Confederation Line (Stage 1) | In Service 1.0

[passwordisnt123]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Heaven help them. Nashville plans a downtown LRT tunnel just like ours and plans to interline trains through the tunnel. Please correct their foolishness.

And yes, the branches will join together close to downtown.

I don’t get it. I don’t think anybody is against interlining either in principle or in practice for the Confederation Line. Many of us are against interlining the Trilium Line and the Confederation Line for a variety of reasons but that’s not the same thing as thinking interlining itself is a bad idea.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by passwordisnt123

I don’t get it. I don’t think anybody is against interlining either in principle or in practice for the Confederation Line. Many of us are against interlining the Trilium Line and the Confederation Line for a variety of reasons but that’s not the same thing as thinking interlining itself is a bad idea.

There have been extensive opposition to interlining on this board. Obviously, that is not possible given the differences in technology for the foreseeable future, however, the opposition has been more general than that. Surely, you have heard the 'every train will be your train' comment and that we have not built the downtown platforms big enough. Of course, now there are comments about short turning trains so the 'every train is your train' comment goes out the window and if that were to ever happen, a lot of people will be waiting more than one train in the downtown tunnel.

[PHrenetic]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

There have been extensive opposition to interlining on this board. Obviously, that is not possible given the differences in technology for the foreseeable future, however, the opposition has been more general than that. Surely, you have heard the 'every train will be your train' comment and that we have not built the downtown platforms big enough. Of course, now there are comments about short turning trains so the 'every train is your train' comment goes out the window and if that were to ever happen, a lot of people will be waiting more than one train in the downtown tunnel.

Good Day.

yep.... interlining per se is not a real problem until you hit capacity and beyond.
Then... big problem, with people on the platforms waiting for -their- train. Which leads to crowding on the platforms.
At least we will not be faced with running up-and-down the platform to catch -our- train just because it came at the other end of the platform to where we are waiting, and missing it as the inevitable result (today's downtown bus transitway stops - too many bus routes at each and every stop (plus drivers who decide to pull out and around early, leaving people behind)).

But - we are already interlining Phase 2, as of this time in planning.

The off-peak operational plan at present is to run shuttle out of LincolnF to one or the other of Moodie or Baseline, with the tendency seeming to be Moodie. So, this is straight run Trim to Baseline with transfer at LincolnF to Moodie.

But - the on-peak is interlined westbound - alternating Moodie and Baseline.

And - we have not heard anything furthur on short-turning eastbound at Hurdman, which is in effect interlining eastbound between Hurdman and Trim.
Which is still straight run to Hurdman, but then 'transfer' to finish out to Trim.

Call it 'shuttle', or wait for -your-train, or .... , the whole concept confuses the straightforward concept of " Every Train Is Your Train".

Sure, customers will figure it out quickly how their choice will give them their best result, but...... ETIYT is out the train window.

Whatcha gonna do ?!? ..... see what we get served up !!

[OCCheetos]

Interlining the Trillium Line and Confederation Line could easily result in a situation similar to Lower Bay station in Toronto (which is bad), especially if the Trillium Line is ever extended across into Gatineau.

Interlining the two branches at Lincoln Fields is more feasible since the two branches could share platforms. Passengers wouldn't constantly have to go up and down stairs to get to the right platform for the next train.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by PHrenetic

Good Day.

yep.... interlining per se is not a real problem until you hit capacity and beyond.
Then... big problem, with people on the platforms waiting for -their- train. Which leads to crowding on the platforms.
At least we will not be faced with running up-and-down the platform to catch -our- train just because it came at the other end of the platform to where we are waiting, and missing it as the inevitable result (today's downtown bus transitway stops - too many bus routes at each and every stop (plus drivers who decide to pull out and around early, leaving people behind)).

But - we are already interlining Phase 2, as of this time in planning.

The off-peak operational plan at present is to run shuttle out of LincolnF to one or the other of Moodie or Baseline, with the tendency seeming to be Moodie. So, this is straight run Trim to Baseline with transfer at LincolnF to Moodie.

But - the on-peak is interlined westbound - alternating Moodie and Baseline.

And - we have not heard anything furthur on short-turning eastbound at Hurdman, which is in effect interlining eastbound between Hurdman and Trim.
Which is still straight run to Hurdman, but then 'transfer' to finish out to Trim.

Call it 'shuttle', or wait for -your-train, or .... , the whole concept confuses the straightforward concept of " Every Train Is Your Train".

Sure, customers will figure it out quickly how their choice will give them their best result, but...... ETIYT is out the train window.

Whatcha gonna do ?!? ..... see what we get served up !!

