Metro Vancouver Transit Discussion

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

Do you think they would ever consider changing the ratio of trains going from Richmond to Vancouver if they did this and add a double tracks at the end this could definitely increase service to Richmond.

Richmond didn't want overhead Skytrain - they wanted on-ground light rail. They were in a snit about it and one of the ways to make them happier (or at least less unhappy) was to single track the final section so it's not as noticeable. That's also why there won't be an extension further into Richmond anytime soon.

[Kisai]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

Do you think they would ever consider changing the ratio of trains going from Richmond to Vancouver if they did this and add a double tracks at the end this could definitely increase service to Richmond.

On another note I've heard before that the skytrain's at least the older lines run on an older version of the automated train software seltrac I believe it's called do you think there is a newer more modern software suite or that one could simply be developed that could add a lot more intelligence to the way the trains are dispatched etc.

The original version used an inductive loop, the current version uses WiFi. AFAIK Vancouver still uses the inductive loop. Software-wise, I don't think anyone can answer that since we don't know what other SELTRAC implementations use.

[Reecemartin]

Originally Posted by Kisai

The original version used an inductive loop, the current version uses WiFi. AFAIK Vancouver still uses the inductive loop. Software-wise, I don't think anyone can answer that since we don't know what other SELTRAC implementations use.

It mentions in the article you linked that the computers can control 125 trains obviously more trains run currently so how have they upgraded the systems to allow this?

[Mac Write]

"125 Trains" refers to a complete train which is made up of 4-6 vehicle/car." Each Train is made up of 4 Mark II and 4 or 6 Mark I trains. So that is 42 Mark II trains + unto 37.5 Mark I 4-car trains, but since 6-car Mark I trains are run the number is allot lower (no clue how many 6-car trains are run). So that is a total of 79.5 trains of "all trains" are in revenue service. based on 4-car train sets. If my memory is correct we need 57 train sets to handle rush-hour with only a 8% or somewhere around there spares.

[Kisai]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

It mentions in the article you linked that the computers can control 125 trains obviously more trains run currently so how have they upgraded the systems to allow this?

Someone else who actually works at BCRTC could answer this more accurately, but it's 125 per VCC. There are four VCC zones. So logically that means 325 based on 3 but not the yard. So 4 VCC's times 3 computers means the entire current skytrain system (not including Canada Line) is run by 12 computers. That's not including the onboard computers, SMC or the non-critical systems that are used by staff.

But you need to read between the lines a bit. Expo West represents the 1986 segment, Expo East represents the 1991 segment (AFAIK it's everything east of the yard) , the Millennium Line represents the 2002 segment, and I assume another two VCC will be needed for the Evergreen line segment. So excluding the yards 500 could be controlled with the non-yard VCC's.

[Zassk]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

When I was last in Vancouver some months back, I took the Canada Line, and was impressed by how much more capacious the cars are than the old MK1s, which are a bit like toy trains.
Before they get around to knocking out station walls etc, could the headways not be increased to 1 minute during rush hours, or would this risk collisions?
Also, a bit too bad the trains don't have a higher max operating speed (like 100 k/h) for the long stretch to YVR. I think the Canada Line is adequate, and could be made even better with more trains and more frequent headways, before doing major surgery on it.

The Rotem literature says the trains are capable of operating up to 90 km/h, which puts them on par with MKII top speed. ProTrans simply does not run them at this speed.

[Kisai]

Originally Posted by Zassk

The Rotem literature says the trains are capable of operating up to 90 km/h, which puts them on par with MKII top speed. ProTrans simply does not run them at this speed.

Technically, there is no defined "top speed" for electrically driven motors. It's just a question of how quickly they can be cooled and power supply. Faster trains consume more power and require more stopping distance. They could be run at 200km/h if there weren't any curves or grade changes in the track.

Motors have a maximum RPM before the windings melt from the lack of thermal dissipation.

The parts Bombardier uses in the Rydiah Metro (Innovia Metro 300, but with rotary motors) are also used in high speed trains going 250kph.

So it's not generally the motors, but the track design and politics that limits the speed.

[Kisai]

http://www.news1130.com/2015/09/24/public-invited-to-translink-board-meeting-for-first-time/

Oh this should be good, anyone want to go?

