HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Transportation & Infrastructure


Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Jan 28, 2007, 10:31 PM
smasher000's Avatar
smasher000 smasher000 is offline
Im smasher000 xD
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Vancouver-Burnaby
Posts: 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr.x2 View Post
First we screwed up on the Canada Line platform lengths, now we're gonna screw up on the technology of the Evergreen Line....gah. *SkyTrain*
^ We did NOT screw up the Canada Line platform lengths. They're are appropriate for the usage. Say if we extended it to 100meters. IT will NOT be used! The officials are not stupid. They do tests to see how many people will use it. Do you understand? It will be money THROWN away. There are SO many other things, other than transportation that money has to be spent on. Like healthcare and education! Unless you are prepared to pay for it yourself... when the time is right, the platforms will be extended.

As for the technology of the Evergreen Line, I agree with you. I think SkyTrain would be the best choice.
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Jan 28, 2007, 11:05 PM
mr.x's Avatar
mr.x mr.x is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 12,805
Quote:
Originally Posted by smasher000 View Post
^ We did NOT screw up the Canada Line platform lengths. They're are appropriate for the usage. Say if we extended it to 100meters. IT will NOT be used! The officials are not stupid. They do tests to see how many people will use it. Do you understand? It will be money THROWN away. There are SO many other things, other than transportation that money has to be spent on. Like healthcare and education! Unless you are prepared to pay for it yourself... when the time is right, the platforms will be extended.

As for the technology of the Evergreen Line, I agree with you. I think SkyTrain would be the best choice.
You seem to be unaware that the Canada Line has 40 metre and 50 metre station platforms (SkyTrain has 80 metre platforms that can be extended beyond). These 40 and 50 metre platforms cannot be extended any further due to the design (large powerful tunnel fans right before and after stations) and the required depth of tunnel for longer platforms. For example, the track switches right before and after Bridgeport Station are too close to the station to allow beyond 50 metre platforms.

The station platforms can be extended, probably, but for a hell lot of money after it is built. We're talking about digging up whole sections of tunnel, redoing the Bridgeport guideway......in other words, platform extensions beyond 50 metres is a dead end.

Do you really think that the Canada Line in 2020 when ridership is 150,000 daily (projections), the line will be able to sustain all that demand? The Expo Line is 33% longer with more stations AND with 80 metre platforms has difficulty in keeping up with all the demand. 180,000 people use the line each day. What makes you think that in 2020 - a line with less stations (therefore more passengers per station on average) AND a line that is shorter AND a line that has shorter platforms AND a line with smaller capacity trains - can handle 150,000 daily?


Healthcare and education?!!!! HA! Isn't that ALL we spent on already?
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Jan 28, 2007, 11:59 PM
SpongeG's Avatar
SpongeG SpongeG is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Coquitlam
Posts: 40,063
i have yet to be on skytrain and see the platforms crowded

the only time i have ever seen a crowd is during the morning rush at broadway - but thats expected

other than that the stations are pretty clear and maneuverable
__________________
belowitall
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Jan 29, 2007, 12:19 AM
Dorian G.'s Avatar
Dorian G. Dorian G. is offline
nogames2010
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 346
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr.x2 View Post
You seem to be unaware that the Canada Line has 40 metre and 50 metre station platforms (SkyTrain has 80 metre platforms that can be extended beyond). These 40 and 50 metre platforms cannot be extended any further due to the design (large powerful tunnel fans right before and after stations) and the required depth of tunnel for longer platforms. For example, the track switches right before and after Bridgeport Station are too close to the station to allow beyond 50 metre platforms.

The station platforms can be extended, probably, but for a hell lot of money after it is built. We're talking about digging up whole sections of tunnel, redoing the Bridgeport guideway......in other words, platform extensions beyond 50 metres is a dead end.

