HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: karula@geo.pu-toyama.ac.jp (Takashi Kawakami)
Subject: Re: About gs
Organization: Department of technology.,Toyama Prefectural Univ.,Toyama,Japan
Date: 20 Nov 1992 08:00:25 GMT

$@$O$8$a$^$7$F!#(J
$@#K#a#r#u#l#a!wIY;38)N)Bg3X$G$9!#(J

In article <1992Nov7.065441.5526@kehost.kokusaidenki.co.jp> sada@kehost.kokusaidenki.co.jp (Sadayoshi Horii) writes:
$@!JA0N,!K(J

 >$@$H$3$m$,!"(J kanji/article9.ps ($@F|K\9q7{K!Bh(J9$@>r$rI=<($9$k%5%s%W%k(J)$@$rI=<($5$;$k$H!"(J
 >
 >Can't find font file ptmr.gsf, substituting Ugly.
 >Can't find font file ptmr.gsf, substituting Ugly.
 >
 >$@$HI=<($5$l!"(J"$@7{(J"$@$N;z$N2#$N(J3$@K\@~$,(J2$@K\$K$J$C$F$7$^$$$^$9!#!#(J
 >$@%W%j%s%H7k2L$b$3$N$h$&$K$J$j$^$9(J$@!#(J

 $@;d$N$H$3$m$G$O!"2?$bJ86g$O8@$C$FMh$^$;$s$,!"F1MM$K#2K\$K$J$j$^$9!#(J
$@$^$?!"(J ghostview-1.4.1 (ps , eps file $@$N(J previewer) $@$G$bF1MM$G$9!#(J
$@!J;d$N;HMQ$7$F$$$k$N$O!"(J sun3 + Ghostscript 2.4.1 $@$G$9!#!K(J

 $@;d(J$@$b(J make $@$7$?$N$O$+$J$jA0$N$?$a!"Dj$+$G$O$"$j$^$;$s$,!"(J
ptmr.gsf $@$O!"(J ghostscript-fonts-2.4.1 $@$K4^$^$l(J$@$F$$$F!"$3$l$O(J
gs $@$N(J make $@;~$K;XDj$7$?(J libdir ( default $@$G(J /usr/local/lib/ghostscript$@!K(J
$@$N$J$+$KE83+$7(J$@$?%U%)%s%H72$rCV$/$@$1$G$9!#(J

 >$@4A;z%U%)%s%H$O!"(JX11R5$@$N(J jiskan24.pcf $@$H(J k14.pcf $@$r;H$C$F$$$^$9!#(J

ghostview $@$OFH<+$N(J gsf $@$r;HMQ$7$F$$$k$N$G!"$3$N>l9g(J
jiskan24.pcf $@$d(J k14.pcf $@$O4X78$J$$$H;W$$$^$9!#(J

 >$@$3(J$@$l$O!";EJ}$,$J$$$3$H$J$N$G$7$g$&$+(J?

$@;EJ}$N$J$$$3$H$G$O$J$$$G$7$g$&$+!#$I$&$7$F$b!"$H$*$C$7$c$k$J$i(J
 font $@$rD>$9$7$+$J$$$H;W$$$^$9!#(J
--
$@#T#S#D#S(J                               $@#K!%@n>e(J $@5.!wIY;38)N)Bg3X(J
 (TPU Software Development Society)    Karula Takashi Kawakami  PU-Toyama
                                       karula@geo.pu-toyama.ac.jp
Newsgroups: fj.comp.printers
From: karula@geo.pu-toyama.ac.jp (Takashi Kawakami)
Subject: Re: About gs
Organization: Department of technology.,Toyama Prefectural Univ.,Toyama,Japan
	<KARULA.92Nov20170025@geo.pu-toyama.ac.jp>
	<KATAYAMA.92Nov20212943@etude.nacsis.ac.jp>
Date: 20 Nov 1992 13:48:37 GMT

