The Great Canadian Transit Thread - Page 353

milomilo · #**7041** Posted **Sep 25, 2015, 3:03 AM**

I think the stations are designed to be 150m long too, so three of those vehicles would be the max length. Ottawa is doing it right.

Horus · #**7042** Posted **Sep 25, 2015, 1:39 PM**

Eglinton Crosstown LRT opening has now been delayed by a year. Target opening is now September 2021.

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/transpor...-to-open-a-year-later-than-expected.html

Quote:

Eglinton Crosstown to open a year later than expected
Metrolinx, announcing new target of fall 2021, says its contractor needs more time to address community issues during construction.

By: Tess Kalinowski Transportation reporter, Published on Thu Sep 24 2015

The $5.3-billion Eglinton Crosstown LRT — believed to be the largest infrastructure project in Ontario history — will open a year later than Metrolinx has been promising for years.

The 19km LRT, which was supposed to begin running late in 2020, is now tracking to open in September 2021, Metrolinx CEO Bruce McCuaig told a press conference announcing the west-bound tunnel drive near Brentcliffe Rd.

The precise reasons aren’t clear.

At the Thursday morning event, McCuaig acknowledged the provincial agency had been expecting to deliver the project earlier. But in talking to the bidders about the construction and the community needs during the build, the date was changed to 2021.

Later, Metrolinx issued a statement attributing the date change to work “done to enhance the bid documents.”
.......

J.OT13 · #**7043** Posted **Sep 25, 2015, 1:56 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by milomilo

I think the stations are designed to be 150m long too, so three of those vehicles would be the max length. Ottawa is doing it right.

No actually, we cheeped out. Initial designs 8 years ago called for 180 meters, it went down to 150 meters, and now we are building 120 meters underground and 90 meters with room for expansion above ground.

As the Mayor said, we can't afford a "Cadillac" system, so we're building a "Chevrolet". Visionary.

caltrane74 · #**7044** Posted **Sep 25, 2015, 1:58 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Horus

Eglinton Crosstown LRT opening has now been delayed by a year. Target opening is now September 2021.

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/transpor...-to-open-a-year-later-than-expected.html

Seems to be a lot of issues with the timeliness of contract fulfillment in the GTA Area these days. Companies Like SNC and Bombardier they just wanna milk it for all it's worth. It's time to forgo using Canadian companies and strictly use European companies, they guys are lazy AF.

Metro-One · #**7045** Posted **Sep 25, 2015, 2:06 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by J.OT13

No actually, we cheeped out. Initial designs 8 years ago called for 180 meters, it went down to 150 meters, and now we are building 120 meters underground and 90 meters with room for expansion above ground.

As the Mayor said, we can't afford a "Cadillac" system, so we're building a "Chevrolet". Visionary.

Not a problem if the line is capable of high frequencies in the future.

I much prefer shorter platforms with more frequent trains than longer platforms with less frequent trains.

What will be the peak frequency on opening day? And what is the theoretical max frequency? Seeing how the entire line is grade separated I am betting pretty good.

J.OT13 · #**7046** Posted **Sep 25, 2015, 2:15 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Not a problem if the line is capable of high frequencies in the future.

I much prefer shorter platforms with more frequent trains than longer platforms with less frequent trains.

What will be the peak frequency on opening day? And what is the theoretical max frequency? Seeing how the entire line is grade separated I am betting pretty good.

Opening day will be around 3 minutes, 15 seconds, with 98 meter trains, capacity of roughly 11,000 phpd. Max frequency would be around 2 minutes, for a capacity of 24,000 phpd (with full length trains/platforms), though I'm sure with full automation, they might push it to 1 minute and a half which would bring the capacity to 32,000 phpd with full length trains (130 meter trains on 120 meter platforms according to the City) .

Nouvellecosse · #**7047** Posted **Sep 25, 2015, 2:20 PM**

Yeah that is more than sufficient imo. If the line ever becomes too congested under those conditions then the city will have likely grown so much that a second downtown corridor will be warranted anyway.

Most full metro system don't have platforms any longer than 120m. That's about the most common length in the London Underground, and in Paris, they're 75-90 metres.

Metro-One · #**7048** Posted **Sep 25, 2015, 2:21 PM**

Nice, so I really don't think you have anything to worry about. Unless Ottawa is expecting to become the size of Tokyo over the next few decades, then I would also agree that 180 meter platforms are not needed. Has the idea of future automation actually been discussed?

Innsertnamehere · #**7049** Posted **Sep 25, 2015, 3:59 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by caltrane74

Seems to be a lot of issues with the timeliness of contract fulfillment in the GTA Area these days. Companies Like SNC and Bombardier they just wanna milk it for all it's worth. It's time to forgo using Canadian companies and strictly use European companies, they guys are lazy AF.

Its not surprising this occurred, apparently it is due to the Scarborough Subway changing the design of Kennedy Station, resulting in a delay. Its the same thing with the Sheppard LRT, it's been delayed to opening after the subway to properly design the interchange between the two.

Ottawa's platforms will be fine. IIRC ultimate peak capacity will be very similar to Toronto's subway network, which Ottawa will not be needing for a long, long time.

