Calgary Public Transit II

[fusili]

Originally Posted by DizzyEdge

Has there been any thought at Calgary Transit to having the 301 follow the potential future path of the combined NCLRT and SELRT?

One potential issue I can see is the imbalance of ridership between the two legs. SELRT advocates will dislike this, but the 301 has far, far, far more ridership than the 302. If integrating the routes results in tons of empty buses running in the SE, is the increase in operating costs worth the slightly more convenient single seat trips for the few who need it? A transfer downtown is acceptable in the short term, IMO.

[Rusty van Reddick]

AMAZING job Chad! Thanks!!

[simster3]

This might be a stupid question, but one thing I keep hearing about subways vs LRT is that subways can hold a lot more people. What is stopping a city like Calgary from building stations 200m long and running 8 cars like a subway does? I ask this in relation to the announcement in Toronto today for funding from the Federal Gov't that will allow them to build a subway extension.

[speedog]

Originally Posted by simster3

This might be a stupid question, but one thing I keep hearing about subways vs LRT is that subways can hold a lot more people. What is stopping a city like Calgary from building stations 200m long and running 8 cars like a subway does? I ask this in relation to the announcement in Toronto today for funding from the Federal Gov't that will allow them to build a subway extension.

You have been in downtown Calgary, right?

At best, most of the E-W avenues that the LRT stations reside on are 125 meters in length.

[RicoLance21]

Originally Posted by simster3

This might be a stupid question, but one thing I keep hearing about subways vs LRT is that subways can hold a lot more people. What is stopping a city like Calgary from building stations 200m long and running 8 cars like a subway does? I ask this in relation to the announcement in Toronto today for funding from the Federal Gov't that will allow them to build a subway extension.

Imagine Toronto using a 3-car LRT system similar to Calgary's. The system would simply not cope, not even with Japanese pushers.

The main reasons are population and, more importantly, density.

[simster3]

Obviously, downtown Calgary is limited in size until we can build underground. A lot of people who are against LRT in Toronto complain that LRT can't hold as many people or is not as efficient as subway. If the system is grade separated and you dont have to worry about size restrictions, like Calgary experiences, why can't an LRT system provide similar service to a subway. And Rico, Toronto has many LRT lines planned and I am just wondering if you can run LRT with as many cars/high frequency as a subway. I am interested in the limitations of LRT because to me, there is not much difference once you have both systems 100% grade separated.

[MalcolmTucker]

Depends if you want to buy equipment off the shelf. U2s were limited to 5 car (125m train) operations at full speed, but with some modifications it should be possible to run them at a further length.

[simster3]

Thanks for the info.

[RyLucky]

Great pictures!

Re more capacity:
-202 (NE/WLRT) can accommodate 4 car trains, and then that's it. When 201 moves under 8th ave, this will allow approximately twice as many 202 trains on 7th ave. In other words, this line could eventually handle 267% of what it can now, plus better off-peak service. Beyond that, the only way to accommodate more capacity would be to bury the downtown section and rebuild nearly every station on the line (current stations were designed to only ever accommodate "1 downtown block's" length), create some some kind of express line, create more bidirectional traffic, upgrade rolling stock, etc. IMO, it is likely we were face this capacity ceiling within 30-40 years, but upgrading it will not be a low priority relative to other system demands.
-If 201 (NW/SLRT) is moved under 8th ave, it will be able to handle 5-car trains max. That will be approximately 333% of what it can hold now. IMO, it will probably reach this ceiling before 202 maxes out. Many of the 201 stations could be extended beyond 5 cars, but major reconstruction would be required for others.
-Line 203 (SE/NCLRT) plans included stations that could accommodate 5-car trains.

When we start talking about major redesign (>4 on 202, >5 cars on 201&203), the cost of upgrading becomes so great that it becomes practical to consider other alternatives like crosstown lines, express lines, and commuter rail. For example, a circle route that bypasses downtown would dramatically improve capacity and service levels:

[DizzyEdge]

Originally Posted by fusili

One potential issue I can see is the imbalance of ridership between the two legs. SELRT advocates will dislike this, but the 301 has far, far, far more ridership than the 302. If integrating the routes results in tons of empty buses running in the SE, is the increase in operating costs worth the slightly more convenient single seat trips for the few who need it? A transfer downtown is acceptable in the short term, IMO.

I was thinking something along the lines where 2 out of every 3 301's short turn at Downtown vs the full route.

[Chadillaccc]

Originally Posted by Rusty van Reddick

AMAZING job Chad! Thanks!!

Thanks. I actually like the design of Shaganappi Point Station a lot. That was the first time I ever got off the train and actually took a good look at all of the stations. They're all quite well done really.

[Bassic Lab]

Originally Posted by DizzyEdge

I was thinking something along the lines where 2 out of every 3 301's short turn at Downtown vs the full route.

