Millennium Line - Broadway Extension: Planning & Pre-Construction

[Hooknose]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

this^^^

only the Canada-Line can have less-than 80m platforms while not hindering capacity AS MUCH as it would on the E & M lines. Canada-Line trains are wider which is why trains can be shorter.

all platforms on the E & M-Line should probably be built to 120m realistically so that the stations never need to be renovated for ~1/2 a century.

You point out something I had not considered .. wider cars.

Just how much wider, if you know and how much more capacity?

That brings us to the question on the ML of just how narrow is it. Is that another indication of lack of planning.

Can the expo lines and ML be widened? Would they fit the tunnels?
If it is just a matter of shaving 1 foot off the platforms and allowing trains of two feet wider length to run, it would be a great, great solution.

[Hooknose]

Originally Posted by Jebby

Once you reach the 25,000pphpd capacity with trains and frequency it makes more sense to build a parallel line since you'd probably have to substantially upgrade every station to handle additional loads.

And a new line creates yet another opportunity for the "pearls on a necklace" development scheme.

Just look at Cambie and Marine on the Canada Line. What a great place to live, with connections everywhere.

[Hooknose]

Originally Posted by Jebby

Or a Hastings Line relieve Downtown demand from the Expo and Canada Lines. The line can the turn north-south to connect with Brentwood and Metrotown as well.

Since we are having fun here ... how about this

A line that runs from the spot in Delta where the 99 and the Sourth Fraser Perimeter road meet. Put in a bus loop so that all south Fraser traffic stops here. In the scraped off peat bog that is really close, build a 5,000 car park. for the park and ride crowd.

Along Number 6 in Richmond to the East West Connector (another bus exchange) across the north arm of the Fraser, straight up knight street, connect at Clark to the ML, and then a station at Hastings and across to lower Lonsdale. (another bus loop).

The wisdom of leaving a bus loop at the end of each point in the line is paramount for building traffic.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by Hooknose

You point out something I had not considered .. wider cars.

Just how much wider, if you know and how much more capacity?

That brings us to the question on the ML of just how narrow is it. Is that another indication of lack of planning.

Can the expo lines and ML be widened? Would they fit the tunnels?
If it is just a matter of shaving 1 foot off the platforms and allowing trains of two feet wider length to run, it would be a great, great solution.

Canada-Line cars are 3.2m in width
Expo & Millennium-Line cars are 2.65m in width

the Expo-Line, when built, could have had the platforms narrowed to allow for standard 3.2m cars. the tunnel and guide-way was also built wide enough for those cars. i cant be sure about the renovations and Millennium-Line though.

Originally Posted by Hooknose

Since we are having fun here ... how about this

A line that runs from the spot in Delta where the 99 and the Sourth Fraser Perimeter road meet. Put in a bus loop so that all south Fraser traffic stops here. In the scraped off peat bog that is really close, build a 5,000 car park. for the park and ride crowd.

Along Number 6 in Richmond to the East West Connector (another bus exchange) across the north arm of the Fraser, straight up knight street, connect at Clark to the ML, and then a station at Hastings and across to lower Lonsdale. (another bus loop).

The wisdom of leaving a bus loop at the end of each point in the line is paramount for building traffic.

TRANSIT FANTASY THREAD

THIS ISN'T A TRANSIT FANTASY THREAD

[Kisai]

Originally Posted by Hooknose

You point out something I had not considered .. wider cars.

Just how much wider, if you know and how much more capacity?

That brings us to the question on the ML of just how narrow is it. Is that another indication of lack of planning.

Can the expo lines and ML be widened? Would they fit the tunnels?
If it is just a matter of shaving 1 foot off the platforms and allowing trains of two feet wider length to run, it would be a great, great solution.

In theory, yes, since wider cars are still standard gauge. The problem is that it's a different loading gauge. If you look at the guideway, you'll note that wider cars could actually use the existing guideway (I don't know if it would fit through everything) but they would still need to cut like 3-8" off the platforms in the stations. It just makes things horribly complicated to run both sizes of rolling stock.

But I think what would more likely happen is that when the concrete guideway itself needs to be replaced (50 years for conventional bridges) they may opt to use a wider guideway or just bury it by making it a subway then.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Kisai

In theory, yes, since wider cars are still standard gauge. The problem is that it's a different loading gauge.

It's a bigger problem than just that. Skytrain is "light" rail, and the guideways and platforms were designed for lightweight vehicles. The cheaper construction costs for the elevated guideways to handle these kinds of vehicles was one of the selling points of the original ALRT system.

The demonstration section along Terminal Avenue had to be upgraded to handle the Mark II cars because they're heavier. Going all the way to cars like the Rotems on the Expo and Millenium lines would require upgrading the guideways across the entire system to handle the heavier vehicles.