The board meeting takes place Friday, 9:00 a.m. to noon at TransLink’s head office at 287 Nelson’s Court, New Westminster.

http://www.translink.ca/-/media/Document...ember/150925_summary_of_agenda_items.pdf

9:00 – 10:00 a.m :
 CEO Report
 Financial Update

 Major Capital Projects Update

 Operating Company Updates
o Coast Mountain Bus Company
o BC Rapid Transit Company
o Transit Police



10:00 – 11:00 a.m:
 Stakeholder Relations and Service Committee
o Committee Chair Briefing
o New Westminster River Market Shuttle – Independent Transit Services
o Transition to Multi-Modal Area Transportation Plans
o Proposed Near-Term Transit Network Changes and Transit Network Consultation
o Fare Policy Development

 Audit Committee
o Committee Chair Briefing
o Banking Resolutions Update
o Update on Borrowing Resolution

 Risk and Capital Committee
o Committee Chair Briefing
o Compass Card and Faregate Project Status
o Rapid Transit Studies

 Human Resources and Governance Committee
o Committee Chair Briefing

11:00 – 12:00 p.m.
 Public Input Session

[rxp]

did anyone go?

how was it?

[xd_1771]

Pretty boring to be honest

I ended up just taking notes, didn't feel like there'd be anything important to ask/clarify. But there were a few key announcements I was happy to hear about. Particularly, that we're going to receive our first Mk III for testing from Kingston within the next 30 days.

----

On the above topics, I'm pretty sure the Mk IIs can do 100km/h and actually operate at that speed on the JFK AirTrain as it's stated in a few AirTrain related spec sheets (in my experience riding it a couple years back, it definitely seemed faster than our system). To run our E/M line at that speed, it's just a matter of ratifying our guideways to run trains faster - and of course, phasing out any cars (Mk Is?) that cannot do higher speeds. For sure, no progress will be made until the power rail upgrades are complete as it would take extra power on already stressed rails.

ProTrans runs the Rotem EMUs at 80km/h in normal operation but I do believe up to 90km/h is used in catch-up mode (when trains are late).

Newer CBTC systems use a transponder located at key segments in the track (I wouldn't necessarily think it's conventional consumer Wi-fi but they are wireless). Basically a train passing over the transponder can receive a command to change state (accelerating, braking, speed) and of course report its location to central command; it also helps trains stop at the proper location on platforms and not overshoot. The system was explained pretty well in a recent NHK documentary (in English) on Japanese train systems, which included segments on CBTC and the numeorus SkyTrain-like linear motor subways. CBTC signalling, although not necessarily for a fully driverless operation, is used basically country-wide in Japan now on everything from subways to intercity trains to urban express commuter lines.

[MIPS]

MK I's can technically max out at 110 however they discovered a long time ago that going over 90 made the suspension oscillate side to side and microlift.

[Reecemartin]

It's interesting to see the advancements made with the Mark III cars in the future can they adjust the number of cars per train? Is there any type of limit? Do you think when we eventually get to a mark four train they will be able to build one that is just long enough that the front and rear doors are at the very edges of the platform? What would the capacity of such a train be?

[Kisai]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

It's interesting to see the advancements made with the Mark III cars in the future can they adjust the number of cars per train? Is there any type of limit? Do you think when we eventually get to a mark four train they will be able to build one that is just long enough that the front and rear doors are at the very edges of the platform? What would the capacity of such a train be?

I doubt a Mark IV is even on the development list at Bombardier. They're using essentially the same Mark III car design for the Monorail and APM line as well.

When "styles" change, we may see a Mark IV. Or some other innovation that proves popular, but not readily retrofit-able on current models. Like if you noticed in the latter Mark II's (the ones that came with the blue and grey color scheme) they changed the seat arrangement to allow more standing passengers, LED station map, and there are cameras (for when it's being driven manually I guess.)

[finalcoolman]

Originally Posted by xd_1771

Pretty boring to be honest

I ended up just taking notes, didn't feel like there'd be anything important to ask/clarify. But there were a few key announcements I was happy to hear about. Particularly, that we're going to receive our first Mk III for testing from Kingston within the next 30 days.

----

On the above topics, I'm pretty sure the Mk IIs can do 100km/h and actually operate at that speed on the JFK AirTrain as it's stated in a few AirTrain related spec sheets (in my experience riding it a couple years back, it definitely seemed faster than our system). To run our E/M line at that speed, it's just a matter of ratifying our guideways to run trains faster - and of course, phasing out any cars (Mk Is?) that cannot do higher speeds. For sure, no progress will be made until the power rail upgrades are complete as it would take extra power on already stressed rails.