$@#K#a#r#u#l#a!wIY;38)N)Bg3X$G$9!#(J
In article <KATAYAMA.92Nov20212943@etude.nacsis.ac.jp> katayama@nacsis.ac.jp (Norio KATAYAMA) writes:
 >
 >$@JR;3!wEl5~Bg3X$G$9!#(J
 >
 >In article <KARULA.92Nov20170025@geo.pu-toyama.ac.jp>
 >karula@geo.pu-toyama.ac.jp (Takashi Kawakami) writes:

 > > $@;d$N$H$3$m$G$O!"2?$bJ86g$O8@$C$FMh$^$;$s$,!"F1MM$K#2K\$K$J$j$^$9!#(J
 > >$@$^$?!"(J ghostview-1.4.1 (ps , eps file $@$N(J previewer) $@$G$bF1MM$G$9!#(J
 > >$@!J;d$N;HMQ$7$F$$$k$N$O!"(J sun3 + Ghostscript 2.4.1 $@$G$9!#!K(J
 >
 >  $@$3$l$O(J k14 $@$r;H$C$?>l9g$I$&$7$h$&$b$"$j$^$;$s!#(J
 >
 >  k14 $@$O!"(J14$@!_(J14 dot $@$NJ,2rG=$NDc$$%S%C%H%^(J$@%C%W%U%)%s%H$J$N$G!"(J"$@7{(J"$@$N(J
 >$@2#@~$O>e$NFsK\$,$/$C$D$$$F$$$^$9!#(J(kterm $@$J$I$GI=<($5$;$F$_$l$P3NG'$G(J
 >$@$-$^$9!#(J) gs $@$O$3$N%S%C%H%^%C%W$r;H$C$F=PNO$7$F$$$k$@$1$J$N$G!"#X$NI=(J
 >$@<($GFsK\@~$J$i$P(J gs $@$N=PNO$bFs(J$@K\@~$K$J$j$^$9!#(J

$@$9$_$^$;$s!"(Jkconfig.ps $@Ey$G@_Dj$7$F$$$k$N$rK:$l$F$$$^$7$?!#(Jm(_o_)m
$@$H$s$G$b$J$/$O$:(J$@$7$F$7$^$C$?$o$1$G$9$M!#<:NiCW$7$^$7$?!#(J

$@!t(J gs252 $@$NF|K\8l%Q%C%A$O$$$D:"=P$k$N$@$m$&!)(J
--
$@#T#S#D#S(J                               $@#K!%@n>e(J $@5.!wIY;38)N)Bg3X(J
 (TPU Software Development Society)    Karula Takashi Kawakami  PU-Toyama
                                       karula@geo.pu-toyama.ac.jp
From: ichiro@rst.fujixerox.co.jp (& Yamashita)
Newsgroups: fj.comp.printers
Subject: Re: About gs
Date: 20 Nov 92 15:32:29 GMT
	<KARULA.92Nov20170025@geo.pu-toyama.ac.jp>
	<KATAYAMA.92Nov20212943@etude.nacsis.ac.jp>
	<KARULA.92Nov20224837@geo.pu-toyama.ac.jp>
Organization: System Technology Research Lab., Fuji Xerox Co., Ltd., Japan
In-reply-to: karula@geo.pu-toyama.ac.jp's message of 20 Nov 92 13:48:37 GMT

$@;32<!wIY;N%<%m%C%/%9$G$9(J. 

In article <KARULA.92Nov20224837@geo.pu-toyama.ac.jp> karula@geo.pu-toyama.ac.jp (Takashi Kawakami) writes:

   $@!t(J gs252 $@$NF|K\8l%Q%C%A$O$$$D:"=P$k$N$@$m$&!)(J

gs241$@$NF|K\8l%Q%C%A$rL5M}LpM}Ev$F$F(J(1$@;~4V$/$i$$$N(Jpatch$@$h$j$A$g$C$H%U%!(J
$@%8!<(J&$@%K%e!<%m$J<j:n6H9~$_(J)$@;H$C$F$$$^$9(J(NEWS OS4.2R + $@3HD%%U%)%s%H%;%C(J
$@%H(J)$@$,(J, $@$$$^(J$@$N$H$3$mLdBj$J$/(J(A4$@$H%l%?!<%5%$%:$NLdBj$O$$$^$@;D$C$F$$$^$9(J
$@$,(J)$@F0$$$F$$$^$9(J. 
$@6a=j$G(J, SPARC$@$G$bF0$$$F(J$@$$$k$h$&$G$9(J. 

gs252$@$K$9$k0UL#$,$"$k$N$+$I$&$+$o$+$j$^$;$s$,(J, (A4$@$,$&$^$/07$($k$h$&$J(J
$@$3$H$,=q$$$F$"(J$@$C$?$h$&$J$N$G(Jgs252$@$K$7$?$N$@$,(J, $@$=$3$O$^$@8+$F$$$J$$(J)
$@$A$g$C$H(J, .rej $@$r$_$F4hD%$C$F$_$F$O$$$+$,$G$9$+(J?

//$@;32<!w%Q%C%A$N:n$jJ}$,$h$/$o$+$i$J$$(J
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
From: adrian@ntmtv.UUCP (Adrian Brandt)
Subject: Re: BART "State of the System" handout
Organization: Northern Telecom Inc, Mountain View, CA
Distribution: ba
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 17:43:28 GMT

In article <siu6204@sgi.sgi.com>, jeremy@classic.asd.sgi.com (Jeremy Higdon) writes:
|> In article <1992Nov19.210145.18084@ntmtv>, adrian@ntmtv.UUCP (Adrian Brandt) writes:
|> > what does BART do that no other rapid transit in the world does?
|> > I can't imagine...
|> 
|> It raises Adrian's blood pressure like no other rapid transit in the
|> world does.  That's gotta be worth something.

Bingo.  You've got me there!

-- 

Adrian Brandt (415) 940-2379
UUCP: ...!ames!ntmtv!adrian
ARPA: ntmtv!adrian@ames.arc.nasa.gov
From: jeremy@classic.asd.sgi.com (Jeremy Higdon)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
Subject: Re: BART and other Bay Area transit agencies... (was Re: BART "State of the System" handout)
Date: 20 Nov 92 22:58:58 GMT
Distribution: ba
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.  Mountain View, CA

In article <1992Nov20.205242.14523@s1.gov>, lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich) writes:
> In article <shs1djs@sgi.sgi.com> jeremy@classic.asd.sgi.com (Jeremy Higdon) writes:
> >In article <1992Nov18.232343.23068@s1.gov>, lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich) writes:
> 
> 	[On bus ride quality...]
> 
> >Mostly it is road quality, though bus suspension design hasn't really
> >gone anywhere in the last 30 years.  Buses on smooth roads are comfortable.
> >On pothole-filled roads, they can be unpleasant.  Much the same with
> >rail.  The worst I've been on is San Diego LRT and Caltrain.  Railfans
> >may like the lateral jarring.  I don't.  BART doesn't seem to have
> >these problems.
> 
> 	I had taken two AC Transit buses that day. One from Hayward to
> Oakland (82L), and one from Rockridge to Berkeley (51). The
> Hayward-Oakland ride was unpleasantly bumpy, while the
> Rockridge-Berkeley one was actually fairly smooth. Looking at the
> roads they went on, the H-O bus went on an average-looking road, while
> the R-B bus went on what looked like a freshly paved one.

AC Transit also typically uses different model buses on the two lines
too.  The models on the Berkeley-Rockridge line are somewhat better
as I recall.  Of course, E. 14th isn't a great street, either.

jeremy
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
From: adrian@ntmtv.UUCP (Adrian Brandt)
Subject: Speed & distance ramblings
Organization: Northern Telecom Inc, Mountain View, CA
Distribution: ca
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 21:12:48 GMT

In article <1502@dosbears>, mikel@dosbears.UUCP (Mike Lipsie) writes:
|> The Subject: line [SOF rail transit setback?] isn't quite accurate
|> anymore but I left it as it was because I couldn't come up with a
|> better one.

