Canada Line | Completed

[LeftCoaster]

Depends on whether you are counting "trips" or "Boardings"

I believe daily ridership figures cite trips, or linked boardings, but to be honest I am not sure and im sure someone here could answer that question with much more certainty than I.

[CLC]

Originally Posted by TransitJack

only 14 trains are being used per day during peak.

what about mid-day (9:30-3:30)?

about the ridership, I observe that the "transit tourism" on C-Line has nearly died down in the weekdays, while the U-pass riders more than enough to replace those "tourist" ridership, paritcularly Langara station is underrated by some forumer here, I figure 5000-8000 "boardings" per day.

[TransitJack]

Originally Posted by CLC

what about mid-day (9:30-3:30)?

about the ridership, I observe that the "transit tourism" on C-Line has nearly died down in the weekdays, while the U-pass riders more than enough to replace those "tourist" ridership, paritcularly Langara station is underrated by some forumer here, I figure 5000-8000 "boardings" per day.

by 7 there are 14 trains, lasting till just after 6pm

[mr.x]

So we're getting all sorts of numbers here....some have 14, some have 16, and others have 18. What is it?

[NucksFanInVan]

Originally Posted by mr.x

So we're getting all sorts of numbers here....some have 14, some have 16, and others have 18. What is it?

And the more important question (to me): if it's not the 18 proposed by InTransit for peak period service, why not??? It's stupid to hold back more than the required stand-by capacity when we've got packed trains and pass-ups.

[mr.x]

Originally Posted by NucksFanInVan

And the more important question (to me): if it's not the 18 proposed by InTransit for peak period service, why not??? It's stupid to hold back more than the required stand-by capacity when we've got packed trains and pass-ups.

I have a feeling that adding more trains isn't as flexible as SkyTrain, as we've got a private operator. InTransitBC also requires week in advance warning for additional trains for special events; for Translink's SkyTrain, they could probably do this within a day. Service levels are determined by the contract or contract amendments.

There's also the issue of cost and profits. For instance, it doesn't hurt them if the same amount of passengers riding the train get on even after waiting 1 or 2 trains before being able to get on. Put in more trains so that passengers can get on the first train that arrives might be declared as "excessive capacity". Basically, they'll try to cram on as many people they can into one train, and with less trains it reduces power and maintenance costs. That's basically why frequency is so low for late-night service.

That's just what I think that is happening.

[djmk]

oh oh mr.x. it sounds like you're having troubles with P3's....

we do not like that type of evil NDP talk on this forum

jk

[TransitJack]

Originally Posted by mr.x

So we're getting all sorts of numbers here....some have 14, some have 16, and others have 18. What is it?

1 - 4, fourteen.

[mr.x]

Originally Posted by djmk

oh oh mr.x. it sounds like you're having troubles with P3's....

we do not like that type of evil NDP talk on this forum

jk

I've always said P3's work, but possibly not necessarily the one we have for the Canada Line.

[NucksFanInVan]

Took some digging but here it is.

Schedule 4 of the Agreement is your answer.

The initial service plan (Sched 4 Appendix B) calls for 16 trains in service to meet 3:45 headways on the mainline and 7:30 headways on the YVR/ Richmond branches.

Clause 5.3.2 requires that the concessionaire transition to their regular service plan (also in Sched 4 Appendix A) which is 18 trains with 3:10/6:20 headways no more than 24 months after implementing service.

So it looks like we're stuck with the current 16 trains at 3:45 for the next 23 months... unless Translink pays more or the Concessionaire realizes they will see more passengers and therefore get more money by bumping up capacity earlier.

[TransitJack]

Originally Posted by NucksFanInVan

Took some digging but here it is.

Schedule 4 of the Agreement is your answer.

The initial service plan (Sched 4 Appendix B) calls for 16 trains in service to meet 3:45 headways on the mainline and 7:30 headways on the YVR/ Richmond branches.

Clause 5.3.2 requires that the concessionaire transition to their regular service plan (also in Sched 4 Appendix A) which is 18 trains with 3:10/6:20 headways no more than 24 months after implementing service.

So it looks like we're stuck with the current 16 trains at 3:45 for the next 23 months... unless Translink pays more or the Concessionaire realizes they will see more passengers and therefore get more money by bumping up capacity earlier.

Maybe they are counting 2 spares? I'm certain there are only 14, from a very reliable source.

[NucksFanInVan]

Departure to departure, InTransit estimated 56.94 min for Richmond-Brighouse and 56.04 for YVR, including lengthy terminal dwells. Based on a 3:45 headway, they forecast needing 16 trains to meet this schedule.

If they cut the terminal dwell times and/or achieved better performance than they estimated, they could probably use 14 trains to get the same headways. The initial service plan has to specify both how many trains are required, and what the operational headway will be, but doesn't clearly say which they will be held to if there is a discrepancy.

