Making Sense From TransLink’s Nonsense
The following is from the RftV friend, Eric Chris. Mr. Chris is a graduate engineer and he sees through TransLink and TransLink Speak.
*****
TransLink is bending the truth to keep the ones who are responsible for the massive fraud (that s-train has more capacity than other modes of transit) from being jailed for the rest of their lives. Ai??Hoaxers at TransLink are essentially stealing billions of dollars from taxpayers to circumvent fair and competitive bidding from Alstom and Siemens proposing tram or LRT lines, for instance, in order to sole source contracts to Bombardier and SNC Lavalin for s-train lines at an inflated cost. Ai??ai???Assumedai??? capacity of LRT ranges from 5,800 pph to 7,200 pph while ai???assumedai??? capacity of s-train (RRT) is 13,000 pph in the study by SNC Lavalin and Steer-Davies-Gleave (summary on page x)? Ai??Whatai??i??s wrong with the ai???realai??? capacity?
Unfortunately Vancouverites just re-elected Mayor Gregor Robertson. Ai??He is a faux pas environmentalist believing that dredging sand from the ocean floors to destroy our aquatic ecosystems is fine as long as it is to produce concrete for his subway to UBC. Ai??Heai??i??d be harmless except for his obsession with the subway to UBC. Ai??Anyhow, the voters have made up their minds and chose him over other candidates having substance ai??i?? thatai??i??s democracy for you and weai??i??ll have to make the best of it until he is hit by a bus or is hopefully defeated in the next election.
ai???Environmentalismai???
Any mode of transit whether it is LRT, s-train or tram can be designed to have the same passenger capacity ai??i?? although, Iai??i??ll concede that there are practical limits to running too many trams on roads. Ai??Broadway is wide enough to be able to manage 45 metre long trams at a frequency of every minute, in my opinion, based on the number and frequency of buses in operation on Broadway, now, and the tram line along Broadway is technically feasible. Ai??Ai??So, the contention by City of Vancouver engineers that only s-train can meet the passenger capacity (for the planned development of concrete condo towers along Broadway) for concrete firms to mine oceans and destroy ecosystems for sand is a blatant lie. Ai??Iai??i??d rather have logging firms harvest trees and replant them for modest homes along tram lines ai??i?? an eccentric environmentalistai??i??s and anti-whaling, Greenpeace sympathizerai??i??s, biased opinion.
Sparing with Gregor Robertson and his Vision council over the last six years over TransLinkai??i??s use of diesel buses for 89% to 100% of the transit service along Broadway in Vancouver on the No. 9, No. 14 and (yes) No. 99 ai???trolleybusai??? routes has made me realize that Gregor is a sham environmentalist. Ai??He is merely deceiving gullible voters who are being seduced and betrayed.
His main goal is to increase the population in Vancouver by cramming more people into condos along Broadway to collect more taxes to run the city. Ai??This is not at all an environmental political platform so he has concocted the lie that the s-train line in the subway to UBC is necessary to reduce road congestion ai??i?? saying what sounds good to appeal to naA?ve individuals, instead, in order to have an excuse to go wild with high density condo development on Broadway.
Passenger capacity of the s-train line, LRT line or tram line depends upon the number of passengers that each set of cars (s-train, LRT or tram) can carry. Ai??Siemens has tram (LRT) designs carrying up to 700 passengers (people). Ai??They are 72 metres in length.
For the 45 metre tram design carrying 300 people every minute, the passenger capacity of the tram line is 300 people / 1 minute = 18,000 people per hour per direction (abbreviated as pph as direction of travel does not matter for an intrinsic property and pph is an intrinsic property). Ai??Youai??i??d never want to run trams at this frequency, but you could if you really had to do it ai??i?? to exceed the present capacity of s-train operated by TransLink in Vancouver. Ai??Along Broadway, the tram length of about 45 metres is ideal, as it is in Sydney, Australia.
http://www.sydneylightrail.
For the 45 metre s-train or LRT design carrying 300 people every minute, the passenger capacity of the LRT line or s-train line is 300 people / 1 minute = 18,000 pph which is the same as the passenger capacity of the tram design ai??i?? obviously the study by SNC Lavalin and Steer-Davies-Gleave is wrong, and it cost TransLink millions of dollars pilfered from taxpayers to prepare.
Are you not entertained by this? Ai??Are you not entertained!
Right now from Broadway at 9:00 am in the morning during weekdays, the following buses arrive at UBC:
-Ai??Ai??Ai??Ai??Ai??Ai??Ai??Ai?? No. 9 trolleybus carrying no more than ~ 60 people every 10 minutes (360 pph)
-Ai??Ai??Ai??Ai??Ai??Ai??Ai??Ai?? No. 14 trolleybus carrying no more than ~ 60 people every 10 minutes (360 pph)
-Ai??Ai??Ai??Ai??Ai??Ai??Ai??Ai?? No. 99 ai???flagshipai??? carrying no more than ~ 100 people every 3 minutes (2,000 pph)
In total, these buses have a combined passenger capacity of ~ 2,720 pph. Ai??If trams were operated, instead of 99 B-Line diesel buses, the combined passenger capacity from transit along Broadway can reach 18,720 pph. Ai??Trams were never considered by SNC Lavalin and Steer-Davies-Gleave which focused on a myriad of impractical possibilities for transit to UBC, instead, in order to make s-train appear much less bad than it truly is. Ai??Stick it, Mick Jagger doesn’t do s-train commercials.
ai???Intrinsic and Extrinsic in the context of transitai???
