Calgary Public Transit II - Page 353

RicoLance21 · #**7041** Posted **Nov 8, 2013, 2:53 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by 5seconds

According to Scott Dipple at the CBC, the Transit smart card system is not coming to Calgary in 2014

"Projected cost of new electronic fare card system for Calgary Transit: $11m over 2015-18. Not happening in '14."

Darn...the Back to the Future's universe must be laughing at us right now.

TallisRH · #**7042** Posted **Nov 8, 2013, 4:20 AM**

Does anyone know which architectural firm did the new Chinook station design?

mersar · #**7043** Posted **Nov 8, 2013, 4:15 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by tallisrh

does anyone know which architectural firm did the new chinook station design?

GEC did that one, and quite a few of the others of late.

MasterG · #**7044** Posted **Nov 8, 2013, 4:37 PM**

When are we scheduled to see our first 4 - car trains? isn't sometime in 2014?

Aegis · #**7045** Posted **Nov 8, 2013, 4:51 PM**

Looks like The Mask won.

You Need A Thneed · #**7046** Posted **Nov 8, 2013, 5:06 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by MasterG

When are we scheduled to see our first 4 - car trains? isn't sometime in 2014?

The first of the new LRVs starts arriving in August 2015, with them all arriving by December 2016.

I would imagine that CT will have enough LRVs to start running a couple of 4 car trains by about Sept 2015, with enough trains to actually see a few 4 cars trains regularly by about November of 2015. The ratio will slowly increase until most trains are 4 cars when all the LRVs have arrived in Dec 2016.

Chadillaccc · #**7047** Posted **Nov 8, 2013, 5:24 PM**

Don't we already have enough LRVs for 4 car trains? The original introduction date for them was in 2014, from what I know, it still is. They planned 4 car trains before the new trains were even on the horizon.

You Need A Thneed · #**7048** Posted **Nov 8, 2013, 5:58 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

Don't we already have enough LRVs for 4 car trains? The original introduction date for them was in 2014, from what I know, it still is. They planned 4 car trains before the new trains were even on the horizon.

The new trains are ordered to allow us to go to 4 car trains. Pretty much every LRV that we have is in service during rush hour - save for a few that are having maintenance done.

We don't even have the option to run 4 car trains yet, since neither line has been completely upgraded to 4 car platforms.

Funding somewhat up in the air is what prevented the city from ordering the trains earlier.

Chadillaccc · #**7049** Posted **Nov 8, 2013, 6:04 PM**

I know they haven't, hence the date of 2014, not November 2013.

fusili · #**7050** Posted **Nov 8, 2013, 6:18 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

I know they haven't, hence the date of 2014, not November 2013.

Thank you, thank you, thank you for writing "hence" and not "hence why". Its one of my pet peeves.

MalcolmTucker · #**7051** Posted **Nov 8, 2013, 6:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by You Need A Thneed

Funding somewhat up in the air is what prevented the city from ordering the trains earlier.

The funding wasn't up in the air - the city couldn't decide what to apply for. Once the decision was made everything was rather quick. I also don't expect the NE-W line to run with four car trains, though my impression of the loads in the NE could be mistaken.

You Need A Thneed · #**7052** Posted **Nov 8, 2013, 7:38 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

I know they haven't, hence the date of 2014, not November 2013.

In short, it's going to be a about 2 years from now before they can start running enough 4 cars trains that the difference will be noticable. They will obviously run all the first 4 car trains on the 201 (other than getting them back to storage , which might be at OBMF) Pretty much every new train that the city receives is going to be stored at OMBF, as that 's where the new storage capacity is.

You Need A Thneed · #**7053** Posted **Nov 8, 2013, 7:42 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

The funding wasn't up in the air - the city couldn't decide what to apply for. Once the decision was made everything was rather quick. I also don't expect the NE-W line to run with four car trains, though my impression of the loads in the NE could be mistaken.

To start, the 201 will get all the 4 car trains, but with trains going to OBMF for storage, there will be quite a few that end up on the 202 as well, certainly going to the NE. When every train is 4 cars long, even more trains then currently will be heading to the NE to be stored.

You Need A Thneed · #**7054** Posted **Nov 8, 2013, 8:04 PM**

Was just looking around on Google Maps, and found this, it looks very curious. Can someone explain this to me, unless it just happens to be multiple camera images blended together?

http://goo.gl/maps/cEhz1

Full Mountain · #**7055** Posted **Nov 8, 2013, 8:16 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by You Need A Thneed

Was just looking around on Google Maps, and found this, it looks very curious. Can someone explain this to me, unless it just happens to be multiple camera images blended together?

http://goo.gl/maps/cEhz1

I would guess that it's a stitching artifact, the single car would be from the first image and be the same vehicle as the lead car in the consist from the second image.

The unlikely situation would be that it was a single training car, but the likelihood of that close of spacing is right next to zero.

Mista_Incognito · #**7056** Posted **Nov 8, 2013, 8:26 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by You Need A Thneed

Was just looking around on Google Maps, and found this, it looks very curious. Can someone explain this to me, unless it just happens to be multiple camera images blended together?

http://goo.gl/maps/cEhz1

I am pretty confident that is just two image tiles being mosaiced together. You can the see the seams by looking to the North. There are double white lines road, the outside curbs on the road dont line up.. etc

freeweed · #**7057** Posted **Nov 8, 2013, 9:08 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by fusili

Thank you, thank you, thank you for writing "hence" and not "hence why". Its one of my pet peeves.

Hence why you're so persnickety when people do it?

fusili · #**7058** Posted **Nov 8, 2013, 9:13 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by freeweed

Hence why you're so persnickety when people do it?

Points for persnickety.

TallisRH · #**7059** Posted **Nov 11, 2013, 5:50 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by mersar

GEC did that one, and quite a few of the others of late.

Cheers!

Joborule · #**7060** Posted **Nov 11, 2013, 11:47 PM**

Was thinking of how the LRT system can look like in the long term future, and thought up a LRT loop route west of the city to connect all the major HUBs together.

CTWestHUB by Joborule, on Flickr

This route would serve to link U of C, Foothills Hospital (indirectly), MRU, Rockeyview Hospital, potential Tsuu T'ina Commercial District, Westhills, and the Children's Hospital. As well Market Mall indirectly would be served in a indirect fashion.

This loop could be linked to other LRT lines such as a N-S LRT along Shaganappi/Sarcee Trail and the SWRR. So it wouldn't be a isolated line with no intersection with others.

Again, this is something that's 20-30 years in the future when the areas are more dense. I figure making this route a LRT would be justifiable though since the areas this loop would serve would service a lot of people in both residence and employment.