Inspecting Our Rails

re: Inspecting Our Rails

Royko — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 03:47:42 GMT

Still, METREAUX refuses to acknowledge that the tram system was shoddily built by Siemens, the largest Multi-national firm in the tram business.

Them we have Mr. Wilson telling the City Council members that the firm they are partnering with, which reportedly includes a few local cronies and political insiders, is going to build a flawless system, and the taxpayers won't get stuck with another Main Street debacle.

Sure......SUCKERS!!!!!!!!!!!!

METREAUX is still shutting down on week-ends to replace improperly wired sections of the system.

Since FY2004, after squandering the $325 million of precious taxpayer funds on the toy train, not counting the $100+ million picked up by taxpayers through the Downtown Management District and several TIRZ's, METREAUX has reported the following expenditures since tram system start-up:

Includes all categories (Guideway, Passenger Stations, Administrative Buildings, Revenue Vehicles, Service Vehicles, Fare Revenue Collection Equipment, Communications/IS, Other)

FTA Form F-20

Rehabilitation / Reconstruction / Replacement / Improvement for Existing service

FY2004 FY2005 FY2006 FY2007

$70,779,021 $ 5,218,346 $ 6,095,404 $ 1,112,187

Expansion of service

FY2004 FY2005 FY2006 FY2007

$10,965,471 $24,834,500 $ 6,229,035 $128,087,819

Totals

FY2004 FY2005 FY2006 FY2007

$81,744,492 $30,052,846 $12,324,439 $129,200,006

Grand Total: $253,321,783

re: Inspecting Our Rails

Brin — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 08:26:53 GMT

I, too, fail to see the connection between rail maintenance and some great conspiracy to take advantage of those who abuse the exclamation point.

re: Inspecting Our Rails

WD — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 18:22:23 GMT

"Geometry testing revealed that the curve at Fannin and old Main did not meet the federal guidelines for allowable speed at that curve because of the elevation of the outside rail."

Hmmmm, please explain. Was Metro running higher speeds around that curve until just now? Is the rail out of spec from when it was built and Metro is just now discovering it? If it was supposed be rated for higher speeds--why is the builder not going to correct the problem? Why wasn't this discovered during the "quality control" checks that should have been done during or after construction?

re: Inspecting Our Rails

Royko — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 02:50:12 GMT

Adrian,

I am not on anyone's payroll.

This is not the first significant defect encountered.

METREAUX has been spending millions so far correcting the defects, and they have collected little if anything from Siemens.

The entire system needs condemnation, as it is merely a boondoggle!

Had METREAUX listened to Mr. Cox, we wouldn't be sitting here watching the Urban Rail RObber Barons playing Monopoly with our precious tax money instead of fullfilling the promise of a 50% increase in bus service to the poor, minority, elderly, and handicapped bus transit dependent riders throughout the service area.

Time will tell, although it will be too late to stop METREAUX from indenturing our future generations to pay for the wasteful urban rail expansions.

re: Inspecting Our Rails

Woody Speer — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 04:17:01 GMT

"For example, recently track maintainers found that rails were being gouged at certain downtown intersections. After conducting an investigation, we discovered that the city street sweepers were inadvertently causing that to occur."

Instead of sweeping a steel rail line, the city out to deploy those street sweepers on the bike lanes. By the way, you use a street sweeper to sweep a steel rail because ......????

re: Inspecting Our Rails

Royko — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 23:17:20 GMT

In regards to that Stray Current comment above. Many have been intolerant of my statements concerning the METREAUXRail boondoggle, and I have said time will tell if METREAUX stuck the taxpayers with a shoddily built system. Please feel free to read Rad Sallee:

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/5563675.html

************

Houston & Texas News

Feb. 22, 2008, 10:47PM

Medical Center wins time to sue over rail current leak

Metro agrees to extend window by 6 months to assess electrical levels at light rail tracks

By RAD SALLEE

TOOLS

Get section feed

Subscribe NOW

Comments

Recommend

The Metropolitan Transit Authority board has approved plans to negotiate with the Texas Medical Center to extend the time that it can sue Metro over "stray" electrical current leaking from the light rail tracks.

The item was described on Metro's monthly board agenda Thursday as authorizing President and CEO Frank Wilson to "execute a tolling agreement," causing some observers to think it was about planned high occupancy-toll lanes on the Katy Freeway.

Instead, as Medical Center President and CEO Richard Wainerdi explained, a tolling agreement "extends the time in which a party has a right to any kind of remedy or action" to recover damages in court.

"In this case, the law is two years," he said.

Statute of limitations

Although neither Wilson nor Wainerdi was sure of the deadline for such a lawsuit, Metro officials revealed the problem publicly in March 2005 after CenterPoint Energy pointed it out to them. That prompted the Medical Center to order its own studies.

Wainerdi said that if damage from the current were discovered several years in the future, it would be too late to go to court. "It doesn't work that way," he said.

"What they've asked for," Wilson said, "is a suspension of the clock that counts the statute of limitations." He said the agreement would extend the Medical Center's window by six months.

"Our view is that they didn't want to be in a position of having to file suit at this point because there's no basis for it," Wilson said. The window, he said, will provide more time for the Medical Center to assess the problem.

"We have a commission, a working group of building owners, utilities and Metro, and if anybody does anything or learns anything, they share the information," Wilson said.

Metro also has been working with Siemens Transportation Systems, which built the track and power system, to reduce the current to levels specified in the construction contract.

Metro maintains that the current has caused no damage to structures along the 7.5-mile route. However, Metro and Siemens have repaired bridge anchors and other track facilities where corrosion was found or current leakage was unacceptably high.

Monitoring for corrosion

A report by a Medical Center consultant, Corrpro, based on monitoring 161 locations at 13 facilities in the medical complex in 2006-2007, found three with current high enough to deserve continued monitoring. Two sites were underground pipes and the third was the Meyer Building of Texas Children's Hospital, 1919 Braeswood at Greenbriar, which houses administrative offices.

Seven facilities had current low enough to be "inconsequential" if it does not increase, the report said, and seven had no measurable current. Consultants for the Medical Center and Metro continue to monitor various sites for corrosion that might be caused by the current.

"It's very hard to define how much damage occurs," Wainerdi said. "We have done some measurements, but all of these pipes are buried. You can know a little bit about the point that you study, but you don't know about a point six inches away."

rad.sallee@chron.com

re: Inspecting Our Rails

Track inspector — Mon, 25 Feb 2008 16:16:56 GMT

Class 1 Track is the same for freight,passenger and LRT except for speed class 1 freight max. speed 10 mph

class 1 passenger max. speed 15 mph

re: Inspecting Our Rails

Clark Morris — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 14:30:41 GMT

I suggest checking to see what the European standards are for light rail for that type of curve. The US notoriously is far more conservative than their European counterparts. Since this has NOT caused a problem in the past 3 - 4 years, I suspect the federal standard is the problem and not the curve. If the European standards allow the previously allowed speed point out to the appropriate Federal authorities that the cars are European design and that the German and other safety authorities are not noted for their laxity.