The Great Canadian Transit Thread

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Codiac Transpo (greater Moncton transit) just finished refreshing their entire fleet of 50 odd busses a couple of years ago. I presume we won't be getting electrics now for 20 years.

If they refreshed a couple of years ago, they should be ready to start replacing the buses towards the end of the decade.

Also the tech keeps improving. Which means the costs keep getting better while the carbon tax keeps making diesel more expensive (or at least doesn't allow for a reduction in price). There will come a point where earlier retirement probably starts to make sense.

They'll be fully electric before 2040. The best thing that operators in this kind of situation can do is at least buy/lease 2-3 electric buses and start some long term trials to understand how electric buses perform for them and how their operations would change in the future. They have the luxury of time. They should put it to productive use.

[Chadillaccc]

Calgary Councillor Jeff Davison just announced that due to the likelihood of the fruition of the Calgary - Rockies rail line, council is now exploring options for a ‘Union Station’ combining the 7 Avenue subway station on the Green Line and enhanced connections to the nearest red/blue line stations two blocks north. Excellent


https://mobile.twitter.com/JeffDavisonYYC/status/1420849160958345216

[manny_santos]

There was a GO train in London today. Apparently it was doing a test run from Kitchener through Stratford to London.

Interesting…

[Nouvellecosse]

If GO were to extend service to London that would make it the longest commuter rail route in NA! Seems a bit odd to me for such large trains to extend so far out of town when most of the ridership would be on the inner 1/3 or even 1/4 of the route. It would probably be better to have a dedicated service with smaller trains, similar to Amtrak's Downeaster which connects Boston with Portland and Brunswick Maine with Portland being a similar size to London and a similar distance from the city.

[manny_santos]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

If GO were to extend service to London that would make it the longest commuter rail route in NA! Seems a bit odd to me for such large trains to extend so far out of town when most of the ridership would be on the inner 1/3 or even 1/4 of the route. It would probably be better to have a dedicated service with smaller trains, similar to Amtrak's Downeaster which connects Boston with Portland and Brunswick Maine with Portland being a similar size to London and a similar distance from the city.

If I’m not mistaken those tracks are also in need of repairs. I took VIA from Toronto to London on those tracks once in 2018 and I remember going rather slow between Kitchener and Stratford.

[GoTrans]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

If GO were to extend service to London that would make it the longest commuter rail route in NA! Seems a bit odd to me for such large trains to extend so far out of town when most of the ridership would be on the inner 1/3 or even 1/4 of the route. It would probably be better to have a dedicated service with smaller trains, similar to Amtrak's Downeaster which connects Boston with Portland and Brunswick Maine with Portland being a similar size to London and a similar distance from the city.

This is what happens when the federal government does not live up to its responsibilities. The result of the province not living up to its responsibility is the lack of service on the Northlander route. We have a very disjointed system of government.

[Beedok]

Go running some smaller faster trains on longer range routes with fewer stops could be useful. But would also eat into VIA...

Either way, somebody should start serving the Kitchener-Hamilton-Niagara corridor. That many people in such close proximity and no real good transit the whole way through? It's a mess.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by Beedok

Go running some smaller faster trains on longer range routes with fewer stops could be useful. But would also eat into VIA...

Either way, somebody should start serving the Kitchener-Hamilton-Niagara corridor. That many people in such close proximity and no real good transit the whole way through? It's a mess.

If the province of Ontario can just tell MegaBus to shoo, I guess.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

That's entirely up to them.

The feds aren't handing out electric buses like some Santa Claus. It's up to each agency to put together a fleet electrification plan and then approach the CIB for a financing package (combination of loans and grants).

I see that some of their councils at have taken up the issue.

https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6022626

https://northernontario.ctvnews.ca/sault...ooks-at-electric-fleet-options-1.4845399

https://www.timminspress.com/news/local-...af32dc4-82a6-4b40-a35a-8f68390fd30f/amp/

Maybe the residents in those towns should be asking their councillors why they are only starting the work in 2021.

Actually, the fact they have even begun to start gives me hope. Thank you for finding those.

Originally Posted by manny_santos

There was a GO train in London today. Apparently it was doing a test run from Kitchener through Stratford to London.

Interesting…

That is interesting. Any pictures or videos?

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

If GO were to extend service to London that would make it the longest commuter rail route in NA! Seems a bit odd to me for such large trains to extend so far out of town when most of the ridership would be on the inner 1/3 or even 1/4 of the route. It would probably be better to have a dedicated service with smaller trains, similar to Amtrak's Downeaster which connects Boston with Portland and Brunswick Maine with Portland being a similar size to London and a similar distance from the city.

