Metro Vancouver Transit Discussion

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by Tvisforme

Given that it is an automated system, I would presume that there is probably less overhead in running extra service. That being said, as others have noted we're not really a 24-hour city yet. The way to test it might be to have very limited service, perhaps a train in each direction every half-hour or hour. That would give some coverage for late-night travellers akin to what a bus route might offer.

Don't stations close up overnight? If Translink were to trial low frequency 24 hour service, they'd have to have Skytrain attendants + transit police on the clock during the twilight hours for probably not a lot of people. Not a great cost/benefit in my eyes. Skytrain is high(er) speed transit, but it's main purpose is to be high capacity transit. We don't really need that capacity at night, and nightbusses aren't exactly held up by traffic at that time so they're plenty fast enough IMO. It can actually be pretty nice taking a bus from downtown late at night when almost no one is getting on or getting off.

[madog222]

Originally Posted by cganuelas1995

The NYC subway is 24 hours because of the quad tracking

Exactly, so I'm not comparing to the NY Subway.

The Copenhagen Metro, a system directly comparable to ours, runs 24 hours by single tracking from midnight to 5am. Weekend nights are 15min frequency on the spur lines with ~7.5min combined service and weekday nights are 20min frequency.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Yeah, the answer seems like "more NightBus frequency" rather than "24/7 SkyTrain." Manhattan has traffic even in the early morning. We don't.

[Tvisforme]

Originally Posted by chowhou

Don't stations close up overnight? If Translink were to trial low frequency 24 hour service, they'd have to have Skytrain attendants + transit police on the clock during the twilight hours for probably not a lot of people. Not a great cost/benefit in my eyes. Skytrain is high(er) speed transit, but it's main purpose is to be high capacity transit. We don't really need that capacity at night, and nightbusses aren't exactly held up by traffic at that time so they're plenty fast enough IMO. It can actually be pretty nice taking a bus from downtown late at night when almost no one is getting on or getting off.

Right, forgot about the personnel for security. Thanks.

[cganuelas1995]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Yeah, the answer seems like "more NightBus frequency" rather than "24/7 SkyTrain." Manhattan has traffic even in the early morning. We don't.

Or a hybrid/dynamic approach. On days with heavier maintenance, more nightbus, otherwise less nightbus on routes paralleling skytrain. Maybe if they do single track skytrain, they could have it so some stations act as passing loops and maybe skip stations that have low nighttime ridership, determined by compass card data

[madog222]

In order to support the higher power demand of increasing capacity (longer trains at higher frequency) Translink is building 8 new Propulsion Power Stations on the exiting Expo and Millenium lines and upgrading rectifiers at the existing stations.

Three new PPS will be in Vancouver, two in Burnaby, one in Surrey, one in Coquitlam, and one in Port Moody.

The first to be constructed will be at VCC-Clark, starting in June, followed by near Sperling in Burnaby and in Port Moody (N of Clarke, W of Moody St.) starting next year.

https://www.translink.ca/plans-and-projects/projects/maintenance-and-upgrade-program/rail-projects

[mcj]

Originally Posted by madog222

In order to support the higher power demand of increasing capacity (longer trains at higher frequency) Translink is building 8 new Propulsion Power Stations on the exiting Expo and Millenium lines and upgrading rectifiers at the existing stations.

Three new PPS will be in Vancouver, two in Burnaby, one in Surrey, one in Coquitlam, and one in Port Moody.

The first to be constructed will be at VCC-Clark, starting in June, followed by near Sperling in Burnaby and in Port Moody (N of Clarke, W of Moody St.) starting next year.

https://www.translink.ca/plans-and-projects/projects/maintenance-and-upgrade-program/rail-projects

Great to see investment in the boring stuff. The second half of this decade is going to be impressive with all the upgrades both seen and unseen.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by madog222

8 new Propulsion Power Stations on the exiting Expo and Millenium lines and upgrading rectifiers at the existing stations.

https://www.translink.ca/plans-and-projects/projects/maintenance-and-upgrade-program/rail-projects

8 new ones? 8 seems like a lot!

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

8 new ones? 8 seems like a lot!

