Calgary Public Transit II - Page 375

lineman · #**7481** Posted **Jan 16, 2014, 4:15 PM**

Yes.

Edit: looks like we posted at the same time.

lineman · #**7482** Posted **Jan 16, 2014, 4:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by DoubleK

They must have lost a bunch of equipment. Energized AC line falling on DC = very bad news. Shocked there wasn't rider poles installed at the crossing location.

Riders won't prevent this. The dead ends let go.

CTrainDude · #**7483** Posted **Jan 16, 2014, 4:38 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by lineman

Riders won't prevent this. The dead ends let go.

So the weights dropped off, and lost tension? That would explain it.

DoubleK · #**7484** Posted **Jan 16, 2014, 6:24 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by lineman

Riders won't prevent this. The dead ends let go.

I had thought that it was an Enmax AC line that had fallen across the Ctrain and edited my post accordingly.

freeweed · #**7485** Posted **Jan 16, 2014, 7:41 PM**

Considering that every time even a minor event happens downtown, people start screaming "this is why it needed to be a subway in the first place!!!"...

I'm a bit surprised I haven't seen people start advocating for electrified rails. Maybe I shouldn't give them ideas.

lineman · #**7486** Posted **Jan 16, 2014, 8:08 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by CTrainDude

So the weights dropped off, and lost tension? That would explain it.

The pantograph snagged the contact wire at the interlock in a way I've never seen and ripped it all down.

MasterG · #**7487** Posted **Jan 17, 2014, 3:14 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by freeweed

Considering that every time even a minor event happens downtown, people start screaming "this is why it needed to be a subway in the first place!!!"...

I'm a bit surprised I haven't seen people start advocating for electrified rails. Maybe I shouldn't give them ideas.

Wasn't there a subway feasibility report of some kind due out a year or two ago? I remember some money being set aside for it in a budget but don't recall it ever coming to fruition...

Chadillaccc · #**7488** Posted **Jan 17, 2014, 3:17 AM**

Subway subway subway *shakes maracas*

Full Mountain · #**7489** Posted **Jan 17, 2014, 3:36 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by lineman

The pantograph snagged the contact wire at the interlock in a way I've never seen and ripped it all down.

Could it be the result of a worn pantograph? Or high speed?

lineman · #**7490** Posted **Jan 17, 2014, 4:05 AM**

The cause is still under investigation.

Chadillaccc · #**7491** Posted **Jan 17, 2014, 8:01 PM**

Reposted from the construction thread. I thought it might generate better discussion here...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Calgarian

I've wondered about this as well. The area around 16th needs a station, but where could you put it that wouldn't screw up traffic? I think it needs to be a Tunnel at least until 16th Ave.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

I would imagine it will be, to be honest... I can't see any other way that we will do it. The 2nd Street Subway alignment is all but approved already, meaning they will have to tunnel under the river, meaning they will have to tunnel under and slope up the North Bank. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if there wasn't a single station between Eau Claire Station and 16 Avenue Station... because otherwise, the intermediate station would be far too deep. The one saving grace of this is that it would basically have to be a bored tunnel, rather than cut-and-cover. Also, if they do go underground to 16th, that would mean it would still have a ways to slope up before coming to grade, likely meaning it wouldn't come above ground before 20th Avenue... which I could live with.

DizzyEdge · #**7492** Posted **Jan 17, 2014, 8:16 PM**

One thing I do not want to see with a NCLRT is this:

https://maps.google.com/?ll=51.037793,-1...6NvkO-370v3oRciCxQ&cbp=12,309.93,,0,1.74

Putting a permanent barrier to any sort of street interaction on one side of the street.

My personal preference would be underground until 64 ave, then using the East side grassy strip as a ROW.

Chadillaccc · #**7493** Posted **Jan 17, 2014, 8:20 PM**

Same here! I don't think we could hope to see it underground that far... but perhaps we will see a "Canada Line" type scenario where it is underground for the urban sections of the city (to about 34 Ave) and then come above and elevated to Sandstone Valley.