Do you really think that the Canada Line in 2020 when ridership is 150,000 daily (projections), the line will be able to sustain all that demand? The Expo Line is 33% longer with more stations AND with 80 metre platforms has difficulty in keeping up with all the demand. 180,000 people use the line each day. What makes you think that in 2020 - a line with less stations (therefore more passengers per station on average) AND a line that is shorter AND a line that has shorter platforms AND a line with smaller capacity trains - can handle 150,000 daily?
I think a better question is whether or not we believe there will be 150,000 people per day waiting to ride the line; the official bullet-point list notes a potential ridership in 2021 of 45 million (assuming the year still has 365 days in the future, this would work out to 125,000/day—but let's not belabor that point; we'll give them the benefit of the doubt that weekends are less important). What is important, though, is that 45 million is the highest ridership lie inTransitBC feels they can foist on us. The more detailed ridership summary available here states "The forecast ridership in 2021 is between 30.9 – 44.8 million riders per year." (30.9 million/yr = 85,000/day). Now it would be overly cynical to suggest that the line would have less riders in 2021, so maybe we should suggest that 100,000 is a ridiculous prediction. In fact, it appears that even Translink agrees:
Quote:
Ken Hardie, director of communications for TransLink, said the transit authority's modelling shows the ridership will be there. "Even without the Canada Line, just looking at the current transit service in that north-south corridor, we're probably looking at about 80,000 a day by 2010," he said.
Councillor David Cadman is even less generous about ridership:
Quote:
"We can only identify 43,000 bus riders who we anticipate will take the Canada Line because their service is being discontinued," he added.
In the worst case, Translink can add capacity back to the bus routes it cut back on to create Canada line ridership in the first place.

It's worth pointing out that it doesn't follow that a shorter line with fewer stations will have more riders than a longer line with more stations. Also, there can only be one limiting factor wrt capacity; either the vehicles are the problem, or the platform, or—as in the case of the Canada line—neither are a problem.
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Jan 29, 2007, 1:48 AM
agrant's Avatar
agrant agrant is offline
Cheers!
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 1,869
WRT Canada Line ridership. I think someone should start a bet.

Aren't they already in the detailed design stage with the Evergreen Line? I don't think it will change back to skytrain at this point. If the LRT was completely grade separated, then I don't think it would be too bad. How many crossings are not grade separated at this point?
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Jan 29, 2007, 2:07 AM
mr.x's Avatar
mr.x mr.x is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 12,805
Quote:
Originally Posted by agrant View Post
WRT Canada Line ridership. I think someone should start a bet.

Aren't they already in the detailed design stage with the Evergreen Line? I don't think it will change back to skytrain at this point. If the LRT was completely grade separated, then I don't think it would be too bad. How many crossings are not grade separated at this point?
If the Evergreen Line does not receive its required funding by April, the LRT is cancelled.
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Jan 29, 2007, 2:29 AM
SpongeG's Avatar
SpongeG SpongeG is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Coquitlam
Posts: 40,063
and if it gets the funding construction is set to start in September 2007. its too late to change to Skytrain now. it would set the project back.
__________________
belowitall
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Jan 29, 2007, 5:54 AM
Canadian Mind's Avatar
Canadian Mind Canadian Mind is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,907
Would someone be able to explain the logic behind having yet another form of transit in this city? Can't we just stick to the three we already have? (Skytrain, Westcoast express, and a shitty ass bus system)
__________________
"you're eating chicken periods" - Vid
"I love eggs, especially the ones with runny yolks" - Me
"EWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW, you're disgusting!" - Vid
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Jan 29, 2007, 6:08 AM
mr.x's Avatar
mr.x mr.x is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 12,805
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadian Mind View Post
Would someone be able to explain the logic behind having yet another form of transit in this city? Can't we just stick to the three we already have? (Skytrain, Westcoast express, and a shitty ass bus system)
1) It would have been difficult and expensive to somehow link up an ART SkyTrain Canada Line under downtown.

