Metro Vancouver Transit Discussion II

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by cganuelas1995

An automated announcement that is absolutely needed on Canada line stations is one reminding people to keep their bikes in the designated bike area of the trains. The times I've seen bikes on the train, the bike area was available for use. One guy was even sitting on the seats across from the bike area and just holding onto his bike.

people who dont do it, wont do it because of an announcement. its not that they dont know, its that they dont care.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Continued from Broadway thread.

Originally Posted by chowhou

- snip -

A map is exactly why I'm pushing this argument - outside of Whalley, the whole region is a blank slate. KGB's already covered by the R1; additional rapid transit down Fraser anchors 152nd, 64th and 88th/96th RapidBuses, as well as shorter, more frequent connections to Guildford, Cloverdale, Carvolth, Willoughby and Walnut Grove and to the 200th Street BRT.

With Scott Road/KGB, it's the exact same bus grid except with one RapidBus on Fraser and maybe another on 64th.

Those are federal ridings. The provincial ones are slightly different. At any rate, a full Maple Ridge extension only affects two ridings (one, if TransLink goes to Port Coq and stops), while any train in Surrey affects up to a dozen.

[cganuelas1995]

How feasible would it be for the trolleybus network to be fully automated?

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by cganuelas1995

How feasible would it be for the trolleybus network to be fully automated?

I'd expect that the only thing which could prevent it would be if they were unable to find a way to autonomously re-wire the poles so that the bus could cope with a dewirement. There are systems that can re-wire poles automatically without driver intervention but I believe they're designed for routes that include battery-driven segments where the re-wiring is an expected part of the route, and I think they depend on a special section of overhead with some sort of mechanical guide.

[madog222]

Originally Posted by cganuelas1995

How feasible would it be for the trolleybus network to be fully automated?

Seeing as trolleys are more demanding to drive than conventional buses and are generally used on busier than average routes I would say it would be significantly less feasible than a fully automated conventional bus route.

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

I think they depend on a special section of overhead with some sort of mechanical guide.

Correct.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

I'd expect that the only thing which could prevent it would be if they were unable to find a way to autonomously re-wire the poles so that the bus could cope with a dewirement. There are systems that can re-wire poles automatically without driver intervention but I believe they're designed for routes that include battery-driven segments where the re-wiring is an expected part of the route, and I think they depend on a special section of overhead with some sort of mechanical guide.

The new Solaris Trollino buses on order have the option for both semi-automatic and automatic pantograph operation. I haven't seen whether our new buses will have that option. The Buzzer blog says "These are our first trolley buses to be air conditioned for customer and operator comfort and have in-motion charging — the latest in trolleybus technology. It allows buses to draw power from the overhead wires for both driving and charging its on-board battery.

This means the new trolley buses will be able to operate away from overhead wires for about 20 kilometres.

This opens the possibility for where trolley buses can go in the future. It includes bus routes where there are trolley overhead wires for only part of the route or during temporary detours that currently require switching to diesel buses."

As the new trolley buses won't have self-driving capability, and they should be good for another 20 years or more, the trolleys don't seem likely to be automated for a very long time (even if, in theory, all the problems with on-road self driving were solved).

New Flyer BEV buses already exist with the potential to operate at Level 4 autonomous operating, but that's not allowed anywhere in Canada yet. They're finally returning end-to-end BEV manufacturing to Winnipeg (rather than building most of the bus in the US as happens now), but when that opens in 2027 it will still only have a capacity of building 240 buses a year.

[cganuelas1995]

Originally Posted by Changing City

The new Solaris Trollino buses on order have the option for both semi-automatic and automatic pantograph operation. I haven't seen whether our new buses will have that option. The Buzzer blog says "These are our first trolley buses to be air conditioned for customer and operator comfort and have in-motion charging — the latest in trolleybus technology. It allows buses to draw power from the overhead wires for both driving and charging its on-board battery.

This means the new trolley buses will be able to operate away from overhead wires for about 20 kilometres.

This opens the possibility for where trolley buses can go in the future. It includes bus routes where there are trolley overhead wires for only part of the route or during temporary detours that currently require switching to diesel buses."

As the new trolley buses won't have self-driving capability, and they should be good for another 20 years or more, the trolleys don't seem likely to be automated for a very long time (even if, in theory, all the problems with on-road self driving were solved).

New Flyer BEV buses already exist with the potential to operate at Level 4 autonomous operating, but that's not allowed anywhere in Canada yet. They're finally returning end-to-end BEV manufacturing to Winnipeg (rather than building most of the bus in the US as happens now), but when that opens in 2027 it will still only have a capacity of building 240 buses a year.

And that's ignoring all the union mumbo jumbo that will obviously happen.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by madog222

Seeing as trolleys are more demanding to drive than conventional buses and are generally used on busier than average routes I would say it would be significantly less feasible than a fully automated conventional bus route.

