Proposal to combine some USA systems

[the_spui_ninja]

So that would mean the S-Line in Salt Lake and the KC streetcar would be in the hypothetical "streetcar" system? Both of these are only one line (although KC might get a branch in the future). Interestingly, despite being labeled a streetcar, the S-Line has its own ROW, which could mean a dedicated system, I have no preference in the matter.

[cl94]

The S-Line is a de facto part of TRAX, so I would just lump it in with TRAX. Almost all of it is a dedicated ROW converted from freight rail.

[the_spui_ninja]

Tourist railroads, incline railways, and airport people movers make sense to combine, making exceptions for systems with multiple lines as necessary. Beyond that, it gets weird.

It seems like there is a consensus on those three, should we move forward with combining those while the streetcar discussion continues?

[Duke87]

Tourist railroads, incline railways, and airport people movers make sense to combine, making exceptions for systems with multiple lines as necessary. Beyond that, it gets weird.

It seems like there is a consensus on those three, should we move forward with combining those while the streetcar discussion continues?

I don't think any inclines are drafted yet but for the others, sure - if you wanna do it go ahead, else I might be able to take care of it later.

[Bickendan]

Technically, Portland has three streetcar lines, as the the Loop Line is treated as two running in opposite directions.

We'd map the AB Loop as one line though, according to current rules.

TriMet defines each loop as its own line and color; Google reflects this on the transit layer. 3/4 of the loop are on separate alignment/opposing couplets, with a crossover section in the Lloyd District.

[Duke87]

TriMet defines each loop as its own line and color; Google reflects this on the transit layer. 3/4 of the loop are on separate alignment/opposing couplets, with a crossover section in the Lloyd District.

Per the current draft manual...

- If a service takes a slightly different route in different directions at some point in the middle (e.g. light rail/streetcar runs one-way down adjacent streets) the mapped path should split the difference between the physical paths the two directions follow, same as with road routes following one-way pairs. All stations along the one-way pair should be included as distinct points even if they are only served in one direction. Stations with different names in each direction that serve the same cross street may be combined into a single waypoint with a slash separating their names in the waypoint label.

(emphasis added)

Now the manual is draft, so if there's a desire to handle this situation differently feel free to propose a revision.


I don't think it makes sense to expect users to clinch the A and B loop separately, since they really are just opposite directions of the same thing.
Of more pragmatic concern though, there's also an issue where the concurrency with the NS Line cannot be mapped properly if the A and B loops are separate, since one is concurrent with each direction of the NS Line through downtown.

[si404]

I'd map the A&B loops as separate services because they are treated as separated services, but concurrent (maybe not entirely so, but certainly mostly) as they aren't really.

The important thing, IMV, is to get the networks drafted, and then move them if needbe, rather than worrying about whether it would be put in a grabbag and not drafting it until that's sorted!

[the_spui_ninja]

usatr - United States Tourist/Heritage Railroads (tier 2 by current draft rules, but up for debate)
usaair - United States Landside Airport Rail Systems (tier 5)
usair - United States Incline Railways (tier 5)

These three should now be live at the next site update. I added in the Lookout Mountain incline in Chattanooga so there's not an empty system.

[cl94]

usatr - United States Tourist/Heritage Railroads (tier 2 by current draft rules, but up for debate)
usaair - United States Landside Airport Rail Systems (tier 5)
usair - United States Incline Railways (tier 5)

These three should now be live at the next site update. I added in the Lookout Mountain incline in Chattanooga so there's not an empty system.

Sweet. I'll throw the Virginia and Truckee (already drafted locally) in the heritage system later today. All of the Vegas people movers are drafted as well, but it might be best to just wait for those until we make a decision about where to put them.

[cl94]

Continuing the trend of combining systems, I propose to combine all of the Las Vegas casino trams into a single system. I have had all 3 of these drafted locally for a while, but I have been hesitant to give a bunch of single lines with 2-4 stops their own systems.

The combined system would be a tier 5 system called Las Vegas Casino Trams (usalvt), which would combine the following systems:

usaae - Aria Express
usambt - Mandalay Bay Tram
usamti - Mirage-Treasure Island Tram

Once we have consensus on this, I'll have the files ready to go so they can go preview quickly.

[Duke87]

Well, those are all people movers. But, since the proposal to combine all US people movers ran into a little trouble with "define people movers", maybe we just drop the idea of doing that. In which case, this is a less bold but logical combination and I support it.

[cl94]

Yeah, I was holding off on these because of said people mover system. If we're going to have it, these go in there. If not, it makes sense to just combine all of the casino people movers into one thing and reduce clutter.

[si404]

The Vegas people movers are a coherent concept for a system. A nationwide grab-bag of all of them is less so.

[cl94]

At least for the time being, I'm going to upload the Vegas people movers as a single system so they're in the browser. If we decide to make a nationwide grab-bag, it can be merged into said system. The monorail is staying its own system, as it is a transit system owned by a county agency as opposed to a private business.

The Circus Circus Sky Tower tram in Reno is currently defunct, so no need to worry about how that would factor into all of this. If it is ever reactivated, this system can be expanded to cover casino trams statewide. Similarly, if the Primm Valley Monorail is ever reactivated, it would belong in the casino trams system being as it was a tram operated by the casino.