Calgary Public Transit II - Page 501

Full Mountain · #**10001** Posted **Dec 21, 2015, 2:27 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by McMurph

Really? Do you also want a couple of old Plymouth Duster's to cruise the dirt streets with alongside their Model A's. The U2's may be historic, but they're not quite antique.

As Dizzy mentions, just because it isn't antique now doesn't mean it won't be in the future. That said if Heritage Park want's to stay in the late 1800's, early 1900's then we'll need to look at parks for the significant time periods there after over then next couple decades. After all if it is good for us to have one for the Heritage Park period then having one for the others is important too.

Does this mean that we need a separate park for every time period? One could argue that, but I'm not sure that is the most efficient method of providing the experience. That said, is there space at Heritage Park to expand it to other time periods?

Quote:

Originally Posted by DizzyEdge

Well that's why the street car at Heritage park is a reproduction, because we got rid of all of them before they were antiques.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

My understanding is that pantographs require higher tension in the supply lines than trolley poles do, meaning the cable would have to be upgraded to use.

In any case, CT isnèt retiring them all right now. Just the oldest ones.

Is there a case to be made for retaining/preserving the oldest one (Unit 2001) though? Tells a bit of better story than a random one would.

lineman · #**10002** Posted **Dec 22, 2015, 1:03 AM**

I wonder if it could go to the Reynolds museum.

Socguy · #**10003** Posted **Dec 22, 2015, 4:05 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by lineman

I wonder if it could go to the Reynolds museum.

Not a bad idea. A very nice museum!

MalcolmTucker · #**10004** Posted **Dec 22, 2015, 4:54 PM**

Or a little shuttle from the LRT to Telus Spark - can even run it streetcar style.

Policy Wonk · #**10005** Posted **Dec 23, 2015, 1:03 AM**

San Diego's are already headed to museums, one is already at the Western Railroad Museum, one is going to a museum in Pennsylvania. I think another is going to the California Science Center and a local museum with several older trolleys wants one too.

srperrycgy · #**10006** Posted **Dec 23, 2015, 1:43 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Full Mountain

Could it be modified to run along with the street car at Heritage park?

The electrical contractor where I work also does some work at Heritage Park and has worked on the streetcar line. I asked if it would be possible and it could be. The streetcar runs at 600V DC as does the old U2 LRV. But the platform levels would be different and would require changes.

Even if they couldn't run a U2 LRV at Heritage Park, one LRV should be set aside as a reminder of our transit history.

Fuzz · #**10007** Posted **Dec 23, 2015, 2:12 PM**

They should incorporate one into the redesign of Olympic Plaza, since the LRT was a big part of the Olympics.

DizzyEdge · #**10008** Posted **Dec 23, 2015, 3:45 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fuzz

They should incorporate one into the redesign of Olympic Plaza, since the LRT was a big part of the Olympics.

U2 Cafe?

mersar · #**10009** Posted **Dec 25, 2015, 6:50 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by DizzyEdge

U2 Cafe?

Well in one article I read they did mention something about the possibility of using them for "food trucks". Wouldn't be impossible, nor that odd. We've seen old buses converted into restaurants before.

DizzyEdge · #**10010** Posted **Jan 1, 2016, 12:36 AM**

I've been using the train a couple of times the past week, and I've been wondering if the heated glass shelters on the Chinook platform are a safety hazard. The doors open inwards, and it seems like it would be more likely that someone would be trying to get out of the shelter in a hurry (electrical short, some other emergency) than trying to get into it. With inward opening doors any rush to get out would cause an instant pileup.

speedog · #**10011** Posted **Jan 1, 2016, 1:46 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by DizzyEdge

I've been using the train a couple of times the past week, and I've been wondering if the heated glass shelters on the Chinook platform are a safety hazard. The doors open inwards, and it seems like it would be more likely that someone would be trying to get out of the shelter in a hurry (electrical short, some other emergency) than trying to get into it. With inward opening doors any rush to get out would cause an instant pileup.

I wonder what the building code says, personal experience has almost always shown me that personal residences have doors that open inwards while publicly accessible or retail/commercial have doors that open outwards and most specifically for emergency exiting purposes.

In fact, I almost find it awkward when I come across a commercial establishment that has doors that open inwards.