2) The Edmonds SkyTrain trainyard can't handle that many more vehicles. A new one would have to be built anyway in the future to handle more vehicles (which makes more of a reason that the Evergreen Line should be SkyTrain so that a second trainyard can be built near Falcon Station).

3) ART is more expensive than standard third-rail.
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Jan 29, 2007, 8:42 AM
cornholio cornholio is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,916
Quote:
Originally Posted by smasher000 View Post
^ We did NOT screw up the Canada Line platform lengths. They're are appropriate for the usage. Say if we extended it to 100meters. IT will NOT be used! The officials are not stupid. They do tests to see how many people will use it. Do you understand? It will be money THROWN away. There are SO many other things, other than transportation that money has to be spent on. Like healthcare and education! Unless you are prepared to pay for it yourself... when the time is right, the platforms will be extended.

As for the technology of the Evergreen Line, I agree with you. I think SkyTrain would be the best choice.
Translink did not forcast rider predictions beyond 2031 and did not do a proper detailed study beyond 2021 if im correct. This line has a 100 year life span but its run and built by a private company for 35 years, they dont care what hapens after that. Infact they dont even necesarly care if it hits capacity say 20 years in to the lines future(about the age of the expo line), say theres a reasonabel chance that the line will hit capacity 15 years before their times up then that doesnt mean that it will pay of to build the line to meet that capacity because the cost may not be recovered in those remaining 15 years for the comany. They are there for profit and not for the comuters, they plan and build the line using a formula to maximize their profits and minimize their risks in the 35 year time frame.

This project should be able to have its platforms expanded in the future but translink is to short sighted and the private company is not in the busines of spending money it doesnt have to and money that it wont recover with a guranteed profit within the 35 year time frame.

Last edited by cornholio; Jan 29, 2007 at 8:48 AM.
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Jan 29, 2007, 5:15 PM
mr.x's Avatar
mr.x mr.x is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 12,805
^ well said. either RAVco should have specified a minimum platform length or this project should've been public run.
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Jan 29, 2007, 5:41 PM
Canadian Mind's Avatar
Canadian Mind Canadian Mind is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,907
Wont they have to build a new rail yard for LRT anyways?
__________________
"you're eating chicken periods" - Vid
"I love eggs, especially the ones with runny yolks" - Me
"EWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW, you're disgusting!" - Vid
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Jan 29, 2007, 5:45 PM
mr.x's Avatar
mr.x mr.x is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 12,805
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadian Mind View Post
Wont they have to build a new rail yard for LRT anyways?
yes they do. they should build it SkyTrain, so that a SkyTrain train yard can be built at the proposed LRT trainyard at Falcon, since the system needs a second train yard in the next 20 years.
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Jan 29, 2007, 5:57 PM
baggab baggab is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by cornholio View Post
Translink did not forcast rider predictions beyond 2031 and did not do a proper detailed study beyond 2021 if im correct. This line has a 100 year life span but its run and built by a private company for 35 years, they dont care what hapens after that. Infact they dont even necesarly care if it hits capacity say 20 years in to the lines future(about the age of the expo line), say theres a reasonabel chance that the line will hit capacity 15 years before their times up then that doesnt mean that it will pay of to build the line to meet that capacity because the cost may not be recovered in those remaining 15 years for the comany. They are there for profit and not for the comuters, they plan and build the line using a formula to maximize their profits and minimize their risks in the 35 year time frame.

This project should be able to have its platforms expanded in the future but translink is to short sighted and the private company is not in the busines of spending money it doesnt have to and money that it wont recover with a guranteed profit within the 35 year time frame.

It's about having a happy medium, for the most part there haven't been alot of public support for the Canada Line in the first place. This is all a deal about compromise, financially.

