Rural Commuter Rail

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Whether or not a student thinks it is ok, it is hard to imagine any regulator agreeing with large bilevel commuter trains sharing tracks with little European trams.

To be fair, the LINT is considered a "Regional Train" (using the real definition, not Moose's made up one) by Alstom, and I believe it is used for mainline travel in Europe. Granted, trains in Europe are smaller and lighter than North American counterparts.

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

My point being that MOOSE had never mentioned "used trains" in the past before.

I might have been mistaken, but even if they hadn't specifically said so, I was under the general impression that Moose was planning on buying used trains. I didn't read all of their documents though (they seem really good at pumping out a plethora of paperwork).

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by roger1818

To be fair, the LINT is considered a "Regional Train" (using the real definition, not Moose's made up one) by Alstom, and I believe it is used for mainline travel in Europe. Granted, trains in Europe are smaller and lighter than North American counterparts.

I took “LRT” to mean Confederation Line style trams, or what Gatineau wants to run over the bridge. But even if they meant the Lint, it seems needlessly risky.

[Truenorth00]

No investor will fund them because there's no business case for this project. It either requires massive subsidies or governments agreeing to massive and unprecedented sprawl. Neither of which is likely to happen.

Gets even better. Moose has no real support from council (which he'd need for any station or other infrastructure inside Ottawa) and the feds would never agree to this scheme even if the Fordites were all for it (which there's no evidence of). Ten years from now, an aging Mr. Potvin will pull up with his walker to tell us about how Moose is launching in 2030 with used bilevels.

His legal efforts have failed. Thankfully. And we're moving full throttle on Trillium Stage 2. Hopefully, we can actually move on to productive decisions. And not fantasy. Like how to get a double tracked Trillium.....instead of talking about commuter service to Carp and Navan.

The only real threat was that some politician might legitimize his ideas. And Doucet was primed to do that. By the next election though, Trillium Stage 2 will be in service, Confederation East will be on the verge of launching service and Confederation West will be a year away from completion. The risk of a Doucet type will be even lower.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

Considering that for the last 7 years they have been somewhat insistent on using brand new bi-level coaches, a change to using some second-hand equipment and the inclusion of DMUs (which I think we can assume is what was meant by "LRT trains") is at least somewhat notable. IIRC it was one of the many criticisms/comments made by members of this forum.

I'm not claiming that this will bring them any closer to accomplishing their goals, but it doesn't make it any less worth noting.

I think it would be more like NASA deciding between re-using old launch components or developing a new launch system to reach Titan. Deciding on space suit colours is more like deciding on liveries (quite literally).

The link you shared says they want to run bi-level coaches and LRT on the same track, which leads me to think they still want bi-level coaches, maybe just used ones. Mr Potvin has been fixated on bi-level rolling stock for a long time and nothing seems to have changed.

[OCCheetos]

Originally Posted by roger1818

I might have been mistaken, but even if they hadn't specifically said so, I was under the general impression that Moose was planning on buying used trains. I didn't read all of their documents though (they seem really good at pumping out a plethora of paperwork).

Some of the documents sounded like they were intending on buying new canadian-made bi-level coaches. I don't think anyone would have an issue with using used coaches, but is there even anyone selling used bi-level coaches?

Originally Posted by acottawa

The link you shared says they want to run bi-level coaches and LRT on the same track, which leads me to think they still want bi-level coaches, maybe just used ones. Mr Potvin has been fixated on bi-level rolling stock for a long time and nothing seems to have changed.

The inclusion of LRT is a change.

Originally Posted by acottawa

I took “LRT” to mean Confederation Line style trams, or what Gatineau wants to run over the bridge. But even if they meant the Lint, it seems needlessly risky.

I think they would look at something more like the FLIRT. Again, look at TEXRail as an example. They're using a slightly modified version of the FLIRT that gained alternative FRA compliance.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

The inclusion of LRT is a change.


.

You think Moose wants to use bilevels and LRT? That isn”t how I read it. There would be no need for the bridge to accommodate bilevels if Moose didn’t want them. I am pretty sure th bilevels are for Moose and “LRT” is another service.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by O-Town Hockey

Ya let's close the thread and pretend that reasonable people who promote city building and intensification never discussed such nonsense

What city building and intensification occurs by facilitating easier commutes from Chelsea, Arnprior, Smiths Falls and Navan? Explain to me as an Ottawa resident how this is a good idea.

I am down to have this discussion. In an era when we're all supremely worried about climate change globally and traffic congestion and commute times locally, why the hell should we encourage people to live > 50 km from downtown Ottawa where they are all but assured to live car dependent lifestyles for anything but their commutes?

Even more ridiculous is that MOOSE wanted to do this while possibly having a negative impact on the services relied upon by lots of Ottawa residents. I am quite happy this proposal will accompany Clive Doucet's legacy into the bin of failure.

Originally Posted by acottawa

You think Moose wants to use bilevels and LRT? That isn”t how I read it. There would be no need for the bridge to accommodate bilevels if Moose didn’t want them. I am pretty sure th bilevels are for Moose and “LRT” is another service.

