Heavy Rail, Commuter Rail, & Intercity Transportation

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by fredinno

There may be room for a spur to the Village along 99, next to the golf course.

and to fantasy land we go...

as much as i would like a train to Whistler, no, that is a fantasy.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

and to fantasy land we go...

as much as i would like a train to Whistler, no, that is a fantasy.

As if most of this thread isn't fantasy?

I'm more concerned with the required double-tracking through West Van. If you can do that, and get away with it, making a small spur next to 99 is nothing.

[ClaytonA]

Re. the Sea to Sky Corridor, 20 years ago studies by TSI (transportation engineering consultant using transportation demand modelling software like EMME) indicated with highway tolls of $12/$22 (good luck there...) that ~5% of the corridor mode share could be captured/induced onto rail by 2025.

http://www.urbanstudio.sala.ubc.ca/squamish2004/trans%20Modal_Diversion_June_draft.pdf

The TSI study (Oct 2001) indicated before the government spent ~$1 billion improving Sea to Sky for the 2010 Olympics that three trains each way per day would have ~500 passengers per day (90 per train) and require a sudsidy of ~$700 per passenger with $97 fares (all 2018 $).

Is it a fair analysis/comparison? Who knows, at the time there were some rumbles highway investment was set up to win and for a one-off event like Olympics, blah, blah, but these numbers appear comparable to Amtrak Cascades.

http://www.urbanstudio.sala.ubc.ca/squamish2004/trans%20Demand_Study.pdf


Some studies done back then here (start at bottom of transportation studies list and work up to review chronologically):

http://www.urbanstudio.sala.ubc.ca/squamish2004/resources.htm

You can also view the Transit Future plan and latest corridor study here:

https://www.bctransit.com/pemberton-valley/transit-future/sea-to-sky-transit-future-plan
______________________________________________________________________________________________

The answer is modal progression. Get a full-ish bus every 30 minutes first.
Lobby the regional district/transportation minister for more bus service to build/demonstrate demand and lobby for investments to be made such that future rail service isn't compromised by any other new infrastructure. Jumping straight to rail now is a waste of scarce transportation funding. (Look at the Calgary Green Line LRT thread for potential O&M cost discussion as they skip BRT for LRT and council pushes back TOD zoning for the 3rd time).

[ClaytonA]

https://web.archive.org/web/201901222318....com/article/topNews/idCAKCN1PF1Z2-OCATP

... Canada’s transport regulator last week to start an investigation into rail services around Port Metro Vancouver, after shippers complained of “discriminatory treatment of certain commodities” by Canadian National Railway (CN) (CNR.TO) and Canadian Pacific Railway (CP) (CP.TO). ...

Does a focus on ever lower operating ratios (cheered on by sell-side stock analysts) have secondary effects/unintended consequences?

Could the government of BC/Canada invest in/incentivize better or more signalling around the ports? Even more sidings/passing opportunities? Upgrades to the BC Rail r.o.w. to divert some North Shore bound traffic through Squamish. (Dreaming, that would be expensive).

A lower operating ratio means getting smaller and using the assets harder/more. E.g. shutting down/selling off short lines and forcing more freight onto trucks while using longer trains. New customers? Growth? Trucks that are going to be electric and run in platoons in the medium/long term...

[ClaytonA]

https://archpaper.com/2019/01/high-speed-rail-plan-pacific-northwest/

https://www.theurbanist.org/2019/01/16/c...ty-chugging-toward-legislative-approval/

On Tuesday, Democrats in the Washington State Legislature introduced Governor Jay Inslee’s (D-Washington) legislation for new transportation funding that would support creation of an interstate high-speed rail authority. ... business case study ... due for completion by end of June. ...

While $3.25 million is a good starting point to get the interstate high-speed rail authority going, more funding is likely needed to facilitate staffing up, administration, and consultant contracts. Over a two-year period, funding comes out to about $1.62 million per year, which means that the authority would only be able to hire 10 or so staff members. The authority, as envisioned, would be concerned with drafting legislation for multiple governments, actively conducting planning and analysis, and negotiating. Hiring seasoned experts to fill those roles will not come cheap. ...

http://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2019-20/Pdf/Bills/Senate%20Bills/5214.pdf

... >= 250mph or 400km/h

corridor governance, general powers, operating structure, legal instruments, and contracting requirements... conduct outreach and preliminary environmental review...