I had said that there were rumours of GO being extended a few pages back. Everyone was quick to jump on me about how Via should increase service. The one thing I really like about GO is that they do what the people want and need. Even if it is 1 train a day each way to augment the existing Via services, it would be a good start. I don't foresee a shorter train unless they plan to make it an express and bypass the rest of the Kitchener line. What would be even nicer is if they had done a run through Cambridge to London. Extending the Milton line would work too.

[Mr. Blue]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I can't wait for GO RER. Wish they could speed up the timeline. I think AD2W throughout the GTA is really going to change how people think about transit (only to get to work) and regional travel.

Agreed. The timeline for GO RER is glacial. It'll well be worth it once this is complete. Impressive that GO Transit can run 15 min headways on tracks they own with diesel trains no less.

[thewave46]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

If GO were to extend service to London that would make it the longest commuter rail route in NA! Seems a bit odd to me for such large trains to extend so far out of town when most of the ridership would be on the inner 1/3 or even 1/4 of the route. It would probably be better to have a dedicated service with smaller trains, similar to Amtrak's Downeaster which connects Boston with Portland and Brunswick Maine with Portland being a similar size to London and a similar distance from the city.

If VIA's owner was more interested in actually doing something worthwhile with it rather than just putting the absolute minimum required into it, maybe there would be more enthusiasm for VIA.

However, GO does seem actually interested in expanding/improving its service to make it something useful. So, why not give it a chance to take on some additional service?

[someone123]

Tunnels are our Transportation Future
https://austinvernon.eth.link/blog/tunnels.html

It is mostly focused on The Boring Company. It has details about how costs can be reduced, for example by boring the tunnels at an angle from the surface and by putting stations above ground. Then there is the "synergy" with electric vehicles. One "big idea" in the article is that in theory tunnels turn ROWs from scarce rival goods into plentiful goods that can be built as needed, but this was always kind of obvious, and the big problem was always cost.

The Las Vegas tunnel project numbers are good:

The LVCC project included 2 miles of tunnel, two above-ground stations, and one underground station. If we use the calculator numbers, the estimate range is $50-$80 million, right in line. The Boring Company completed the project and verified the capacity in June 2021.

2 miles of tunnel for 100M CAD of tunnel would make all sorts of projects profitable. The "mobilization" cost was $2.5M US. I wonder if that could be brought down. In theory, all sorts of small tunnels could be built around cities to weave together ROWs.

[manny_santos]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

That is interesting. Any pictures or videos?

https://london.ctvnews.ca/go-train-spott...ning-the-transit-possibilities-1.5533329

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by someone123

Tunnels are our Transportation Future
https://austinvernon.eth.link/blog/tunnels.html

It is mostly focused on The Boring Company. It has details about how costs can be reduced, for example by boring the tunnels at an angle from the surface and by putting stations above ground. Then there is the "synergy" with electric vehicles. One "big idea" in the article is that in theory tunnels turn ROWs from scarce rival goods into plentiful goods that can be built as needed, but this was always kind of obvious, and the big problem was always cost.

The Las Vegas tunnel project numbers are good:

The LVCC project included 2 miles of tunnel, two above-ground stations, and one underground station. If we use the calculator numbers, the estimate range is $50-$80 million, right in line. The Boring Company completed the project and verified the capacity in June 2021.

2 miles of tunnel for 100M CAD of tunnel would make all sorts of projects profitable. The "mobilization" cost was $2.5M US. I wonder if that could be brought down. In theory, all sorts of small tunnels could be built around cities to weave together ROWs.

There's very little that's relevant to transit unfortunately, and the article makes that very clear by arguing against trains and for cars. They correctly point out that a big part of the cost is in underground stations so moving the stations above ground would help, but that generally isn't applicable to transit service because any area too space constrained for a surface travel ROW, whether it be roadway or rail tracks, certainly isn't going to have room for both the ROW and platform or designated waiting area. But of course that isn't relevant to cars as the cars would simply emerge from the tunnel and continue driving on the surface without having the passengers embark/disembark at the tunnel portal.

This is also underscored by another of their ideas which is to make the tunnels smaller. These smaller tunnels would likely be fine for vehicles that lack sufficient height for standing or circulating passengers (such as passenger cars and SUVs) but would rule out trains and buses. In other words, most of the suggestions constitute a plan to reinforce the infrastructural bias toward automobiles and against mass transit. The built form in most metro areas is still characterised by this bias due to the planning practices and fund allocations of the 20th century, and the boring company is gearing up for another round. Even if automobile tunnels were to become much cheaper to the point of being feasible for widespread implementation, that doesn't alleviate all of the issues associated automobile dominance just as the widespread construction of expressways didn't alleviate all the problems (and in some cases made them worse or introduced new ones).

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by thewave46

If VIA's owner was more interested in actually doing something worthwhile with it rather than just putting the absolute minimum required into it, maybe there would be more enthusiasm for VIA.

However, GO does seem actually interested in expanding/improving its service to make it something useful. So, why not give it a chance to take on some additional service?