Nouvellecosse · #**7050** Posted **Sep 25, 2015, 4:20 PM**

Considering that Calgary is just now upgrading to 100m platforms to handle 4 car trains and has ridership of 300,000 per weekday as is, then yes Ottawa has nothing to worry about.

What makes me curious is where they came up with the idea of 180m platforms at the beginning.

MalcolmTucker · #**7051** Posted **Sep 25, 2015, 4:35 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

Considering that Calgary is just now upgrading to 100m platforms to handle 4 car trains and has ridership of 300,000 per weekday as is, then yes Ottawa has nothing to worry about.

What makes me curious is where they came up with the idea of 180m platforms at the beginning.

The original report probably didn't consider the ability to use different lengths of train cars, so they picked a model and worked backwards from their capacity number.

ssiguy · #**7052** Posted **Sep 25, 2015, 6:51 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by J.OT13

No actually, we cheeped out. Initial designs 8 years ago called for 180 meters, it went down to 150 meters, and now we are building 120 meters underground and 90 meters with room for expansion above ground.

As the Mayor said, we can't afford a "Cadillac" system, so we're building a "Chevrolet". Visionary.

No, cheapening out is Vancouver's Canada Line with 40 meter stations, single track at the end of the line, no inclines of tracks so it's as loud as hell in parts, station platforms are dangerously thin, stations have only one entry/exit, no ability to store an extra train at Waterfront in case of an emergency, no all day/night connection between the main interchange downtown, and a lack of rolling stock.

Campbell and the city only concern was to make sure that something, anything was up and running for the Olympics and making an actual effective and viable transit system over the long term was completely irrelevant.

The Canada Line is the poster child of how not to plan for the future.

SkahHigh · #**7053** Posted **Sep 25, 2015, 7:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ssiguy

No, cheapening out is Vancouver's Canada Line with 40 meter stations, single track at the end of the line, no inclines of tracks so it's as loud as hell in parts, station platforms are dangerously thin, stations have only one entry/exit, no ability to store an extra train at Waterfront in case of an emergency, no all day/night connection between the main interchange downtown, and a lack of rolling stock.

Campbell and the city only concern was to make sure that something, anything was up and running for the Olympics and making an actual effective and viable transit system over the long term was completely irrelevant.

The Canada Line is the poster child of how not to plan for the future.

It's funny because in Montreal they showed the Canada Line as a perfect example for what to do for the South Shore RT line... Apparently the Caisse will use similar technology (automated Bombardier metro cars).

st7860 · #**7054** Posted **Sep 25, 2015, 7:08 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by J.OT13

No actually, we cheeped out. Initial designs 8 years ago called for 180 meters, it went down to 150 meters, and now we are building 120 meters underground and 90 meters with room for expansion above ground.

As the Mayor said, we can't afford a "Cadillac" system, so we're building a "Chevrolet". Visionary.

That makes sense.

However in Vancouver the Canada line is clean and quiet, since it is new. With a safety system so fine tuned you can practically breathe towards the tracks and it tells you to step back, and an excess of trainsets already bought and kept in Richmond as spares. Service can be upgraded so easily its not even funny-Around 3 times the current level of service without much construction at all.

MalcolmTucker · #**7055** Posted **Sep 25, 2015, 7:17 PM**

^ Not every line needs future capacity for 100,000 ppdph.

LeftCoaster · #**7056** Posted **Sep 25, 2015, 8:06 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkahHigh

It's funny because in Montreal they showed the Canada Line as a perfect example for what to do for the South Shore RT line... Apparently the Caisse will use similar technology (automated Bombardier metro cars).

Canada line is a great system, not without it's faults, but certainly it's strengths can be used in a case study for what to do in Mtl.

I wouldn't really listen to SSi, I think someone involved with the Canada Line shot his dog or something...

Metro-One · #**7057** Posted **Sep 25, 2015, 9:04 PM**

ssiguy was actually temporarily suspended from this site several months ago for his continuous rantings against the Canada Line containing many false statements that he has been told / shown otherwise many many times.

The Canada Line does have its faults, but overall it is a success and actually proves that 180 meter platforms would be an insane waste of money / overbuild regarding any modern grade separated system.

Again, the Canada Line carries over 100 000 people today and can increase this to around 300 000 without any modifications not already planned for within the initial design.

Nouvellecosse · #**7058** Posted **Sep 25, 2015, 9:16 PM**

I think the CL is an excellent option for the South Shore! The new crossing will be a very exciting project imo.

milomilo · #**7059** Posted **Sep 25, 2015, 11:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by J.OT13

No actually, we cheeped out. Initial designs 8 years ago called for 180 meters, it went down to 150 meters, and now we are building 120 meters underground and 90 meters with room for expansion above ground.

As the Mayor said, we can't afford a "Cadillac" system, so we're building a "Chevrolet". Visionary.

Ah, my mistake. Still, as others have said that's still pretty good, and they've made other good decisions as well (underground in the core, full grade separation).

red-paladin · #**7060** Posted **Sep 25, 2015, 11:53 PM**

We really need to put the Canada Line topic to rest in my opinion.
Even though I am personally critical of a lot of the design, this is not a topic which needs to be restated over and over again with no new information.

I'm not a moderator of this section and I'm not speaking as a moderator, but there is no point to discuss a topic where everyone knows where everyone else stands.