The Great Canadian Transit Thread

[SkahHigh]

Originally Posted by TorontoDrew

You would have thought a quick paint job was in order.

I personally never saw an AMT locomotive with the GO livery. They were all re-painted within weeks.

[Procrastinational]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

It's interesting that the Mascouche Line is being criticized for a projected ridership of 14,000. Vancouver's West Coast Express has a ridership of 11,000 (as of 2011) and is generally considered successful.

The West Coast Express is a bit of a joke compared to the Montreal system. Although for how limited the schedule and route is, the ridership figures are decent.

I'd love for the Greater Vancouver area to get more commuter rail to serve some of the more distant suburban areas. You could probably run a commuter rail line all the way to Squamish or Chilliwack even. It would take some of the traffic off our sorely lacking freeway network as well.

What I've noticed in cities with good commuter rail systems is that people seem willing to commute longer by train (with proper spacious seating) than by car. Much less stressful, and you can get some work done on the way I suppose. So while driving from Abbotsford into Burnaby or Downtown Vancouver every day would be horrible, taking the train would be doable.

Seems like a general trend that commuter rail is much more established in eastern North America than in the west.

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by Procrastinational

The West Coast Express is a bit of a joke compared to the Montreal system. Although for how limited the schedule and route is, the ridership figures are decent.

I'd love for the Greater Vancouver area to get more commuter rail to serve some of the more distant suburban areas. You could probably run a commuter rail line all the way to Squamish or Chilliwack even. It would take some of the traffic off our sorely lacking freeway network as well.

What I've noticed in cities with good commuter rail systems is that people seem willing to commute longer by train (with proper spacious seating) than by car. Much less stressful, and you can get some work done on the way I suppose. So while driving from Abbotsford into Burnaby or Downtown Vancouver every day would be horrible, taking the train would be doable.

Seems like a general trend that commuter rail is much more established in eastern North America than in the west.

I'm sure our system will get expanded eventually, it's just really not a priority right now. We don't even have good bus service to Abbotsford yet–you have to take a bus to Aldergrove, then another one there to Surrey just to get to the SkyTrain in Surrey. Frankly, there are just a lot more important things to take care of, like the Broadway subway, than commuter rail. I think a bus would be a good start, but Translink won't do it until they absorb Abbotsford into their coverage area (which has been talked about for a while.) BC Transit would have to be the only to implement it if they want it now.

[Procrastinational]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

I'm sure our system will get expanded eventually, it's just really not a priority right now. We don't even have good bus service to Abbotsford yet–you have to take a bus to Aldergrove, then another one there to Surrey just to get to the SkyTrain in Surrey. Frankly, there are just a lot more important things to take care of, like the Broadway subway, than commuter rail. I think a bus would be a good start, but Translink won't do it until they absorb Abbotsford into their coverage area (which has been talked about for a while.) BC Transit would have to be the only to implement it if they want it now.

Obviously it's not a short term priority, but in the long term, as Metro Vancouver matures, I really hope that a few more lines are built. The reason I bring it up though, is because preserving the right of way for the future requires planning now.

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by Procrastinational

Obviously it's not a short term priority, but in the long term, as Metro Vancouver matures, I really hope that a few more lines are built. The reason I bring it up though, is because preserving the right of way for the future requires planning now.

I'm sure there's been some thought about it. Yeah, in the Valley it won't be that bad, but trying to get a commuter rail line downtown would be very tough. The rail corridor the Expo Line was built on would've been perfect, if they had built it underground. I'm really not sure where they could build it now, unless it was extensively tunelled.

[Metro-One]

The other difference is Vancouver is much more linear than places like Montreal (which are more classical radial). By that nature it actually doesn't need as much commuter rail (since it would all essentially be east / west) 3 commuter rail lines would likely be all that the Lower Mainland needs (WCE north of the river, and east / west line south of the river, and maybe a North / south line to White Rock and area.)

That being said, I believe the WCE actually breaks even (or almost even) for cost recovery, making it very successful. Good news is the mayor's plan does include buying several new cars and a new locomotive (so essentially adding a new train to the fleet).

[Procrastinational]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

The other difference is Vancouver is much more linear than places like Montreal (which are more classical radial). By that nature it actually doesn't need as much commuter rail (since it would all essentially be east / west) 3 commuter rail lines would likely be all that the Lower Mainland needs (WCE north of the river, and east / west line south of the river, and maybe a North / south line to White Rock and area.)

That being said, I believe the WCE actually breaks even (or almost even) for cost recovery, making it very successful. Good news is the mayor's plan does include buying several new cars and a new locomotive (so essentially adding a new train to the fleet).

I don't see the need for more than 3 either. Interestingly though, places like Toronto and Boston have somewhat more linear networks than Montreal, but they have significant coverage nonetheless.

[SkahHigh]

Originally Posted by Procrastinational

I don't see the need for more than 3 either. Interestingly though, places like Toronto and Boston have somewhat more linear networks than Montreal, but they have significant coverage nonetheless.

I think it's because the metro areas of Toronto and Boston are more populated than Montreal (although slightly for Boston) and their CR systems are a lot older, so they had time to improve. GO started in 1967 and MBTA in 1973, while the AMT was founded in 1996. Obviously, the older the system, the better it's going to be in terms of infrastructure and service.

Montreal doesn't need more than 6 lines. I read somewhere that there used to be like 10 lines 60 years ago but they were operated by the CN and CP, and the Metro wasn't around yet. Anyway, this wouldn't be possible today will all the freight trains.