Ok, I changed the subject line.


|> Fremont is "about" as far from SF as Mt. View.

I know you put about in quotes, so I am not flaming you or anything, but
in case you were wondering:

Fremont to Embarcadero on BART  is 31.1 miles.
Mountain View to SF on CalTrain is 36.1 miles.

|> many, close [BART] station stops in SF and Oakland slow down the average.

BART Embarcadero - 16th & Mission  : 2.5 mi. in 7 min. = 21.4 mph.

and for comparison:

BART tube (West Oak - Embarcadero) : 5.9 mi. in 6 min. = 59.0 mph.


-- 

Adrian Brandt (415) 940-2379
UUCP: ...!ames!ntmtv!adrian
ARPA: ntmtv!adrian@ames.arc.nasa.gov
From: joshua@Veritas.COM (Joshua Levy)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
Subject: Re: BART "State of the System" handout
Date: 18 Nov 92 00:26:32 GMT
Distribution: ba
Organization: VERITAS Software

In article <1992Nov17.005529.26766@s1.gov> lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich) writes:
> Weekday ridership was 262000 people/day,
> while weekend ridership was at a record high. 

Welcome to one of transit's Big Lies: ridership data.  The numbers Loren
is quoting are boardings per day, not people per day!  Assuming that
almost everyone takes part to work and back home, the actual number
of people using BART on any day is about 130,000.  Of course, if people
used BART to run errands (at lunch for example), then each person
would cause 4 boardings a day, and the number of users would be
about 65,000 per day.

Remember this when a mass transit person sez something like: "200,000
people use BART and 300,000 (for example) use MUNI, so 500,000 people
use transit!  Not really.  What really happens is that there are 
200,000 boardings of BART trains by less than 100,000 people.  The
same is true of the bus system.   Also, many BART riders use
take MUNI (or some local bus system), so the number of people using
mass transit is much lower than the sum of the people who use each
system sperately, which (in turn) is half, or less, of the boarding
numbers.

Joshua Levy  (joshua@veritas.com)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
From: adrian@ntmtv.UUCP (Adrian Brandt)
Subject: Re: BART and other Bay Area transit agencies... (was Re: BART "State of the System" handout)
Organization: Northern Telecom Inc, Mountain View, CA
Distribution: ba
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 21:49:12 GMT

In article <1992Nov18.232343.23068@s1.gov>, lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich) writes:
|> 	BART also did fairly well in other measures, such as operating
|> cost per passenger-mile: 20.9 cents. The champion was Vancouver's
|> SkyTrain at 9.8 cents, while the worst was the Buffalo light-rail
|> system, was at 58.4 cents. San Diego was at 11.6 cents, and Sacramento
|> at 37.3 cents.

Last time I checked, CalTrain's operating cost per passenger mile was
down around 18 cents.  Since BART is running fuller and with higher
fares, it will be more difficult to drive it's cost per passenger mile
down.  CalTrain doesn't run as full and it's system is under-utilized
and is not promoted too well, so it's operating cost per passenger mile
can drop significantly.  Also, CalTrain has some inefficiencies that can
and will be addressed over time that will help drive cost per passenger
mile even lower.  BART is more "maxed" out in all regards (ridership,
system utilization and operating efficiency improvements), so it is
already close to it's theoretical best (lowest) cost per passenger mile.

|> 	So, it's safe to say that BART _does_ run efficiently.

Yup, about as efficiently as it ever can, and it still has a higher
operating cost per passenger mile (and higher fares) than the long-
neglected and under-utilized CalTrain system.  

