The Great Canadian Transit Thread

[Beedok]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

Okay, I was clearly using St. Kitts as an example. I could have very well said Oshawa or any other medium sized city. Size doesn't equal importance is the point, not the minor details.

But the thing is that St. Kitts is smaller than Regina, and less important, while the whole region is larger by population and more important than Regina so it's a very bad example. Oshawa does sort of work, but it's at least half Toronto suburb by now so is a bit iffy. Now Windsor I think could maybe work, or maybe Sherbrooke vs. St. John's? Brantford vs. Thunder Bay?

[Chadillaccc]

Originally Posted by Beedok

But the thing is that St. Kitts is smaller than Regina, and less important, while the whole region is larger by population and more important than Regina so it's a very bad example. Oshawa does sort of work, but it's at least half Toronto suburb by now so is a bit iffy. Now Windsor I think could maybe work, or maybe Sherbrooke vs. St. John's? Brantford vs. Thunder Bay?

It's in a Metro area of over 400 000, it works. You're just being overly critical for no reason, focusing on details not important to the topic, which is London and Kitchener.


So back to that...

Has London ever had plans for an LRT? is there any route that would work? I guess a streetcar-style LRT up Dundas? Maybe another up Wellington?

[Chadillaccc]

Not sure if this has been mentioned, but Calgary's recent order of 60 new LRVs (15 four-car trains) is part of the city's larger, 30-year strategy to increase our number of LRV's from the current 192 to 390. With the addition of these new vehicles, the fleet will grow to 228. 36 (9 trains) will go toward expanding the fleet, and 24 (6 trains) will go towards replacing the original Siemens U2 Vehicles, 80 of which remain in service (27 three-car trains, 20 four-car trains).

It should be noted, that even after all 60 new vehicles are delivered and four-car trains come online, our total number of trains in operation will be reduced from 64 to 57, though carrying capacity will be increased by 33%.

[GernB]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

Oh I know that for sure. I just mean planning for the future like Saskatoon is starting to do right now. With how fast the Lethbridge area has been growing, 200 000 isn't that long away, maybe 20 years or more? By then a new cheaper version of rail transit tech could come out and be viable for smaller cities. The High Level could probably handle it as the transit bridge while still being a freight bridge.

Lethbridge is growing fairly fast by SW Alberta standards but is light years behind the Calgary-Edmonton corridor, so I think a doubling of population in twenty years might be optimistic. There's no oil/gas sector here to speak of; agriculture is the base of the economy and within that limitation we are doing pretty well.

But the high-level bridge wouldn't be available without the the CPR's permission (unlikely) and/or widening (impossible or impractical). As well, using the bridge would more than double the distance from DT to the U. But I agree an LRT connection would be nice.

[GernB]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

A lot of smaller cities had small streetcar lines that were generally built and ripped up again within 20 or 30 years, built in boom years with shaky business plans, and then once the car started to take over in the 1930's they started to come down after a decade or two of struggling. WWII put the rip down on hold, but it continued in force after the war. Its not a surprise its gone and few remember it, many of these streetcars barely had much ridership even before the car.

Yeah the lines ran from DT to the exhibition grounds along 6th/7th Avenues and from DT to the north side up 13th Street. I've got a picture somewhere of the line when it was being opened ~1910-12; if I can find it I'll post it.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

Not sure if this has been mentioned, but Calgary's recent order of 60 new LRVs (15 four-car trains) is part of the city's larger, 30-year strategy to increase our number of LRV's from the current 192 to 390. With the addition of these new vehicles, the fleet will grow to 228. 36 (9 trains) will go toward expanding the fleet, and 24 (6 trains) will go towards replacing the original Siemens U2 Vehicles, 80 of which remain in service (27 three-car trains, 20 four-car trains).

It should be noted, that even after all 60 new vehicles are delivered and four-car trains come online, our total number of trains in operation will be reduced from 64 to 57, though carrying capacity will be increased by 33%.

Does Calgary still have those ancient trains from the 70s and if so are they going to ditch them soon?