Probably future-proofing.

[madog222]

Notable that two will be along the Evergreen Extension built less than 10 years ago, though I guess one can argue it's a straightforward upgrade so it doesn't really matter.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Wait, VCC, Sperling and Port Moody? Sounds like they picked the substation sites via dartboard (yeah, I know they didn't, that's just what it sounds like).

[NewfBC]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Probably future-proofing.

Translink future proofing? That's a new one.

Ron.

[superelevation]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

It's pretty amazing that Skytrain is actually competitive with the TTC considering the latter has far larger cars and platforms almost twice as long. It just goes to show you how important frequency is.

I'd be very surprised if our capacity hasn't doubled since the original 4-car Mark I trains went into service in 1986, less than 40 years ago. There are over 75 years left in this century. I think you're going to be proven wrong.

I think you need to consider these numbers with a grain of salt, the way ridership and capacity is calculated from system to system varies and Vancouver tends to predict higher than average capacity (based on a given train frequency and size) than a lot of other cities.

TTC uses a pretty reasonable crowding standard for crush loaded trains as well iirc.

At the end of the day the capacities are just not in the same ballpark. TTC uses fully open gangway 6 car trains with cars that are wider and longer than the cars used on the Canada Line. (A Toronto Rocket Subway Train is ~138m x 3.1m when compared to a Mark V which is ~82m x 2.7m - plus the rockets have 24 doors on each side while the MV has 15) The theoretical frequency is also not far off the Expo Line as Toronto recently implemented moving block signalling on Line 1.

Originally Posted by madog222

Exactly, so I'm not comparing to the NY Subway.

The Copenhagen Metro, a system directly comparable to ours, runs 24 hours by single tracking from midnight to 5am. Weekend nights are 15min frequency on the spur lines with ~7.5min combined service and weekday nights are 20min frequency.

Copenhagen isn't necessarily as comparable as you think - the system was built over a decade later and explicitly designed for 24 hour service. That meant isolating electrical circuits, and building additional switches for more single tracking - but also providing significant physical separation for tracks so that workers could work while trains operate at regular speed on the other track - typically by using separate tunnels or widely spaced guideways . . see below pictures

Note how widely spaced the tracks leaving this crossover are

That's not to say we shouldn't aim for 24 hour, many systems in Europe operate 24 hours on weekends (Friday and Saturday nights) and the subway in Toronto has in the past run 24/7 a couple nights a year for major events. The sense I get is that this is just much harder to do when you are in a backlogged state with maintenance.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by superelevation

I think you need to consider these numbers with a grain of salt, the way ridership and capacity is calculated from system to system varies and Vancouver tends to predict higher than average capacity (based on a given train frequency and size) than a lot of other cities.

TTC uses a pretty reasonable crowding standard for crush loaded trains as well iirc.

At the end of the day the capacities are just not in the same ballpark. TTC uses fully open gangway 6 car trains with cars that are wider and longer than the cars used on the Canada Line. (A Toronto Rocket Subway Train is ~138m x 3.1m when compared to a Mark V which is ~82m x 2.7m - plus the rockets have 24 doors on each side while the MV has 15) The theoretical frequency is also not far off the Expo Line as Toronto recently implemented moving block signalling on Line 1.

TTC has lower frequency than SkyTrain, though.

[cganuelas1995]

Originally Posted by fredinno

TTC has lower frequency than SkyTrain, though.

Kinda hard to be high frequency when you still have manually driven trains

[cganuelas1995]

Anyone know where I can find old archival photos of SkyTrain stations and other TransLink infrastructure?

[nname]

Originally Posted by superelevation

I think you need to consider these numbers with a grain of salt, the way ridership and capacity is calculated from system to system varies and Vancouver tends to predict higher than average capacity (based on a given train frequency and size) than a lot of other cities.

TTC uses a pretty reasonable crowding standard for crush loaded trains as well iirc.