In my opinion a route just isn't a route unless >80% of the busses travel the entire thing. Otherwise it would just add needless confusion. That said, I could see it making sense to route the 302 along Centre Street so that it followed the future NC-SE LRT if the north needed the additional capacity. Say if some of the suburban peak time express routes were transitioned to all day community routes with transfers to the 301/302, or if the 301 was extended down to Heritage in conjunction with a decrease in frequency.

[floobie]

If I may derail (*knee slap*) this discussion for a moment:

What's up with the "next train" boards? Literally every day for the past few weeks, during my commute, they've been flat-out wrong. Every time I get on at Dalhousie, the "next train" sign is just completely wrong. A Somerset train arrives when the sign still says "4 minutes". Or, when I get on at 3rd street, it says a Crowfoot train is arriving when it's actually a 69th street train. I got on the wrong train last week for this reason. I guess that's what I get for assuming that the information these boards provide is remotely accurate. And, in both cases, the voice announcing a train is arriving has consistently been playing after the train has already left.

So: Is it just me? If not, are they working on this? I mean, I'd frankly rather they just turned all that stuff off until it's working properly.

[MalcolmTucker]

Next train/bus systems are notoriously hard to keep in working order in other places. No surprises that they have issues here too.

[Riise]

Originally Posted by fusili

One potential issue I can see is the imbalance of ridership between the two legs. SELRT advocates will dislike this, but the 301 has far, far, far more ridership than the 302. If integrating the routes results in tons of empty buses running in the SE, is the increase in operating costs worth the slightly more convenient single seat trips for the few who need it? A transfer downtown is acceptable in the short term, IMO.

What if only a portion of the busses running the route did the complete route and the rest short-turned downtown?

Originally Posted by simster3

This might be a stupid question, but one thing I keep hearing about subways vs LRT is that subways can hold a lot more people. What is stopping a city like Calgary from building stations 200m long and running 8 cars like a subway does? I ask this in relation to the announcement in Toronto today for funding from the Federal Gov't that will allow them to build a subway extension.

The equipment will be a major issue. The light in LRT and heavy in heavy rail refer to the capacity of each technology. Consequently, for Calgary to mimic Toronto's system they would essentially have to change technology to a heavy rail system and that would require a lot of physical modifications (i.e. grade separation).

Originally Posted by floobie

So: Is it just me? If not, are they working on this? I mean, I'd frankly rather they just turned all that stuff off until it's working properly.

I'm actually a bit concerned with their reliability. With the system CT is using it should be getting better with age but it's progress has stagnated at best and possibly regressed at worst.

[Allan83]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

Next train/bus systems are notoriously hard to keep in working order in other places. No surprises that they have issues here too.

That surprises me. In this day and age of GPS and powerful computers you’d think that we’d be able to keep track of where the trains are in real time.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by Riise

The equipment will be a major issue. The light in LRT and heavy in heavy rail refer to the capacity of each technology. Consequently, for Calgary to mimic Toronto's system they would essentially have to change technology to a heavy rail system and that would require a lot of physical modifications (i.e. grade separation).

Kinda. Sometimes "light rail" refers to trains with overhead caternary power supply, while "heavy rail" refers to third rail power supply, hence the grade separation. However, things such as diesel trains (which the GOTrain is IIRC), are also classified as "heavy rail".

"Light rail" is perfectly capable of being fully grade separated and thus, having higher capacity. Not sure about the comparative levels of power supply, and thus how many train cars can be in a single consist, between the two. My feeling is that heavy rail power supply can support much larger trains. I think NYC runs 8-11 car trains.

[DizzyEdge]

Originally Posted by Bassic Lab

In my opinion a route just isn't a route unless >80% of the busses travel the entire thing. Otherwise it would just add needless confusion. That said, I could see it making sense to route the 302 along Centre Street so that it followed the future NC-SE LRT if the north needed the additional capacity. Say if some of the suburban peak time express routes were transitioned to all day community routes with transfers to the 301/302, or if the 301 was extended down to Heritage in conjunction with a decrease in frequency.

That actually makes more sense than my suggestion, so you'd have the ability to ride the whole route, but at 302 frequency rather than 301. Plus that leaves the 301 doing the route everyone is used to. The fact the 302 would do both north and south might surprise people who didn't know about the change, but better to be surprised that the bus you're on goes more places than you thought, than less places.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by Allan83

That surprises me. In this day and age of GPS and powerful computers you’d think that we’d be able to keep track of where the trains are in real time.

Last mile is the difficulty. The data in the backend exists, but getting it onto a screen is hard. Easier and much better to give access to the data to third parties, and let them design smart phone apps. From an economic perspective it is much better too, since once you're on the platform, you're waiting unless there is an egregious delay. Access anyway else however aids in trip planning and can reduce idle waiting time.

[mersar]

Originally Posted by Allan83

That surprises me. In this day and age of GPS and powerful computers you’d think that we’d be able to keep track of where the trains are in real time.

Most of Calgary Transit's system is actually RFID based rather than GPS, as GPS is notoriously bad downtown and simply impossible underground. Still no reason it shouldn't work, but its been almost constantly broken at least somewhere in the city since its launch.