Metro Vancouver Transit Discussion

[madog222]

Originally Posted by Mac Write

Thank you for the info. If the platform doors were designed for Mark III/IV would would it look like for a Mark II to use the platform doors (illustration would greatly help)

Systems do exist to work with different door spacing where the barrier lifts vertically.
They do look to significantly increase the required dwell time as they are relatively slow to move and the train doors must wait for the platform doors to fully open before opening. This would have an impact on system capacity for a system like ours that relies on very high frequency.

• Video Link

• Video Link

[cganuelas1995]

Originally Posted by madog222

Systems do exist to work with different door spacing where the barrier lifts vertically.
They do look to significantly increase the required dwell time as they are relatively slow to move and the train doors must wait for the platform doors to fully open before opening. This would have an impact on system capacity for a system like ours that relies on very high frequency.

• Video Link

• Video Link

They could do something where they input the type of car and configuration of the train, like say "Mark II, 2 cars", and have a variable door like a shutter that can open in multiple spots independently. Japan is testing them.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by rickvug

10 years of 5% compound annual growth will bring the Expo Line from 17,500 to 28,505 pphpd. Personally I wouldn't be surprised to see growth in excess of 5% considering the Surrey-Langley Skystrain extension, bounce back from COVID, increased immigration targets, and large pipeline of development around Skytrain Stations. I could absolutely see a scenario where the Surrey-Langley line sees more ridership that anticipated and there are heavy overcrowding issues in 2028-2030.

Good thing the Mark Vs let us hit 35k+; again, the only part that's actually at capacity is Stadium-Commercial, and after the Arbutus extension opens, maybe not even that.

As Farmer pointed out, there's been attempts to lure offices to the suburban stations (with varying success), which may also reduce that demand.

[rickvug]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Good thing the Mark Vs let us hit 35k+; again, the only part that's actually at capacity is Stadium-Commercial, and after the Arbutus extension opens, maybe not even that.

As Farmer pointed out, there's been attempts to lure offices to the suburban stations (with varying success), which may also reduce that demand.

Glad to hear that there is a clear pathway to getting up to 35k+. Any data on historical growth rates or demand projections based on what is being built within the Skytrain walksheds?

Anecdotally from my own Expo Line commute, I'm finding that Metrotown - Commercial Drive is getting increasingly crowded. With the Surrey-Langley Line moving the "centre of gravity" of the line East, and with the Broadway Line increasing transfer demand, I wonder if this section will become a bottleneck as well.

[chowhou]

https://buzzer.translink.ca/2023/06/...ng-an-upgrade/

The West Coast Express service is getting a boost and its engines are getting a tune-up!

Starting on June 19, a freshly painted and fully refurbished new locomotive (the front engine car) begins riding the rails, bringing back a fifth train in service for the first time in over three years.

This new addition to the fleet provides more convenience and capacity for our customers. The additional train will make two trips each weekday, restoring Train 2 in the West Coast Express schedule.
New West Coast Express service details

5:55 a.m. weekday departure from Mission City Station
4:20 p.m. weekday departure from Waterfront Station

Keen-eyed West Coast Express watchers will notice this new locomotive looks a little different from our others.

It’s all part of the ongoing West Coast Express Fleet Refurbishment Project. Our locomotives are nearing the end of their lifespan, so this initiative will drastically improve the quality of their engines. The project is co-funded by the Government of Canada, the Government of British Columbia, and TransLink.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by rickvug

Glad to hear that there is a clear pathway to getting up to 35k+. Any data on historical growth rates or demand projections based on what is being built within the Skytrain walksheds?

Anecdotally from my own Expo Line commute, I'm finding that Metrotown - Commercial Drive is getting increasingly crowded. With the Surrey-Langley Line moving the "centre of gravity" of the line East, and with the Broadway Line increasing transfer demand, I wonder if this section will become a bottleneck as well.

It's crowded at 9-10pm too, but that's because there's not enough trains late in the day.

Langley adds a max of 7,560 pphpd to the Expo by 2050.
This assumes the bus network is reoriented to funnel into the Expo Extension.

More would be added with a 104th-KGB SkyTrain, which is also planned.

[cganuelas1995]

Originally Posted by fredinno

It's crowded at 9-10pm too, but that's because there's not enough trains late in the day.

Maybe they could use AI and Compass data to reallocate trains on the fly

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by rickvug

Glad to hear that there is a clear pathway to getting up to 35k+. Any data on historical growth rates or demand projections based on what is being built within the Skytrain walksheds?

Anecdotally from my own Expo Line commute, I'm finding that Metrotown - Commercial Drive is getting increasingly crowded. With the Surrey-Langley Line moving the "centre of gravity" of the line East, and with the Broadway Line increasing transfer demand, I wonder if this section will become a bottleneck as well.