At the end of the day the capacities are just not in the same ballpark. TTC uses fully open gangway 6 car trains with cars that are wider and longer than the cars used on the Canada Line. (A Toronto Rocket Subway Train is ~138m x 3.1m when compared to a Mark V which is ~82m x 2.7m - plus the rockets have 24 doors on each side while the MV has 15) The theoretical frequency is also not far off the Expo Line as Toronto recently implemented moving block signalling on Line 1.

It's that TTC normally estimate capacity on the lower side, but not by that much as you suggested.

Typical capacity estimate for a MkV train is 660 passengers (I use the average for 650-675).
TTC Rocket is stated at 1080 passengers capacity.

For SkyTrain, the maximum design frequency is 75s, so 48 trains per hour.
TTC after signaling upgrade can run up to 30-32 trains per hour (instead of 25 before upgrade)

So just do the math:

Van SkyTrain: 660 passengers/train * 48 trains/hour = 31,680 pphpd
TTC Subway: 1080 passengers/train *32 trains/hour = 34,560 pphpd

Although neither of the above had been achieved or may not even proven to be possible yet. TTC I believe only ran up to 30 trains/hr after the upgrade, and Vancouver ran the system consistently with 43 trains/hr during the Olympics. Both are lower now due to COVID and lack of rolling stock. The TTC capacity quoted is using the 30 trains/hr maximum.

And for the second part about capacity per train... again, just do some calculation:

Van SkyTrain: 660 passengers / (85m x 2.7m) = 2.87 passengers/m^2
TTC Subway: 1080 passengers / (138m x 3.1m) = 2.52 passengers/m^2

Keep in mind that you have to take off a few meters on both end of TTC for the driver's cab. So the estimate should be even closer to the number above.

Typically, maximum capacity is 4 pass/m^2, and crush load is 6 pass/m^2

So both estimate are well below industry standard. I believe in one of the Bombardiar brochure for the ART system, the stated maximum capacity is something like 54,000 pphpd for a 6 car train

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by nname

It's that TTC normally estimate capacity on the lower side, but not by that much as you suggested.

Typical capacity estimate for a MkV train is 660 passengers (I use the average for 650-675).
TTC Rocket is stated at 1080 passengers capacity.

For SkyTrain, the maximum design frequency is 75s, so 48 trains per hour.
TTC after signaling upgrade can run up to 30-32 trains per hour (instead of 25 before upgrade)

So just do the math:

Van SkyTrain: 660 passengers/train * 48 trains/hour = 31,680 pphpd
TTC Subway: 1080 passengers/train *32 trains/hour = 34,560 pphpd

Although neither of the above had been achieved or may not even proven to be possible yet. TTC I believe only ran up to 30 trains/hr after the upgrade, and Vancouver ran the system consistently with 43 trains/hr during the Olympics. Both are lower now due to COVID and lack of rolling stock. The TTC capacity quoted is using the 30 trains/hr maximum.

And for the second part about capacity per train... again, just do some calculation:

Van SkyTrain: 660 passengers / (85m x 2.7m) = 2.87 passengers/m^2
TTC Subway: 1080 passengers / (138m x 3.1m) = 2.52 passengers/m^2

Keep in mind that you have to take off a few meters on both end of TTC for the driver's cab. So the estimate should be even closer to the number above.

Typically, maximum capacity is 4 pass/m^2, and crush load is 6 pass/m^2

So both estimate are well below industry standard. I believe in one of the Bombardiar brochure for the ART system, the stated maximum capacity is something like 54,000 pphpd for a 6 car train

Is that standard for developing or developed nations?
Also, SkyTrain maxes out at 5-car.

[nname]

Originally Posted by fredinno

Is that standard for developing or developed nations?
Also, SkyTrain maxes out at 5-car.

That's the standard when selling the system globally.

[Migrant_Coconut]

How TransLink compares to other major Canadian public transit agencies

Ahead of this week’s TransLink’s Mayors’ Council meeting, TransLink staff have provided the region’s elected municipal leaders with a breakdown of how Canada’s largest public transit authorities compare with Metro Vancouver’s public transit agency.

This comparison, outlined in a report, was produced following a request by the Mayors’ Council for more information earlier this year...

All that, and with 2-3x the amount of ground to cover plus roadworks. Not bad, TransLink.