Once you near capacity, you near capacity whether there is interlining or not. The trains still need to deal with the same number passengers. I often thought of the real lack of mathematical logic to blame interlining for this problem. It does not matter whether we transfer everybody north-south at Bayview, the vast majority are still heading to and from downtown, so we will still have a capacity problem. At that point, we need to build another line into downtown, no question about it. So these capacity comments are bogus. We may postpone the problem a couple of years at best by eliminating interlining. Thinking about logic here (or the lack thereof), instead of building a proper north-south line into downtown and across into Gatineau, we will probably build a parallel route under Albert or Slater. So instead of building something new that will attract new riders, we will just adjust to the capacity issue and again serve the same people as before with two subways a block or two apart. If this ever comes about, I will be shaking my head the whole time.

When I hear these comments from certain posters about interlining, my impression is that they are getting upset that the trains may run through their neighbourhood every 3 minutes instead of every 2 minutes. Outside of central part of the city, there is clearly no need for that level of service.

Your comment about trains not running to end of the line in the west end only applies to service after midnight when trains run every 15 minutes and it still only applies to one branch, likely to Baseline. During all other hours, trains will alternate so service minimum levels will be every 15 minutes on both branches.

[swimmer_spe]

Once you are reaching capacity on the central interlined section, they can plan to build a second set of tunnel downtown. It really in not that difficult.

[acottawa]

The problem with interlining isn't the trains, it is the platforms. With a non-interlined train the platform clears with every train, each interlinked train increases the number of people waiting on the platform for their destination.

This works in Oslo where the platforms are massive. This works in London where the splits occur a long way from the central london and only a small percentage of riders are actually going that far.

The original designs for the Confederation line anticipated interlining. They had deep stations with huge platforms. When the province capped their contribution at $600M then the city had to cut costs and these features were dropped.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by acottawa

The problem with interlining isn't the trains, it is the platforms. With a non-interlined train the platform clears with every train, each interlinked train increases the number of people waiting on the platform for their destination.

This works in Oslo where the platforms are massive. This works in London where the splits occur a long way from the central london and only a small percentage of riders are actually going that far.

The original designs for the Confederation line anticipated interlining. They had deep stations with huge platforms. When the province capped their contribution at $600M then the city had to cut costs and these features were dropped.

When they build Phase 3 or beyond, could they not build deeper station boxes to accommodate the extra people?

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by acottawa

The problem with interlining isn't the trains, it is the platforms. With a non-interlined train the platform clears with every train, each interlinked train increases the number of people waiting on the platform for their destination.

This works in Oslo where the platforms are massive. This works in London where the splits occur a long way from the central london and only a small percentage of riders are actually going that far.

The original designs for the Confederation line anticipated interlining. They had deep stations with huge platforms. When the province capped their contribution at $600M then the city had to cut costs and these features were dropped.

This latest discussion came about because Nashville is planning to build a downtown tunnel for interlined trains which branch close to downtown.

It is very common for cities to interline in this manner.

It is alarming if the platforms cannot handle one missed train.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

This latest discussion came about because Nashville is planning to build a downtown tunnel for interlined trains which branch close to downtown.

It is very common for cities to interline in this manner.

It is alarming if the platforms cannot handle one missed train.

What is the projected ridership in Nashville? A lot of these sunbelt light rail systems have tiny ridership compared to what Ottawa is expecting.

How big are the platforms? If they're designed for interlining then that's great. Ottawa's are not.

[eltodesukane]

Originally Posted by acottawa

... When the province capped their contribution at $600M then the city had to cut costs and these features were dropped.

This is the problem with very many projects: not one but many are in charge.
The city would do something, but must wait for contribution from the province, who must wait for contribution from the federal.
In the end nothing gets done, or some watered-down version gets done much later.
When you need a new table or a new tv, do you wait for a cost-sharing agreement with your neighbors? No. You want it, you get it, you pay it. The end.

[PHrenetic]

Originally Posted by acottawa

What is the projected ridership in Nashville? A lot of these sunbelt light rail systems have tiny ridership compared to what Ottawa is expecting.

How big are the platforms? If they're designed for interlining then that's great. Ottawa's are not.

Good Day.

And there's the rub.

Rideau station platforms are 'somewhat' bigger than Parl or Lyon, but not by much, and (let's face it) Parl and Lyon are -tiny- !!!
There is no interlining in Phase 1 (fortunately), so we can get some experience in before Phase 2 westbound interlining does hit us.
Interlining is fine in small load LRTs, but in big load factors - miss just one train (which is what interlining basically comes to) and the platform is overloaded.
Add just one glitch, and you have 'crush'.
Nope - I was scared we were going to get tiny 50's style narrow difficult platforms, and yipee - here we are - Lyon and Parl - ripe for overload. OMG!

I am not hopeful. Prayerful that I am wrong, but not hopeful.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Once you are reaching capacity on the central interlined section, they can plan to build a second set of tunnel downtown. It really in not that difficult.

