Metro Vancouver Transit Discussion - Page 568

officedweller · #**11341** Posted **Oct 15, 2013, 7:21 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

I think the city is prime for a duck-boat style tourist bus. Does that count?

There have been plans for one - but I think the only boat ramp anywhere close to downtown is at Kits Point.

aberdeen5698 · #**11342** Posted **Oct 15, 2013, 7:39 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mac Write

How would banked corners be handled with a non concrete base?

It's called "superelevation", and it's used on gravel-ballasted rail track all over the world. See: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/9a/5_inch_track_superelevation.jpg

xd_1771 · #**11343** Posted **Oct 15, 2013, 9:48 PM**

Quote:

Still might not be suitable for LIM but they could figure something out for the power rail, which could make a relatively inexpensive White Rock extension a possibility for the non-LIM Canada Line.

The LIM rests on the ties much the same as the rails. On concrete ties, they should be fine.

I read a study somewhere verifying ballasted LIM track. Finding it...

officedweller · #**11344** Posted **Oct 15, 2013, 10:25 PM**

Part of the Yonge Line in Toronto may have to be shut down for weeks for track bed repairs -

http://toronto.ctvnews.ca/ttc-may-have-t...-yonge-subway-line-for-repairs-1.1483624

http://www.680news.com/2013/10/04/track-repair-could-close-portion-of-yonge-line-for-weeks/

Mac Write · #**11345** Posted **Oct 15, 2013, 10:48 PM**

Hence why it ain't good for Automated trains

deasine · #**11346** Posted **Oct 15, 2013, 11:08 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mac Write

Hence why it ain't good for Automated trains

?

aberdeen5698 · #**11347** Posted **Oct 16, 2013, 12:09 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mac Write

Hence why it ain't good for Automated trains

I don't think the issue is automation per se, I think the issue is (a) how well the track bed stands up to frequency of use (which I guess actually is related to automation because automation = higher frequency) and (b) the impact of required maintenance downtime, which is higher for a transit backbone than a traditional railway.

Millennium2002 · #**11348** Posted **Oct 16, 2013, 12:34 AM**

Agreed with the above... also, an automated train built on the same trackbed would have the same fate anyway.

We're a little lucky that much of the mainline has the track tied down on concrete, although that in itself poses a few challenges of its own if the tracks have to be realigned a little and such.

deasine · #**11349** Posted **Oct 16, 2013, 1:13 AM**

As a follow-up to the discussion, the Copenhagen Metro is automated and uses ballast on gravel, with an average operational speed of 40kph (max speed 80kph). Doesn't have any issues with operation.

• Video Link

Mac Write · #**11350** Posted **Oct 16, 2013, 2:10 AM**

I am thinking longer maintenance windows which can't be done over-night etc.

Tfreder · #**11351** Posted **Oct 16, 2013, 4:29 AM**

Caught this on twitter today. This is the line up at surrey central for the 96 headed to guildford. I guess the 96 isn't doing too bad

source:twitter

Mac Write · #**11352** Posted **Oct 16, 2013, 5:03 AM**

I guess they won't cancel it then. Now as for the 555…

Millennium2002 · #**11353** Posted **Oct 16, 2013, 5:36 AM**

It was said a few months back that the 555 was holding steady... anyone want to attest to that?

logicbomb · #**11354** Posted **Oct 16, 2013, 6:30 AM**

xd_1771 made mentions of the signs. Guess they've worked!

Quote:

Originally Posted by allan_kuan

It was said a few months back that the 555 was holding steady... anyone want to attest to that?

If anything, the 555 needs to run every 7 minutes during peak hours! Keep in mind, this is without the stop at 156 ST!

Perhaps he meant the 595?

Mac Write · #**11355** Posted **Oct 16, 2013, 6:42 AM**

Nope I meant the Portman Express. the 5 times I've taken it no more then 6 people on it.

logicbomb · #**11356** Posted **Oct 16, 2013, 6:57 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mac Write

Nope I meant the Portman Express. the 5 times I've taken it no more then 6 people on it.

I've been left behind 2 out of the 6 times I've ridden it from Braid, though that's during rush hour.

Weekend and midday ridership could be better though, and this is where a stop at Guildford (156th) would really bolster ridership.

nname · #**11357** Posted **Oct 16, 2013, 3:22 PM**

Its being said, the service is being increased to every 9 minutes during peak, but frequency near both ends of the peak hours is being cut.

Millennium2002 · #**11358** Posted **Oct 16, 2013, 6:58 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by nname

Its being said, the service is being increased to every 9 minutes during peak, but frequency near both ends of the peak hours is being cut.

I'm not sure if they should do that... Perhaps they can promote the start and end times of the buses better, like the 96?

xd_1771 · #**11359** Posted **Oct 16, 2013, 7:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by logicbomb

xd_1771 made mentions of the signs. Guess they've worked!

Yeah, I did a whole feature of them on my blog
96 B-Line Execution proves that TransLink listens

Nice to see! Mind if I add that picture to the article?

Quote:

Originally Posted by logicbomb

If anything, the 555 needs to run every 7 minutes during peak hours! Keep in mind, this is without the stop at 156 ST!

Perhaps he meant the 595?

A short-turn service, doubling frequency from a future 156 St stop, is at this point pretty much something that really needs to be considered. I'm bringing forth a proposal to City Council on this soon. Such a service could also service the somewhat-neglected East Guildford Park & Ride at 160 St.

The MOTI is reviewing the stop proposal by Surrey at the moment, but neither MOTI or TransLink have committed funding, and Surrey cannot.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mac Write

Hence why it ain't good for Automated trains

By the way Mac Write, I don't know if you've been riding the SkyTrain lately.... but from my new vantage point near the SkyTrain in Burnaby, I have found the automated system's flexibility to be exceptional during the after 8PM periods when track work is being done. Not too long ago, I was riding into Metrotown and my train had to switch onto the eastbound track via the pocket track. An eastbound train actually passed by, full-speed, right as my westbound train was on the pocket track, literally SECONDS before my westbound train would have moved onto the eastbound track. Heck, just last night, I was on a westbound train again after 8PM, and the workers were right on the westbound track beside the pocket track, so close that if a window was open I could have reached out and touched them.

It surprised me, hugely, how our automatic train control system (Seltrac) is as flexible as this. If we ever had some sort of SkyTrain line using ballasted track, I'm certain that we would have the flexibility to do this one-side at a time and not require a full closure; i.e. similar to how it is being done today.

nname · #**11360** Posted **Oct 16, 2013, 7:26 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by xd_1771

A short-turn service, doubling frequency from a future 156 St stop, is at this point pretty much something that really needs to be considered. I'm bringing forth a proposal to City Council on this soon. Such a service could also service the somewhat-neglected East Guildford Park & Ride at 160 St.

The MOTI is reviewing the stop proposal by Surrey at the moment, but neither MOTI or TransLink have committed funding, and Surrey cannot.

If its a short-turn service then I think it would be easier to have a separate route from Guildford to Braid/Lougheed via the 152 St on-ramp. That would be easier and quicker to implement as no extra stop is needed, cheaper for TransLink because of the shorter distance and no need to extend bus routes to 156th, and probably higher ridership potential as there's more destinations on the 152nd than the 156th.

I keep thinking.. it would be nice if they extend the #375 to either Coquitlam or Braid/Lougheed via Hwy 1, and eventually upgrade it to a FTN or B-Line...