Confederation Line (Stage 1) | In Service 1.0

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I wouldn't characterize them as "adapted for our needs" more like "hopefully functional." Bulked up trams are still way less useful than the many light metro systems on the market in the 2010s.

If they weren't adapted to our needs, which other Citadis train do you think ours are a clone of? When talking to a former colleague who had previously worked for Alstom, he told me that the Citadis Spirit was nothing like any of the other Citadis trains. They may have tried to reuse some of the components, but the train itself was a new design to meet North American requirements.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by roger1818

If they weren't adapted to our needs, which other Citadis train do you think ours are a clone of? When talking to a former colleague who had previously worked for Alstom, he told me that the Citadis Spirit was nothing like any of the other Citadis trains. They may have tried to reuse some of the components, but the train itself was a new design to meet North American requirements.

Obviously wasn't new design enough.

I continue to think the idea of using a tram as a metro makes no sense. A high floor system would have allowed for a more robust wheel assembly and more passengers in a more comfortable environment.

Even the 2009 report identified performance risks with a tram technology (page 356) that light metro did not have.

https://app06.ottawa.ca/calendar/ottawa/...Rail%20System%20Study%20Document%201.pdf

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Obviously wasn't new design enough.

Yup, but you can't say that it wasn't "adapted to our needs" at all.

I continue to think the idea of using a tram as a metro makes no sense. A high floor system would have allowed for a more robust wheel assembly and more passengers in a more comfortable environment.

Even the 2009 report identified performance risks with a tram technology (page 356) that light metro did not have.

https://app06.ottawa.ca/calendar/ottawa/...Rail%20System%20Study%20Document%201.pdf

Agreed. That was the city being tunnel minded about it having to be an LRT system, and not accepting the recommendations of experts.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Yup, but you can't say that it wasn't "adapted to our needs" at all.



Agreed. That was the city being tunnel minded about it having to be an LRT system, and not accepting the recommendations of experts.

I don't think it was adapted to our needs.

• It wasn't adapted to Ottawa weather.
• It wasn't adapted to the city's planned track layout.
• It wasn't adapted to the projected capacity needs (in some ways the pandemic saved the city's bacon, imagine a no-pandemic world where most office workers go to the office 5 days a week, the city would have been up **** creek without a paddle).
• It wasn't adapted to be suitably reliable to form the main trunk of the transit system.

[lrt's friend]

According to CBC news, the Confed Line will not re-launch on Monday. A new risk assessment needs to occur which may take 10 days.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/oc-transpo-lrt-update-july-28-1.6921468

[Fading Isle]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

According to CBC news, the Confed Line will not re-launch on Monday. A new risk assessment needs to occur which may take 10 days.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/oc-transpo-lrt-update-july-28-1.6921468

I’ve seen multiple sources saying that it will be at least 10 days (possibly more), not up to 10 days. There are issues with the tracks, not just bearings, according to reports.

Why is everything still so secret? They keep saying that they’re going to be more transparent, but still don’t provide even the simplest information like explaining what the track issue is that will take at least 10 days to fix. Must be a significant issue.

[Richard Eade]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I don't think it was adapted to our needs.

• It wasn't adapted to Ottawa weather.
• It wasn't adapted to the city's planned track layout.
• It wasn't adapted to the projected capacity needs (in some ways the pandemic saved the city's bacon, imagine a no-pandemic world where most office workers go to the office 5 days a week, the city would have been up **** creek without a paddle).
• It wasn't adapted to be suitably reliable to form the main trunk of the transit system.

Perhaps you are not familiar with the Citadis Spirit vehicle that Alstom is developing for Ottawa, and a greater North American market.

Yes, the vehicles are adapted for our weather, with much more climate insulation. That is one of the reasons that these vehicles are heavier than their European ancestors.

Yes, the vehicles are adapted for tight curves, with pivoting bogies. The North American version also has articulated bogies, which, Alstom says, gives a smoother ride. Unfortunately, due to time constraints, an older wheel bearing design was used – but this is now being remedied.

Yes, the vehicle provided are larger, with a capacity to carry more passengers. They are also modular, which, theoretically, allows an extra segment to added as need arises. This was done with regard to Ottawa’s projected capacity needs. It did add weight to the vehicle.

As this is a vehicle that is still under development, the future reliability has not been determined. However, it will be run along one of Ottawa’s O-Train lines; whether that is to be run as a ‘Trunk Line’ is still to be determined. To me, it is looking as if it is simply being run as two cross-city routes.

[DTcrawler]

Originally Posted by Fading Isle

I’ve seen multiple sources saying that it will be at least 10 days (possibly more), not up to 10 days. There are issues with the tracks, not just bearings, according to reports.

Why is everything still so secret? They keep saying that they’re going to be more transparent, but still don’t provide even the simplest information like explaining what the track issue is that will take at least 10 days to fix. Must be a significant issue.