I doubt the actual driving dynamics would be a big problem. That mostly consists of being aware of overhead specialwork which requires limited speeds, which lanes the wires can be reached from, insulated sections through which the bus needs to coast without power, and the ability to control the switches by turning or by applying (or not applying) power at the correct time. Since the overhead is (obviously) all on fixed routes, that could all be easily mapped out for the buses to follow.

Recovery from dewirement seems like the biggest challenge, to me.

[logan5]

With automation and battery buses now practical, I wonder if future subways would consider using autonomous battery powered buses.

It would be cheaper to build a bus tunnel, because you would need less infrastructure to accommodate a bus vs train, which need a tracks and electrical systems. Autonomous buses can travel in convoys for higher capacity needs, or spread out in order to maintain high frequencies.

[Migrant_Coconut]

There is no possible configuration that allows a fully grade-separated bus to have more potential capacity or lower costs than a fully grade-separated train.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

There is no possible configuration that allows a fully grade-separated bus to have more potential capacity or lower costs than a fully grade-separated train.

Flexibility. Automated buses could use transit only tunnels in dense urban areas then spread out on their own routes on roads outside of it.

[jollyburger]

I guess it depends if you could change the physical design of a bus. Look at a train where it's basically an open box on wheels vs a bus that has to be designed around 4 huge wheels and other mechanical components. It's probably hard to find any benefits of dumping hundreds of automated buses on a single lane grade-separated route vs existing Skytrain technology.

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Flexibility. Automated buses could use transit only tunnels in dense urban areas then spread out on their own routes on roads outside of it.

Why can't buses being driven by humans do that?

[madog222]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Flexibility. Automated buses could use transit only tunnels in dense urban areas then spread out on their own routes on roads outside of it.

So just a guided busway but within a very expensive tunnel.

[WarrenC12]

Buses with drivers are more expensive, think bigger long term. Uber is creating a bigger shared transportation service and gets made fun of for "re-inventing the bus". It's true, but not thinking longer term.

Imagine a ton of autonomous buses driving around, various sizes. There are no fixed routes and times. You open up the app say "I'm here and want to go there". The system works it's magic and says a bus will be there in x mins to take you and drop you at your destination (or maybe a "station" in a busy downtown) and will cost xyz. It's less convenient than Uber and will take longer as it picks up and drops off others, but that will be reflected in the cost.

It's a smart mix of public transit and a taxi. Being autonomous will cut costs and no fixed routes will allow them to focus demand where it is needed for special events.

Skytrain is obviously great but it isn't going to be everywhere and costs continue to escalate.

[officedweller]

See the history of the Ottawa Tansitway:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transitway_(Ottawa)

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Imagine a ton of autonomous buses driving around, various sizes. There are no fixed routes and times. You open up the app say "I'm here and want to go there". The system works it's magic and says a bus will be there in x mins to take you and drop you at your destination (or maybe a "station" in a busy downtown) and will cost xyz.

Fixed routes and probably even fixed times are necessary for efficiency. A bus that spends all its time wandering around residential neighborhoods picking everybody up from their doorstep is a bus that nobody wants to ride because it takes too long to get anywhere, and what's worse is that the length of time varies every day because it's going to different doorsteps.

What people will want to ride is an automated car that's cheap enough for them to justify that will take them directly from their front door to the nearest fixed route bus or (even more likely) rapid transit stop.

Everyone seems to imagine that automation is somehow going to change the geography of roads and the efficiency of vehicles, and it's just not the case. The transit system and the way it's organized is already the pretty close to the most efficient way to move the number of people who need to be moved given the money we're willing to pay for it. The only big change I can see automation making is solving the "last mile" problem to people's individual destinations.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Imagine a ton of autonomous buses driving around, various sizes. There are no fixed routes and times. You open up the app say "I'm here and want to go there". The system works it's magic and says a bus will be there in x mins to take you and drop you at your destination (or maybe a "station" in a busy downtown) and will cost xyz. It's less convenient than Uber and will take longer as it picks up and drops off others, but that will be reflected in the cost.

What aberdeen said; the niche for "bus-sized rideshare" isn't very big to begin with.

[logan5]

I’ve see studies that predict driverless Ubers will cost as low as 35 cents per mile. Probly won’t be that low, but not having to pay wages and electrification eliminating fuel costs, an Uber will be a lot cheaper than it is now. To the point of it being cost competitive with what buses are today. Buses will be cheaper too, but I’m willing to bet that a large percentage of bus riders would take 3 dollar Uber share over 1.50 bus ride. Transit agencies will respond to this by offering something similar, but at lower cost to the user.

It’s pretty easy to predict these vehicles will use the roads far more efficiently when there are enough of them on the roads. Road space won’t be a problem.

[Migrant_Coconut]

The bottleneck isn't technology, it's basic physics. Either make smaller SUVs, or find a quantum uncertainty loophole that lets two passengers share one seat, or it's the exact same problem as what we have now.