Confederation Line (Stage 1) | In Service 1.0

[phil235]

Originally Posted by FFX-ME

Montreal is unusual in that it uses rubber tires.

Right, didn't think of that. I guess it's not traditional rail transit in that respect. But that would also leave some of the Paris metro lines outside the definition as well.

[H>T&T>P]

Originally Posted by phil235

Right, didn't think of that. I guess it's not traditional rail transit in that respect. But that would also leave some of the Paris metro lines outside the definition as well.

Now I can't find the site but it pretty much said rubber wheels didn't meet their definition. they had 157 systems listed in the world only Toronto(for Canada) met their criteria for having a "Metro"

[bikegypsy]

Concerning this talk about who's in or out in respect to metros here is the definition found on Wikipedia:

"Rapid transit or mass rapid transit, also known as heavy rail, metro, MRT, subway, tube, U-Bahn or underground, is a type of high-capacity public transport generally found in urban areas.[1][2][3] Unlike buses or trams, rapid transit systems are electric railways that operate on an exclusive right-of-way, which cannot be accessed by pedestrians or other vehicles of any sort,[4] and which is often grade separated in tunnels or on elevated railways."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapid_transit

I think that excluding Montreal because their trains have rubber tires (which is the first time I hear such non sense) is non sense.
Excluding Vancouver because it is elevated is equally silly.
Excluding both Calgary and Edmonton is reasonable since so much of their lines are shared with traffic and are slow moving at several points.... They have classic LRT systems.

Such is the case with Rouen's rail system, which locals call the "metro" but which is a term put in quotes in the French language page of the system to highlight the rather liberal use of the term.

"Le tramway de Rouen, localement dénommé le « métro » de Rouen, est un réseau de tramway circulant en site propre."

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tramway_de_Rouen

[Reecemartin]

[Deleted]

[bikegypsy]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

Edmonton and Calgary's systems aren't shared with regular traffic?
From the definition posted both could probably be considered Metro given they have exclusive ROW

??? Everyone knows on this forum that both these systems use shared portions of roads.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VxNJaPyn-Fc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7sYXbFXwzs

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

https://twitter.com/otrainfans613/status/1031689305998143490

I'm guessing these tables and chairs will be moved once the station is in operation.

[FFX-ME]

Originally Posted by bikegypsy

??? Everyone knows on this forum that both these systems use shared portions of roads.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VxNJaPyn-Fc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7sYXbFXwzs

[H>T&T>P]

Originally Posted by bikegypsy

Concerning this talk about who's in or out in respect to metros here is the definition found on Wikipedia:

"Rapid transit or mass rapid transit, also known as heavy rail, metro, MRT, subway, tube, U-Bahn or underground, is a type of high-capacity public transport generally found in urban areas.[1][2][3] Unlike buses or trams, rapid transit systems are electric railways that operate on an exclusive right-of-way, which cannot be accessed by pedestrians or other vehicles of any sort,[4] and which is often grade separated in tunnels or on elevated railways."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapid_transit

I think that excluding Montreal because their trains have rubber tires (which is the first time I hear such non sense) is non sense.
Excluding Vancouver because it is elevated is equally silly.
Excluding both Calgary and Edmonton is reasonable since so much of their lines are shared with traffic and are slow moving at several points.... They have classic LRT systems.

Such is the case with Rouen's rail system, which locals call the "metro" but which is a term put in quotes in the French language page of the system to highlight the rather liberal use of the term.

"Le tramway de Rouen, localement dénommé le « métro » de Rouen, est un réseau de tramway circulant en site propre."

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tramway_de_Rouen

That only part of what it says on that page.

It also says
"However, some rapid transit systems have at-grade intersections between a rapid transit line and a road or between two rapid transit lines".

Without this sentence it would eliminate Chicago and many others from the list as they have level crossings on "Subway" lines.(yellow and brown lines)

One line in Edmonton actually operates on a road which I agree would preclude that line but not the whole system. By the same means line 2 (O-train)being diesel would not preclude the confederation line.

[SkeggsEggs]

The Canada Transit thread is already plagued with these discussions of transit nomenclature, can we not ruin this thread with them?

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by SkeggsEggs

The Canada Transit thread is already plagued with these discussions of transit nomenclature, can we not ruin this thread with them?

[PHrenetic]

Originally Posted by SkeggsEggs

The Canada Transit thread is already plagued with these discussions of transit nomenclature, can we not ruin this thread with them?

Good Day.



EnJoy!

[kmcamp]

https://photos.app.goo.gl/JRMsGLpSYdigLjMw5


A train running as a coupled pair today at Hurdman, first time I've gotten to see it in its full length glory

[Reecemartin]

[Deleted]

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

Edmonton and Calgary's systems aren't shared with regular traffic?
From the definition posted both could probably be considered Metro given they have exclusive ROW

I prefer official definitions from regulatory bodies. As I said last week in post #7841, The International Association of Public Transport defines a Metro as follows:

(I) Metros: UGT [Urban Guided Transport] systems operated on their own right of way and segregated from general road and pedestrian traffic. They are consequently designed for operations in tunnel, viaducts or on surface level but with physical separation in such a way that inadvertent access is not possible. In different parts of the world Metro systems are also known as the underground, the subway or the tube. Rail systems with specific construction issues operating on a segregated guideway (e.g. monorail, rack railways) are also treated as Metros as long as they are designated as part of the urban public transport network

Given that the downtown section is paved (to allow it to be shared with buses) and at grade with the other streets, inadvertent access is definitely possible in Calgary.

[J.OT13]

So much wasted space. Alstom has a 59 meter unit available, so what's stopping them from creating a continuous 96 meter train? I get that the City will only be running a 48 meter car on weekends, but I feel that for efficiency and maintenance wise, a full single car 96 meter train would have been better.


https://twitter.com/rail613/status/1032429158884929536

[zzptichka]

Wonder when will they be testing them with full ~50 tonne load?

[jchilds72]

Is that new info on the Ready for Rail site? It looks like they have the new service map for when the train is operative and layout maps for the stations and stuff.

[J.OT13]

OMG!!!! That is so cool!! Why the hack was that not considered as a major photo-op announcement!?

[JHikka]

Example of station layouts.

And nearby locations:

[Kitchissippi]

The layered map of levels is too complex, not sure if most of the public is going to understand or get utility out of it.