[Hooknose]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

It's a bigger problem than just that. Skytrain is "light" rail, and the guideways and platforms were designed for lightweight vehicles. The cheaper construction costs for the elevated guideways to handle these kinds of vehicles was one of the selling points of the original ALRT system.

The demonstration section along Terminal Avenue had to be upgraded to handle the Mark II cars because they're heavier. Going all the way to cars like the Rotems on the Expo and Millenium lines would require upgrading the guideways across the entire system to handle the heavier vehicles.

Good post. Another issue that no one considered. The expo guideways are too weak, wrong gauge and platforms too wide.

No quick fix here. If the previous comment about 25,000 pphpd is right, then we may be looking at a new east west line before we know it.

[ilikeredheads]

Aside from the fact that such upgrade would require shutting down the both Expo and Millennium Line for significant amount of time, you have to consider that even if it is viable to upgrade the system to use wider cars (it is not), the moment you make the switch the existing rolling stock will instantly become useless.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by ilikeredheads

Aside from the fact that such upgrade would require shutting down the both Expo and Millennium Line for significant amount of time, you have to consider that even if it is viable to upgrade the system to use wider cars (it is not), the moment you make the switch the existing rolling stock will instantly become useless.

unless, Platform Gap Filler

[Meraki]

Originally Posted by Hooknose

That brings us to the question on the ML of just how narrow is it. Is that another indication of lack of planning.

Can the expo lines and ML be widened? Would they fit the tunnels?
If it is just a matter of shaving 1 foot off the platforms and allowing trains of two feet wider length to run, it would be a great, great solution.

The Expo/Millennium cars are that width because that's the widest they could fit into the Dunsmuir Tunnel into Downtown, built in 1932.

It wasn't a lack of planning, it was working with what you had available. From there you expand the system with what's compatible, and here we are now.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Meraki

The Expo/Millennium cars are that width because that's the widest they could fit into the Dunsmuir Tunnel into Downtown, built in 1932.

I'm pretty sure that's not true. The Dunsmuir tunnel was original a heavy rail line over which the stainless steel Budd cars of The Canadian ran on a regular basis. Those cars are considerably wider and longer than even the latest Skytrain rolling stock.

[Kisai]

Originally Posted by Meraki

The Expo/Millennium cars are that width because that's the widest they could fit into the Dunsmuir Tunnel into Downtown, built in 1932.

It wasn't a lack of planning, it was working with what you had available. From there you expand the system with what's compatible, and here we are now.

It's the opposite actually. One of the selling points of re-using the tunnel was that the MK I cars could be stacked in the tunnel. Take note of how large the tunnel really is:

http://searcharchives.vancouver.ca/uploa...a-bcf2-40d1-9e92-49e117cf5a62-A49435.jpg

[jollyburger]

More details on the Dunsmuir tunnel width here:

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?p=7537339

And search for "Dunsmuir Tunnel eastern diversion, Vancouver ALRT - E-Periodica" on Google for a PDF with some schematics of the tunnel and a brief technical overview of the rebuilding of the tunnel.

[jbrizzy]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

I thought the Metrotown station renovations were essentially enabling a 100m platform for that station? Are you sure about that?

I think they are extending the platform levels slightly to meet up with the top of the escalators but definitely not 10m at each end.. and it appears that the extensions will be glassed in. But I could be wrong..

[ilikeredheads]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

unless, Platform Gap Filler

It'll cause longer dwell times for trains which affects the high frequency of our trains. Plus, it'll be another set of moving parts that'll require regular maintenance, thereby adding the workload of the maintenance crew. If one malfunctions during service, it'll cause major disruptions.

[casper]

Originally Posted by ilikeredheads

It'll cause longer dwell times for trains which affects the high frequency of our trains. Plus, it'll be another set of moving parts that'll require regular maintenance, thereby adding the workload of the maintenance crew. If one malfunctions during service, it'll cause major disruptions.

The Wikipedia page that the photo references are all in Japan or New York and used in stations with curved platforms. It looks to be extremely rare. I could see this as a work around for one or two stations in a system but not at every station. As you say it would slow down the entire network.

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by casper

The Wikipedia page that the photo references are all in Japan or New York and used in stations with curved platforms. It looks to be extremely rare. I could see this as a work around for one or two stations in a system but not at every station. As you say it would slow down the entire network.

"Mind the gap between the train and the platform"

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

"Mind the gap between the train and the platform"

Surprisingly, even that causes problems.

[nname]

Well, hopefully some of TransLink's 668M surplus this year can be used to fund this project...

And... just noticed that the plan is to construction the stations by mining to reduce surface disruption. Hopefully they will realize that the construction method cost so much and start to explore cheaper alternatives (ie. cut-and-cover)

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Surprisingly, even that causes problems.

Yes... especially on an automated train. I can only imagine the furor after the first incident.

The comment was somewhat tongue in cheek, though admittedly a touch flippant.