A lot of people seem to have insane nostalgia for transit vehicles of that era--in Kingston when our last bus from the 80s was retired a stupidly high number of people got on its last trip in-service--but I disagree completely. All those buses look fugly, and the 21st century vehicles that both Ottawa & Kingston now use exclusively are so much better. The Toronto streetcars & Montreal subway trains also bug me a lot with their oldness although I know both plan on replacing them in the immediate future. Please tell me Calgary is too?

[caltrane74]

Speaking of Bridge Widening.....

Humber Span Bridge For Kitchener Line/UPX - Construction Timelapse

• Video Link

[SFUVancouver]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

It should be noted, that even after all 60 new vehicles are delivered and four-car trains come online, our total number of trains in operation will be reduced from 64 to 57, though carrying capacity will be increased by 33%.

It's great news that Calgary is investing in modernizing and expanding the C-Train fleet. It's unfortunate that the total number of trains in revenue service at any given time will decline. That's a loss of level of service even though the trains' capacity is increased. A seven train decline isn't too massive, but I suspect it may create delays for waiting passengers that is perceptible.

[Innsertnamehere]

neat video! Its interesting how with the Georgetown south project they are building all of the bridges and whatnot for the planned final amount of tracks.. in the humber river bridges case, 4, but yet won't be laying all of the tracks. The Humber River bridge in 2015 will have 3 tracks running over it, but will be built for 4 tracks. Talk about future proofing! another example is the Strachan overpass, where the overpass is built for 8 tracks but on opening day will have 5.

[niwell]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

neat video! Its interesting how with the Georgetown south project they are building all of the bridges and whatnot for the planned final amount of tracks.. in the humber river bridges case, 4, but yet won't be laying all of the tracks. The Humber River bridge in 2015 will have 3 tracks running over it, but will be built for 4 tracks. Talk about future proofing! another example is the Strachan overpass, where the overpass is built for 8 tracks but on opening day will have 5.

It's nice that we are actually building for the future again in Southern Ontario! Metrolinx is one of the best things that has happened for the GTHA in recent memory I think. Regional transit is actually constantly growing now, as it should be.

[Daveography]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Does Calgary still have those ancient trains from the 70s and if so are they going to ditch them soon?

A lot of people seem to have insane nostalgia for transit vehicles of that era--in Kingston when our last bus from the 80s was retired a stupidly high number of people got on its last trip in-service--but I disagree completely. All those buses look fugly, and the 21st century vehicles that both Ottawa & Kingston now use exclusively are so much better. The Toronto streetcars & Montreal subway trains also bug me a lot with their oldness although I know both plan on replacing them in the immediate future. Please tell me Calgary is too?

Edmonton uses the same LRVs (Siemens U2), and I believe they just wrapped up a major refurbishment that should see them last another 20-30 years. Despite a desire for everything to look modern, getting 50-60 years out of these vehicles is a pretty amazing investment when you think about it. Part of the refurb includes improved lighting, brand new seats and floors, and bright digital signage, at least, so they certainly look less old than they are.

[Chadillaccc]

Originally Posted by RTA

Edmonton uses the same LRVs (Siemens U2), and I believe they just wrapped up a major refurbishment that should see them last another 20-30 years. Despite a desire for everything to look modern, getting 50-60 years out of these vehicles is a pretty amazing investment when you think about it. Part of the refurb includes improved lighting, brand new seats and floors, and bright digital signage, at least, so they certainly look less old than they are.

Yeah, 80 out of Calgary's 83 are still currently perfectly functional and in service, but I believe the city intends to replace them as soon as possible. Edmonton's still look fantastic, especially compared to ours. I could see why the city is planning to keep them. I wonder why they kept so well, over ours? Possibly they just look cleaner cause the interior is white and blue versus our hideous beige and orange.

[rike5]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

Edmonton's still look fantastic, especially compared to ours. I could see why the city is planning to keep them. I wonder why they kept so well, over ours? Possibly they just look cleaner cause the interior is white and blue versus our hideous beige and orange.

