http://www.timesherald.com/article/2012062...d-state-economy

Of course we shall not consider the fact that regular rail commuter service in Tokyo has also shown profits for many many years. In both cases part of their income comes from real estate adjacent to the rail RoW.

One thing that we seem to specialize on is making bogus arguments based on selective presentation of facts.

We will not worry about the fact that a completely different mode will require completely new maintenance facilities with completely different set of inventory and completely different set of staff with zero cross usability, and hence will increase overall cost beyond reason. And there is no guarantee that it will pay for itself based on any fare structure that anyone will be able to afford.

Sigh... I am sure another set of consultants will get their kids through colleges on the back of this and the public will of course finally get nothing.

Truth: This is a Letter to the Editor from a reader, a reader whose reputation went out the window with his reference to the R6. We're coming up on 2 years since the retirement of that designation.

I agree with Jishnu that despite the pitfalls that SEPTA has, they really should consider using the technology that is being used now, namely an extension or a branch of existing regional rail service. Make use of the current Trenton Cutoff freight-only line.

Another thing to consider is where this fantasy would put a downtown terminal for a monorail. It is unlikely that the infrastructure, which this writer says would be built up high so as not to be affected by river flooding, would be asthetically pleasing or accepted by the neighborhoods it would traverse to get to Center City. There are good reasons why SEPTA tore down Reading Railroad's former viaduct entry into the city and replaced it with the current commuter tunnel.

Well while he's correct that the Seattle Monorail makes a profit, the big problem is that he fails to understand why it makes a profit!

It doesn't make a profit because it's a monorail.

It makes a profit in part because it is a major tourist attraction, but not so much a viable commuter system. And it makes a profit because it charges a premium price, which tourists are willing to swallow when on vacation. But your average commuter isn't going to accept a charge of $1.25 per mile traveled, which is what the $2.25 fare to ride works out to per mile.

By comparison, one can ride from the end of the Market-Frankford line to the other end a distance of 12.9 miles for $2.00. And that R6 he mentioned, it's 18.1 miles long. If they charged Seattle monorail rates, then it would cost $22.63 one way to ride. SEPTA currently charges $6 for that ride if one buys a ticket from the conductor on a weekday, the most expensive ticket one can buy.

Alan,

Of course that assumes that a fare structure based on mileage would be instituted. As you know in your own city, the transit fare is flat, whether one rides the A train one stop from 42nd Street to 34th Street, or from 42nd Street all the way to Far Rockaway.

Remember too that NJT has a flat fare for the entire RiverLINE, which is 34 miles long -- almost twice the length of the Philly-Norristown commuter line.

I don't advocate a monorail for this purpose between Philly and King of Prussia/Valley Forge, but should it happen the fare could be set in that manner. A monorail of that length would be a new thing as would distance based monorail fares. Thinking of other such properties in Las Vegas, Jacksonville, and others, all do charge a flat fare.

Oh, I agree 100% Kevin.

I was simply trying to point out why the Seattle monorail makes money and SEPTA loses money.