-- 

Adrian Brandt (415) 940-2379
UUCP: ...!ames!ntmtv!adrian
ARPA: ntmtv!adrian@ames.arc.nasa.gov
From: jeremy@classic.asd.sgi.com (Jeremy Higdon)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
Subject: Re: BART "State of the System" handout
Date: 20 Nov 92 00:02:08 GMT
Distribution: ba
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.  Mountain View, CA

In article <1992Nov19.210145.18084@ntmtv>, adrian@ntmtv.UUCP (Adrian Brandt) writes:
> In article <1992Nov18.175327.23026@netcom.com>, kudzu@netcom.com (Michael Sierchio) writes:
> |> And people carp about BART, but it does what no other Rapid Transit in
> |> the world does, and does it well
> 
> And what might that be?  That is, what does BART do that no other rapid
> transit in the world does?  I can't imagine... other than stupid answers
> like: "It goes under the San Francisco Bay" (duh), or "it costs lots to
> extend and is way over-politicized" (duh).

It raises Adrian's blood pressure like no other rapid transit in the world
does.  That's gotta be worth something.

jeremy


:-)
Xref: sparky ba.transportation:2716 rec.railroad:9088
From: jeremy@classic.asd.sgi.com (Jeremy Higdon)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation,rec.railroad
Subject: Re: Failure of Proposition 156
Date: 20 Nov 92 02:40:12 GMT
Distribution: ca
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.  Mountain View, CA

In article <1992Nov19.213652.18395@ntmtv>, adrian@ntmtv.UUCP (Adrian Brandt) writes:
> In article <1992Nov18.223841.22457@s1.gov>, lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich) writes:
> |> In article <1992Nov18.182041.1287@ntmtv> adrian@ntmtv.UUCP (Adrian Brandt) writes:
> |> 
> |> >passenger rail service on the Bay Area-Santa Rosa-Eureka corridor
> |> 
> |> How did that go?
> 
> In light of prop 156's failure (it had money for this corridor), the
> chances of implementing any of the corridor improvements identified
> in the most recent CalTrans Division of Rail study are diminished for
> the near future...  The study concluded that tourist-oriented service
> between Wilits and Eureka could operate at a *profit* and that an
> inter-city travel oriented service between a Marin County ferry
> terminal and Wilits via Santa Rosa would just barely get up to the
> state-mandated 55% farebox for state-subsidized inter-city services.
> By blending the northern tourist-oriented service with the southern
> inter-city-oriented service for financial purposes the corridor could
> still make the 55% cost-recovery.  By making capital upgrades to up
> speeds and by cost-sharing with Santa Rosa - Marin commuter rail
> service the corridor could become quite successful.  But, alas, with
> 156's failure, we might have to wait awhile before any of this gets
> moving.  Also, Marin county is a big problem for staring rail service
> in this corridor.  Aparently certain vocal factions of Marin (including
> "environmentalists") are opposed to rail service.  They are afraid it
> will spur development and cut into the Marin image/mystique/cache (or
> whatever it is).  Instead, some rail opponents seem to think that if
> only 101 was widened then commuters would just zoom though Marin so
> fast they won't stop and settle there!  (Or some such pipe dream.)

I'm pretty sure that they would not consider this a fair summary of
their reasoning.  The environmentalists are almost surely against
widening 101 also.

> |> But if Clinton lives up to his campaign promises, things _might_ be
> |> a little easier.
> 
> I certainly hope so!  Things for rail and transit in general were damn
> tough under Bush, no doubt about it.

The flexible spending program (with that catchy name I can't quite
remember) started under Bush.  I thought that was considered to be
good for transit.  He didn't turn on the money faucet, but Clinton
is going to have a hard time doing that also, if he wants to be
reelected.

jeremy
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
From: lazzaro@boom.CS.Berkeley.EDU (John Lazzaro)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
Subject: Re: BART "State of the System" handout
Date: 18 Nov 92 02:45:29 GMT
Distribution: ba
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: boom.cs.berkeley.edu

In article <1992Nov18.002632.29468@Veritas.COM> joshua@Veritas.COM (Joshua Levy) writes:

> Assuming that
>almost everyone takes part to work and back home, the actual number
>of people using BART on any day is about 130,000. 

