Weighing In on Metro Safety

Discussion Policy
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
Sunday, July 5, 2009

The recent Metro tragedy demonstrates that the front and rear cars of trains serve as energy-absorbing protection for passengers in the middle cars. Shouldn't Metro install energy-absorbing bumpers at the front and rear of trains, so passengers in the front and rear cars are protected as well?

The technology is available. NASCAR has developed energy-absorbing walls made of steel tubes and hard foam. This technology has dramatically decreased injuries and fatalities. Shouldn't Metro, and rail systems throughout the world, draw on this technology to protect their riders?

-- James N. Fox, Fairfax

--

Having been away for more than a week, I have been stunned to discover that there has been no discussion of the logic of extending Metro to Dulles. That the system is underfunded and the existing equipment and infrastructure are in need of major capital investment cannot be debated. So why would the people of the Washington area want Metro extended to Dulles before repairs and needed investment are made to the existing system? There is not enough money to extend and repair Metro, so the common sense decision would be to fix what we have first. No dessert until you finish what is on your plate!

-- Ken Windheim, Arlington

--

The Metro crash raises again the call for a dedicated funding source so the subway system can promptly undertake expenditures needed to overcome massive safety deficiencies.

A Jan. 24, 1981, front-page story in The Post carried the headline: "Land Around Metro Stations Increases $2 Billion in Value." A congressional study I led detected this dramatic impact when only 39 percent of the original 101-mile system was operating. Since then, Metro's presence has increased land values by many billions of dollars more.

Our survey found that the bulk of these increases -- called Metro premiums by real estate agents -- went into the pockets of property owners "lucky enough to own land within easy access to Metro stations." Since 1981, many have urged Metro to recapture this value that it created to fund the operation and upgrading of its popular and widely used transit system.


CONTINUED     1           >


© 2009 The Washington Post Company