Their sales pitch is toast once people start riding the Confederation Line in a few months. So they have to update the language a tad. Their best shot was that some politician would grab on and help them bring it to fruition. But the elections are done and LRT has won. If you were a provincial conservative in one of those western suburban ridings, would you want to risk cancelling Confederation Line West for Mr. Potvin's hare-brained scheme? Do you see any councillors or MPs jumping onboard with this? So now they are on to the next phase, where they can keep arguing that they can supplement the LRT. I expect eventually, we'll see them evolve into arguing for diesel LRT (like the FLIRTs) extensions to those rural towns. Should happen after Stage 2.

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

I think it would be more like NASA deciding between re-using old launch components or developing a new launch system to reach Titan. Deciding on space suit colours is more like deciding on liveries (quite literally).

More like NASA deciding where exactly to build the Mars base and what private companies have to charge to set up nearby, when they don't even have funding for a study on funding the next space shuttle.

[OCCheetos]

Originally Posted by acottawa

You think Moose wants to use bilevels and LRT? That isn”t how I read it. There would be no need for the bridge to accommodate bilevels if Moose didn’t want them. I am pretty sure th bilevels are for Moose and “LRT” is another service.

The city markets the Trillium Line as LRT. I believe when MOOSE says LRT, they are suggesting using the same/similar type of DMU's as the city (likely something like the FLIRT which can be FRA alternative compliant). They would be able to use bi-levels and this type of DMU together on the same tracks which is the same kind of setup as TEXRail.

To people who don't care about the specifics of european vs american light vs heavy rail, trains like the LINT and the FLIRT are considered "LRT".

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by acottawa

The link you shared says they want to run bi-level coaches and LRT on the same track, which leads me to think they still want bi-level coaches, maybe just used ones. Mr Potvin has been fixated on bi-level rolling stock for a long time and nothing seems to have changed.

And that's another part of the plan that lacks credibility. The NCR does not have the population to support bi-levels (let alone commuter rail). If this train had any chance of succeeding, a frequent single level would be better.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

And that's another part of the plan that lacks credibility. The NCR does not have the population to support bi-levels (let alone commuter rail). If this train had any chance of succeeding, a frequent single level would be better.

Exactly. Train capacity should only be increased once frequency is high.

[acottawa]

But Moose isn’t in the transportation business, it is in the vexatious litigation business. The bi-level plan increases the opportunities for vexatious litigation because they can also complain about the decrease in height.

[OCCheetos]

Originally Posted by acottawa

But Moose isn’t in the transportation business, it is in the vexatious litigation business. The bi-level plan increases the opportunities for vexatious litigation because they can also complain about the decrease in height.

But what exactly does that get MOOSE..? They don't make money off of "vexatious litigation".

Unfortunately for the city, that wouldn't/won't be a difficult case for MOOSE to win.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

But what exactly does that get MOOSE..? They don't make money off of "vexatious litigation".

Unfortunately for the city, that wouldn't/won't be a difficult case for MOOSE to win.

Same thing a patent troll gets out of vexatious litigation - settlement money if they win one of the court cases.

[OCCheetos]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Same thing a patent troll gets out of vexatious litigation - settlement money if they win one of the court cases.

Well, it's the CTA going after the city, not MOOSE, and it was the city who turned it into a court case against the CTA (again, not MOOSE). Even if there were a settlement... which, in my limited understanding of law, wouldn't even apply in this case, MOOSE would get none of it.

Edit: To be extra clear, MOOSE went to the CTA who in turn went and ordered the City to reconnect and repair the bridge and then the City went to court with the CTA to overturn the order. No one's going after money here, and MOOSE would certainly have no part in any exchange of money even if there were.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

Well, it's the CTA going after the city, not MOOSE, and it was the city who turned it into a court case against the CTA (again, not MOOSE). Even if there were a settlement... which, in my limited understanding of law, wouldn't even apply in this case, MOOSE would get none of it.

Edit: To be extra clear, MOOSE went to the CTA who in turn went and ordered the City to reconnect and repair the bridge and then the City went to court with the CTA to overturn the order. No one's going after money here, and MOOSE would certainly have no part in any exchange of money even if there were.

Yes, I agree they have not yet been successful. Moose has filed close to a dozen regulatory and judicial actions since it has been in “business” and has otherwise not taken any significant steps to advance its stated business. They have made no attempt to establish a proof of concept, no attempt to license or franchise its business model and no attempt to publicize the advantages of high-density rural living (which is the whole basis of the stated business model). Have you ever heard of a legitimate entrepreneur that spent their first 7 years of operations doing little else but filing regulatory complaints?

[Truenorth00]

I’m the rare critic who takes them seriously. I think Mr. Potvin is a misguided zealot. Somewhere along the way he did some academic work on “property powered rail” and decided to become an evangelist for the concept. And like all religious converts, they tend to be more zealous than those born into the faith. So now he believes in rail at all cost. He doesn’t give a damn about actual public transit, sprawl or the whole host of other issues. He starts with the premise that rail is the best solution and then designs the rest of the concept around it.

