Transit Fantasies

[MIPS]

What if for some oddball reason we had articulated MK I's?



Image courtesy of Transit Toronto

Actually, the idea of a pantograph could mean that the trains could run at ground level. Just protect the leaky coax lines and you could almost run without fencing because then it would be like any other heavy use rail line in the region. It would also make a line out to White Rock or Chilliwack affordable.

[xd_1771]

While the first picture definitely reminds me of the Mk Is, the second picture actually looks like a Mk II to me o-o

I can't believe they were seriously going to ruin the low-height with the overhead catenary system T^T then again, this appeared to predate linear motor technology

[st7860]

Originally Posted by MIPS

Actually, the idea of a pantograph could mean that the trains could run at ground level. Just protect the leaky coax lines and you could almost run without fencing because then it would be like any other heavy use rail line in the region. It would also make a line out to White Rock or Chilliwack affordable.

a line out to white rock or south surrey is affordable its just that people don't think ahead 30 years.

[Alex Mackinnon]

Originally Posted by MIPS

What if for some oddball reason we had articulated MK I's?



Image courtesy of Transit Toronto

Actually, the idea of a pantograph could mean that the trains could run at ground level. Just protect the leaky coax lines and you could almost run without fencing because then it would be like any other heavy use rail line in the region. It would also make a line out to White Rock or Chilliwack affordable.

You would need a driver if there was no barrier. Also I would imagine the reactor rail is something you don't really want cars and whatnot driving over at level crossings.

[xd_1771]

There's more pictures of the GO ALRT proposal at [THIS LINK]. It was an excellent concept actually, a different way of doing commuter rail that, had gone as proceeded, could have offsetted a lot of freeway expansion and sprawl in the GTA.

I think one of the train designs assisted the development of the Mk II vehicle by Bombardier.

[deasine]

You would still need the LIM rail no matter what which seems to defeat the purpose then.

[officedweller]

Note the following from the link above:

The GO-ALRT vehicles were to look similar to the ICTS models currently in use on the Scarborough RT. Except that they would not use linear induction motors, would be longer, and have an articulated section. A single car would carry over 100 people. The system could carry up to 25000 passengers per hour with trains operating at two minute headways -- far more frequent than the twenty minute headways currently enjoyed by the far larger commuter trains.

http://transit.toronto.on.ca/gotransit/2107.shtml

[deasine]

^Shows I should be reading But doesn't that defeat the purpose? I'm sure many of the benefits of ICTS model, namely the steep grades trains can handle, wouldn't work?

[MIPS]

Originally Posted by deasine

You would still need the LIM rail no matter what which seems to defeat the purpose then.

That's just a heavy lump of steel with an aluminum cap. It jsut needs to be a measured distance form the LIM. For level crossing you just thicken the rail and set it on a reinforced concrete bed that puts it flush with the road. Everywhere else you can continue to use the same mounting method that's been in use for the last 30 years. Your major problem however is that you need to prevent objects from getting between the rail and the LIM. A penny or a stone on the rail might seem like something childish but it can be extremely expensive when the LIM catches it. Briefly the SkyTrain used cow catchers.

Either way, GO-ALRT didn't use LIM. I don't think there has actually ever been studies in how long a LIM would last for long haul trips.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by deasine

^Shows I should be reading But doesn't that defeat the purpose? I'm sure many of the benefits of ICTS model, namely the steep grades trains can handle, wouldn't work?

Sounds like the key benefits of ICTS were shorter trains (intermediate capacity), with higher frequency - i.e. a more generic vision of ICTS rather than the linear induction equipment-based version we use today.

Also note that ALRT meant "Advanced LIGHT RAIL Transit" (see plaque at link above), rather than "Advanced LIGHT RAPID Transit".

The terminology has changed over time.

[MIPS]

There's absolutely no way the existing SkyTrain network could handle an expansion out through the valley. The idea would be to construct a completely new set of lines. An OMC would be built to operate the line and the much longer three car articulated trains (or two car articulated if you read form the above spec sheet and not the photo). Transfer stations would be built in Surrey (or Langley if the SkyTrain is extended) and/or Richmond so you could walk form train to train. Technically you can get away without the LIM on the flat valley but we can keep it anyways for more reliability in poor weather.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by MIPS

There's absolutely no way the existing SkyTrain network could handle an expansion out through the valley. The idea would be to construct a completely new set of lines. An OMC would be built to operate the line and the much longer three car articulated trains (or two car articulated if you read form the above spec sheet and not the photo). Transfer stations would be built in Surrey (or Langley if the SkyTrain is extended) and/or Richmond so you could walk form train to train. Technically you can get away without the LIM on the flat valley but we can keep it anyways for more reliability in poor weather.

Just as there is the familiar West Coast Express serving Coquitlam and the north "slope" of the valley, I am sure that
there will ultimately be a call for a southern commuter route, linking metro to Langley, Abbotsford, and perhaps
Chilliwack in the long haul.
For this, LIM motors or not, I think a larger, but especially faster, transport material would be needed. The market has lots of choice.
But I think there'll be an amplification of the valley "commuter belt," and that will necessitate a second rail line. OK, if not "West Coast Express" type trains,
what type of vehicles would be optimal? It would seem frequency is the most desirable outcome, as suggested in the link posted by Officedweller.

[Canadian Mind]

I disagree to a point. Skytrain should continue to expand south, east, and northeast, someday maybe even to the north shore. I get the feel that everyone looks at the system as Vancouver-centric, so the farther away from Vancouver you are, the more extremes the commutes will be. This thinking is toxic. While it is often the case, it isn't always. Many commuters from Langley just want to go to the other side of Langley, Surrey, Delta, New West, or Burnaby. Going to these places would be no more of an extreme that the current Surrey commute to pretty much anywhere on the line. A rail line with a single stop in Langley, a single stop in Surrey, Richmond, and finally Downtown Vancouver is Vancouver-centric and would not support the needs of the most commuters at this time.

