Metro Vancouver Transit Discussion

[ssiguy]

Great to see they are finally putting the old MK1s out to pasture but am a little perplexed about these new MK V.

The current 4 car long trains already go end to end of the platforms so how are the stations going to accommodate a 5 car train? I believe the stations are 72 meters and each carriage is 18 so that 4 fit but an extra carriage means the stations would have to be about 90 meters. Any info?

[madog222]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

Great to see they are finally putting the old MK1s out to pasture but am a little perplexed about these new MK V.

The current 4 car long trains already go end to end of the platforms so how are the stations going to accommodate a 5 car train? I believe the stations are 72 meters and each carriage is 18 so that 4 fit but an extra carriage means the stations would have to be about 90 meters. Any info?

Existing platforms are 80m, Broadway Subway and Surrey Langley are being built to 82.5m.
Translink is currently upgrading stations in order to accommodate the longer trains, this mainly involves relocating emergency exits from the platform ends, moving the cross track walkway, and moving equipment and sensors currently at the platform ends. https://www.translink.ca/plans-and-proje...ojects/station-access-and-safety-project

Mark III end cars are 17.35m and centre cars are 16.7m so a Mark V train should be 84.8m long. The ends of the train will poke out past the platforms but the doors will fit.

[madog222]

Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon

Are there any curvature differences in between the different phases?

Measuring roughly off Google Earth the curve west of Main St Stn looks to be about a 70m radius I/B and an 80m radius O/B.
The two sharp curves on the Evergreen Extension, from Lougheed Stn onto North Rd and from Coquitlam Central onto Lougheed, seem to both be a 90m radius on the inside track.

[nname]

Originally Posted by madog222

Existing platforms are 80m, Broadway Subway and Surrey Langley are being built to 82.5m.

I believe Evergreen extension were also built to 82.5m.. and any Expo line station that had gone through extensive renovation were also expanded to at least 82.5m.

[ssiguy]

Thanks for the info, for some reason I thought they were 72 meters. It's great they future proofed the Evergreen Line like this as well.

I see that the feds have chipped in to help Translink replace some it's rail and that's great news. Vancouver {and basically all Canadian systems} hav e put a priority on "state of good repair" and it pays off.

In the US you have so many cities with transit expansions but don't maintain the systems properly causing eventual shutdowns. We have seen this famously in Washington & Boston where they let the existing infrastructure basically rot and have to shut down whole lines for extended periods and usually after a major derailment. It's penny wise and pound foolish as it undermines the public's perception that the system is both safe and reliable.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by nname

I believe Evergreen extension were also built to 82.5m.. and any Expo line station that had gone through extensive renovation were also expanded to at least 82.5m.

Does that include the underground stations?

[madog222]

Originally Posted by nname

I believe Evergreen extension were also built to 82.5m.. and any Expo line station that had gone through extensive renovation were also expanded to at least 82.5m.

I have never seen or heard that that is the case. I don't recall the 82.5m value ever coming up in discussion on SSP or elsewhere until the Broadway Subway Project.

I'm certain the renovated stations (Metrotown, Main St.) haven't been extended.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by madog222

I have never seen or heard that that is the case. I don't recall the 82.5m value ever coming up in discussion on SSP or elsewhere until the Broadway Subway Project.

I'm certain the renovated stations (Metrotown, Main St.) haven't been extended.

Yeah, there's also extra platform space that's not really usable that's for the utility access.

Either way, it shouldn't matter, since Mark V is designed to the 80m standard. The extra 2.5m might reduce crowding, but it's not critical.

[nname]

Originally Posted by fredinno

Yeah, there's also extra platform space that's not really usable that's for the utility access.

Either way, it shouldn't matter, since Mark V is designed to the 80m standard. The extra 2.5m might reduce crowding, but it's not critical.

Well utility relocation will be needed for every station so they will not be blocked by a stopped train that overhang the platform. After that's done, I'm sure some of the glass panels can be open up to make the platform slightly longer.

