Millennium Line - Broadway Extension: Planning & Pre-Construction - Page 436

Reecemartin · #**8701** Posted **Mar 30, 2018, 7:01 PM**

[Deleted]

jollyburger · #**8702** Posted **Mar 31, 2018, 5:07 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Olden Retreiver

Recent comment to a March 18th post about Transit Oriented Development on "The Good Neighbour By-Law Port Moody, B.C." Facebook Group:

" I heard an interesting comment recently in regard to adding more trains to the Evergreen Line- as they are often full. The comment was that, although not publicized , the skytrain tunnel cannot accommodate more than one train in either direction in the tunnel, due to design error. This will compromise future ridership expansion. If anyone knows anything definitive please comment."

https://www.facebook.com/groups/1424397057829844/?ref=group_header

The current peak capacity is a train every three minutes but the project overview said that can be increase to every two minutes.

https://www.partnershipsbc.ca/files-4/documents/PBCEvergreen.pdf

Reecemartin · #**8703** Posted **Mar 31, 2018, 2:33 PM**

[Deleted]

Migrant_Coconut · #**8704** Posted **Mar 31, 2018, 8:17 PM**

No need to be a dick, jollyburger's half right - the full quote from the link is "two minutes or less."

Rico · #**8705** Posted **Mar 31, 2018, 11:22 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

It can increase to 90s just like the rest of the Skytrain network. Check your facts.

Not technically correct as long as the Columbia branch operates because 90s is the limit on the combined section so if you operate the Evergreen portion at 90s you can't have any trains to Columbia....I know just nitpicking, sorry.

Reecemartin · #**8706** Posted **Mar 31, 2018, 11:53 PM**

[Deleted]

cabotp · #**8707** Posted **Apr 1, 2018, 2:11 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rico

Not technically correct as long as the Columbia branch operates because 90s is the limit on the combined section so if you operate the Evergreen portion at 90s you can't have any trains to Columbia....I know just nitpicking, sorry.

Uh the Millennium/Evergreen line trains don't go to Columbia station. At least at the present time. They only go between VCC-Clark & Laforge.

The trains going between Production Way & Columbia are the Expo line trains. So yes those trains could get no better than every 180s on that portion and even longer times if more trains are sent to Surrey.

On another thought though. I don't feel the system can maintain a head way of 90s for long periods. It can do it in bursts, but not long periods. One big reason is it requires quite a bit of the system to be running efficiently. For dwell times to be quite perfect. For no one to hold up a train at a station because of their stupidy.

jollyburger · #**8708** Posted **Apr 1, 2018, 4:07 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

It can increase to 90s just like the rest of the Skytrain network. Check your facts.

Wrong. 75 seconds, check your facts.

YYCguys · #**8709** Posted **Apr 1, 2018, 4:24 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ilikeredheads

As for the Canada Line, they are also out of the question until all the stations are extended to 50m and all the trains are fitted with a C car, because the C car will be shorter.

I’m sorry for not being into the lingo, but what is a “C” car?

Migrant_Coconut · #**8710** Posted **Apr 1, 2018, 4:35 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by YYCguys

I’m sorry for not being into the lingo, but what is a “C” car?

You know those accordion things that link metro trainsets together? "C" car refers to a half-sized car that you can link between two full-sized ones and make a slightly longer train.

VancouverOfTheFuture · #**8711** Posted **Apr 1, 2018, 9:37 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by YYCguys

I’m sorry for not being into the lingo, but what is a “C” car?

in the Mark III trainsets, it would be the 2 middle cars. the end cars would be A, B with a middle C.

Mark I
A-A-A-A
A-A-A-A-A-A

Mark II
A-B
A-B=A-B

Mark III
A-C-C-B

diagram version
Mark I
[]-[]-[]-[]
[]-[]-[]-[]-[]-[]

Mark II
(]-[)
(]-[)=(]-[)

Mark III
(]-[]-[]-[)

casper · #**8712** Posted **Apr 1, 2018, 11:00 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by YYCguys

I’m sorry for not being into the lingo, but what is a “C” car?

It is basically a car without the same on-board computer, control console and in some cases may not have the propulsion equipment. So the car at the front and rear are A and B models. You stick the C car in the middle to add more capacity at a lower cost since it lacks all the other stuff.

