The Official Transit Thread

[nitronuts]

Does anyone have a good estimate of the ridership when the olympics are in town, just wondering.

Oh, probably well over 100,000. Expect lineups, though not as long as Monday's.

Edited August 23, 2009 by nitronuts

[Common sense]

I don't think I've been on a train anywhere in the world that shows the time inside the car, there's no point to it really. But it's obviously quite useful on the platform.

Trains running on the MTR's original three lines do. They're displayed along with short news blurbs and the weather.

[nitronuts]

Trains running on the MTR's original three lines do. They're displayed along with short news blurbs and the weather.

lol, if i remember correctly those were either LED or LCD displays inside the MTR trains. We'd have to do something similar. Personally, i'd like to keep the electronic scroll at the front and middle of the Canada Line trains for destination displays only.

[Buggernut]

I (somewhat) agree with your decision to run the 10 to Bridgeport; instead, I propose that the "modified 98" travel only in Vancouver, taking stops along Marine, 70, 49, 41, KingEd, 16, Broadway, 5, and then its current downtown stops. Keeps the commuters who need to west of Granville happy, while taking load off of the RAV for those who need to get to downtown but can't get onto the train.

I think that Bridgeport is better for the #10 or "modified 98" terminus, because it would provide a direct connection to the south of Fraser routes, and not have to crowd the CL just to cross the bridge between Bridgeport and Marine Drive.

[nitronuts]

^ i don't think it's very feasible to have trolleys going over the Arthur Laing and into Richmond for the #10. For the 98, maybe...

Of course, the return of these services won't be happening for a very long time.

[Denrik]

It's been like that for SkyTrain for the last 23 years, it's not different. Why are you complaining now?

If anything, the Canada Line staff are doing a lot more fare checks than SkyTrain staff - don't risk not paying.

So I took the canada line the other day. How come richmond is the same zone as burnaby? Could I not have paid for a 1 zone traveling from richmond to burnaby and no ticket checker would be the wiser?

[MikeGillis58]

So I took the canada line the other day. How come richmond is the same zone as burnaby? Could I not have paid for a 1 zone traveling from richmond to burnaby and no ticket checker would be the wiser?

Try taking the 410 from Richmond to New Westminster to Burnaby.

[Buggernut]

15-25years. At this point, they just need more trains in the system. First, they will add 20 or so trains to the system. And then eventually, they'll add a third car (the C-cars) to all 40 two-car trains....adding a third-car will require platforms to be extended to 50-metres.

Ridership for the past 5 days has averaged a little over 80,000/day, and that's without the bus integration! Granted, a lot are still transit tourists but I think that'll only be marginal decrease once the novelty of the system ends.

I mean, before the Canada Line opened my own projections were 60,000-70,000 passengers/day during the first few months in operation and that was WITH bus integration! I never thought that the trains would be this crowded in the first week. For years, and yes I've been harping on the lack of capacity during that period as well, I thought it would take 2-3 years to reach 100,000/day. Then Translink said it themselves a month or two ago, that it would take until 2013 to reach 1000,000, almost as if they'd read my post somewhere. Of course, over the last few days they've backtracked on that with the massive crowds on the Canada Line...we may well reach 100,000 sometime this year, perhaps even in a few weeks. 100,000 is the needed number to break even on operational costs, and that wasn't expected until 2013. Translink was posturing on buying more cars in 2015, but now that could happen a lot earlier.

By 2015, we could see crowds at 120,000/day at this rate. But 20 trains ain't gonna do the job.

With today's 80,000, you can tell that bus integration has already happened on top with a lot more new transit riders. It appears to me that they've grossly underestimated new ridership on the system. It's going to be a bloody mess when south of Fraser buses start terminating at Bridgeport....it's already quite busy there, without the bus loop in operation, and the platform is absolutely tiny for those bus transfer crowds we will start seeing in a few weeks.

We had a lot of people underestimating the Vancouver-Richmond transportation demands, thus underestimating the transit needs of the corridor. Some even thought the Canada Line shouldn't even have been built as Richmond isn't a growth area in the region, being that its soils are prone to liquefaction during an earthquake. But we're seeing a ton of growth, whether or not the Livable Region Strategic Plan likes it or not.

These small platforms don't just allow longer trains, but they also don't allow a lot of people to wait on the platform for a train. It doesn't take a lot of time, after something goes wrong, before InTransitBC attendants stop the flow of people from going to the platform because it's too crowded.

So could an incremental upgrade to the system to alleviate Canada Line overcrowding look something like this?

1. Order more trains.

2. Increase the lengths of platforms and trains.

3. Restore 98, 400-, 350- and 600-series buses to downtown.

4. Build Arbutus LRT.

5. Extend Expo Line to Newton, and divert the bulk of S. Surrey and White Rock traffic onto it.

6. Build a replacement for the Canada Line, running overhead over most of Cambie on its median, using LIM or MagLev technology. Hopefully by then, the pro-transit lobby will outweigh any resistance from local NIMBY's along the Cambie corridor.

[Columbo]

So could an incremental upgrade to the system to alleviate Canada Line overcrowding look something like this?

1. Order more trains.

2. Increase the lengths of platforms and trains.

3. Restore 98, 400-, 350- and 600-series buses to downtown.

4. Build Arbutus LRT.

5. Extend Expo Line to Newton, and divert the bulk of S. Surrey and White Rock traffic onto it.

6. Build a replacement for the Canada Line, running overhead over most of Cambie on its median, using LIM or MagLev technology. Hopefully by then, the pro-transit lobby will outweigh any resistance from local NIMBY's along the Cambie corridor.

Once the first 5 things are done, I don't think the 6th will ever be necessary. But otherwise I like your plan, though I would order them differently: 1, 3, 5, 2, 4.