ProTrans runs the Rotem EMUs at 80km/h in normal operation but I do believe up to 90km/h is used in catch-up mode (when trains are late).

Newer CBTC systems use a transponder located at key segments in the track (I wouldn't necessarily think it's conventional consumer Wi-fi but they are wireless). Basically a train passing over the transponder can receive a command to change state (accelerating, braking, speed) and of course report its location to central command; it also helps trains stop at the proper location on platforms and not overshoot. The system was explained pretty well in a recent NHK documentary (in English) on Japanese train systems, which included segments on CBTC and the numeorus SkyTrain-like linear motor subways. CBTC signalling, although not necessarily for a fully driverless operation, is used basically country-wide in Japan now on everything from subways to intercity trains to urban express commuter lines.

Higher than 100 actually, MK IIs can OPERATE at 110km/h, since the Beijing Airport Express which also uses MK II trains has a cruising operating speed of 110km/h.

If they can operate at 110km/h, it means their actual theoretical top speed is likely about 10-20km/h higher than that.

PS. When you look at the Beijing Airport Express, it is EXACTLY what the Canada Line should have been.

Beautiful 4-car long wide-bodied married trainsets that make our Rotem trains look so crappy.

If only we could swap our Olympic Airport line with theirs.

Interior view:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dqq_LEpkx_8

View out rear window leaving their beautiful airport station:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlDSfDx1Vow


Photo credit:Alamay

Photo credit:Urbanrail.net

Photo credit:Wikipedia

[Express691]

https://youtu.be/iuPG8utxJDU

What on earth...

[st7860]

Originally Posted by Express691

https://youtu.be/iuPG8utxJDU

What on earth...

good driving (not)!

[Waders]

Originally Posted by Express691

https://youtu.be/iuPG8utxJDU

What on earth...

Oops! Bad spot to do a U-turn. Fortunately the bus didn't crash into the skytrain track support column.

Did the driver miss the left turn to the bus loop?
Looks like the driver needs a good coffee break before the next trip.

[st7860]

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/tories+promise+funds+surrey+light+rail/11395609/story.html
"The Conservatives are expected to announce Monday a pledge of major federal help for the $2.1-billion Surrey light rapid transit proposal.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper planned to announce his party’s commitment earlier this month, but that was derailed when the shocking photograph of a drowned Syrian boy on a beach in Turkey shifted national attention to the Syrian refugee crisis.

A Sun source confirmed Sunday evening that Surrey, one of Canada’s key battlegrounds heading into the Oct. 19 vote, is about to get what will be one of the biggest election commitments to B.C. of the campaign by the governing party.

A news conference is scheduled for Monday morning that will be headlined not by Harper, but by senior B.C. minister James Moore, who is not running for re-election"

[retro_orange]

Anyone know what's going on with the large fenced off area at the southern foot of the Cambie bridge? It covers almost half the parking lot behind Olympic village station and crosses over both unused rail lines to Commodore road in false creek, the temporary blue fences are oddly placed over a large area. I noticed them on Saturday

[Sheba]

The Conservatives are expected to announce Monday a pledge of major federal help for the $2.1-billion Surrey light rapid transit proposal.

...

Justin Trudeau's Liberal party indicated earlier this month - without making promises - that it backed the project.

...

The Liberals did not put a dollar figure on their offer. Surrey-Newton Liberal candidate Sukh Dhaliwal said on Sept. 9 the Liberals are committed to providing an additional $20 billion for public transit funding over the next decade for the country's top regional priorities. Without specifying a dollar amount, he said "Surrey is well-placed to secure B.C.'s first funding commitment under the Liberal plan."

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/tories+promise+funds+surrey+light+rail/11395609/story.html

Oh lovely - two parties are for light rail in Surrey. The only good thing about it I saw in the article was: "Electrically powered trains on three arterials would serve up to 7,500 riders per direction per hour, travelling down the centre of King George Boulevard, 104 Avenue and Fraser Highway in their own dedicated lanes at speeds similar to vehicle traffic." Whether or not that means they're going to physically separate the lanes with barriers...?