Who in their right mind would propose regular rail service to Arnprior? Nobody except someone who thinks rail must be built at any cost.

There’s zero business case for this. Unless you’re a zealot. In which case, any amount spent is justifiable. As is any consequence. Creating a framework to move hundreds of thousands of residents to these smaller towns at great detriment to our environment and regional cohesion? Entirely justifiable for Mr. Potvin, as long as he gets his choo-choo.

And what makes him dangerous is that politicians might jump on the idea. Just to be different. Or even as a way out to lots of people as home prices rise. “Hey, we have a plan to help you commute from your new half acre in Arnprior!” I have no doubt in my mind that had Doucet been elected, MOOSE would be in the catbird seat guiding the limited expansion of the existing LRT plan and diversion of resources to rural rail. We’re lucky, the threat has passed for a cycle. But if we don’t bring the LRT to Barrhaven and Kanata fast enough, voters there will be clamoring for such a plan soon. If you’re the least bit interested in building a truly urban city, you need to shut this down.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I’m the rare critic who takes them seriously. I think Mr. Potvin is a misguided zealot. Somewhere along the way he did some academic work on “property powered rail” and decided to become an evangelist for the concept. And like all religious converts, they tend to be more zealous than those born into the faith. So now he believes in rail at all cost. He doesn’t give a damn about actual public transit, sprawl or the whole host of other issues. He starts with the premise that rail is the best solution and then designs the rest of the concept around it.

I tend to agree. Also, since Joseph doesn't live in Ottawa, he doesn't care how much his actions cost the Ottawa taxpayers. The problem with legal battles against governments is the innocent end up footing the bill. If the government ends up losing, it doesn't cost the people who made the decision anything.

[Charles5]

Originally Posted by Joseph Potvin

We're still advancing the project. For an overview, our brochure was recently updated:
https://www.onyvamoose.ca/wp-content/uploads//MooseRail_Brochure2018-Ottawa-V8.pdf

Well, I guess despite the updated brochure, MOOSE still hasn't figured out basic math.


"Moose Consortium's whole-region service will result in 25,000 fewer cars in downtown Ottawa each day."

• 25,000 cars = 30,000 commuters at an average of 1.25 commuters per vehicle.
• Each train holds just under 500 passengers
• There are three lines going through Ottawa with passengers flowing in from both directions, giving a capacity of 3,000 passengers per run (3 x 2 x 500 = 3,000).
• 30,000 passengers / 3,000 passengers per run = 10 runs.

Given hourly service starting at 5:30am as indicated in the Moose plan(page 6 of update 25 Nov 16) you would need to run fully loaded trains from 5:30am to 2:30pm just to get all the passengers into the downtown core. (In retrospect, it is mathematically possible, but totally unrealistic, as is most of what MOOSE proposes.)

I can just imagine that poor soul who wants to commute to work into downtown, but has to wait until the last train as he competes with the hoards of commuters who are flowing out of these small rural towns. He manages to find the last seat on the 2:30pm train, only to endure the 90 minute commute into central Ottawa, finally arriving at work at 4pm. He pulls an 8 hour shift, finishing at midnight only to find out he's missed the last train home. (SARCASM if you haven't realized it yet.)

PS: Speaking of the 'updated' brochure: The 125th anniversary of the opening of the Ottawa Electric Railway was in 2016, and yet you have it being celebrated again in 2019.

[acottawa]

25k is a pretty impressive reduction, considering only about 30k cars drive into central Ottawa every morning.

http://www.ncr-trans-rcn.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/2011AM_work_autod.xls

[Allandale25]

Originally Posted by Joseph Potvin

Moose Consortium Inc. has posted online several documents relating to the Canadian Transportation Agency's determination relating to the track connecting Ottawa and Gatineau.
https://www.letsgomoose.ca/moose-consort...t-essential-railways-in-canadas-capital/

Joseph Potvin
Director General | Directeur général
Moose Consortium (Mobility Ottawa-Outaouais: Systems & Enterprises) | www.letsgomoose.com
Consortium Moose (Mobilité Outaouais-Ottawa: Systèmes & Enterprises) | www.onyvamoose.com
[email protected]
[email protected]

I reviewed the documents provided in the link above. Here's a summary, where I chronologically ordered the files:



Of all the files, two stand out.

First, from the 17Aug18 Transport Canada letter to Moose, I notice the passage below. One to two years from August 17, 2018 (date of the letter) or September 14, 2018 (deadline set out by the letter to start the processing, I wonder how far along Phase II will be. Further, it seems like a very tall order.



Second, a letter from the Railway Association of Canada supporting the City of Ottawa's case. Interesting that the railway industry association isn't supportive of Moose's plan. I seem to recall the Moose proponents saying they would contract another railway operator that has the necessary approval documentation from Transport Canada to run their service. I assume most if not all of these existing operators are members of RAC.