Jump to content

Roger1818

Member
  • Content Count

    36
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I was in Munich last summer and their S-Bahn line S1 to the Airport works that way. Two short trains couple at Neufahrn and continue the rest of the way downtown. I remember wondering why there was such a long wait at Neufahrn and then later I noticed the train was longer than when I boarded. They have 7 lines sharing one tunnel downtown. It made waiting for the train you wanted quite long despite trains arriving very frequently.
  2. Given that the city needs to do some tests after receiving the keys (so to speak) and opening it for revenue service, it won't happen with a weeks notice (I am not even sure how they planned to get it running by the end of November with a November 2 handover unless they were expecting it to actually be completed much before that). The lack of an exact date is more an indication that they are being cautious and don't want to make yet another promise that they can't keep (twice bitten, three times shy).
  3. Thanks for the update. Last I heard they wanted to buy it but it wasn't official. I found an article with more details. Railway to Churchill, Man., sold — repairs to begin 'immediately' My point is that not all of ViA's Long Haul Services are tourist trains. I do agree that VIA should stop focusing on providing tourist experiences and instead focus on providing transportation solutions. If tourists also want to use the trains, that is great, but the focus should be on the locals. If you look at the schedule for The Canadian, someone can fly to Vancouver or Toronto, catch the train the same day, stay on the train all the way across the country and then fly home. There are few opportunities for them to spend money in Canada (other than the train ride itself) so it is doing little to stimulate the local tourism industry, yet their train ticket was heavily subsidized. By having a series of daytime trains, it forces people to stay overnight in various cities across the country and spend money while in town. As a result, even if the train is still heavily subsidized, it is at least stimulating local spending. More importantly, it is providing better service to the communities it travels through.
  4. As per the Stage 2 Light Rail Transit Implementation Report – Project Definition and Procurement Plan – March 8, 2017 pg. 39. I can't find anything official beyond that at the moment.
  5. That is mostly true for The Canadian (even still there are some small communities that rely on its service though), but less so for the other routes, which while they do have a tourist component (what train doesn't) but also provide a vital link to the communities they serve. This is especially true for the Winnipeg-Churchill train as there are no roads to Churchill (though the train has been suspended indefinitely as the tracks were damaged by a flood and the owners claim they can't afford to fix them). The Ocean is also popularly used as a form of transportation and it is the one that uses Renaissance cars. VIA could once again and try to cancel The Canadian and use its equipment elsewhere, but the last time that was threatened (in the late 80's early 90's), BC politicians objected saying that the railway was part of why they joined the confederation and the train couldn't be abandoned. Personally I would like to see it broken up into a bunch of shorter routes with mostly daytime service to better serve the local communities that currently only have trains in the middle of the night. It would also make it more reliable as delays wouldn't accumulate as badly.
  6. Roger1818