By June 30, 2020... assessment of current laws ... results from the community engagement process. ...

[ClaytonA]

ID and protect an alignment for future high speed rail.

Invest in the current program.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Could this $3.25mm be better spent as a down payment for buying trains to replace the lost one from the 2017 derailment or another new train to add frequency between Seattle/Portland or another run north to Bellingham?

Could this money (off topic here) be put toward extending the Sounder train south to Dupont? They're widening and improving I-5 and this could ameliorate traffic congestion too. Could BC spend their expected portion of the money on comparable commuter rail planning? E.g. https://www.agassizharrisonobserver.com/...-highway-widening-abbotsford-mayor-says/

... Braun said the province should also start making a plan to build an LRT line to Abbotsford, potentially down the median of Highway 1. ...

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by ClaytonA

ID and protect an alignment for future high speed rail.

Invest in the current program.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Could this $3.25mm be better spent as a down payment for buying trains to replace the lost one from the 2017 derailment or another new train to add frequency between Seattle/Portland or another run north to Bellingham?

Could this money (off topic here) be put toward extending the Sounder train south to Dupont? They're widening and improving I-5 and this could ameliorate traffic congestion too. Could BC spend their expected portion of the money on comparable commuter rail planning? E.g. https://www.agassizharrisonobserver.com/...-highway-widening-abbotsford-mayor-says/

Nowhere near enough money for something like that. I remember cost estimates for the rolling stock of SRY commuter rail being over $100M. Take that with a grain of salt though.

[TransitJack]

Not sure if this was already posted, Vancouver Sun reporting CN plans to double track the Burrard Inlet line through the cut from Nanaimo to Powell.

https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news...van-residents-frustrated-by-noisy-trains

CN is handing its own Intermodal trains to the South Shore again after CP handled the switching and spotting to the terminals for many years under the CN/CP co-production agreement that dates back to 2004.

Some background:

ource:
http://www.globeinvestor.com/servlet/ArticleNews/print/GAM/20170415/RBCDRAILVANCOUVER

[officedweller]

Thanks for posting!

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

simple solution, don't buy next to an active railway that was built in 1911.

none of these people bought there before it was built.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

simple solution, don't buy next to an active railway that was built in 1911.

I think the main reason that people are complaining is that it really wasn't all that active a railway until recently.

But yeah, the railway was there first, deal with it. It's the same as people who complain about noise from airports, as far as I'm concerned.

[officedweller]

i.e. people assuming that things will never change....
(rail usage would stay the same, etc.)

[WestCoastEcho]

Seriously, if you want to cut back on the rumbling diesel noises, and the diesel exhaust, be prepared to pay CP and CN Rail a 🞵🞵🞵🞵 ton of money to convert the lines to electric so they can run electric trains for the local work, with some sort of locomotive exchange once the trains reach either CP's Pitt Meadows terminal or CN's Surrey terminal.

That does lead me to wonder; how much would it cost to electrify all Metro Vancouver rail lines? Probably looking at overhead catenaries...

[retro_orange]

Originally Posted by WestCoastEcho

Seriously, if you want to cut back on the rumbling diesel noises, and the diesel exhaust, be prepared to pay CP and CN Rail a 🞵🞵🞵🞵 ton of money to convert the lines to electric so they can run electric trains for the local work, with some sort of locomotive exchange once the trains reach either CP's Pitt Meadows terminal or CN's Surrey terminal.

That does lead me to wonder; how much would it cost to electrify all Metro Vancouver rail lines? Probably looking at overhead catenaries...

I have been wondering how much it would cost to encapsulate the line in a concrete tunnel and then fill in the Grandview cut once the tunnel is complete, creating more developable land to help offset the likely insane cost that no Canadian rail line would ever pay for. It would have to be federally funded, along with any electrification of said rail line. Along the same lines of fantasy of encapsulating the railyards in downtown New West with developable land that I have been mocked for in the past a few times...

TBF, I would eat all my hats if this ever happened. All of them.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by WestCoastEcho

Seriously, if you want to cut back on the rumbling diesel noises, and the diesel exhaust, be prepared to pay CP and CN Rail a 🞵🞵🞵🞵 ton of money to convert the lines to electric so they can run electric trains for the local work, with some sort of locomotive exchange once the trains reach either CP's Pitt Meadows terminal or CN's Surrey terminal.

