mile at most from the train stations to just north of the crossover taxi way, that only two tracks will be needed, one for each side.

If the Skytrain was extended north to a DFW transit center on the north, two guideways each having two lanes would be needed to extend the loop. I bet the at grade two double track rail lines would be cheaper to build.

[msutton]

electricon, great ideas. Is there room in the middle to put two stops for the terminals? one where AB/CD meet and one where CD/E meet? The RER to CDG in Paris has two stops, and it's perfectly convenient to use, even with a somewhat lengthy trek from the train to check in. Moving sidewalks make those distances seem like nothing...

[electricron]

electricon, great ideas. Is there room in the middle to put two stops for the terminals? one where AB/CD meet and one where CD/E meet? The RER to CDG in Paris has two stops, and it's perfectly convenient to use, even with a somewhat lengthy trek from the train to check in. Moving sidewalks make those distances seem like nothing...

I'm sure there is room on both sides for the tracks. Generally, the old AAtrain guideways are placed between International Parkway and its service roads, closer to the service roads than the Parkway, except where it goes under the service roads to reach the terminals. There isn't going to be much room for the stations, so it will be tight. On the east side, Dart will have to figure a way to avoid the northbound ramp between the service road and the parkway near Terminal A's parking structure.

[JCL]

Both Cotton Belt regional trains, from FW and C can share the same tracks.

Since the FTW and Plano trains will be of the commuter type... I'm envisioning a scenario similar to the TRE at Union station (commuter rail at the terminal stop)... the trains sit and wait for quite some time until their next scheduled run... now multiply that by 2 for 2 lines, and run this out into the future when ridership on both lines has just exploded and they reduce both lines to 20 minute headways... still 2 tracks?

[darkblood]

Since the FTW and Plano trains will be of the commuter type... I'm envisioning a scenario similar to the TRE at Union station (commuter rail at the terminal stop)... the trains sit and wait for quite some time until their next scheduled run... now multiply that by 2 for 2 lines, and run this out into the future when ridership on both lines has just exploded and they reduce both lines to 20 minute headways... still 2 tracks?

The electric light rail line from Irving could tunnel underneath the airport. Sure it would cost more, but it would give the other lines more room. The light rail line could still go all the way to Centerpoint station.

Also the lines from Plano and FW could be ones that pass by north of the airport, stopping at the TOD neighborhood. People wanting to go to the airport could transfer to the Orange Line. If both the commuter lines from FW and Plano are of the same type then they could link those together for a continuous run from FW to Plano.

[JCL]

The electric light rail line from Irving could tunnel underneath the airport. Sure it would cost more, but it would give the other lines more room. The light rail line could still go all the way to Centerpoint station.

Centerpoint station is technically in T territory... would DART be willing to foot the bill to extend the line on 'foreign soil'? (unless in the future we have some scenario where all the transit agencies morph into one big region-wide agency)


Also the lines from Plano and FW could be ones that pass by north of the airport, stopping at the TOD neighborhood. People wanting to go to the airport could transfer to the Orange Line. If both the commuter lines from FW and Plano are of the same type then they could link those together for a continuous run from FW to Plano.

Where exactly would they transfer to the orange line? Also, I think they are trying to avoid a scenario where one line gets preferred access to the airport to the detriment of the other two... if one has to transfer, they all should transfer.