CTrainDude · #**10012** Posted **Jan 1, 2016, 1:59 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by DizzyEdge

I've been using the train a couple of times the past week, and I've been wondering if the heated glass shelters on the Chinook platform are a safety hazard. The doors open inwards, and it seems like it would be more likely that someone would be trying to get out of the shelter in a hurry (electrical short, some other emergency) than trying to get into it. With inward opening doors any rush to get out would cause an instant pileup.

I think the idea is to prevent people walking down the platform from getting smashed with a door, and you have to be careful not to have anything that'll push or force people towards the tracks.

DizzyEdge · #**10013** Posted **Jan 2, 2016, 4:04 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by CTrainDude

I think the idea is to prevent people walking down the platform from getting smashed with a door, and you have to be careful not to have anything that'll push or force people towards the tracks.

Both of those make sense. I guess the current configuration is the best of two not great options. Probably should have made them sliding doors.

sportsdude · #**10014** Posted **Jan 5, 2016, 7:12 PM**

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/tristin+h...c+slows+down+transit/11631665/story.html

Calgary City Council should observe this article about the new Metro Line LRT in Edmonton.

They can then see how this could effect the Centre Street LRT if they chose the terrible option of building on top of the existing bridge.

DizzyEdge · #**10015** Posted **Jan 5, 2016, 7:35 PM**

"Taken together, the whole project is the equivalent of a candy company releasing a new chocolate bar called Herpes Al-Qaeda."

outoftheice · #**10016** Posted **Jan 5, 2016, 7:42 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by sportsdude

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/tristin+h...c+slows+down+transit/11631665/story.html

Calgary City Council should observe this article about the new Metro Line LRT in Edmonton.

They can then see how this could effect the Centre Street LRT if they chose the terrible option of building on top of the existing bridge.

Definitely some big lessons to be learned from this debacle however I think regardless of the option chosen for the Green Line N we're already well ahead of Edmonton in terms of avoiding gridlock. The article makes it clear that the traffic delays in Edmonton are being caused by 4+ light waits to cross the tracks during peak times. For the Green Line N the tracks will be grade separated at 16th Ave N, McKnight Blvd and Beddington Trail. As these three roads are the only main E/W connectors along the corridor we should be able to avoid the mess they have in Edmonton.

lubicon · #**10017** Posted **Jan 5, 2016, 8:11 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by sportsdude

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/tristin+h...c+slows+down+transit/11631665/story.html

Calgary City Council should observe this article about the new Metro Line LRT in Edmonton.

They can then see how this could effect the Centre Street LRT if they chose the terrible option of building on top of the existing bridge.

"But before designing a single new subway line or streetcar lane, be cognizant of one ironclad maxim; don’t let idiots build your transit."

Above all else I pray that we follow this piece of advice.

UofC.engineer · #**10018** Posted **Jan 5, 2016, 8:18 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by sportsdude

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/tristin+h...c+slows+down+transit/11631665/story.html

Calgary City Council should observe this article about the new Metro Line LRT in Edmonton.

They can then see how this could effect the Centre Street LRT if they chose the terrible option of building on top of the existing bridge.

I get the impression that the author is exaggerating the problem with the Metro line. Can anyone on this forum attest to the problems?

fusili · #**10019** Posted **Jan 5, 2016, 8:37 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by sportsdude

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/tristin+h...c+slows+down+transit/11631665/story.html

Calgary City Council should observe this article about the new Metro Line LRT in Edmonton.

They can then see how this could effect the Centre Street LRT if they chose the terrible option of building on top of the existing bridge.

It is an important criticism. We need to ensure that we handle cross-intersections, signalization and grade separation properly. I think the key is to ensure major cross streets (16th, 20th, 40th, McKnight, 64th, Beddington Blvd are dealt with appropriately, which means either grade separation or proper signalization. IIRC, 16th, 20th and McKnight will be grade separated.

You Need A Thneed · #**10020** Posted **Jan 6, 2016, 4:11 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by UofC.engineer

I get the impression that the author is exaggerating the problem with the Metro line. Can anyone on this forum attest to the problems?

I don't think the current problems are exaggerated. Though, in theory it will get much better when the signalling works properly. I say in theory because it's well over two years since it was supposed to work.