The Great Canadian Transit Thread

[ssiguy]

That's great news about the new Metro cars for Montreal.

How large are the cars themselves and how long are the trains. I know the stations are huge but how many cars actually fir onto one platform?

[GreaterMontréal]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

That's great news about the new Metro cars for Montreal.

How large are the cars themselves and how long are the trains. I know the stations are huge but how many cars actually fir onto one platform?

Train length - 152.43m
Width - 2.51m
Top speed - 72.4km/h

9 articulated cars per train, boa type, 1068 passengers per train

468 cars (52 sets)

they will replace the MR-63 trains (336) ,

MR-73 (423) , Azur-MPM-10 (468)

[HomeInMyShoes]

Sticker shock this morning when I renewed my transit pass. $84 a month. Last year it was $75 and the previous year is was $62.

Yearly the increase has been from $744 to $900 to $1008. And it is going up again next year. It'll be $92 a month or $1104 a year then.

So a 35% increase in two years and a 48% increase in three years. Ludicrous. The only capital spending outside of a new facility for to fix the broken down fleet we purchase from other cities when they actually upgrade their fleet is for some scheduling software. How hard is it to schedule the minimal frequency we have?

Angry I am today.

[ainvan]

As usual, our transit systems are just meh but they charge us nickel-and-dime.

The beauty to live in inefficient Canada







BlogTO

[Nouvellecosse]

I'm not sure I'd classify having lower operating subsidies as being inefficient. I'd classify efficiency as being more an issue of overall cost and energy usage relative to performance, independent of who's paying.

Also, what exactly is "trip index"?

[1overcosc]

Transit may be more expensive in Canada than in the US, but our transit systems are way better. Sure, American cities have all the fancy LRTs and air links, but they fail at actually getting vehicles on the road. Operating spending and actual on-the-ground convenience are way better here especially in the suburbs.

A typical American city will have a bunch of fancy LRT lines but they'll only show up once or twice an hour and they'll stop running after 8pm.

A typical Canadian city will be mostly buses but they'll show up every 15 minutes and they run until midnight.

Canadian cities generally have far higher transit ridership than similarly-sized American cities. If you look at the top 15 cities in US+Canada for transit ridership, New York is #1 but the rest of the list is almost entirely Canadian cities. And there's a reason for it.

[yaletown_fella]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Why not an elevated metro line?

Because it's not trendy and European.

I'm shocked that RT hasnt been seriously looked at, especially with all the money being poured into these transit studies. Theres an extensive ravine system from Victoria Park station all that way up to the Science Center, perfect for an aboveground RT. That covers 60% of the entire distance of the proposed downtown relief line. A RT DTR from St Andrew Stn -) King Stn->Vic Park Stn->Fairview Mall with frequent service would be an affordable solution and huge difference maker for Toronto's congested system.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by yaletown_fella

Because it's not trendy and European.

That and because it's uglier, more expensive, and less appropriate to the setting.

[yaletown_fella]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

That and because it's uglier, more expensive, and less appropriate to the setting.

But elevated RT is considerably closer in price range to LRT than a full fledged subway. It's a reasonable comprimise.


In Halifax, LRT would be more appropriate, as far as I know it's not as badly congested in Toronto.
I was stuck in traffic for an hour in a half from Yonge/Sheppard to Markham/Ellesmere. The last thing on my mind was how ugly anything was. It was my time getting burned.

The harsh reality is Toronto is a Canada's Los Angeles, not Milan or Rotterdam.

Now luckily, Ive learned my lesson and Im relocating. Life lesson: never get lured by Scarborough cheap rent.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by yaletown_fella

But elevated RT is considerably closer in price range to LRT than a full fledged subway. It's a reasonable comprimise.

Actually, when you factor in maintenance costs, elevated lines are actually much closer to subway costs than LRT costs.

Maintenance is important. Elevated structures age and wear down in winter weather conditions and require a lot of work to keep them in shape. This is a problem cities like Vancouver don't have because of their milder climate. But in the rest of Canada it's huge.

In Ontario, the MTO designs freeway overpasses with as little bridge span as possible using embankments instead. On rural freeways they'll even fill the median with embankments, like such: https://www.google.ca/maps/@44.8169784,-...sdHzhB3siAkwT5rGqGKbQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656. There's a reason for it.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by yaletown_fella

But elevated RT is considerably closer in price range to LRT than a full fledged subway. It's a reasonable comprimise.

This statement follows the doctrine that elevated metro is fundamentally superior to LRT when that isn't the case. Whatever mode is most appropriate for a setting is superior in that situation than a less appropriate mode. For a route intended as a high capacity local feeder to a trunk route, there is going to be a higher frequency of stops. Making it elevated makes that less practical as the stops are a large part of the cost, take up more room and block more light, and take longer for passengers to get in and out of. And a service with a lot of stops isn't going to be terribly fast anyway. As long as it has a dedicated lane and signal pre-emption, there isn't going to be much difference.

Paying more (or even the same) for something less appropriate is not a reasonable compromise imo. Just poor decision making.

[J.OT13]

Ottawa Senators and Rendez-Vous LeBreton proposing to bury Confederation Line from just east of Bayview to the current west portal to the Downtown Subway.

See lower, left.


http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/2-visions-for-lebreton-flats-unveiled-1.3420196

[1overcosc]

^ Bury in what sense?

I imagine it just means covering the tracks rather than actually tunnelling.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

^ Bury in what sense?

I imagine it just means covering the tracks rather than actually tunnelling.

Well yes, covering or building over.

[1overcosc]

I'm looking at the Sens proposal in more detail, and I now see that they'd accomplish a burial of the LRT by raising the entire southern half of the site.

That last picture posted makes this very clear; the aqueduct is considerably below the rest of the site in the diagram yet most of Lebreton is roughly at the same level right now.

Raising the site, aside from allowing the burial of the Confederation Line, would probably also make the decontamination process easier.

[Innsertnamehere]

Apparently Queen Street has been selected as the preferred route for the Downtown Relief Line in Toronto.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/toro...-for-new-toronto-subway/article28460818/

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

Apparently Queen Street has been selected as the preferred route for the Downtown Relief Line in Toronto.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/toro...-for-new-toronto-subway/article28460818/

Using a piece of existing infrastructure. That is a great idea.

As I see it, they should make a U that goes to Bloor. Once that is done, plan out the next legs to Crosstown. Then extend it to Sheppard/YYZ.

That would go a long way from not only reducing the crowding on the Young line, but also help other lines as well.

[Beedok]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

Apparently Queen Street has been selected as the preferred route for the Downtown Relief Line in Toronto.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/toro...-for-new-toronto-subway/article28460818/

Will it not have transfer stations with the Yonge Line? That seems iffy.

[Innsertnamehere]

It likely will have pedestrian tunnels to both Osgoode and Queen station, like at Spadina today. So it will have a connection, but it won't be designed for high levels of transfers.

The next extension of it should go to Eglinton. The western part of the line is needed more for streetcar system relief, and with the king street pedestrian mall back on the table and with Smart Track having a stop at Liberty Village, the west end will be good for a while longer. And I live in the west end.

[nephersir7]

2015 ridership figures for the AMT commuter train lines:



http://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/fewer-people-taking-the-amts-busiest-train-lines