BuckyHermit Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 Man, worst SkyTrain ride for me. It's 11:30am, technical problems at Edmonds (which I wasn't aware of). The SkyTrain is there waiting I try to go in, but it's so full I can't even half of my body in so I wait for the next one, but the next one takes about 7 minutes to come (because of the technical problems at Edmonds) so now I'm late for work. I get in the SkyTrain, it was like hell. First there were 2 old Chinese guys yapping at each other in Cantonese across the Skytrain, then a baby crying it's brains out for the whole ride (I went from Patterson to Broadway)right next to me, and lastly some idiot comes in with a bike with the wheel leaving stains on my new shoes. Jeez, horrible ride for me. Luckily my boss doesn't care if I'm late or not. It could be worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuckyHermit Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 (edited) http://dimsum-timbits-kimchi.blogspot.com/...r-in-world.html -- The best bus driver in the world? Edited July 8, 2009 by BuckyHermit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitronuts Posted July 8, 2009 Author Share Posted July 8, 2009 ^ lmao.....wow. Amazing how they risked a $1.4-million bus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buggernut Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 It could be worse. This would never... (Finish the sentence.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Common sense Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 This would never... (Finish the sentence.) ...happen in Canada. Some of those guys might get sued for touching a woman in her buttocks in an attempt to get her wide load onto the Skytrain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuckyHermit Posted July 11, 2009 Share Posted July 11, 2009 Some new Canada Line pics and videos, courtesy of the Buzzer Blog: ^Waterfront Station ^Waterfront Station ^Waterfront Station ^Waterfront Station ^Waterfront Station (end of the line) ^Richmond-Brighouse Station (end of the line) ^Richmond-Brighouse Station ^Richmond-Brighouse Station ^going over the bridge between Marine Drive Station and Bridgeport Station Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Violator Posted July 11, 2009 Share Posted July 11, 2009 Holly bucky "the nitrotnuts" hermit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeGillis58 Posted July 11, 2009 Share Posted July 11, 2009 Why does Richmond Brighouse Station only has 1 track instead of 2? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BradMayFan Posted July 11, 2009 Share Posted July 11, 2009 Why does Richmond Brighouse Station only has 1 track instead of 2? Don't quote me on this but I think it's done like that so that trains can have a faster turn-around time. Also it was probably cheaper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuckyHermit Posted July 11, 2009 Share Posted July 11, 2009 Don't quote me on this but I think it's done like that so that trains can have a faster turn-around time. Also it was probably cheaper. I'm willing to bet that is the main reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Common sense Posted July 11, 2009 Share Posted July 11, 2009 Don't quote me on this but I think it's done like that so that trains can have a faster turn-around time. Also it was probably cheaper. No need for expansion (yet), so to have 1 track = cheaper. When there is, then they'll be biting their asses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitronuts Posted July 11, 2009 Author Share Posted July 11, 2009 (edited) It's a single-track because it was cheaper, to shave about $30-million in costs. The single track starts 100-metres south of Lansdowne Station, and is 640-metres long. At Sea Island, the last 640-metres is also single-tracked as well. This gives the two YVR and Richmond spans, starting at Bridgeport, a max. frequency of 4-minutes....and in Vancouver, the max. frequency is 2-minutes. While SkyTrain has a max. frequency of 90 secs, the linear propulsion system allows it as there is much less wear and tear than the standard rail technology that the Canada Line uses - a lot of moving parts and wheel grinding. Supposedly, the single-tracked sections can be twinned...i presume they would have to demolish the entire structure including the pillars/columns as they are much more narrower than the double-track columns. Edited July 11, 2009 by nitronuts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthecivil Posted July 11, 2009 Share Posted July 11, 2009 It's a single-track because it was cheaper, to shave about $30-million in costs. The single track starts 100-metres south of Lansdowne Station, and is 640-metres long. At Sea Island, the last 640-metres is also single-tracked as well. This gives the two YVR and Richmond spans, starting at Bridgeport, a max. frequency of 4-minutes....and in Vancouver, the max. frequency is 2-minutes. While SkyTrain has a max. frequency of 90 secs, the linear propulsion system allows it as there is much less wear and tear than the standard rail technology that the Canada Line uses - a lot of moving parts and wheel grinding. Supposedly, the single-tracked sections can be twinned...i presume they would have to demolish the entire structure including the pillars/columns as they are much more narrower than the double-track columns. Oh, you could twin it. Those structure guy are up to a challenge. Maybe have to cantilever it a bit if there isn't enough room for a paralel column. Or maybe you just offset the columns. Only place you would have to rip it up would be at the junction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitronuts Posted July 11, 2009 Author Share Posted July 11, 2009 ^ I higly doubt you could twin it considering the columns/pillars are at least 33% thinner than the ones built for double track. I mean, if you could build it that thin on the first place for double track why not do it for the entire elevated portion to save a few $. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthecivil Posted July 11, 2009 Share Posted July 11, 2009 ^ I higly doubt you could twin it considering the columns/pillars are at least 33% thinner than the ones built for double track. I mean, if you could build it that thin on the first place for double track why not do it for the entire elevated portion to save a few $. You would have a new elevated structure for the twinned track. Obviously you couldn't jam another train onto the existing structure. You build the same structure beside it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitronuts Posted July 11, 2009 Author Share Posted July 11, 2009 ^ kinda terrible for street aesthetics to have two elevated guideways, no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthecivil Posted July 11, 2009 Share Posted July 11, 2009 ^ kinda terrible for street aesthetics to have two elevated guideways, no? Vs. One? I think the consensus optimal number of elevated guildways for street aesthetics would be zero. They would be right beside each other if such a thing were to be done, so close you probably couldn't tell where one begins and the other ends. What else you going to do, close the last station for over a year while you demolish and completely rebuild the existing one? That would be much more disruptive and much more costly. And if your wondering if simply twinning the track would still cost much more than the 30 million than it would have cost to double track it in the first placek, I think you already know the answer to that. Should have never done that at the Richmond Terminal. At least at YVR we can be confident that there will NEVER be a desire to expand further westward. Richmond, I dunno. Mind you, even if it does cost more than 30 million to double track the last part of the Richmond section in order to do an expansion that cost would be peanuts compared to the capital cost of whatever project was being considered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThePointblank Posted July 11, 2009 Share Posted July 11, 2009 You would have a new elevated structure for the twinned track. Obviously you couldn't jam another train onto the existing structure. You build the same structure beside it. Or just extend the track so it loops back to where it changes from single to double... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitronuts Posted July 11, 2009 Author Share Posted July 11, 2009 I highly doubt we'd want to extend the Canada Line any further with its rather limited capacity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthecivil Posted July 11, 2009 Share Posted July 11, 2009 Or just extend the track so it loops back to where it changes from single to double... Even a very very sharp train curve where it would have to inch around would be very VERY BIG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now