    Staff at stations

    I was in London a month ago and many of the stations I went to didn't have ticket booths (though looking back, there was one at Waterloo station). I am not sure what his official title was, but on two separate occasions I saw the same "security" person (may have been British Transport Police, but I don't know) working at the same Paddington tube station entrance, and on both occasions he helped me with a transaction that I wasn't sure how to do (I also saw him similarly help others), so I assumed he was posted there to help and keep an eye on things. I did notice a large security presence at the entrances.
  7. My guess is that they thought it would make sense for North/South routes to continue further north to Gatineau. They also probably chose shorter routes, which would tend to be the North/South ones. If you look back at old system maps (link provided by kmcamp on the Skyscraper page), route 8 (as we know it) wasn't created until 1985 (shortly after the transitway opened).
  8. Not sure if the STO would gain enough by not having to extend routes across the river to cover the cost of the extra trains OC Transpo would have to buy. Even if they did, it doesn't change the fact that the Confederation Line would be significantly closer to its ultimate capacity if we diverted all Ottawa bound riders from Gatineau to Bayview Station. This old Key Messages document indicates that if you include Gatineau traffic, by 2031 the ridership capacity required would be 24,000 pphpd (the ultimate capacity of the line). It isn't clear what they mean by "Gatineau traffic," but current projections are 18,000 pphpd by 2031, so I suspect it may include diversions via the POW bridge.
  9. The POW bridge isn't in a very good location to be the transit crossing, but it might be okay as a transit crossing (especially a secondary one). The big problem is the bridge is too far west. For Ottawa residents travelling to Gatineau, it is okay for those west of (or close to) the Trillium Line, but for anyone east of it, the POW bridge is a significant detour, so an alternate route would be needed. For Gatineau residents travelling to Ottawa, Bayview is not a destination that many people will be travelling to (even after the LeBreton Flats Redevelopment), so a transfer to the Confederation Line would be necessary. Since most people transferring would be travelling in the same direction as people in western Ottawa travelling to downtown, it would unduly burden the Confederation line (I read estimates of an extra four to six thousand pphpd, but can't find a firm reference). This would require Ottawa to purchase and run extra trains solely for the purpose of transporting STO customers (which OC Transpo receives no money for). With the current setup, most STO riders don't need to transfer to OC Transpo, and since the stops are downtown, those who do, take up space vacated by an OC Transpo customer, so it doesn't cost OC Transpo much, and the quid pro quo of STO accepting OC TRanspo customers saves them money in service to Gatineau. As for comparison's to Montreal's yellow line, they are similar, but there are a few key differences: Berri-UQAM station is at least on the outer edge of Monreal's downtown and home to UQAM, which is a common destination for many riders. A higher fare is required to transfer from RTL to STM, so some of the extra costs are covered. Both systems are in the same province, so provincial funding is the same.
  10. When I said "ahead," I was using it as a measurement of time. Not a determination of which system is better.
  11. Roger1818

    Staff at stations

    Most (if not all) tube stations in London don't have collectors anymore either, but they do have a security guard at most (if not all) entrances who can help you if needed. A much more flexible solution as they are free to deal with other issues since they aren't confined to a booth.
  12. Certainly the YVR spur is popular, but while some times of day are more popular than other, it doesn't have the same level of crush demand that you see with commuters. Similar with Outlet Mall at Sea Island (which uses a different station). As a result, I remain to be convinced that a 6 minute frequency is inadequate for the spur. The same is true for Richmond–Brighouse. This is the bigger problem. My guess is that there isn't a need to increase frequency on the YVR spur, but to increase the frequency on the Richmond spur, they need to increase the frequency on the Airport spur since the single track limits the maximum frequency on each spur. As for YOW, I just don't see it being a problem. It is a much smaller airport and won't ever be a major airport like YVR (it is Canada's second busiest airport).
  13. Umm. Construction of Gatineau's Rapibus line was completed in the summer of 2013 and with service beginning in the fall of that year. That was 5 years ago so Gatianau is ahead.
  14. Roger1818

    Staff at stations

    Also, the ticket machines will have a help button that will connect you to a live attendant who can take control of the machine.
  15. I don't see the need to significantly increase frequencies to the Ottawa Airport (one train every 10-15 minutes should be more than adequate to it). Ottawa's population is about 30 years behind Vancouver's and YOW won't ever be as busy as YVR, since we are so close to both YUL and YYZ. Once the Trillium line is eventually double tracked, and airport spur can be interlined, they can have 1 train in 3 or 4 go to the airport. As for the Vancouver Airport, I am not convinced it needs more frequent service than its peak of one train every 6 minutes. If the objective is to increase the frequency on the main part of the line, they could similarly have one train in 3 go to the airport. As for Richmond–Brighouse, that is a different story and it is unfortunately equally constrained as the Airport station, so the priority should be to fix that somehow.
Rail Fans is not affiliated, nor connected to any transit agency or city.
×
×
  • Create New...