While the Communities east of Langley are spread out, Langley was as far away from Surrey in 1993 as it is now from Abbotsford, and now it is close enough that Skytrain to Langley should be given realistic consideration after the UBC extension. Ten years from now the boundary between Langley and Surrey will be unnoticable in the same way as the boundary between Burnaby and Vancouver.

As for needing a new OMC, this would be perfect for it. The area is still relatively wide open so space can be found. It would also allow the system to be modularised so that if there is a fault somewhere it wouldn't cripple a significant portion of the system.

Like I stated above, Skytrain is an intermediate capacity transport system that would give people in Langley an easy, transfer-free commute as far away as Burnaby. While it wouldn't be the best for people going to downtown Vancouver, with a 75+ minute ride time, it would be a significant improvement over the current meathod of busing to Skytrain in Surrey first.

That being said, I don't want this to be a this/that argument. The best solution would be for a commuter rail service to Chillowack and a Langley Skytrain extension to be built at the same time to compliment eachother. This would allow Langley and Surrey Residents quick access to both Richmond and Vancouver, while at the same time giving commuters further east an option to transfer to the local system once in either Langley or Surrey. Ideally the transfer points would be in central Langley, and Scott Road Station.

[TransitFreak]

Given the context here is Fantasy, I would love to see King George retrofitted to have additional guideways on the outside of the side platforms, essentially having two centre platforms, with 4 guideways...the current Expo line (at peak) could shuttle back and forth as usual, and the two outer guideways can handle the KG to Langley segment, to increase the frequency on this segment - remember, Expo line is constrained by having one of the train sets used for Millenium. This would provide consistent service in the Langley area, and you can use different train configurations (i.e. smaller trains) to feed the main expo line.

During non-peak, the trains can either run all the way through, or continue to use the shuttle concept. The outer guideways would now serve as the 'storage' tail track area that it currently uses, if the trains were to run straight through...

Those wanting to continue east of KG would just cross platform to the waiting train on the new guideway, and those wanting to continue to Vancouver would cross-platorm from the new guideway to the existing inbound platform...

This would allow true segmented service if required, and run different frequencies as required, as well as provide a clean separation for segmented service when the inevitable system issues occur...

[MIPS]

I disagree to a point. Skytrain should continue to expand south, east, and northeast, someday maybe even to the north shore.

I'm all for ICTS in every corner of the lower mainland but only if new OMC's are constructed to store and maintain the doubling of our current rolling stock.

[WBC]

Given that the day when we will have cars drive themselves is rapidly approaching (see Google cars and other initiatives) some thought should be given to future of transit in such scenarios.

- Will we even need transit if you can operate a fleet of automated pods for everyone to share? Or will the pods become Transit?
- Could you transform buses into trains on the road by following each other closely (making things such as trams completely useless)?
- Are the bus driver / cab driver professions about to end?
- Economic impact - no more driver salaries to pay for?

Anyway, just some thoughts to encourage discussion in this area...

[MIPS]

Even automated cars will have a level of dwell that you simply cannot avoid. Unlike say the SkyTrain where active track access is strictly monitored and secured and thus your trains can travel, accelerate and stop at whatever speed they want, roads still have to contend with things such as J-walkers, safety zones for collision avoidance and break-downs.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by MIPS

Unlike say the SkyTrain where active track access is strictly monitored and secured and thus your trains can travel, accelerate and stop at whatever speed they want, roads still have to contend with things such as J-walkers, safety zones for collision avoidance and break-downs.

Absolutely. People seem to have this unrealistic idea that automated cars will whiz along bumper-to-bumper, eliminating the need for traffic lights because traffic streams crossing at right angles will just magically interleave themselves. The reality is that even existing automated systems with secured guideways can't operate with those kind of nonexistent safety margins. How can people expect automated cars to be that much better, especially given the kind of reliability we can expect from mass production and the liability burden that the manufacturers will have to undertake for anything that goes wrong?

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Canadian Mind

I disagree to a point. Skytrain should continue to expand south, east, and northeast, someday maybe even to the north shore. I get the feel that everyone looks at the system as Vancouver-centric, so the farther away from Vancouver you are, the more extremes the commutes will be. This thinking is toxic.

Agreed,as my quote by TransitFreak will elaborate on constructively.
I bolded the North Shore simply because that's my ultimate dream. hehe
I would like to add here, though, that I consider the UBC line right up there in priority.

Originally Posted by TransitFreak

Given the context here is Fantasy, I would love to see King George retrofitted to have additional guideways on the outside of the side platforms, essentially having two centre platforms, with 4 guideways...the current Expo line (at peak) could shuttle back and forth as usual, and the two outer guideways can handle the KG to Langley segment, to increase the frequency on this segment - remember, Expo line is constrained by having one of the train sets used for Millenium. This would provide consistent service in the Langley area, and you can use different train configurations (i.e. smaller trains) to feed the main expo line.

During non-peak, the trains can either run all the way through, or continue to use the shuttle concept. The outer guideways would now serve as the 'storage' tail track area that it currently uses, if the trains were to run straight through...

Those wanting to continue east of KG would just cross platform to the waiting train on the new guideway, and those wanting to continue to Vancouver would cross-platorm from the new guideway to the existing inbound platform...

This would allow true segmented service if required, and run different frequencies as required, as well as provide a clean separation for segmented service when the inevitable system issues occur...

I left it all intact, because upon closer reading, this sounds good.

[MIPS]

A terminus at Horseshoe Bay would be amazing.