I assume the last question is rhetorical, but the answer would be that GO is a metropolitan commuter service provider with the rolling stock, operations, and mandate intended to optimize that role rather than the role of intercity service provider. The solution to the problem of the appropriate intercity provider not being interested in providing improved service is for them to be made to change their mind and become interested, rather than for an inappropriate commuter service provider to step in. But of course, not being an optimal solution doesn't necessarily mean it won't work. Let's face it, the current iteration of GO isn't even optimal for metropolitan service given that it isn't electrified or particularly frequent, but it nonetheless manages to function.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by manny_santos

https://london.ctvnews.ca/go-train-spott...ning-the-transit-possibilities-1.5533329

Thank you for the video.
This makes me think of when up north, we saw a Northlander train do a run from Cochrane to Toronto and back a few months ago. If I were a betting man, I'd bet that in about a year or so, we could see GO going to London. The video does allude to the potential of it coming on other routes. I am wondering if they did 3 a day, on all 3 lines from the GTA to London, however, It appears that any trains running on the CP line (Milton GO through Cambridge) would need some infrastructure built in London to interchange between the lines.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

I assume the last question is rhetorical, but the answer would be that GO is a metropolitan commuter service provider with the rolling stock, operations, and mandate intended to optimize that role rather than the role of intercity service provider. The solution to the problem of the appropriate intercity provider not being interested in providing improved service is for them to be made to change their mind and become interested, rather than for an inappropriate commuter service provider to step in. But of course, not being an optimal solution doesn't necessarily mean it won't work. Let's face it, the current iteration of GO isn't even optimal for metropolitan service given that it isn't electrified or particularly frequent, but it nonetheless manages to function.

I don't see why an arbitrary distinction has to be made that GO is for commuter service and VIA is for intercity. I agree in an ideal world, VIA and the federal government would take responsibility for upgrading that London route, but if VIA isn't providing what Ontarians want, and Ontario owns a successful railway company with the skills to add more service, why not have them do so? Getting the federal government involved just complicates the matter and if the glacial pace of HFR is anything to go by, there is no reason to be optimistic.

The current GO trains might not be the best fit, but it's better than nothing at all, and GO appears to be (far) more successful than VIA at undertaking capital investment.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

There's very little that's relevant to transit unfortunately, and the article makes that very clear by arguing against trains and for cars.

In the future the line between transit and private vehicles may be blurrier. If you imagine autonomous vehicles running in tunnels for example these could be public or private and they could have one or more people in them. The ideal transit system of the future is one where you get a car that takes you exactly to where you want to go (but the service is available to everyone, upkeep is managed centrally, no parking needed, etc.). The model where big vehicles carry lots of people is a consequence of having a limited number of routes and needing a driver in the vehicle. Busy stations are related to this as well.

The article talks about moving shipping containers through tunnels which are not small.

Furthermore if you can separate out some kinds of traffic then options increase for what you do with transit on the old road and rail network.

[Beedok]

Originally Posted by someone123

Tunnels are our Transportation Future
https://austinvernon.eth.link/blog/tunnels.html

It is mostly focused on The Boring Company. It has details about how costs can be reduced, for example by boring the tunnels at an angle from the surface and by putting stations above ground. Then there is the "synergy" with electric vehicles. One "big idea" in the article is that in theory tunnels turn ROWs from scarce rival goods into plentiful goods that can be built as needed, but this was always kind of obvious, and the big problem was always cost.

The Las Vegas tunnel project numbers are good:

The LVCC project included 2 miles of tunnel, two above-ground stations, and one underground station. If we use the calculator numbers, the estimate range is $50-$80 million, right in line. The Boring Company completed the project and verified the capacity in June 2021.

2 miles of tunnel for 100M CAD of tunnel would make all sorts of projects profitable. The "mobilization" cost was $2.5M US. I wonder if that could be brought down. In theory, all sorts of small tunnels could be built around cities to weave together ROWs.

From what I've heard about the actual product the Boring Company makes, their biggest cost saving is skipping over a trivial little thing known as... safety for users. They built all of zero emergency exists in the tunnels in Vegas, and basically never include any in the plans they released for other projects. They also had no fire suppression infrastructure nor ventilation to deal with smoke. They just built a concrete pipe, installed some LEDs and hired people to drive down it at 30mph.

[ssiguy]

No matter what happens to GO service to London, it will most certainly catch VIA rail's attention and concerns. VIA's SWO routes require the least amount of subsidy per passenger KM that any other routes in the country including Mon/Tor. For VIA, this is a population they cannot allow to ignore and have GO take over much of their ridership. Such a scenario would put a real dent in VIA's already precarious financial situation and further reduce it's credibility to effectively serve even the most populace areas of the country.

Even the threat of a GO service to London may finally be the kick in the ass VIA needs to take it's London service seriously lest they loss a huge portion of market share.