OC Transpo are the last people I want to be defending right now, but they did say that the extra 10 days will be for re-aligning restraining rails in 16 spots along the line to ensure they don’t make contact with the wheels, as it was determined this causes extra stress to the assemblies. The work will start on Monday after a risk assessment is developed over the weekend. This was explained in the article you responded to.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Williamoforange

The engineers/project managers went back to Toronto, the city didn't hire a engineers to represent them or review what was coming there way, and the in-house rail team was up and running yet. It relied on the principle of P3 to protect them, as any mistake would be RTG to eat.

The city learned from it's mistakes and hired outside review and upped the in-house team for phase 2.

Edit: stupid Swype errors

They didn't have Owner's Engineers for Stage 1? WTF?

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Obviously wasn't new design enough.

I continue to think the idea of using a tram as a metro makes no sense. A high floor system would have allowed for a more robust wheel assembly and more passengers in a more comfortable environment.

Even the 2009 report identified performance risks with a tram technology (page 356) that light metro did not have.

https://app06.ottawa.ca/calendar/ottawa/...Rail%20System%20Study%20Document%201.pdf

The REM is really going to put the Confederation Line to shame, as they show what could have been done had politicians in Ottawa not had insane tunnel vision forcing LRT as the solution.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

The REM is really going to put the Confederation Line to shame, as they show what could have been done had politicians in Ottawa not had insane tunnel vision forcing LRT as the solution.

Rail transit should greatly enhance transit, while under-designing or basically cheaping out rail has seriously damaged transit in Ottawa. I had no idea it was going to be this bad, but the warning signs were there before opening day when they didn't buy enough trains to keep 15 double trains going on a daily basis and left us with a system that technically had enough capacity but made for a system stressed to the absolute limits with spiraling problems showing up almost immediately, at least somewhat affected by running trains at crush loads. We stressed the whole transit system when we decided that trains should replace most buses downtown in a single step.

And here we are, with a system that has fallen to 43% of pre-pandemic ridership with train problems that are clearly delaying ridership recovery, and a train system that is by itself destroying public confidence.

We are going to see Line 2 re-opening soon, and we have known all along that we are not really going to deliver an 'improved' rail line. We have focused on capacity rather than improved service. Again, we cheaped out on the design of this line as well. I am not optimistic about this at all.

Then we look at Montreal and its apparent delivery of world class 21st century new transit. Trains that can move faster than traffic. Well, what do you know. Ottawa will continue to have trains running at bicycle speed including Line 2. We are satisfied with second or even third rate. Just look at the airport spur and its known speed problems in getting people downtown.

REM will probably have some hiccups but it looks like a system designed for a world class city and a world leader in transit. Ottawa's system was designed for a hicktown and falling ridership is our well deserved reward.

Oh how Ottawa has fallen. From a transit leader in the 1980s to this.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Rail transit should greatly enhance transit, while under-designing or basically cheaping out rail has seriously damaged transit in Ottawa. I had no idea it was going to be this bad, but the warning signs were there before opening day when they didn't buy enough trains to keep 15 double trains going on a daily basis and left us with a system that technically had enough capacity but made for a system stressed to the absolute limits with spiraling problems showing up almost immediately, at least somewhat affected by running trains at crush loads. We stressed the whole transit system when we decided that trains should replace most buses downtown in a single step.

And here we are, with a system that has fallen to 43% of pre-pandemic ridership with train problems that are clearly delaying ridership recovery, and a train system that is by itself destroying public confidence.

We are going to see Line 2 re-opening soon, and we have known all along that we are not really going to deliver an 'improved' rail line. We have focused on capacity rather than improved service. Again, we cheaped out on the design of this line as well. I am not optimistic about this at all.

Then we look at Montreal and its apparent delivery of world class 21st century new transit. Trains that can move faster than traffic. Well, what do you know. Ottawa will continue to have trains running at bicycle speed including Line 2. We are satisfied with second or even third rate. Just look at the airport spur and its known speed problems in getting people downtown.

REM will probably have some hiccups but it looks like a system designed for a world class city and a world leader in transit. Ottawa's system was designed for a hicktown and falling ridership is our well deserved reward.

Oh how Ottawa has fallen. From a transit leader in the 1980s to this.

I'm usually reluctant to agree with jealousy threads but I'm in Montreal this weekend and took the chance to check it out and it is really amazing the results. They have spread the stations apart for blazing fast speed, didn't let NIMBYs bury the line keeping costs low (They killed the East Expansion because of this though). Fully automated so no driver strikes. They didn't have to move people around the centre as they already had a metro so not entirely fair comparison but you can see certain choices they made and I don't think it's all about us cheaping out. We have made lots of expensive choices. Just not generally the right ones.

[Truenorth00]

The biggest mistake Ottawa made was forcing a technology. Virtually every problem with the Confederation Line flows from this decision. Likewise, a lot of the passenger comforts we lack flow from this decision. LRT is basically why we didn't build shorter fully enclosed stations like the REM.