Bad assumption. Lots of people carpool one direction and BART/bus the
other, whether its two spouses in a car for the trip in, or two
co-workers in a car on the trip out. The net effect of one car being
taken off the road is achieved in this case.
Newsgroups: ba.transportation,rec.railroad
From: adrian@ntmtv.UUCP (Adrian Brandt)
Subject: CalTrain engineer declared innocent
Organization: Northern Telecom Inc, Mountain View, CA
Distribution: ba
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 19:20:57 GMT

There was a small item in yesterday's (Tue 11-17) SJ Merc that said
that the Amtrak/CalTrain engineer that was arrested by Sunnyvale
Police on suspicion of being under the influence of alcohol when
his train hit and killed a trespasser has had all charges against
him dropped.  Tests showed no alcohol in his system.  An Amtrak
spokesman said that the engineer was allowed to resume work as
soon as the test came back negative but that the engineer is still
troubled by the incident. 

The accident happened early in the morning about two or three *months*
ago near the Lawrence station near Lawrence Expressway.  The engineer
said he spotted the woman crouching on the tracks with her back to
the approaching train, but it was too late to stop the train.  The
woman was in her 70's and was reportedly an Alzheimer's patient that
had "escaped" from her home in the area shortly before the incident.
For some reason, a Sunnyvale policeman thought the engineer was DUI
and arrested him at the scene.  I understand from "inside sources"
that this whole thing ruffled some feathers at Amtrak and among its
train crews because of jurisdictional questions vis-a-vis the rail-
road's own police.

I wonder why it has taken so long for this matter to be resolved,
since the blood test results were presumably known within a matter
of days (if not hours) after the incident?

-- 

Adrian Brandt (415) 940-2379
UUCP: ...!ames!ntmtv!adrian
ARPA: ntmtv!adrian@ames.arc.nasa.gov
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
From: adrian@ntmtv.UUCP (Adrian Brandt)
Subject: Re: SFO rail transit setback?
Keywords: Kopp SFO BART CalTrain
Organization: Northern Telecom Inc, Mountain View, CA
Distribution: ca
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 20:37:25 GMT

In article <5629@gold.gvg.tek.com>, mikea@zorba.gvg.tek.com (Michael P. Anderson) writes:
|> BART under the airport is the only solution.

Could you explain why in some detail?  Be sure to compare and contrast with
pros & cons of the people-mover-to-the-joint-BART/CalTrain-station solution.
(Use cost, travel time, and convenience comparisons too.)


|> Find the money and do it right this time.

Why don't you help campaign for the gas/property/sales-tax to do it.
Be sure to let those who agree with your view know how they can help too.


|> (Ever been to Frankfurt? THREE levels of trains to all of Germany! Is
|> it that they're just smarter than us?)

The Germans pay about three or four times what we do for gas and
they pay much higher taxes overall.  They enjoy shorter work-weeks
than we do, 4 or 5 weeks of vacation per year, excellent infrastucture,
"free" public healthcare, etc.  Until our taxes and transportation
priorities/policies are more in line with those of Germany, we can't
hope to find the money or political will to "do it right".

-- 

Adrian Brandt (415) 940-2379
UUCP: ...!ames!ntmtv!adrian
ARPA: ntmtv!adrian@ames.arc.nasa.gov
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
From: jeremy@classic.asd.sgi.com (Jeremy Higdon)
Subject: Re: Speed & distance ramblings
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.  Mountain View, CA
Distribution: ca
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 22:11:35 GMT

In article <1992Nov23.211248.25853@ntmtv>, adrian@ntmtv.UUCP (Adrian Brandt) writes:
> 
> Fremont to Embarcadero on BART  is 31.1 miles.
> Mountain View to SF on CalTrain is 36.1 miles.

How long does Fremont to Embarcadero take?