When you talk about passenger capacity in pph, it is an intrinsic property such as pressure in ai???psiaai??? or enthalpy in ai???BTU per pound massai???. Ai??When you talk about the number of rail cars referred to as rolling stock (set of s-train cars, LRT cars or tram cars) required for a rail line, it is an extrinsic property. Ai??It is important to understand the difference between the number of rail cars required for the rail line (extrinsic) and the passenger capacity in pph of the rail line (intrinsic). Ai??Ask anyone at TransLink to explain what intrinsic and extrinsic mean in the context of the rail line to UBC. Ai??Youai??i??ll get plenty of confused looks. Ai??Taxpayers are entrusting billions of dollars to the planners at TransLink for their ai???expertiseai??? to design transit, nevertheless.
ai???Capacityai???
Presently along Broadway, the round trip transit time (t) for the 99 B-Line (express articulated diesel bus) service with 13 stops during peak hours is approximately 80 minutes. Ai??Consequently, if trams replace the Ai??99 B-Line service, their round trip transit time will also be 80 minutes, and 80 trams will be required for the tram line during peak hours if the trams operate at the frequency of one tram every minute (f) to achieve the 18,000 pph passenger capacity along Broadway, t/f = 80 minutes/1 minute per tram = 80 trams. Ai??With trams operated every minute, 80 drivers are necessary too during peak hours for about six hours daily, at most.
Round trip transit time for the 99 B-Line service during ai???off-peakai??? hours is approximately 60 minutes. Ai??For 14 hours of operation daily during off-peak hours, the transit demand is only about 600 pph (if that) and you can provide double this with four trams and four drivers with transit service every 15 minutes. Ai??So, on average, for 20 hours of transit service daily, there are 27 drivers working per hour on the tram line, (6 hours * 80 drivers + 14 hours * 4 drivers ) / 20 hours = 27 drivers per hour.
Automated s-train requires no drivers. Ai??However, s-train requires at least 11 people per km per 20 hours, instead. Ai??This is only 7 pseudo-drivers per hour on average for the 12.5 km UBC line (11 employees per km * 12.5 km divided by 20 hours = 7 pseudo drivers per hour). Ai??Pretty good, except that power consumption for the s-train is three times the tram’s power consumption. Ai??Forget this for a moment: Ai??the s-train for 18,000 pph in passenger capacity saves 20 drivers on average (27 drivers for the tram per hour – 7 pseudo-drivers for the s-train per hour = 20 drivers per hour on average saved by s-train). Ai??Each added driver for the tram line costs about $60,000/year for eight hour working days.Ai?? For the 20 hour transit days, the drivers cost $3 million annually in salaries (20 added drivers per hour on average by the tram * $60,000/yr per 8 hour working days per driver * 20 hour transit days = $3 million/yr).
ai???Powerai???
Linear induction motors used by s-train are power pigs. Ai??Expo Line moving no more than about 12,000 pph at peak times ate $7.4 million/yr in power in 2011 (TransLink FOI). Ai??Running more rolling stock for 18,000 pph in transit capacity on the Expo Line raises the cost of power to $11.1 million/yr ($7.4 million/yr * 18,000 pph / 12,000 pph = $11.1 million).
Adjusting the 28.9 km Expo Line power consumption for the 12.5 km UBC line brings the power cost down to $4.8 million/yr ($11.1 million/yr * 12.5 km / 28.9 km = $4.8 million/yr). Ai??Round trip transit time for the s-train line is one-half the tramai??i??s round trip transit time and the tram line requires double the rolling stock of the s-train line, therefore (rolling stock required is directly proportional to the round trip transit time).
Since the tram line to UBC uses twice as much rolling stock compared to the rolling stock for the s-train line, the power consumption of the tram line would be $9.6 million/yr (twice the s-trainai??i??s) if trams were power pigs. Ai??Trams are not power pigs and use very efficient squirrel cage motors with regenerative braking and consume one-third as much power as the crappy motors used by s-trains. Ai??So, the power for the tram line to UBC with 18,000 pph in transit capacity costs only $3.2 million/yr (33% * $9.6 million/yr = $3.2 million/yr).
ai???Costsai???
There you have it, $4.8 million/yr for s-train power minus $3.2 million/yr for tram power = $1.6 million/yr saved with the tram line to UBC. Ai??In other words, the high power costs of s-train offset savings from the s-train not having drivers. Ai??Just looking at drivers and power, the tram line to UBC adds $1.4 million/yr in operating costs ($3 million/yr cost of drivers with trams – $1.6 million/yr saved on power with trams = $1.4 million/yr net cost with trams) but there are many other s-train costs such as the $30 million/yr transit police at s-train stations and maintenance of the white elephant elevated s-train station themselves (driving up the cost of the s-train line further). Ai??Ai??For the tram line to UBC, this small added operating cost which does not consider all the added costs of the s-train, including the many bus drivers required to shuttle the many transit users to the s-train line, does not outweigh the added capital cost of the s-train line to UBC.
When you consider that the tram line costs a meagre $60 million to construct compared to the s-train line costing $5,000 million to construct, many heads have to roll at TransLink ai??i?? actually every head at TransLink. