The Official Transit Thread

[inane]

Adding more freeways to Melbourne didn't result in travel time savings. Ok. What's your point? Melbourne already had a lot of freeways, and average travel speeds (80km/h or so) looked pretty darn fast to start with. Certainly faster than anywhere in metro Vancouver!

It's just more evidence on the growing pile of evidence that more roads does not equal better or faster traffic. I have yet to see evidence showing that more roads=less congestion or more roads=less traffic or more roads=faster average speeds in the long term.

But it's all on deaf ears, here and apparently in government...

[nitronuts]

These groups make me boil, they are run by idiots and sadly they make quite a bit of noise that influences the people in charge:

Light rail groups renew call to scrap SkyTrain expansion

Groups say light rail is a less expensive option

Bruce Claggett TRI-CITIES (NEWS1130) 2009-09-29 19:15

The two groups have called for light-rail in the past (Photo: Courtesy Rail for the Valley)

TRI-CITIES (NEWS1130) - Two community action groups are calling on senior governments to scrap plans for SkyTrain expansion and concentrate on at-grade light rail, which they say is a less expensive option.

The request comes from the community action groups ‘Rail for the Valley’ and the ‘Light Rail Committee’ who are calling for an at-grade light rail system for both Surrey and the Tri-Cities area .They say local mayors, like Surrey's Dianne Watts, already understand the potential exists to rapidly expand the light rail network using a mixture of track-sharing.

The Light Rail Committee also says the proposed Evergreen expansion is not the wisest choice. The group says the Tri-Cities area would be better off with diesel-electric light rail vehicles, which is something the Committee proposed years ago.

They are responding to this, it gives them momentum (note that they are against a SkyTrain extension to UBC and want light rail instead):

Mayors suggest Evergreen Line switch to LRT to save money

The Evergreen Line was originally proposed to run at grade using a light rail system, before the decision to use SkyTrain technology.

By Jeff Nagel - BC Local News

Published: September 28, 2009 3:00 PM

Updated: September 28, 2009 3:09 PM

TransLink can save $400 million in one easy step by switching plans for the Evergreen Line from expensive SkyTrain technology back to the originally envisioned at-grade light rail system.

That's the suggestion from area mayors who say the move would save a big chunk of capital money and go a long way to helping the transportation authority get on sustainable financial footing.

"Given these economic times, maybe we go back to the drawing board and have a look at it," said Surrey Mayor Dianne Watts, who also chairs the Mayors Council on Regional Transportation.

She told a Metro Vancouver board meeting Sept. 25 a shift back to light rail would save a significant amount of money and would be supported by northeast sector residents along the line.

Port Moody Mayor Joe Trasolini said he'd be happy to switch technologies away from SkyTrain if it gets the line built through his city.

"You could build it with today's budget," he said. "They've done all the technical research on it. The tunnel engineering is the same."

Coquitlam and Port Moody originally supported the light rail idea, which would have meant more local stations and a slower overall trip along the line – more of a community system than a high-speed commuter route.

"If you're going from Coquitlam Centre to Lougheed Mall and it takes two or three minutes longer is that going to kill you?" Trasolini asked.

But transportation minister Shirley Bond is defending the switch to SkyTrain technology, noting the decision was based on a solid business case and endorsed by both the province and TransLink.

"Although the Evergreen Line’s ALRT [skyTrain] technology has higher construction costs than LRT, it has significantly lower annual operating costs, significantly shorter travel times for commuters, and would have two-and-a-half times more ridership by 2021," Bond said in a statement.

"These benefits clearly outweigh the relatively small additional cost of SkyTrain versus LRT.”

TransLink CEO Tom Prendergast told the board he has heard suggestions Ottawa might pull its funding for the Evergreen Line if federally preferred SkyTrain technology was abandoned or if the project takes too long to move forward.

He noted a significant section of the route would have to be tunneled, regardless of the technology.

And he said there would have to be a fresh cost analysis done on a light rail option.

Watts said the apparent senior government bias to SkyTrain is a problem that threatens to hurt the outlook for rapid transit extensions in Surrey as well.

"South of the Fraser, we want at-grade light rail," she said. "You see it all over the world. And for some reason it's just not on the table. So we've got to pay that much more money that we don't have."

Prendergast, who was hired a year ago, said he backs objective decision-making on rapid transit technologies for future lines – something he said hasn't happened here so far.

The renewed debate over Evergreen Line technology came as Metro Vancouver board directors passed judgment on the funding options TransLink has tabled for its new 10-year plan.

