Seattle will run into the same issues with Link to Tacoma.
Reliability will be better but with a top speed of 55mph, the existing express buses and insanely infrequent commuter rail will be faster to Seattle than the Link extension.
To be fair, the Sounder's coastal route skirts the suburbs entirely. So a high capacity rapid transit spine connecting suburban town centers is needed. But if not LRT, what should this spine be? Even Ottawa is using LRT as its Downtown to suburb rapid transit spine.
I am speaking of the segment south of Seattle, which is more direct to Tacoma. The coastal segment north to Everett is much weaker. And Link is not going to really go to “suburban town centers” along the north-south spine. Instead it will parallel the interstate mostly
The NYCT Select Bus Service system, despite many flaws, is another example of a service pattern that combines BRT-lite stations, frequency, and branding (the B44-SBS, for example) with local service patterns (the B44) that offer more frequent stop spacing.
I remember you mentioned on an RM Transit stream that you were using a genetic algorithm to deploy transit vehicles to optimize frequency. I plan to pursue data science. I've already taken Calc III, Diff Eq, Linear Algebra, and Engineering Stats. What further math/CS courses would be most useful in transit operations research? E.g. Intro to AI, Linear Optimization, Chaos/Nonlinear dynamics, Algoritum design, or Game Theory?
You made some excellent points, I think that if you are going to build a transit service that needs higher speeds but increased stops, something like a tram is a good start but also what needs to be important is the frequency of the service of this transit line. Another solution would be to make an RER or S-Bahn style service with a bus service for stops which need a transit service but don't justify a metro or suburban rail line. Many cities' solution is BRT but the downside to BRT is that it doesn't provide the same service as a metro or light rail does and is a temporary solution.
One thing the train/transit commentators never seem to give much attention to is - proper separated bike lanes. With eBikes slowly becoming less heavy and more affordable, they could become a true convenient and cheap last mile solution for metros/trains, but only if the safe bike lanes are in place.
I bring up bike lanes and bike infrastructure from time to time - but I am focussed on Transit, and I do think sometimes people over emphasize the usefulness of bikes. 
That's true. San Diego's Mission Valley is building 2 $4B infill TOD projects on the same LRT line. The community is on a river, though, so the river bike trail will get flooded. Meanwhile, the LRT line is elevated above the flood plain by embankments and viaducts.
Say hello to Ottawa, where we cut bus routes so going one stop in a transit desire line requires two transfers to and from the Confederation Line. Look at its high ridership! /sigh
Even if the stations are close *in downtown* and can effectively serve the area, the reliability problems alone justify putting parallel bus service so you don't have to wait for the R1s to go into service.
This is one place where my local Dutch transit actually succeeds with a rail line that provides international services ie the ic Amsterdam - Berlin. Express services I.e. the local NS intercity's and the all stop local blauwnet (and during rush our also ns) sprinter services and a bus line on the same corridor that provides even more connectivity and nicely integrates with the national express ns intercity's.
the only thing that needs to be improved is the frequencies because half hourly express and local service outside rush hour is to low and the is capacity for an additional 2 local trains. on the of hour that the international service doesn't run.
“Now, some (in Toronto at least) argue that this is a fundamental flaw with subways”- Reminds me of some cranky urban economist professors I had in planning school who would tout the superiority of a basic “bus” over a high cost “urban rail project”
Seattle will run into the same issues with Link to Tacoma.
Reliability will be better but with a top speed of 55mph, the existing express buses and insanely infrequent commuter rail will be faster to Seattle than the Link extension.
Yep, one of the cases where rail is actually slower than buses.
To be fair, the Sounder's coastal route skirts the suburbs entirely. So a high capacity rapid transit spine connecting suburban town centers is needed. But if not LRT, what should this spine be? Even Ottawa is using LRT as its Downtown to suburb rapid transit spine.
I am speaking of the segment south of Seattle, which is more direct to Tacoma. The coastal segment north to Everett is much weaker. And Link is not going to really go to “suburban town centers” along the north-south spine. Instead it will parallel the interstate mostly
The NYCT Select Bus Service system, despite many flaws, is another example of a service pattern that combines BRT-lite stations, frequency, and branding (the B44-SBS, for example) with local service patterns (the B44) that offer more frequent stop spacing.
Yes, the select bus service is a really good one! 
Yes, exactly, we need more alternatives, not less.
Hi Pierre,
I remember you mentioned on an RM Transit stream that you were using a genetic algorithm to deploy transit vehicles to optimize frequency. I plan to pursue data science. I've already taken Calc III, Diff Eq, Linear Algebra, and Engineering Stats. What further math/CS courses would be most useful in transit operations research? E.g. Intro to AI, Linear Optimization, Chaos/Nonlinear dynamics, Algoritum design, or Game Theory?
I would suggest to take transit oriented courses like transportation technologies or public transit theory (operations, economics and planning)
You made some excellent points, I think that if you are going to build a transit service that needs higher speeds but increased stops, something like a tram is a good start but also what needs to be important is the frequency of the service of this transit line. Another solution would be to make an RER or S-Bahn style service with a bus service for stops which need a transit service but don't justify a metro or suburban rail line. Many cities' solution is BRT but the downside to BRT is that it doesn't provide the same service as a metro or light rail does and is a temporary solution.
I hesitate to call anything that uses rail a start because it very much isn’t temporary!
One thing the train/transit commentators never seem to give much attention to is - proper separated bike lanes. With eBikes slowly becoming less heavy and more affordable, they could become a true convenient and cheap last mile solution for metros/trains, but only if the safe bike lanes are in place.
I bring up bike lanes and bike infrastructure from time to time - but I am focussed on Transit, and I do think sometimes people over emphasize the usefulness of bikes. 
That's true. San Diego's Mission Valley is building 2 $4B infill TOD projects on the same LRT line. The community is on a river, though, so the river bike trail will get flooded. Meanwhile, the LRT line is elevated above the flood plain by embankments and viaducts.
Say hello to Ottawa, where we cut bus routes so going one stop in a transit desire line requires two transfers to and from the Confederation Line. Look at its high ridership! /sigh
Definitely a situation where it was seen as bad to have multiple services “in competition”
Even if the stations are close *in downtown* and can effectively serve the area, the reliability problems alone justify putting parallel bus service so you don't have to wait for the R1s to go into service.
Absolutely! Horrible decision, esp. considering the reliability problems.
This is one place where my local Dutch transit actually succeeds with a rail line that provides international services ie the ic Amsterdam - Berlin. Express services I.e. the local NS intercity's and the all stop local blauwnet (and during rush our also ns) sprinter services and a bus line on the same corridor that provides even more connectivity and nicely integrates with the national express ns intercity's.
the only thing that needs to be improved is the frequencies because half hourly express and local service outside rush hour is to low and the is capacity for an additional 2 local trains. on the of hour that the international service doesn't run.
“Now, some (in Toronto at least) argue that this is a fundamental flaw with subways”- Reminds me of some cranky urban economist professors I had in planning school who would tout the superiority of a basic “bus” over a high cost “urban rail project”
There’s definitely a lot of weird discussion that goes around with different transit modes.