[nitronuts]

So could an incremental upgrade to the system to alleviate Canada Line overcrowding look something like this?

1. Order more trains.

2. Increase the lengths of platforms and trains.

3. Restore 98, 400-, 350- and 600-series buses to downtown.

4. Build Arbutus LRT.

5. Extend Expo Line to Newton, and divert the bulk of S. Surrey and White Rock traffic onto it.

6. Build a replacement for the Canada Line, running overhead over most of Cambie on its median, using LIM or MagLev technology. Hopefully by then, the pro-transit lobby will outweigh any resistance from local NIMBY's along the Cambie corridor.

Great order.

1. Definitely, the system lacks trains at this point.

2. Definitely, when the system is maxed out or near maxing out on the number of trains the platfroms will be extended for a third car (40-metre platforms to 50-metre platforms).

3. I don't think the 98 would be restored, but I could see some of the 4xx, 6xx, and 350 buses being restored.

4. An Arbutus LRT is a band aid solution, it's a secondary route. It might alleviate congestion on the Canada Line for maybe 5-10 years, but that's basically it. The Canada Line's capacity problems will have to be resolved sooner or later; throw in maybe $1-2-billion to re-dig large sections of the tunnels (tough luck Cambie merchants), and rejig them and soften the grades/slopes to allow longer platforms and to extend those platforms to maybe 80-metres. I never said beyond 50-metres was not possible, just very, very expensive.

5. Hmm...highly unlikely.

Edited August 23, 2009 by nitronuts

[Buggernut]

Once the first 5 things are done, I don't think the 6th will ever be necessary. But otherwise I like your plan, though I would order them differently: 1, 3, 5, 2, 4.

6 may be necessary to undo 3 though.

[Guest canucksfan80]

i went on it yesterday

Edited August 23, 2009 by canucksfan80

[lateralus]

^ what?

If you meant there aren't enough ticket vending machines, yes that is a huge problem throughout the entire line. You can tell they really underestimated ridership with so few machines on the system.

Yeah that's what I mean, there are only 2 ticket vending machines at Lansdowne......

Also there should be a big map on the wall because there was no information about the line until you buy a ticket and go into the paid fare zone.

We got off at Vancouver City Centre there were only 3 ticket vending machines and two were out of service at the time (on the way back only one was out of service)

[nitronuts]

^ yea, i'm not sure what's up with these new model ticket vending machines going out of service all the time.

Well to be fair, there is a map on the ticket vending machines....and there's a regional system map right next to them.

[tom_1]

they could always hire people pushers; pretty sad that the line is aleady inadaquate. The $1-2 billion needed to improve service would be better used on new routes such as surrey, evergreen and ubc extensions. Money doesnt grow on trees.

Edited August 23, 2009 by tom_1

[Buggernut]

5. Hmm...highly unlikely.

They should, to connect it to the old Interurban line and facilitate transfers to any LRT or commuter rail system that they have up Valley in the future.

[Columbo]

Yeah that's what I mean, there are only 2 ticket vending machines at Lansdowne......

Also there should be a big map on the wall because there was no information about the line until you buy a ticket and go into the paid fare zone.

We got off at Vancouver City Centre there were only 3 ticket vending machines and two were out of service at the time (on the way back only one was out of service)

I was at Vancouver City Centre when one of the machines were out of service, and there must have been 20 people in line for each of the working machines. Even if the 3rd one was in service it wouldn't have been enough. It's those small things that I hope they resolve before September - I mean a couple extra ticket machines can't be that hard/expensive to install, can they? If people are late for work because they have to wait 15 minutes to buy a ticket, they're not going to be too happy with the new line.

[nitronuts]

They should, to connect it to the old Interurban line and facilitate transfers to any LRT or commuter rail system that they have up Valley in the future.

^ the interurban line is destined to fail if it ever goes ahead, it's one massive squiggly line - it's a detour. Unfortunately, that's one of the few rail corridors we have left for transit use.

It would probably be cheaper to simply upgrade the Canada Line, and there's no point in ditching infrastructure we've built.

Anyhow, when it comes to the near future.....100,000 seems closer to reality everyday, and that's good because it means Translink won't have to subsidize it. But the downside of that is Translink will have to find tens of millions to buy more trains much earlier than originally planned ($6-million per 2-car train). We're at 80,000/day right now and that's WITHOUT bus integration, I think we can easily reach 100,000 within a matter of weeks with south of Fraser buses terminating at Bridgeport, the elimination of the 98 B-Line, people going back to school, and the majority of the office worker population returning to work.

Edited August 23, 2009 by nitronuts

[Buggernut]

4. An Arbutus LRT is a band aid solution, it's a secondary route. It might alleviate congestion on the Canada Line for maybe 5-10 years, but that's basically it. The Canada Line's capacity problems will have to be resolved sooner or later; throw in maybe $1-2-billion to re-dig large sections of the tunnels (tough luck Cambie merchants), and rejig them and soften the grades/slopes to allow longer platforms and to extend those platforms to maybe 80-metres. I never said beyond 50-metres was not possible, just very, very expensive.

Actually, it would be a permanent solution for those heading to more westward destinations, such as UBC, as well as those living along its corridor.

Another idea would be to override the NIMBY's living along SW Marine Drive, widen it and run direct buses from Richmond and South Vancouver to UBC through them. Even if those NIMBY's are rich and have a lot of political clout, the sheer volume of commuters should outweigh them by now.

Edited August 23, 2009 by Buggernut

[Buggernut]

^ the interurban line is destined to fail if it ever goes ahead, it's one massive squiggly line - it's a detour. Unfortunately, that's one of the few rail corridors we have left for transit use.

Can they build a new track running alongside Fraser Highway between Langley and Abbotsford?