I suppose a contractual argument could be made that the headway is the dominant requirement since that (not number of trains) is what will govern system capacity. Thus, as long as they make their headways, Translink doesn't have a hammer to have them put the other trains in service. Argh, that may well be what is happening, but it makes my brain hurt.

The good news (?) from this would be that we could get to ultimate capacity with less trains, since they used the same operating speeds, terminal dwells, etc for the 15,000 pphpd calcs.

[Gordon]

They were supposed to have 20 trains as part of the package that came with the building of the line.

I would suspect that Translink's more pressing issue capacity wise is to get as much capacity on the e & M lines as they possibly can?

[argon007]

what about the airporter bus? after airporter is out of business on october, i think translink can use the airporter bus as 43, 25, and 480.

hope i think too much...lol.

[NucksFanInVan]

Originally Posted by NucksFanInVan

The good news (?) from this would be that we could get to ultimate capacity with less trains, since they used the same operating speeds, terminal dwells, etc for the 15,000 pphpd calcs.

If TransitJack is correct and they are making 3:45 headways with 14 trains, the really good news is that Translink can increase capacity beyond the current level by nearly 30% (14 -> 18 trains, mainline headways 3:45 -> 2:45) with no additional capital investment, just the additional payments to ProTrans.

Let's git 'er done, boys.

[metroXpress]

^ excellent news

[NucksFanInVan]

More support for the 14-train people, from the opening day Vancouver Sun article ("Vancouver's new Canada Line draws thousands for free ride on Monday", 18/08/09):

Five extra trains were added during the evening rush hour — bringing the total to 19 — to help ease the crush, while 11 extra buses were brought in to help reduce the overflow crowds waiting for the 98 B-Line between Vancouver and Richmond as well as the No. 41 and No. 99 B-Line along Broadway.

[mr.x]

Are you sure? From the document:





INTIAL SERVICE PLAN in 2009/2010
7-day frequency (32 vehicles/16 trains required)

Early Morning
- Waterfront to Bridgeport: 6 minutes
- Bridgeport to YVR: 12 minutes
- Bridgeport to Richmond Centre: 12 minutes

Morning Peak Period
- Waterfront to Bridgeport: 3 mins 45 secs
- Bridgeport to YVR: 7 mins 30 secs
- Bridgeport to Richmond Centre: 7 mins 30 secs

Mid-Day
- Waterfront to Bridgeport: 3 mins 45 secs
- Bridgeport to YVR: 7 mins 30 secs
- Bridgeport to Richmond Centre: 7 mins 30 secs

Afternoon Peak Period
- Waterfront to Bridgeport: 3 mins 45 secs
- Bridgeport to YVR: 7 mins 30 secs
- Bridgeport to Richmond Centre: 7 mins 30 secs

Evening
- Waterfront to Bridgeport: 6 minutes
- Bridgeport to YVR: 12 minutes
- Bridgeport to Richmond Centre: 12 minutes

Late Night
- Waterfront to Bridgeport: 10 minutes
- Bridgeport to YVR: 20 minutes
- Bridgeport to Richmond Centre: 20 minutes



SERVICE PLAN (will kick in when line gets busier)
7-day frequency (36 vehicles/18 trains required)

Early Morning
- Waterfront to Bridgeport: 6 minutes
- Bridgeport to YVR: 12 minutes
- Bridgeport to Richmond Centre: 12 minutes

Morning Peak Period
- Waterfront to Bridgeport: 3 minutes 10 secs
- Bridgeport to YVR: 6 minutes 20 secs
- Bridgeport to Richmond Centre: 6 minutes 20 secs

Mid-Day
- Waterfront to Bridgeport: 3 minutes 10 secs
- Bridgeport to YVR: 6 minutes 20 secs
- Bridgeport to Richmond Centre: 6 minutes 20 secs

Afternoon Peak Period
- Waterfront to Bridgeport: 3 minutes 10 secs
- Bridgeport to YVR: 6 minutes 20 secs
- Bridgeport to Richmond Centre: 6 minutes 20 secs

Late Night
- Waterfront to Bridgeport: 10 minutes
- Bridgeport to YVR: 20 minutes
- Bridgeport to Richmond Centre: 20 minutes

[NucksFanInVan]

That's the whole question. The service plan / initial service plan are based on departure-to-departure times of 56.94 mins for Richmond and 56.04 mins for YVR. The terminal dwells included in these figures are 3:30/3:24 for Richmond and 2:20/3:24 for YVR.

14 trains could serve 3:45 headways if they could get each line's round-trip time down to 52.5 mins (52:30), a decrease of about 4:26 / 3:32 for Richmond / YVR respectively.

60-75 sec average terminal dwell times would make this happen. And, it seems like exactly the kind of thing a P3 would come up with to save themselves money at no "cost" to the project (same line capacities).

[CLC]

About the non-existence Richmond-Brighouse busloop, the info is that Translink has to wait for Scotiabank building to move out of the way, and it is expected to be at least 2 years later...