They endorsed the preferred option of TransLink and area mayors for new sources of funding from the province – such as road pricing or tolling – coupled with a vehicle levy to deliver $450 million more per year.

"Our regional land-use plan will not work if we don't have the appropriate transportation plan to support it," said Metro chief administrator Johnny Carline.

Prendergast warned them the base case scenario would force drastic cuts of 40 per cent to bus service in some areas and spell "chaos" for the region.

Another "funding stabilization" option to generate an extra $130 million a year so the region can tread water would still mean reductions of spending in some areas, he said.

Cycling infrastructure spending would be cut and road maintenance grants to cities would be reduced, leaving them to pick up those costs or scale back road repairs.

Since TransLink cannot adopt the $450-million plan – extra sources from the province are so far not forthcoming – the Metro board motion calls on TransLink to give priority for bus and rapid transit extensions to the historically underserved eastern and southern areas.

Burnaby Mayor Derek Corrigan, however, warned TransLink's plans are unaffordable and argued scarce funding should be used to sustain service to areas with strong existing ridership rather than areas with low transit use if cuts are required.

"There are significant subisides going into many of the South of Fraser routes that are questionable in terms of business efficiency," he said.

Some Metro directors also suggested TransLink could save money by eliminating its plan to add fare gates to the SkyTrain system to help enforce payment.

Prendergast said the capital cost of that is estimated at $70 to $80 million, but noted those costs were to be entirely covered by the provincial and federal governments.

TransLink has committed $400 million for the $1.4-billion Evergreen Line, but there's still a $173-million shortfall after federal and provincial contributions.

TransLink's share translates into annual costs of $40 to $50 million – money the authority says it can't afford with either the base plan or funding stabilization option.

BAD IDEA.

I believe it was said the cost difference between LRT and SkyTrain is only $150-million, definitely not $400-million, because both require almost the same amount of tunneling, elevated guideway, and at-grade guideway. Not to mention a new OMC, and a second SkyTrain OMC wouldn't just be for the Evergreen but the entire SkyTrain system.

It's absolutely asinine to suggest going back to LRT. Absolutely asinine.

And if they want community service, there's something called a bus....don't spend $1.2-billion on a bus with steel wheels that does not compete with the car.

Edited September 30, 2009 by nitronuts

[cj_coolcat]

Just curious, how much would an extension of the Millenium Line to Granville cost if done at the same time as the Evergreen Line? Would that make the situation on Broadway better or worse?

I was discussing this with my Dad the other day, and he brought up that idea. I thought I'd pitch it here...

[nitronuts]

Just curious, how much would an extension of the Millenium Line to Granville cost if done at the same time as the Evergreen Line? Would that make the situation on Broadway better or worse?

I was discussing this with my Dad the other day, and he brought up that idea. I thought I'd pitch it here...

There would be some cost savings, but they would be marginal. For instance, they could use the same boring machine (a boring machine has a lifespan of about 15-20-kms)...though if the Broadway extension were to be bored, they'd need at least 2 boring machines assuming they have twin tunnels instead of one massive tunnel for both trains. Note that tunnel boring machines the size of the Canada Line's don't cost too much, only about $10-million. There are also other construction start-up savings.

Arbutus would be the terminus if we were to end it in Central Broadway, not Granville. But to answer your question, to Granville it's about a 5-km route and I'd wager it would cost about $1.3-billion. Arbutus is 6-kms, it would probably cost close to $1.5-billion.

Edited September 30, 2009 by nitronuts

[nitronuts]

These people are idiots:

A different plan for the Evergreen Line

The Light Rail Committee proposed a different plan for light-rail in the Tri-City area which is based on modern light-rail philosophy that has proven so effective elsewhere in the world.

The plan also takes into account the advice of several transit consultants, would use use diesel and diesel-electric light-rail vehicles, combining track sharing with existing railways and the use of on-street operation where practical. The plan consisted of on-street operation from Port Moody to Coquitlam Centre, with a spur line using the Ioco freight branch to the Esso refinery line to 1st Ave. in Ioco. The line would then travel South along Lougheed highway till it connected to the CPR rail line paralleling the Lougheed highway, connecting to the BNSF/CN mainline until it reached Pacific Central Station in Vancouver.

