SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum//index.php)
-   Transportation (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum//forumdisplay.php?f=25)
-   -   New electric train for Montreal and suburbs (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum//showthread.php?t=222395)

montréaliste Apr 23, 2016 2:09 PM

New electric train for Montreal and suburbs
 
A massive new project to link North shore to South shore suburbs and a western line linking Montreal island burbs and the airport to downtown.

5.5 billion dollars and technology anticipated to be much like the Vancouver and Dubai Skytrains. 67 km of two way track and future extensions would be announced not too far off into the future according to some sources. This would make it the 3rd longest electrically generated set in the world, and the ambition is to make it the longest.

http://montrealgazette.com/news/loca...nd-south-shore

canucklehead2 Apr 23, 2016 3:36 PM

Awesome news. I take it Bombardier might be a partner in the project given its Quebecois heritage and that fact that it's the pioneer in ALRT technology...

M II A II R II K Apr 23, 2016 4:30 PM

Could be Innovia ICTS technology. Which also assures it stays off of the road.

SkahHigh Apr 23, 2016 4:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by M II A II R II K (Post 7418303)
Could be Innovia ICTS technology. Which also assures it stays off of the road.

Could very well be. It will have catenary wires, it's not third rail electrification.

tayser Apr 24, 2016 2:56 AM

Intéressant. This will be a project to watch! (50% will be interesting will be the type of tech/system implemented and the other 50% will how well the financing works: AU has trillions locked up in superannuation ('pension') funds which generally flow to toll road projects atm, if this works well in CA then look out AU!).

ardecila Apr 24, 2016 8:52 PM

Impressive. This is really just a conversion of the Deux-Montagnes Line, though, with some new extensions along expressway corridors.

The devil is in the details when it comes to expressway transit, but it usually doesn't create much new development in the North American context.

http://cdpqinfra.com/sites/all/files...artes_en_2.jpg

http://cdn06.branchez-vous.com/wp-co...on-800x410.jpg

GreaterMontréal Apr 24, 2016 9:19 PM

the Deux-Montagnes Line is over-saturated, we also need a transit link from YUL to the South Shore. There is a TOD proposal in Brossard, construction starting soon.

ardecila Apr 24, 2016 11:07 PM

^ Of course. I'm not saying it's a bad proposal, but it will need to be planned carefully, especially the expressway stations.

The rendering is promising...

montréaliste Apr 25, 2016 3:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 7419175)
Impressive. This is really just a conversion of the Deux-Montagnes Line, though, with some new extensions along expressway corridors.

The devil is in the details when it comes to expressway transit, but it usually doesn't create much new development in the North American context.



As far as inner-city development goes, I think this project will be a big boost to St-Laurent Technopaerc developers, and of course the airport link is expected to provide development around Dorval and Pointe-Claire also. These areas are pretty dense already, but a lot of warehouse and manufacturing spaces on certain axes are outdated in terms of just in time delivery, and the better transit will spur development in these areas.

The other interesting feature of the Brossard/Deux Montagnes line is that it crosses 3 shores and thus connects communities in a way only highway 30 looping or often painful trans island commutes are able to do now.

M II A II R II K Apr 25, 2016 4:04 PM

It's kind of like a Docklands Light Rail. Hope they call it Ligne 3.

Crawford Apr 25, 2016 4:19 PM

Looks cool. Would this be the only electrified commuter rail in Canada?

hammersklavier Apr 25, 2016 6:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crawford (Post 7419875)
Looks cool. Would this be the only electrified commuter rail in Canada?

The Deux-Montagnes Line -- which is at the core of this proposal -- is currently Canada's only electrified commuter-rail line. IIRC Toronto's Go network has plans to electrify its system in the future as well.

A major issue with calling this a "light rail" proposal is that the network spine is currently heavily used by AMT services: the Deux-Montagnes Line as well as the Mascouche and Mont-St-Hilaire lines both access central Montréal with critical infrastructure this proposal takes over: the Mt. Royal Tunnel and the Victoria Bridge across the St. Lawrence (the latter still used by CN and Via as well).

At a certain level, the only way this plan doesn't actively harm Montréal's existing commuter network is if we instead interpret the project as being branches off of Deux-Montagnes, packaged as "light rail" but really needing to coexist with the network's other heavy users and being more akin to Denver's A Line.

SkahHigh Apr 25, 2016 6:42 PM

It won't cohabit with commuter rail though. The Mascouche Line will stop at the A40 with an REM transfer, the Mont-Saint-Hilaire Line will keep running as it doesn't cover the same population axis, and the Deux-Montagnes Line will be converted. The tracks will only be used by the REM so it'll be grade-separated.

This is more light rapid transit project than bonified commuter rail. Similar to Docklands Light Railway like Mark said.

hammersklavier Apr 25, 2016 6:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkahHigh (Post 7420040)
It won't cohabit with commuter rail though. The Mascouche Line will stop at the A40 with an REM transfer, the Mont-Saint-Hilaire Line will keep running as it doesn't cover the same population axis, and the Deux-Montagnes Line will be converted. The tracks will only be used by the REM so it'll be grade-separated.

This is more light rapid transit project than bonified commuter rail. Similar to Docklands Light Railway like Mark said.

The non-full lines on the map are commuter rail:

http://cdn06.branchez-vous.com/wp-co...on-800x410.jpg

Those answers raise more red flags:

(1) Transfer penalties are much more significant with commuter rail than other modes, and get even more significant the further from the core you are. How would the transfer be managed? Even more importantly, has there been any consideration whatsoever to any sort of solution that doesn't negatively affect the Mascouche Line's ridership? The media articles seem to ignore this as an issue altogether.

(2) If not via the Victoria Bridge, how on earth do you intend to cross the St. Lawrence?