I wonder how much it'll cost to have expandable platforms, but as many have stated before. It's usually not used. As most trains I've been on are only about 2 cars, sometimes 4... utilizing only about 60-70% of the platforms. All in all I don't know why people think it's such a huge issue.
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Jan 29, 2007, 6:43 PM
mr.x's Avatar
mr.x mr.x is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 12,805
Quote:
Originally Posted by baggab View Post
It's about having a happy medium, for the most part there haven't been alot of public support for the Canada Line in the first place. This is all a deal about compromise, financially.

I wonder how much it'll cost to have expandable platforms, but as many have stated before. It's usually not used. As most trains I've been on are only about 2 cars, sometimes 4... utilizing only about 60-70% of the platforms. All in all I don't know why people think it's such a huge issue.
That's because SkyTrain sacrifices longer trains for higher train frequency. Also, we lack SkyTrain cars.....which is why you only see 2-car Mark II's (260 passengers) and 4-car Mark I's (320 passengers). With the new order of 34 Mark II cars, the Mark II's will be paired into 4-car trains (520 passengers) and the old Mark I's into 6-car trains (480 passengers); all or most of the 80 metre SkyTrain platforms will be occupied when the trains arrive. Remember that this is only 20 years after the Expo Line was completed.
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Jan 29, 2007, 7:53 PM
Canadian Mind's Avatar
Canadian Mind Canadian Mind is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,907
yea, wont the canada line trains be only 4 cars long anyways?
__________________
"you're eating chicken periods" - Vid
"I love eggs, especially the ones with runny yolks" - Me
"EWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW, you're disgusting!" - Vid
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Jan 29, 2007, 10:16 PM
SpongeG's Avatar
SpongeG SpongeG is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Coquitlam
Posts: 40,063
doesn't LRT just mean Light rail? so isn't skytrain just an automated LRT?
__________________
belowitall
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Jan 30, 2007, 2:04 AM
LeftCoaster's Avatar
LeftCoaster LeftCoaster is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Toroncouver
Posts: 13,141
prettymuch, but its also grade seperated, and runs on a different propulsion system... propiteary mumbo jumbo something, im sure mr. X2 knows more about it, him or the infamous queetz.
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Jan 30, 2007, 2:53 AM
Jared's Avatar
Jared Jared is offline
senior something
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 4,051
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadian Mind View Post
yea, wont the canada line trains be only 4 cars long anyways?
2 cars initially, with a third shrimpy one in the middle if they renovate the platforms.



Skytrain is an LRT btw. Third rail vs. overheard wires etc. is completely irrelevant. LRT just requires a fairly light capacity in terms of pphpd, and a ROW, prepaid boarding etc.
__________________
My Diagrams My Photos

I'm not the guy from Subway.
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Jan 30, 2007, 3:11 AM
mr.x's Avatar
mr.x mr.x is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 12,805
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftCoaster View Post
prettymuch, but its also grade seperated, and runs on a different propulsion system... propiteary mumbo jumbo something, im sure mr. X2 knows more about it, him or the infamous queetz.
SkyTrain and the Canada Line are both technically LRT, but they do share characteristics of heavy rail as well.....so yea, Vancouver's LRT system is in the middle of LRT and heavy rail. But that's just my opinion.



Quote:
2 cars initially, with a third shrimpy one in the middle if they renovate the platforms.
yep.

| = one metre
( = head/tail of train
- = train gangway

Canada Line (2-car): 41 metres
(||||||||||||||||||||-||||||||||||||||||||)
Canada Line (3-car): 51 metres
(||||||||||||||||||||-||||||||||-||||||||||||||||||||)
Mark II (4-car): 72 metres
(||||||||||||||||||-||||||||||||||||||)-(||||||||||||||||||-||||||||||||||||||)
Mark I (6-car): 72 metres
(||||||||||||)-(||||||||||||)-(||||||||||||)-(||||||||||||)-(||||||||||||)-(||||||||||||)

Last edited by mr.x; Jan 30, 2007 at 3:37 AM.
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Closed Thread

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Transportation & Infrastructure
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:20 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.