Yes, with extensions to Barrhaven and Blackburn Hamlet!

Anything, anything, ANYTHING to avoid providing urban transit to the urban area.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Yes, with extensions to Barrhaven and Blackburn Hamlet!

Anything, anything, ANYTHING to avoid providing urban transit to the urban area.

Yep, we will need a second parallel line going to the west and east end and we will again spend several billion. And yes, that will not be down Montreal Road.

This is being reactive. Instead of spreading the load by building in completely different direction with the added benefit of bringing in new riders. This is what a sane city would do.

Do we see Calgary planning LRT on another east-west street downtown because the east-west route is at capacity? No, they are going to build on a perpendicular axis. But our logic is that we build strictly where current demand exists, not considering where potential need is. Potential need is to be ignored.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by PHrenetic

Good Day.

And there's the rub.

Rideau station platforms are 'somewhat' bigger than Parl or Lyon, but not by much, and (let's face it) Parl and Lyon are -tiny- !!!
There is no interlining in Phase 1 (fortunately), so we can get some experience in before Phase 2 westbound interlining does hit us.
Interlining is fine in small load LRTs, but in big load factors - miss just one train (which is what interlining basically comes to) and the platform is overloaded.
Add just one glitch, and you have 'crush'.
Nope - I was scared we were going to get tiny 50's style narrow difficult platforms, and yipee - here we are - Lyon and Parl - ripe for overload. OMG!

I am not hopeful. Prayerful that I am wrong, but not hopeful.

Inevitably, there will be delays and short-term shut downs.

How will we deal with Canada Day? Bring buses downtown again but now without the Transitway accesses? It seems inevitable.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by acottawa

What is the projected ridership in Nashville? A lot of these sunbelt light rail systems have tiny ridership compared to what Ottawa is expecting.

How big are the platforms? If they're designed for interlining then that's great. Ottawa's are not.

why did Ottawa do this? Under building is not a wise long-term plan. It was to save money in the short-term because their original estimates were too low.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

why did Ottawa do this? Under building is not a wise long-term plan. It was to save money in the short-term because their original estimates were too low.

The city had planned a more future proof line with a rough-in for interlining with the Trillium line and much larger platforms. The Province capped its contribution at 600M, the Feds wouldn't put in more than the Province and the city was stuck with over 40% of the cost (compared to zero percent for projects in the GTA).

[Richard Eade]

People talk about building a second tunnel as if it would be prohibitively expensive. Although tunnels are not cheap, we need to remember that of the $5.5B-$6B of costs associated with Stages 1 and 2, only about $650M was for excavating the 2.5 kilometre long tunnel. The vase majority of the cost is for the conversion of busway to railway. Since we’ll already have a railway by the time we need a second tunnel, that new tunnel would likely cost ‘only’ about a billion dollars if it is mined, or about $700M if it is a shallower cut & cover tunnel. Granted, as I said above, tunnels are not cheap, but they are also not out of the question.

[For reference; the CSST is being bored and lined with a TBM for a 3m finished diameter and will have 6.2km of tunnels when finished – for the cost of $233.3M, of which the City is paying $108M. For trains, we would need two 5m diameter bores of say, 2.2km each (from new library station to uOttawa Station, running under Laurier) – which would be less than twice the tunnel volume compared to the CSST. Stations would add $60M-$100M each, with, I imagine, a station spanning from the library to Tech. school grounds, one spanning Kent to Bank, one under Elgin, and any modification needed to the uOttawa Station.]

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Richard Eade

[For reference; the CSST is being bored and lined with a TBM for a 3m finished diameter and will have 6.2km of tunnels when finished – for the cost of $233.3M, of which the City is paying $108M. For trains, we would need two 5m diameter bores of say, 2.2km each (from new library station to uOttawa Station, running under Laurier) – which would be less than twice the tunnel volume compared to the CSST. Stations would add $60M-$100M each, with, I imagine, a station spanning from the library to Tech. school grounds, one spanning Kent to Bank, one under Elgin, and any modification needed to the uOttawa Station.]

I'm not sure you can scale up the cost of a tunnel designed to transport shit to a tunnel designed to transport humans. The latter require stations, ventilation, tracks, utilities, and safety features.

[Truenorth00]

Comparing Nashville to Ottawa? People really jump the shark sometimes, in these parts. Again, Ottawa will have the busiest LRT line in North America on day one of the Confederation Line's operation. Such a comparison is ridiculous.

All that said, interlining, would be great....if we had the money for it. So many compatibility issues. Confederation Line uses light rail. Trillium Line uses heavy rail rolling stock. Confederation Line is electrified. Trillium Line isn't. And with no double track on the Trillium Line, the junction at Bayview becomes a network and capacity planning nightmare.

Maybe some day when we can resolve a whole lot of issues with the Trillium Line, they can work towards interlining.