TransLink's numbers seem to focus on traffic reduction and ridership. Seeing as the metro only managed an all-time high of 14.9k pphpd in 2019 (42 percent?) though, there's reason to be optimistic.

I wonder how many of those Commercial-Metrotown riders need to use that specific route; relief lines (e.g. Metrotown-Hastings) might help shift demand away from the Expo. As for Surrey, the numbers (page 34) say there's a grand total of 500 riders/day on the SLS who want to go all the way downtown; for the most part, SoF commuters stay SoF.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

As for Surrey, the numbers (page 34) say there's a grand total of 500 riders/day on the SLS who want to go all the way downtown; for the most part, SoF commuters stay SoF.

i could see that changing once SLS is built. it would be quite convenient and i think it would open up more possibilities for people.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

i could see that changing once SLS is built. it would be quite convenient and i think it would open up more possibilities for people.

I don’t doubt it, but for the most part SLS commuters will head to Whalley, maybe some to New West or Metrotown. It's not like 70k people would suddenly reinvent their lives around downtown Van like Linda Hepner or Patrick Condon said they would.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

I don’t doubt it, but for the most part SLS commuters will head to Whalley, maybe some to New West or Metrotown. It's not like 70k people would suddenly reinvent their lives around downtown Van like Linda Hepner or Patrick Condon said they would.

Some people seem to think that extending the Skytrain further out will mean that everyone will go out of their way to travel to / from downtown Vancouver, so no one living on this side of the river will be able to ride the train because it'll be packed to the gills all the time.

As Migrant posted earlier, it's been proven that most people won't be doing that. Surrey needs better transit *within Surrey* and extending the Expo line will be one step to doing that. Sure it will make it easier for people living there to travel to CoV - but that doesn't mean they're going to suddenly leave their current job and get another one that's further away just because it's in CoV and the Skytrain is now closer to them than it was before. That doesn't make any sense.

It'll make it easier for more people to travel around in the region without a car. Yes sometimes that'll mean someone living SoF will travel NoF - or even vice versa. That's not a bad thing. Thinking the only area that Skytrain should be is CoV and building it anywhere else is a bad thing is elitist thinking.

[officedweller]

It'll become the 2nd major office destination, as planned, eventually with lines feeding into Whalley from KGB /104.
It will hopefully help Whalley attract more offfice development.

[Mac Write]

When more lines are constructed will they have any connections to the existing Stytrain system for train transfers, etc?

[ssiguy]

The Broadway subway should have platform screen doors. In relation to the cost of subway stations, the extra cost is small. The real cost is when they have to be built after the fact. They are very much like elevators that way.

After the subway, the priority should be to build platform screen doors at all Canada Line stations. The stations themselves are very short so crowds have less area tto spread out made much worse by the dangerously thin platforms.

[nname]

Originally Posted by madog222

End cars are 0.65m longer than Mark III centre cars so a Mark II 4-car train would have have every door misaligned by 0.65m off a Mark III/V, or one married pair aligned and the other misaligned by 1.3m.

Maybe if they keep all the MkII trains as 2-cars on the Millennium Line (with 2min frequency), PSD may work after all the MkIs are retired.

The M-Line will need to have a mix of 4-cars MkIII and 2-cars MkIIs though.

[cganuelas1995]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

The Broadway subway should have platform screen doors. In relation to the cost of subway stations, the extra cost is small. The real cost is when they have to be built after the fact. They are very much like elevators that way.

After the subway, the priority should be to build platform screen doors at all Canada Line stations. The stations themselves are very short so crowds have less area tto spread out made much worse by the dangerously thin platforms.

Pays for itself in on time performance with less intrusions coming from the platform at the very least. Now if we could completely enclose the surface and elevated sections then we could further improve on time performance, but I'd imagine that would not look very good from the POV of the NIMBY crowd

[Tvisforme]

Originally Posted by cganuelas1995

....Now if we could completely enclose the surface and elevated sections then we could further improve on time performance....

Sorry, I'm not clear on how this would improve performance?

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by Tvisforme

Sorry, I'm not clear on how this would improve performance?

Snow?

[ilikeredheads]

You aint building PSDs on Canada Line until you extend the remaining platforms to 50m.
And you aint' extending those platforms until there is a need to add the C-car to ALL trains.
In short, PSDs on Canada Line is so far into the future that it's unlikely to happen.

As for the Expo and M line, if Translink is serious about installing them, they should use the 3rd platform on Stadium-Chinatown to test out various prototype designs to ensure their feasibility. You want something that is compact, reliable, and has minimal impact on dwell times.

The platform screen doors used in MTR's and MRT's above ground stations should be ideal.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by Tvisforme

Sorry, I'm not clear on how this would improve performance?

it wont really. pointless waste of money.