Vantage · #**8713** Posted **Apr 2, 2018, 9:30 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

in the Mark III trainsets, it would be the 2 middle cars. the end cars would be A, B with a middle C.

Mark I
A-A-A-A
A-A-A-A-A-A

Mark II
A-B
A-B=A-B

Mark III
A-C-C-B

diagram version
Mark I
[]-[]-[]-[]
[]-[]-[]-[]-[]-[]

Mark II
(]-[)
(]-[)=(]-[)

Mark III
(]-[]-[]-[)

Aren't Mk I's technically
A-B-A-B-A-B
OR
A-B-A-B

TransitJack · #**8714** Posted **Apr 2, 2018, 2:02 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vantage

Aren't Mk I's technically
A-B-A-B-A-B
OR
A-B-A-B

Yes. That is more accurate as they are mated pairs.

aberdeen5698 · #**8715** Posted **Apr 2, 2018, 3:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by TransitJack

Yes. That is more accurate as they are mated pairs.

I don't really get this "A-B" designation for married pairs of Mk 1 and Mk 2 trainsets. If one of the two was a master and the other was just a slave (motors only but no brains) then I'd understand it, but to the best of my knowledge each unit of the pair has identical capabilities. One may act as the master, but they are both capable of it. "A-A" would be a more accurate description, IMHO.

twoNeurons · #**8716** Posted **Apr 2, 2018, 7:39 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

I don't really get this "A-B" designation for married pairs of Mk 1 and Mk 2 trainsets. If one of the two was a master and the other was just a slave (motors only but no brains) then I'd understand it, but to the best of my knowledge each unit of the pair has identical capabilities. One may act as the master, but they are both capable of it. "A-A" would be a more accurate description, IMHO.

Or perhaps it's due to requiring them to be paired because that's how they maintain redundancies. if one side of the car goes down, the other side of the A-B ( or A-A ) pair can control both parts. That's how I'd see it. Personally, calling them A-A pairs is a bit weird.

VancouverOfTheFuture · #**8717** Posted **Apr 2, 2018, 7:45 PM**

realistically, since they are identical they should be considered the same. as in A-A. as they are identical from exterior, to interior, to control systems.

but, the way humans process things is generally there is a front and a back. therefore the front car would be A, and the back car B. of course everyone knows this is wrong as the trains dont have a front or back as they change directions. it is just the way the human brain works.

nname · #**8718** Posted **Apr 2, 2018, 7:45 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

It can increase to 90s just like the rest of the Skytrain network. Check your facts.

75 seconds

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rico

Not technically correct as long as the Columbia branch operates because 90s is the limit on the combined section so if you operate the Evergreen portion at 90s you can't have any trains to Columbia....I know just nitpicking, sorry.

They would just have to be turned around at Lougheed instead of Production.

twoNeurons · #**8719** Posted **Apr 2, 2018, 10:58 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

realistically, since they are identical they should be considered the same. as in A-A. as they are identical from exterior, to interior, to control systems.

but, the way humans process things is generally there is a front and a back. therefore the front car would be A, and the back car B. of course everyone knows this is wrong as the trains dont have a front or back as they change directions. it is just the way the human brain works.

I suppose so... or you could look at it in a temporal perspective... that every car is either A or B while in motion, but a car is both A & B when at rest until directional energy is applied to make it travel one direction or the other.

Cue Schrödinger's cat analogy.

Hot Rod · #**8720** Posted **Apr 3, 2018, 12:28 AM**

so what is the length of a 6-car Mk1 train and how does it compare to a 4-car Mk2 and Mk3?

Are Expo Line platforms going to be lengthened to 120? If so, then would that justify 6-car Mk2 and Mk3 and 8-car Mk1? If we can get these going, SkyTrain will firmly move into full metro capacity. I hope the Millennium Line subway will be built with 120s, with Commercial/Broadway-Arbutus running additional longer trains to the obviously shorter ones coming from Coquitlam.

I wish there was a plan to extend Canada Line to 80m so we could do A-A=A-A; again True metro configs/lengths and capacity. A-C-C-A would be ok as well.