This would give very fast journeys for people living in the Tri-Cities to Vancouver and visa versa. The Light Rail Committee estimated that the cost of this line would have been in the neighbourhood of $400 million to $600 million and giving a superior and direct service to downtown Vancouver. For a fraction the cost of SkyTrain or TransLink’s grossly over engineered light-rail plans, we could get a much larger usable ‘rail’ network that would be available to far more transit customers than a truncated light-metro line.

TransLink officials quickly shot down the plan because: “We had just built a $1.2 billion metro line and we had get get as many passengers on the new rapid transit line as we can.”

Maybe the time has come for TransLink to get out of the business of transit planning and hire independent consultants to compete to provide plans for the best and most affordable transit solutions for our endemic regional transportation chaos. The taxpayer can no longer afford TransLink’s grandiose gold-plated rapid transit lines that, in the past, have not attracted the motorist from the car and at best, gives the bus rider a questionably faster, yet more inconvenient journey.

[silverpig]

Any of those people who want light rail should come ride the Canada line at 8 am on a weekday to see how much it is uses right off the bat. You have to build to capacity demands, and not cut costs just because.

Then they should ride the 99 on Broadway, and ask themselves if putting the b-line on rails would be worth it for the money they suggest.

Light rail isn't worth it. Put the money into express buses like the 99/98/97/480/43/etc for Surrey and the valley until they can spend the money on a real rapid transit line.

Edited September 30, 2009 by silverpig

[nitronuts]

^ they're lying through their teeth, and they know it - they are doing it because of their own self-interests. They think if SkyTrain is built for Evergreen and UBC, there won't be any money left for their precious interurban light rail projects in the Fraser Valley. It's simply selfish.

They want to expedite their rail in the valley by building the UBC and Evergreen extensions incorrectly and cheaply. This is partially why the Canada Line is underbuilt.

It's not like Translink is going to run out of money forever in building rapid transit projects and their Fraser Valley LRT won't ever get built, it will be built eventually.

But they are right that LRT should be looked at in the region, and it certainly is a feasible technology for Surrey and the Fraser Valley.

Edited September 30, 2009 by nitronuts

[Columbo]

The taxpayer can no longer afford TransLink’s grandiose gold-plated rapid transit lines that, in the past, have not attracted the motorist from the car and at best, gives the bus rider a questionably faster, yet more inconvenient journey.

(quote from the article)

Are these people for real?

- "Not attracted motorists from their car"? Have they ever ridden the Skytrain at 8am on a weekday morning??

- "Questionably faster" than the bus????

- "More inconvenient" than the bus ?!?!?!?!?!?!?

And since when is "the taxpayer" paying for these things? I'd love it if Translink got some real tax revenues!

When someone writes an article like that and puts so little emphasis on factual credibility, it really makes them look like a joke...

[nitronuts]

^ they are quite real. They also claim subways require 400,000-500,000 passengers a day in order to be feasible and that up to 70% of ridership can be lost from additional transfer, yet they want Evergreen to be LRT.

They also claim that LRT on Broadway can be built for just $10-million per kilometre (the real and more accurate figure is $50-60-million per km).

They also claim how BC Transit (they built SkyTrain) holds much of SkyTrain construction debt, and claims that wouldn't happen with LRT....essentially, they are saying that it would cost nothing to build LRT. (crazy people)

Edited September 30, 2009 by nitronuts

[Columbo]

^ they are quite real. They also claim subways require 400,000-500,000 passengers a day in order to be feasible and that up to 70% of ridership can be lost from additional transfer, yet they want Evergreen to be LRT.

They also claim that LRT on Broadway can be built for just $10-million per kilometre (the real and more accurate figure is $50-60-million per km).

Haha LRT on Broadway should really be a non-issue. It doesn't matter how much or how little it costs, you can't ignore the fact that THERE'S NOWHERE TO PUT IT!

[nitronuts]

Haha LRT on Broadway should really be a non-issue. It doesn't matter how much or how little it costs, you can't ignore the fact that THERE'S NOWHERE TO PUT IT!

They say there's plenty of space down the middle of a street, and cite European examples of small streets disregarding the fact that Broadway is the biggest east-west artery in the city.

They also work with fudge-it numbers: on their website, they claim the UBC extension will cost $4-billion instead of the claimed $2.8-billion (i assume we are building the UBC extension with gold?).

They also claim you could build 200-kms of light rail in the region with the UBC extension's claimed budget of $2.8-billion.

[nitronuts]

BTW, we should all help out with that UBC SkyTrain Facebook group. I've invited all my friends, you should too!