Otherwise, the Confederation Line is fine. Stop spacing is okay for a metro. REM is a bit wider (2.6 km spacing vs. 1.5 Km for Stage 2 Confederation Line) but it's replacing a suburban rail service. The stations are decently designed. Fare systems are okay with Presto.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

The biggest mistake Ottawa made was forcing a technology. Virtually every problem with the Confederation Line flows from this decision. Likewise, a lot of the passenger comforts we lack flow from this decision. LRT is basically why we didn't build shorter fully enclosed stations like the REM.

Otherwise, the Confederation Line is fine. Stop spacing is okay for a metro. REM is a bit wider (2.6 km spacing vs. 1.5 Km for Stage 2 Confederation Line) but it's replacing a suburban rail service. The stations are decently designed. Fare systems are okay with Presto.

The elevated guideway for REM is okay out along the highway but it wouldn’t have flown on any routing that the O-train could have taken. Likewise, the stations on that stretch are mostly located in mall parking lots or industrial areas, so they really aren’t likely to drive much urban-style development nearby. The only part of the O-train that is really similar is the stretch through Orleans.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

The biggest mistake Ottawa made was forcing a technology. Virtually every problem with the Confederation Line flows from this decision. Likewise, a lot of the passenger comforts we lack flow from this decision. LRT is basically why we didn't build shorter fully enclosed stations like the REM.

Otherwise, the Confederation Line is fine. Stop spacing is okay for a metro. REM is a bit wider (2.6 km spacing vs. 1.5 Km for Stage 2 Confederation Line) but it's replacing a suburban rail service. The stations are decently designed. Fare systems are okay with Presto.

REM station spacing is affected by crossing a very wide river and in Phase 2, crossing beneath a mountain.

Unfortunately, we judge Confed Line against REM when REM choices were made after ours. None of us knew REM choices regarding technology and station design were realistic when our choices were made around 6 years earlier. Our choices were made based on the previous failed project. With this comparison, the Confed Line was a considerable upgrade. We probably made some bad choices but we couldn't have expected REM in Ottawa, REM is such an unexpected step forward in urban rail design.

Montreal also had a major advantage with a required fast replacement of the Champlain Bridge needed.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

REM station spacing is affected by crossing a very wide river and in Phase 2, crossing beneath a mountain.

Unfortunately, we judge Confed Line against REM when REM choices were made after ours. None of us knew REM choices regarding technology and station design were realistic when our choices were made around 6 years earlier. Our choices were made based on the previous failed project. With this comparison, the Confed Line was a considerable upgrade. We probably made some bad choices but we couldn't have expected REM in Ottawa, REM is such an unexpected step forward in urban rail design.

Montreal also had a major advantage with a required fast replacement of the Champlain Bridge needed.

Yes you're right it's mostly unfair. But Panama to Du Cartier has a bunch of potential stations if the goal was 70% of people within 2 km or some other ridiculous metric. We chose Prom D'Orleans and Jean D'arc stations. Besides the waster $30 million. Every trip from Trim and points beyond will take an extra minute. The tunnelling and diversion to avoid inconveniencing anyone in Westboro is another example.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Unfortunately, we judge Confed Line against REM when REM choices were made after ours. None of us knew REM choices regarding technology and station design were realistic when our choices were made around 6 years earlier. Our choices were made based on the previous failed project.

Nonsense. The industry consultation they had, that I attended (open to the public), back in 2008 or thereabouts, has bidders who recommended a light metro. Kinkisharyo specifically had a recommendation that was a lot like the REM. The idea that they didn't know what could be done is nonsense. They just automatically dismissed it as overkill for Ottawa. Yet, we're probably going to end up spending nearly as much in the end to get a much worse product. It's not just the politicians of the city. The public here is routinely ignorant and still acts like Ottawa is a mid size metro that doesn't need proper rail. That enables politicians to cheap out.

Having witnessed those consultations and the sheer ignorant public comments in them, is why I'm such a prickly urbanist. The staunch suburban mindset needs to be balanced.

[zzptichka]

I heard they built REM at $100M/km.
How much is Phase 3 into Barrhaven that runs mostly through empty fields? $500M per km?

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by phil235

The elevated guideway for REM is okay out along the highway but it wouldn’t have flown on any routing that the O-train could have taken. Likewise, the stations on that stretch are mostly located in mall parking lots or industrial areas, so they really aren’t likely to drive much urban-style development nearby. The only part of the O-train that is really similar is the stretch through Orleans.

That describes everything in Ottawa east of OttawaU and west of Richmond.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by acottawa

That describes everything in Ottawa east of OttawaU and west of Richmond.

Hopefully not for long. I’d have much higher hopes for anything inside the greenbelt than I would for those stations on the West Island or in the median of the 10.