That does lead me to wonder; how much would it cost to electrify all Metro Vancouver rail lines? Probably looking at overhead catenaries...

well, in 1985 it cost 500 million to electrify 132km for the tumbler ridge BC Rail subdivision. assuming for only inflation, that is 1.05 billion today.

which would make it ~ 8 million/km in today's money. now, it is important to keep in mind that it was built next to a hydro dam so there was no need to run a lot of transmission lines to power it.

for CP Rail from Pit Meadows to the port, you're looking at about 40kms. so that is 320 million. lets assume there are 2 main-lines. that is now 640 million.

for CN Rail from Surrey Yard to the port, you're looking at about 30kms. that is 480 million. lets assume again there are 2 main-lines. that is now 480 million.

so, now how do we get enough electricity to power them? Tumbler ridge was built next to a large hydro-electric dam. they would need a lot of transmission lines to power these engines as Tumbler ridge used 50,000 volts AC for its overhead gantries. for comparison, SkyTrain generally uses 600 Volts DC.

for equipment, you would need a lot, and i mean A LOT of engines for these trains. freight trains dont normally use electric. the engines for Tumbler Ridge were unique and custom made to allow use without special operators.

now, it is important to remember that diesel engines are much better for freight because of tractive effort which really doesn't matter for passenger trains.

also, another big key issue, is double stacked well-cars used almost always in North America. Europe doesn't really use these, but over head gantries pose a clearance issue with these.


but, in the end, this wouldn't solve one key issue that people have; shunting. no amount of electricity will solve that issue. diesel locomotives are also much more efficient then trucks so that is better then purring everything on trucks.

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by TransitJack

Not sure if this was already posted, Vancouver Sun reporting CN plans to double track the Burrard Inlet line through the cut from Nanaimo to Powell.

https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news...van-residents-frustrated-by-noisy-trains

CN is handing its own Intermodal trains to the South Shore again after CP handled the switching and spotting to the terminals for many years under the CN/CP co-production agreement that dates back to 2004.

Some background:

ource:
http://www.globeinvestor.com/servlet/ArticleNews/print/GAM/20170415/RBCDRAILVANCOUVER

I think it was announced last summer:

The third project, led by CN with investment from the port authority, involves designing and building a 2.6-mile secondary track, parallel to the existing Burrard Inlet line, in Vancouver. The increased rail capacity will support the flow of goods through the south shore port area as trade volumes continue to grow, government officials said.

https://www.progressiverailroading.com/c...ancouver-port-infrastructure-work--54968

[jollyburger]

And electrifying the lines will do nothing about the noise from shunting or "blaring bells" I assume .

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by WestCoastEcho

Seriously, if you want to cut back on the rumbling diesel noises, and the diesel exhaust, be prepared to pay CP and CN Rail a 🞵🞵🞵🞵 ton of money to convert the lines to electric so they can run electric trains for the local work, with some sort of locomotive exchange once the trains reach either CP's Pitt Meadows terminal or CN's Surrey terminal.

That's not going to stop the massive bangs caused by marshaling cars in the Glen Yard, which is what many of the complaints are about. Particularly when you hear the "wham-wham-wham-wham-wham" of a line of cars that are being pushed or pulled as the slack in the couplers is compressed or taken up.

[Tetsuo]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

That's not going to stop the massive bangs caused by marshaling cars in the Glen Yard, which is what many of the complaints are about. Particularly when you hear the "wham-wham-wham-wham-wham" of a line of cars that are being pushed or pulled as the slack in the couplers is compressed or taken up.

Doesn't seem to bother the community of van dwellers

[WestCoastEcho]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

That's not going to stop the massive bangs caused by marshaling cars in the Glen Yard, which is what many of the complaints are about. Particularly when you hear the "wham-wham-wham-wham-wham" of a line of cars that are being pushed or pulled as the slack in the couplers is compressed or taken up.

It seems the bulk of the complaints are about the noise and vibration from trains running through the area, and the noise and vibration of idling engines.

Also, one could instead get a number of dual mode electro-diesels (new or modify existing engines), and modify parts of the lines with the most sensitivity about engine noise and vibration modified for electric operation either via overhead catenaries or third rail.

There are a number of passenger electro-diesels produced by Bombardier and GE, and of course, they appear to have some traction in Europe for freight as well.