[Buggernut]

These groups make me boil, they are run by idiots and sadly they make quite a bit of noise that influences the people in charge:

Light rail groups renew call to scrap SkyTrain expansion

Groups say light rail is a less expensive option

Bruce Claggett TRI-CITIES (NEWS1130) 2009-09-29 19:15

The two groups have called for light-rail in the past (Photo: Courtesy Rail for the Valley)

TRI-CITIES (NEWS1130) - Two community action groups are calling on senior governments to scrap plans for SkyTrain expansion and concentrate on at-grade light rail, which they say is a less expensive option.

The request comes from the community action groups ‘Rail for the Valley’ and the ‘Light Rail Committee’ who are calling for an at-grade light rail system for both Surrey and the Tri-Cities area .They say local mayors, like Surrey's Dianne Watts, already understand the potential exists to rapidly expand the light rail network using a mixture of track-sharing.

The Light Rail Committee also says the proposed Evergreen expansion is not the wisest choice. The group says the Tri-Cities area would be better off with diesel-electric light rail vehicles, which is something the Committee proposed years ago.

They are responding to this, it gives them momentum (note that they are against a SkyTrain extension to UBC and want light rail instead):

Mayors suggest Evergreen Line switch to LRT to save money

The Evergreen Line was originally proposed to run at grade using a light rail system, before the decision to use SkyTrain technology.

By Jeff Nagel - BC Local News

Published: September 28, 2009 3:00 PM

Updated: September 28, 2009 3:09 PM

TransLink can save $400 million in one easy step by switching plans for the Evergreen Line from expensive SkyTrain technology back to the originally envisioned at-grade light rail system.

That's the suggestion from area mayors who say the move would save a big chunk of capital money and go a long way to helping the transportation authority get on sustainable financial footing.

"Given these economic times, maybe we go back to the drawing board and have a look at it," said Surrey Mayor Dianne Watts, who also chairs the Mayors Council on Regional Transportation.

She told a Metro Vancouver board meeting Sept. 25 a shift back to light rail would save a significant amount of money and would be supported by northeast sector residents along the line.

Port Moody Mayor Joe Trasolini said he'd be happy to switch technologies away from SkyTrain if it gets the line built through his city.

"You could build it with today's budget," he said. "They've done all the technical research on it. The tunnel engineering is the same."

Coquitlam and Port Moody originally supported the light rail idea, which would have meant more local stations and a slower overall trip along the line – more of a community system than a high-speed commuter route.

"If you're going from Coquitlam Centre to Lougheed Mall and it takes two or three minutes longer is that going to kill you?" Trasolini asked.

But transportation minister Shirley Bond is defending the switch to SkyTrain technology, noting the decision was based on a solid business case and endorsed by both the province and TransLink.

"Although the Evergreen Line’s ALRT [skyTrain] technology has higher construction costs than LRT, it has significantly lower annual operating costs, significantly shorter travel times for commuters, and would have two-and-a-half times more ridership by 2021," Bond said in a statement.

"These benefits clearly outweigh the relatively small additional cost of SkyTrain versus LRT.”

TransLink CEO Tom Prendergast told the board he has heard suggestions Ottawa might pull its funding for the Evergreen Line if federally preferred SkyTrain technology was abandoned or if the project takes too long to move forward.

He noted a significant section of the route would have to be tunneled, regardless of the technology.

And he said there would have to be a fresh cost analysis done on a light rail option.

Watts said the apparent senior government bias to SkyTrain is a problem that threatens to hurt the outlook for rapid transit extensions in Surrey as well.

"South of the Fraser, we want at-grade light rail," she said. "You see it all over the world. And for some reason it's just not on the table. So we've got to pay that much more money that we don't have."

Prendergast, who was hired a year ago, said he backs objective decision-making on rapid transit technologies for future lines – something he said hasn't happened here so far.

The renewed debate over Evergreen Line technology came as Metro Vancouver board directors passed judgment on the funding options TransLink has tabled for its new 10-year plan.

They endorsed the preferred option of TransLink and area mayors for new sources of funding from the province – such as road pricing or tolling – coupled with a vehicle levy to deliver $450 million more per year.

"Our regional land-use plan will not work if we don't have the appropriate transportation plan to support it," said Metro chief administrator Johnny Carline.

Prendergast warned them the base case scenario would force drastic cuts of 40 per cent to bus service in some areas and spell "chaos" for the region.

Another "funding stabilization" option to generate an extra $130 million a year so the region can tread water would still mean reductions of spending in some areas, he said.

