O-Train Line 1/3 [Stage 2 | West Extension | Tunney's to Baseline/Moodie] | U/C

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by CityTech

Alternatively, they could have the shortturn at Place d'Orleans instead of Blair (so alternating Trim-Baseline and Place d'Orleans-Moodie at 6 minutes with 3 minute combined between Lincoln Fields and Place). That would increase the train requirement to 34, still allowing 2 spares.

Given that currently Trim Rd currently seems to have a maximum of 8 buses an hour, having one in 3 trains going to Trim would be a significant increase in capacity and would provide a similar frequency of service (the buses are not currently evenly spaced). As a result, I could easily see 2 in 3 buses going to Orleans (I don’t have stats, but I doubt if the vast majority of those currently boarding at Blair are transferring from Orleans so just because 3 minute service is needed downtown doesn’t mean Orleans also needs that.

[CityTech]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Given that currently Trim Rd currently seems to have a maximum of 8 buses an hour, having one in 3 trains going to Trim would be a significant increase in capacity and would provide a similar frequency of service (the buses are not currently evenly spaced). As a result, I could easily see 2 in 3 buses going to Orleans (I don’t have stats, but I doubt if the vast majority of those currently boarding at Blair are transferring from Orleans so just because 3 minute service is needed downtown doesn’t mean Orleans also needs that.

Hmm.. so how about this arrangement?

In the west, trains alternate between Moodie and Baseline, and in the east, trains alternate between Place, Blair, and Trim.

With that arrangement:
-There'd be consistent 3 minute service at Blair
-There'd be alternating 3 minute and 6 minute service gaps at Montreal, Jeanne D'Arc, Orleans Blvd, and Place d'Orleans
-There'd be 12 minute service at Trim.

For lining up service with the western branches, whatever branch the trains starting/ending at Blair & Trim are using would be the opposite branch as the one the trains starting/ending at Place D'Orleans would be using. However, this wouldn't be useful for those heading to specific western destinations, really, because if you just pissed a train to Baseline, you might end up having to wait 11 minutes for the next train to Baseline.. versus waiting only 2 minutes for the next train to Moodie. So for someone heading to Baseline, it would make more sense to just get on the train to Moodie, get off at Lincoln Fields and wait 3 minutes for a cross-platform transfer, then it would be to wait an extra 9 minutes in Orleans to avoid that transfer.

EDIT: I did the math, and with this arrangement, because you'd fewer trains completing the whole run in the east, you could have slightly higher frequencies with the size of the Phase 2 fleet.. you could have:
With that arrangement:
-2min 45s service at Blair
-There'd be alternating 2min 45s and 5min 30s service gaps at Montreal, Jeanne D'Arc, Orleans Blvd, and Place d'Orleans
-There'd be 11 minute service at Trim.

[lrt's friend]

So much for the big reason why interlining was so unacceptable. Downtown stations would back up with passengers because every train is no longer 'your' train. Now we are discussing multiple destinations for trains. Double standard I say.

[CityTech]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

So much for the big reason why interlining was so unacceptable. Downtown stations would back up with passengers because every train is no longer 'your' train. Now we are discussing multiple destinations for trains. Double standard I say.

With Phase 2, the interline splits are pretty far out, so a significant chunk has the "every train is your train" benefit.

Say 40% of the ridership is bound for Lincoln Fields going west, and 30% are bound for each of the spurs. That would mean that any given westbound train would work for 70% of riders.

If we had an interlined route splitting off at Bayview, it would quickly get much more problematic because so few riders downtown would have a common destination of Bayview or Pimisi, so no train would be able to clear more than half the platform.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by CityTech

Hmm.. so how about this arrangement?

In the west, trains alternate between Moodie and Baseline, and in the east, trains alternate between Place, Blair, and Trim.

With that arrangement:
-There'd be consistent 3 minute service at Blair
-There'd be alternating 3 minute and 6 minute service gaps at Montreal, Jeanne D'Arc, Orleans Blvd, and Place d'Orleans
-There'd be 12 minute service at Trim.

With 1 in 3 trains going to Trim, it would actually have 9 minute service. 12 minute service would be only with 1 in 4 trains going to Trim.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by CityTech

With Phase 2, the interline splits are pretty far out, so a significant chunk has the "every train is your train" benefit.