Also, do you happen to know how far it is from 1st/Santa Clara
in San Jose to Fremont BART?

jeremy

Newsgroups: ba.transportation
From: lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
Subject: Re: BART "State of the System" handout
Date: 18 Nov 92 03:14:50 GMT
Distribution: ba
Organization: LLNL

In article <27491@dog.ee.lbl.gov> b_nbca@icarus.lbl.gov (Bruce Nordman) writes:
>My memory is that the transfer between Richmond- and Concord-bound
>trains can only be made at 12th Street.  That is, one of the trains
>may get to 19th and/or MacArthur, open its doors, and close them
>_before_ there is time to enter it from the other train.
>SO, transfer as soon as you can, regardless of which direction
>you are going.

	Well, I _have_ had some experience with this
simultaneous-arrival feature, and the two northbound trains _do_ stop
together at MacArthur as well as 12th St. It is certainly a sight to
see going to MacArthur, another BART train traveling beside the one
that one's riding in.

>I find the new "Commuter Channel" TVs annoying, and they actually
>provide less information (since the time shows up less often).
>With such a big screen, it bothers me that they can't (or won't) put
>the time and minutes till next trains in the corner constantly.

	I agree that that would be a helpful service. They do show the
time now and then; showing when the next trains will be showing up
would be a good addition.

>I'm glad the Coliseum<->Airport project is going ahead, but
>I would sure prefer that they used some standard, existing
>technology for it rather than inventing something new, since
>I want to use it, not just read about it.

	They could always copy the Wuppertal design, couldn't they? :-)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
From: murphy@well.sf.ca.us (Daniel A. Murphy)
Subject: Re: SF ballpark raises hope for CalTrain
Keywords: SF Giants ballpark CalTrain
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link
Distribution: ba
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 12:25:49 GMT


If Alioto gets her way, and the station is back at 7th and Channel, I'm
not at all sure why the train would come to San Francisco at *all*.

If Jordan and Alioto want environmentalists to support their stadium,
they had better figure out *something* reasonable to get CalTrain to
Market Street, to connect with the four downtown stations.
-- 
-------------------
Daniel A. Murphy        Net:         murphy@well.sf.ca.us
San Francisco, CA       GEnie:       D.MURPHY11
U.S.A.                  MCI Mail:    377-7947
From: jeremy@classic.asd.sgi.com (Jeremy Higdon)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
Subject: Re: SFO rail transit setback?
Keywords: Kopp SFO BART CalTrain
Date: 22 Nov 92 07:07:03 GMT
Distribution: ca
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.  Mountain View, CA

In article <1992Nov21.094253.23354@s1.gov>, lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich) writes:
> 
> 	BART to San Jose would be nice, though going underground in
> downtown SJ will be awfully expensive. Even going part of the way
> would be good, however, since BART's Silver Trains good at going very
> fast. The SC 180 express bus goes from Fremont to the San Jose
> Amtrak/CalTrain station in an hour; a BART train could probably make
> it there in less than half the time, and with a much more pleasant
> ride.

The 180 actually takes about 45 minutes, but who's counting.  I doubt
that BART would be able to do it in less than 30.  The 180 ride will
be much better when they pave over the original concrete on 880
between Montague and Brokaw.  Do we really need to spend $2 billion on
this?  That's over $1000 per county resident!  Note that when 880 is
widened, the 180 will be able to use HOV lanes.  They could also run
directs, bypassing Milpitas, to get the runtime about equal with BART,
and certainly less than an LRT alternative.

> >(Ever been to Frankfurt? THREE levels of trains to all of Germany! Is it
> >that they're just smarter than us?)
> 
> 	They have a three-level station??? I've heard of two-level
> ones, but three levels?
> 
> 	But I certainly agree that they're smarter than us, railwise.
> That massive post-WWII commitment to the car has turned out to be a
> disastrous blunder.

That's pretty hyperbolic.  I would say that some urban freeway
alignments have had unfortunate consequences, but I don't think
most people would call it 'disastrous'.

jeremy