Cycling infrastructure spending would be cut and road maintenance grants to cities would be reduced, leaving them to pick up those costs or scale back road repairs.

Since TransLink cannot adopt the $450-million plan – extra sources from the province are so far not forthcoming – the Metro board motion calls on TransLink to give priority for bus and rapid transit extensions to the historically underserved eastern and southern areas.

Burnaby Mayor Derek Corrigan, however, warned TransLink's plans are unaffordable and argued scarce funding should be used to sustain service to areas with strong existing ridership rather than areas with low transit use if cuts are required.

"There are significant subisides going into many of the South of Fraser routes that are questionable in terms of business efficiency," he said.

Some Metro directors also suggested TransLink could save money by eliminating its plan to add fare gates to the SkyTrain system to help enforce payment.

Prendergast said the capital cost of that is estimated at $70 to $80 million, but noted those costs were to be entirely covered by the provincial and federal governments.

TransLink has committed $400 million for the $1.4-billion Evergreen Line, but there's still a $173-million shortfall after federal and provincial contributions.

TransLink's share translates into annual costs of $40 to $50 million – money the authority says it can't afford with either the base plan or funding stabilization option.

BAD IDEA.

I believe it was said the cost difference between LRT and SkyTrain is only $150-million, definitely not $400-million, because both require almost the same amount of tunneling, elevated guideway, and at-grade guideway. Not to mention a new OMC, and a second SkyTrain OMC wouldn't just be for the Evergreen but the entire SkyTrain system.

It's absolutely asinine to suggest going back to LRT. Absolutely asinine.

And if they want community service, there's something called a bus....don't spend $1.2-billion on a bus with steel wheels that does not compete with the car.

Somebody show them that "Metro's Greatest Hits" video on a big screen at their rally.

Edited September 30, 2009 by Buggernut

[ronthecivil]

You spend one weekend drinking and this is what you get....

[ronthecivil]

It's just more evidence on the growing pile of evidence that more roads does not equal better or faster traffic. I have yet to see evidence showing that more roads=less congestion or more roads=less traffic or more roads=faster average speeds in the long term.

But it's all on deaf ears, here and apparently in government...

Case by case, as I said. Your overwhelming opposition does not take local conditions into perspective. This is not Melbourne. I know you at least know someone that knows how to work EMME2.

[ronthecivil]

^ they are quite real. They also claim subways require 400,000-500,000 passengers a day in order to be feasible and that up to 70% of ridership can be lost from additional transfer, yet they want Evergreen to be LRT.

They also claim that LRT on Broadway can be built for just $10-million per kilometre (the real and more accurate figure is $50-60-million per km).

They also claim how BC Transit (they built SkyTrain) holds much of SkyTrain construction debt, and claims that wouldn't happen with LRT....essentially, they are saying that it would cost nothing to build LRT. (crazy people)

Good god. So rapid grade seperated for Coquitlam, but not Vancouver. Tell me I haven't had enought sleep.

The original skytrain HAD debt. I think they if not paid if off, are close. Now, in a business sense, it's a money maker.

[inane]

Case by case, as I said. Your overwhelming opposition does not take local conditions into perspective. This is not Melbourne. I know you at least know someone that knows how to work EMME2.

It's not strictly financial, that's where your theory falls apart. Deciding to put in a bunch of highways is about cost benefit, but it's also about what kind of cities, neighbourhoods, communities we want, what kind of environmental choices we want to make, etc...

[nitronuts]

Ridership on the Canada Line is averaging at 82,500 per day.

Cubic, TransLink Report Record Use of New Fare Collection System for Canada Line

VANCOUVER, BC--(Marketwire - September 30, 2009) - With the determination of an Olympic speed skater, the new Canada Line opened 15 weeks ahead of schedule and is setting new records for transportation ridership in the metropolitan Vancouver region of British Columbia. Cubic Transportation Systems, a subsidiary of San Diego-based Cubic Corporation (NYSE: CUB), provided the Canada Line's world-class fare collection system months before the start of the 2010 Winter Olympics.

On August 17, the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority, better known as TransLink, officially opened the Canada Line and hosted a "Fare-Free Day" across all 16 Canada Line stations, with thousands of passengers taking a free inaugural trip on the 12-mile system. A day later, on August 18, Cubic's fare collection equipment began operation. So far, TransLink has seen an average of 82,500 riders per day since the fare collection system launched. Passenger support of the new line has been very good, and the forecast of achieving 100,000 daily riders within two years of opening is well on track.