As for Vancouver, you guys have a pretty awesome light rail system which we don't have (yet). Yes, the East is more advanced than the West in terms of CR (only Van, LA, San Fran and Seattle have systems), but that's because the eastern cities are older I guess. I hope you guys get extensions on the WCE in the future.

[Aylmer]

What Montreal really needs is frequency. You can't have TOD around a line which only passes 6 times in one direction and six in the other.

With some smaller, quicker trains, an integrated fare in the intramuros zone and 15-30 minute frequency on the portions that warrant it, it could become a well-used service complimentary to the metro for longer-distance urban trips (like to Laval, Brossard, Dorval or Montréal-Nord). The only line where this would currently be possible is the Deux-Montagnes line (which is already frequent-ish at 30-60 minute intervals throughout the day in both directions because the tracks sore owned by AMT and trains are electric), but once the AMT starts buying up or building its own track and electrifying its lines, we could start to see a real long-distance transit system.

Toronto totally has the right idea there.

[SkahHigh]

^ they're trying to do that with the Train de l'Ouest project (15-minute frequency on the Vaudreuil-Hudson Line by adding a third track). That would be good, but the MTQ and the AMT need to be willing to do it, which doesn't seem to be the case right now.

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by SkahHigh

I think it's because the metro areas of Toronto and Boston are more populated than Montreal (although slightly for Boston) and their CR systems are a lot older, so they had time to improve. GO started in 1967 and MBTA in 1973, while the AMT was founded in 1996. Obviously, the older the system, the better it's going to be in terms of infrastructure and service.

Montreal doesn't need more than 6 lines. I read somewhere that there used to be like 10 lines 60 years ago but they were operated by the CN and CP, and the Metro wasn't around yet. Anywau, this wouldn't be possible today will all the freight trains.

As for Vancouver, you guys have a pretty awesome light rail system which we don't have (yet). Yes, the East is more advanced than the West in terms of CR (only Van, LA, San Fran and Seattle have systems), but that's because the eastern cities are older I guess. I hope you guys get extensions on the WCE in the future.

AMT may have started in 1996, but before that, there were trains on two routes operated by its predecessor (the Rigaud line and the Deux Montagnes line).

[SkahHigh]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

AMT may have started in 1996, but before that, there were trains on two routes operated by its predecessor (the Rigaud line and the Deux Montagnes line).

The Deux-Montagnes Line is almost centennial. The infrastructure was very average and the trains were really old when the AMT took over. They spent a lot of money modernizing the line, and it eventually paid off.

Mont-Royal Station a while back:


http://www.butoba.net/homepage/cntmr.jpg

[mcmcclassic]

[Toronto]

The Presto payment system can be now found on a few streetcars. I've only seen it on the Spadina line and it seems to work fine, but I can see a problem arising from how you have to get a transfer.

Right now you tap to get on the streetcar, and when you get to the station/stop, you have to tap a different machine to get the transfer. If you don't do the second step, you pay again at the next connection (which I learned the hard way).

[1overcosc]

One of the reasons why GO stations have so much parking and why so many people drive there is because of the way pricing works. GO is seperately run from local transit authorities in the GTA, so you don't have free transfers like you do within a single system. You have to pay to take your local bus, then pay again to take GO. I believe most transit agencies have a discount system of sorts that reduces the transfer cost, but it's still a cost. Whereas with parking, you get it for free at the station.

I've heard that Metrolinx is planning on 'decoupling the cost of parking from GO fares', which I assume means that they'll start charging for parking and then reduce GO fares to offset it, so as to change the economics to make taking local transit to GO more desirable while avoiding angering those who currently drive and want to keep doing so.

[caltrane74]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

The frequency, reliability, and coverage are just as big a part of it as the route length and our
systems are pretty average in pretty much all those characteristics. I just fail to see how there's anything exceptional about them. What I would consider to be a more advanced form of commuter rail would be frequent electrified service of 4 or more trains per hour and this is exactly what Montreal and Toronto should have.

I know in Toronto, this is coming, however it will take time. Maybe 10 years for electrification and frequent service.

[SkahHigh]

Took the Mascouche Line today for 2 stations. Lots of people inside!

My picture when it was leaving Mont-Royal Station:

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by SkahHigh

I think it's because the metro areas of Toronto and Boston are more populated than Montreal (although slightly for Boston) and their CR systems are a lot older, so they had time to improve. GO started in 1967 and MBTA in 1973, while the AMT was founded in 1996. Obviously, the older the system, the better it's going to be in terms of infrastructure and service.

Montreal doesn't need more than 6 lines. I read somewhere that there used to be like 10 lines 60 years ago but they were operated by the CN and CP, and the Metro wasn't around yet. Anyway, this wouldn't be possible today will all the freight trains.

As for Vancouver, you guys have a pretty awesome light rail system which we don't have (yet). Yes, the East is more advanced than the West in terms of CR (only Van, LA, San Fran and Seattle have systems), but that's because the eastern cities are older I guess. I hope you guys get extensions on the WCE in the future.

Well our "light rail system" is actually a fully separated metro, and is intended to be the equivalent of your guys' Métro.

[SkahHigh]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

Well our "light rail system" is actually a fully separated metro, and is intended to be the equivalent of your guys' Métro.

Indeed. But Montreal is late in terms of rapid transit extensions compared to Toronto, Calgary and Vancouver. Nothing since the 3-station extension of the Orange Line to Laval. At least some things are planned lol...

[Innsertnamehere]

As of today Toronto has nothing since 2002.

[caltrane74]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

As of today Toronto has nothing since 2002.

Sad but true, the Spadina extension has been pushed back to 2016.

Unbelieveable.

UPX up and running by Spring of 2015 though. So that will be the first in 13 years.