So far, this looks to me like a heavily greenwashed proposal rather than something that actually positively affects Montréal.

SkahHigh Apr 25, 2016 7:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hammersklavier (Post 7420047)
Those answers raise more red flags:

(1) Transfer penalties are much more significant with commuter rail than other modes, and get even more significant the further from the core you are. How would the transfer be managed? Even more importantly, has there been any consideration whatsoever to any sort of solution that doesn't negatively affect the Mascouche Line's ridership? The media articles seem to ignore this as an issue altogether.

(2) If not via the Victoria Bridge, how on earth do you intend to cross the St. Lawrence?

So far, this looks to me like a heavily greenwashed proposal rather than something that actually positively affects Montréal.

(1) The Mascouche Line might be converted to REM in a later phase, but we don't know the transfer details yet.

(2) There is a $4.2B new Champlain bridge currently under construction. The tracks will be in the middle of the bridge:

http://www.on-sitemag.com/wp-content...1003690652.jpg
http://www.on-sitemag.com/wp-content...1003690652.jpg

Don't underestimate the impact or planning of this project. Most details have been studied by the Caisse, they're just not out to the public yet. They have experience in infrastructure investment and a good crew of transportation specialists from the city (notably, Richard Bergeron).

a very long weekend Apr 25, 2016 7:45 PM

this project is great, but the edouard montpetit and mcgill stations are crucial to the viability of this project long term. if the rem is accessible from all three metro lines, it's an easy one transfer trip systemwide. this makes it useful to virtually everyone along the routes. if the only point is central station however, its usefulness declines significantly and ridership will suffer.

SkahHigh Apr 25, 2016 7:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by a very long weekend (Post 7420100)
this project is great, but the edouard montpetit and mcgill stations are crucial to the viability of this project long term. if the rem is accessible from all three metro lines, it's an easy one transfer trip systemwide. this makes it useful to virtually everyone along the routes. if the only point is central station however, its usefulness declines significantly and ridership will suffer.

I'm sure at least the Edouard-Montpetit Station will be built.

hammersklavier Apr 25, 2016 8:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkahHigh (Post 7420074)
(1) The Mascouche Line might be converted to REM in a later phase, but we don't know the transfer details yet.

(2) There is a $4.2B new Champlain bridge currently under construction. The tracks will be in the middle of the bridge:

http://www.on-sitemag.com/wp-content...1003690652.jpg
http://www.on-sitemag.com/wp-content...1003690652.jpg

Don't underestimate the impact or planning of this project. Most details have been studied by the Caisse, they're just not out to the public yet. They have experience in infrastructure investment and a good crew of transportation specialists from the city (notably, Richard Bergeron).

I am aware of the Caisse's experience in transportation investment. Canada having as prolific a mass-transit investor as them is one of the reasons Canadian mass transit is often well ahead of its American counterparts.

However, that said ...

I don't think the Docklands is the project Caisse should be looking at. Rather, the layout of the Mt. Royal Tunnel makes it far more useful to develop an RER-like system in the city and suburbs. Recall Deux-Montagnes is a longstanding and successful commuter line, serving 31,000 riders a day. The system will need to be compatible with the existing network; replacing electrification systems is so expensive I don't think anybody's ever done it at scale.

Given that Mascouche already has dual-mode locomotives that can run under the existing electrification network, I am dubious about kicking it out of the Mt. Royal Tunnel as well. The main issue seems to be one of compatibility for their new-build routes (i.e. the ones to the airport and Brossard), which they don't want to invest as much into. Given that Deux-Montagnes already has decently-performing EMUs, I think the network would optimally just use designs derived from them; is tunnel capacity really such an issue you'd rather kick Mascouche trains out?

SkahHigh Apr 25, 2016 9:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hammersklavier (Post 7420132)
I am aware of the Caisse's experience in transportation investment. Canada having as prolific a mass-transit investor as them is one of the reasons Canadian mass transit is often well ahead of its American counterparts.

However, that said ...

I don't think the Docklands is the project Caisse should be looking at. Rather, the layout of the Mt. Royal Tunnel makes it far more useful to develop an RER-like system in the city and suburbs. Recall Deux-Montagnes is a longstanding and successful commuter line, serving 31,000 riders a day. The system will need to be compatible with the existing network; replacing electrification systems is so expensive I don't think anybody's ever done it at scale.

Given that Mascouche already has dual-mode locomotives that can run under the existing electrification network, I am dubious about kicking it out of the Mt. Royal Tunnel as well. The main issue seems to be one of compatibility for their new-build routes (i.e. the ones to the airport and Brossard), which they don't want to invest as much into. Given that Deux-Montagnes already has decently-performing EMUs, I think the network would optimally just use designs derived from them; is tunnel capacity really such an issue you'd rather kick Mascouche trains out?

Regarding tunnel capacity and that particular rail line, they won't want heavy AMT trains running with REM trains as it these AMT trains are much slower and that would create a capacity issue (the tunnel only has two tracks).

I'm sure with the environmental assessment study we'll get more details in the coming months.

ardecila Apr 25, 2016 9:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hammersklavier (Post 7420132)
Given that Deux-Montagnes already has decently-performing EMUs, I think the network would optimally just use designs derived from them; is tunnel capacity really such an issue you'd rather kick Mascouche trains out?

Automated trains and conventional trains don't gel, and the automation is essential to keep operating costs low and frequency high. I think at the frequencies proposed for REM, it will indeed max out the capacity of a two-track tunnel (well, the RER-A has 90-second headways but that's kind of an outlier)

RER is a useful planning concept, but automation is a different and equally useful paradigm.

This is basically automated SkyTrain minus the linear induction traction. The power system may very well be compatible with other electrified lines, but the signaling will be totally incompatible with the conventional trains used on Mascouche trains.


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:08 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.