"We're very pleased that this project was completed ahead of schedule and that the new line is so popular. We will be able to ensure that the system operates smoothly for our many customers and for the scores of Olympic spectators coming to Vancouver in 2010," said Ron Aitken, Director, Contract Services and Business Development for TransLink.

"Demand has exceeded expectations, and Cubic is proud that we are part of a system which serves local needs now and will be playing an important international role in the near future," commented Richard Wunderle, senior vice president and general manager for Cubic Transportation Systems, which designed, developed, manufactured and installed the new system.

The Canada Line extends from Vancouver's waterfront to the city of Richmond, and to Vancouver International Airport. The Cubic-developed fare collection system includes new touchscreen vending machines that allow passengers to select from six languages -- English, French, German, Chinese, Japanese and Punjabi -- to purchase tickets. Patrons can use cash, Visa and MasterCard credit cards and certain debit cards for payment. Cubic also delivered ticket validating machines which allow FareSaver program participants to validate their ticket before boarding a bus or train.

All transactions are processed through Cubic's Nextfare Solution Suite®, a powerful central computer system that provides sophisticated data reporting, administrative and management capabilities.

The successful launch of the Canada Line ticketing system is Cubic's latest effort in two decades of transportation projects in British Columbia. Cubic's first project was delivering fareboxes for Coast Mountain Bus, a TransLink subsidiary. Later, Cubic developed and installed ticketing systems for the SkyTrain's Millennium and Expo rail lines. The interoperability of Cubic's ticketing systems lets passengers transfer seamlessly between TransLink's bus and rail services.

[ahzdeen]

Ridership on the Canada Line is averaging at 82,500 per day.

Cubic, TransLink Report Record Use of New Fare Collection System for Canada Line

VANCOUVER, BC--(Marketwire - September 30, 2009) - With the determination of an Olympic speed skater, the new Canada Line opened 15 weeks ahead of schedule and is setting new records for transportation ridership in the metropolitan Vancouver region of British Columbia. Cubic Transportation Systems, a subsidiary of San Diego-based Cubic Corporation (NYSE: CUB), provided the Canada Line's world-class fare collection system months before the start of the 2010 Winter Olympics.

On August 17, the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority, better known as TransLink, officially opened the Canada Line and hosted a "Fare-Free Day" across all 16 Canada Line stations, with thousands of passengers taking a free inaugural trip on the 12-mile system. A day later, on August 18, Cubic's fare collection equipment began operation. So far, TransLink has seen an average of 82,500 riders per day since the fare collection system launched. Passenger support of the new line has been very good, and the forecast of achieving 100,000 daily riders within two years of opening is well on track.

"We're very pleased that this project was completed ahead of schedule and that the new line is so popular. We will be able to ensure that the system operates smoothly for our many customers and for the scores of Olympic spectators coming to Vancouver in 2010," said Ron Aitken, Director, Contract Services and Business Development for TransLink.

"Demand has exceeded expectations, and Cubic is proud that we are part of a system which serves local needs now and will be playing an important international role in the near future," commented Richard Wunderle, senior vice president and general manager for Cubic Transportation Systems, which designed, developed, manufactured and installed the new system.

The Canada Line extends from Vancouver's waterfront to the city of Richmond, and to Vancouver International Airport. The Cubic-developed fare collection system includes new touchscreen vending machines that allow passengers to select from six languages -- English, French, German, Chinese, Japanese and Punjabi -- to purchase tickets. Patrons can use cash, Visa and MasterCard credit cards and certain debit cards for payment. Cubic also delivered ticket validating machines which allow FareSaver program participants to validate their ticket before boarding a bus or train.

All transactions are processed through Cubic's Nextfare Solution Suite®, a powerful central computer system that provides sophisticated data reporting, administrative and management capabilities.

The successful launch of the Canada Line ticketing system is Cubic's latest effort in two decades of transportation projects in British Columbia. Cubic's first project was delivering fareboxes for Coast Mountain Bus, a TransLink subsidiary. Later, Cubic developed and installed ticketing systems for the SkyTrain's Millennium and Expo rail lines. The interoperability of Cubic's ticketing systems lets passengers transfer seamlessly between TransLink's bus and rail services.

I wonder when the idiots at Translink are going to start kicking themselves for not making it skytrain and allowing it to be a P3?

[nitronuts]

^ it wasn't Translink, it was the provincial government. Translink knows it's a clusterf@ck....believe me.