DizzyEdge · #**7494** Posted **Jan 17, 2014, 8:21 PM**

If not underground until 64th then perhaps elevated from 7th avenue until 32 ave, running just to the east of the alley that is east of centre street, likely leading to expropriation of 2 houses per block. Then after 32nd similar method but up the east side of 1st st NE, until 41st ave then skirt the various parks and school grounds until 60th, then underground until 64th.

I also realize that isn't the question being asked at all haha.

DizzyEdge · #**7495** Posted **Jan 17, 2014, 8:23 PM**

To be honest even if underground you'd proabably need to do the same expropriation, as it would likely be cut and cover

MalcolmTucker · #**7496** Posted **Jan 17, 2014, 9:01 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by DizzyEdge

One thing I do not want to see with a NCLRT is this:

https://maps.google.com/?ll=51.037793,-1...6NvkO-370v3oRciCxQ&cbp=12,309.93,,0,1.74

Putting a permanent barrier to any sort of street interaction on one side of the street.

My personal preference would be underground until 64 ave, then using the East side grassy strip as a ROW.

http://goo.gl/maps/S8Atz Doesn't look so bad. Elevated for a period for sure.

DizzyEdge · #**7497** Posted **Jan 17, 2014, 9:04 PM**

For a lot of streets it wouldn't matter, I'm just thinking for Centre it's a street we want to densify, and we wouldn't want to exclude one half of the street.

I guess another option might be sending it elevated right up the middle of centre.

Judging by this view

https://maps.google.com/?ll=49.208598,-1...nx4b-qDf0lxg&cbp=12,188.06,,0,-8.06&z=16

you could run it up the middle with it taking about 1 lanes width.

WaitWhat? · #**7498** Posted **Jan 17, 2014, 9:30 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by DizzyEdge

For a lot of streets it wouldn't matter, I'm just thinking for Centre it's a street we want to densify, and we wouldn't want to exclude one half of the street.

I guess another option might be sending it elevated right up the middle of centre.

Judging by this view

https://maps.google.com/?ll=49.208598,-1...nx4b-qDf0lxg&cbp=12,188.06,,0,-8.06&z=16

you could run it up the middle with it taking about 1 lanes width.

I'm wondering if it would work to have it elevated through that much residential. I could see a lot of opposition (noise, shadow, etc.). My current preference (it's changed many times) would be to have it underground to 41 ave and then pop up to grade at the park east of Centre, navigate the parks and schools east of Centre to 60 ave, expropriate the houses on the east side of Centre from 60 ave to Blackthorn Rd and then travel the east side of Centre all the way to Beddington Drive, expropriate the houses on the east side of Centre between Beddington Drive and Beddington Trail and then the middle of Harvest Hills the rest of the way. It would still be underground or off Centre in the areas most likely to densify.

lineman · #**7499** Posted **Jan 17, 2014, 9:30 PM**

Max track grade is 6%. The tunnel would have to be bored until at least ~12th Ave.

sportsdude · #**7500** Posted **Jan 18, 2014, 5:05 AM**

Does anyone find Nenshi's use of the 520 million dollars towards transit as a well intended but a misplaced/political use of the funds?

I guess this moreso my opinion on the waste the SETWAY is in terms of capital dollars to riders compared to the other BRT routes in the RouteAhead plan. Actually any of the other BRT routes have much better business cases/economics then the SETWAY.

Calgary has a early stage Younge subway situation in its hands with the South LRT and the 4 car trains will be only a stop gap situation. Calgary needs to use this money to increase the SD200 train order to get all the 80's U2 trains retired ASAP to increase the reliability of the system immensely and be able to run 4 car trains for rush hour sufficiently. Some of the money should also be spent on 26th ave and Heritage Drive overpasses to decrease travel times and help traffic on McLeod Trail.