But yes, that aren't necessary as long as there is 80m open to the train. What I meant is that the previous station upgrade added additional 5m of space at each end of the platform, so Metrotown really have 90m of space for circulation at platform level (compared to about 81m before the upgrade)

The same applies to Main, Joyce, 29th Avenue, and possibly some others. For each station with side entrance, the last upgrade always added additional space at the platform level to improve circulation (even if the additional area do not have direct access to train). The same cannot be said for some of the center-loading stations where the platform is still exactly 80m. When the train/station is busy, there may not be enough space on the side of the first/last door to stand to let people off the train first...

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by nname

Well utility relocation will be needed for every station so they will not be blocked by a stopped train that overhang the platform. After that's done, I'm sure some of the glass panels can be open up to make the platform slightly longer.

But yes, that aren't necessary as long as there is 80m open to the train. What I meant is that the previous station upgrade added additional 5m of space at each end of the platform, so Metrotown really have 90m of space for circulation at platform level (compared to about 81m before the upgrade)

The same applies to Main, Joyce, 29th Avenue, and possibly some others. For each station with side entrance, the last upgrade always added additional space at the platform level to improve circulation (even if the additional area do not have direct access to train). The same cannot be said for some of the center-loading stations where the platform is still exactly 80m. When the train/station is busy, there may not be enough space on the side of the first/last door to stand to let people off the train first...

If it's just needing waiting room, you can expand the center platforms at the ends anyways.
You're not entering from that extra 2.5m, so there's no need to worry about being fully level and aligned with the train doors.

There's also the possibility of adding platform screen doors.


Canada has far less room on the station platforms vs the train capacity (the trains and platforms are narrower and the trains are wider) and is mostly underground, so I'm more worried about that.

Elevated Stations can be built bigger later on much more easily.

[nname]

Originally Posted by fredinno

Elevated Stations can be built bigger later on much more easily.

Not for station like Metrotown, for the obvious reason. So when they design the rennovation, they must already have 5-car trains in mind.

[Mac Write]

Is there a plan in place and timeline for going to 6-car Mark VI trains?

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by Mac Write

Is there a plan in place and timeline for going to 6-car Mark VI trains?

i doubt they would ever do that because i dont see 6 trains fitting on even the new broadway subway platforms at 82.5m

[Tvisforme]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

i doubt they would ever do that because i dont see 6 trains fitting on even the new broadway subway platforms at 82.5m

It's doable, as some other systems (such as London and New York City) have had to adjust to older, shorter platforms by opening the doors on a subset of the full train - with announcements that the next station was only for certain cars. It's certainly not ideal however.

[ssiguy]

As I understand it, the SkyTrain can be ultimately expanded to 100 meter stations throughout the system. It would cost a lot but there are no actual barriers {ie cross tracks, station geographic locations} to stop them from doing it. The SkyTrain was well future proofed and I love the SkyTrain.

The Canada Line, on the other hand, was built strictly for Campbell's beloved Olympics and future transit needs were considered completely irrelevant. From the puny 50 meter max stations, dangerously thin platforms, single tracking thru Richmond with no land allowance so it can never be extended, and no extra storage spot for Waterfront so they can use both tracks and still have a back-up train parked if needed, the system has absolutely no future proofing at all.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

As I understand it, the SkyTrain can be ultimately expanded to 100 meter stations throughout the system.

[Citation needed]

This would be massive if true.

[madog222]

The track geometry probably allows for that but most stations would need extensive rebuilding.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

The Canada Line, on the other hand, was built strictly for Campbell's beloved Olympics and future transit needs were considered completely irrelevant.

you cant blame Campbell for that. you need to blame the mayors who tried to constantly kill it. thats pretty obvious.

as for the 100m platforms? i doubt theyll be extending them to 100m. i dont see that happening; ever. if broadway subway isnt getting them now, they wont get it later.

[madog222]

From the 2012 Expo Line Capacity Study:

The platform length currently provided at most Expo Line Stations is 80 metres. This length would enable operations of five vehicle MKII trains with four stations requiring modest platform extensions. Although six vehicle MKII trains were also considered initially, it is not possible to accommodate this train length without significant and costly reconstruction of all stations, which would be particularly costly for the underground stations.

https://www.canadianconsultingengineer.com/awards/pdfs/2012/F8_ExpoLineUpgradeStrategyVancouver.pdf [archived link]

[WarrenC12]

I'd prefer shorter headways over longer trains.