Say 40% of the ridership is bound for Lincoln Fields going west, and 30% are bound for each of the spurs. That would mean that any given westbound train would work for 70% of riders.

If we had an interlined route splitting off at Bayview, it would quickly get much more problematic because so few riders downtown would have a common destination of Bayview or Pimisi, so no train would be able to clear more than half the platform.

Exactly! You took the words out of my mouth.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by CityTech

That's actually unworkable because you couldn't space them out correctly. If you did that then trains in the core would have to go two in a row on each branch rather than alternate because trains also have to alternate between Trim and Blair. Think about it. It means the sequence would be:

-Trim-Blair-Moodie
-Blair-Baseline
-Trim-Blair-Baseline
-Blair-Moodie
-Trim-Blair-Moodie
-Blair-Baseline
-Trim-Blair-Baseline
-Blair-Moodie

That means trains would not be arriving at the western termini at appropriate intervals. At Lincoln Fields there's be alternating 3 min and 9 min gaps for departure frequencies on each branch.

That's a good point. In that case, I would get the Orleans Line going to Moodie since there are larger employment centres (DND and Kanata) and requires a transfer for anyone of those. So only one transfer instead of two. Algonquin traffic is more spread-out during the day.

I would not split the trains in three down in the east. That would over-complicate people's commute and, as mentioned, overcrowd downtown platforms.

All Orleans trains should go to Trim. Having a few terminate at Place would complicate operations because it would have to stop and switch tracks in the middle of the line. Place or Trim, they are both pretty close anyway; having them short-turn a little earlier won't benefit those living in the densest parts between Blair to Lincoln Fields. There is also no room for a pocket track like the one's proposed at Hurdman and past Blair near Jasmine.

Quick question, are there any other pocket tracks proposed on the line?

[OTownandDown]

Stockholm actually does the splitting fairly well on ALL of their subway lines, and even their commuter lines have several splits.

You really have to watch each train at each station to make sure you're on the right number, just as you would a bus number.

Having said that, their suburbs are in small, spread-out pockets, so having splits only makes sense.

And also, for a city with almost EXACTLY the same population, they're putting our transit to shame (except for the 2.4M suburban population outside of City limits)


https://www.transitmap.net/stockholm-rail/#jp-carousel-5453

[zzptichka]

Originally Posted by OTownandDown

And also, for a city with almost EXACTLY the same population, they're putting our transit to shame (except for the 2.4M suburban population outside of City limits)

Pretty much any European city puts transit of any North American city of the same population to shame

[Radster]

Originally Posted by OTownandDown

Stockholm actually does the splitting fairly well on ALL of their subway lines, and even their commuter lines have several splits.

You really have to watch each train at each station to make sure you're on the right number, just as you would a bus number.

Having said that, their suburbs are in small, spread-out pockets, so having splits only makes sense.

And also, for a city with almost EXACTLY the same population, they're putting our transit to shame (except for the 2.4M suburban population outside of City limits)

Stockholm's system is amazing, and from what I remember reading a while back, they built their system out into the burbs before they were developed, forward thinking basically.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Radster

Stockholm's system is amazing, and from what I remember reading a while back, they built their system out into the burbs before they were developed, forward thinking basically.

Queue the 2006 Chiarelli plan debate.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Radster

Stockholm's system is amazing, and from what I remember reading a while back, they built their system out into the burbs before they were developed, forward thinking basically.

Much cheaper to do it early. No NIMBYs to force rail underground.

It shows how far behind Ottawa is.

I laughed when someone mistakenly said that after Phase 2, 90% of the population was within a 5 minute walk of LRT.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Queue the 2006 Chiarelli plan debate.

Don't worry. I won't bring it up.

[Admiral Nelson]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Queue the 2006 Chiarelli plan debate.

Cue, unless you're standing in a queue?

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Admiral Nelson

Cue, unless you're standing in a queue?

My bad.

[Kitchissippi]

la queue qui remue le train?

[zzptichka]

Noticed the other day they cut all this wood around iris.

[zzptichka]

[Admiral Nelson]

I guess we've got wood for some nice architectural elements. Just hope somebody doesn't come by and ruin it all with offbrand fire retardant this time round

[waterloowarrior]

Thanks for posting! Noticed that the City added maps of all the tree cutting going on
https://ottawa.ca/en/city-hall/public-en...-2-lrt-confederation-line-tree-removal-0