They had their interiors refurbished rather recently. They too used to have ugly orange-brown interiors. The refurbishment was part of the decision to keep using the U2s.

Old:


http://www.cptdb.ca/wiki/images/a/ae/Edmonton_Transit_System_U2_Interior-a.jpg

New:


http://img364.imageshack.us/img364/9095/30417jpgua9.jpg

[Mikemike]

Edmonton's U2s saw lighter service through the 90s when we had more than were needed day-to-day, and I assume that being farther from traffic would mean less road salt and less corrosion. The original NE line had only 6 street crossings, some of which are fairly minor.

[armorand93]

Originally Posted by Mikemike

Edmonton's U2s saw lighter service through the 90s when we had more than were needed day-to-day, and I assume that being farther from traffic would mean less road salt and less corrosion. The original NE line had only 6 street crossings, some of which are fairly minor.

Plus unlike Calgary, the system never expanded for nearly 25 years... minus underground expansions and the tunnel up to Health Sciences. Calgarys was expanded en masse, way before Edmonton expanded theirs.

[Bassic Lab]

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

It's great news that Calgary is investing in modernizing and expanding the C-Train fleet. It's unfortunate that the total number of trains in revenue service at any given time will decline. That's a loss of level of service even though the trains' capacity is increased. A seven train decline isn't too massive, but I suspect it may create delays for waiting passengers that is perceptible.

Four car trains take longer to clear intersections than three car trains and we're currently at the absolute limit for three car trains on 7 Ave. The only way to keep headways at the current level, or decrease them, during the peak is to build a subway for one of the lines downtown.

[Mla]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

Yeah, 80 out of Calgary's 83 are still currently perfectly functional and in service, but I believe the city intends to replace them as soon as possible. Edmonton's still look fantastic, especially compared to ours. I could see why the city is planning to keep them. I wonder why they kept so well, over ours? Possibly they just look cleaner cause the interior is white and blue versus our hideous beige and orange.

And almost half of Edmonton's LRT runs underground so less exposure to the elements over the years probably helped. That along with less ridership and less km travelled overall...

[Chadillaccc]

Originally Posted by Bassic Lab

Four car trains take longer to clear intersections than three car trains and we're currently at the absolute limit for three car trains on 7 Ave. The only way to keep headways at the current level, or decrease them, during the peak is to build a subway for one of the lines downtown.

Yes, it's a sad state of affairs for the Ctrain. The 201 Line (NW to SW) needs to be UG downtown. Once it is, there will be virtually nothing to impede its free flow, and seeing as it carries over 60 percent of Ctrain ridership, it should be the absolute priority.

[VIce]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Does Calgary still have those ancient trains from the 70s and if so are they going to ditch them soon?

A lot of people seem to have insane nostalgia for transit vehicles of that era--in Kingston when our last bus from the 80s was retired a stupidly high number of people got on its last trip in-service--but I disagree completely. All those buses look fugly, and the 21st century vehicles that both Ottawa & Kingston now use exclusively are so much better. The Toronto streetcars & Montreal subway trains also bug me a lot with their oldness although I know both plan on replacing them in the immediate future. Please tell me Calgary is too?

Heh, they're actually a 1960's design and the original operator (the Frankfurt U-Bahn) has some early 70s examples still running. All of Calgary's trains are slightly (a decade) newer than that, though. The oldest trains have been run pretty hard, and are apparently making the maintenance schedules pretty tough. All train orders to date have been to expand the fleet, but that will be changing with the next order we have now. No plans or schedule to scrap the U2s for the sake of it, though.

Edit: that said, if you're worried about the trains being ugly, 60% of the fleet has been constructed later than 2000, and the older trains are usually the first to be pulled back into the barns after rush hour service (when nearly all trains are active). As I commute mostly off-peak, I rarely ride on an old U2.

[milomilo]

I preferred riding the oldest trains to the newest ones entirely due to much more comfy seats. Looks like the new trains will have much improved seating.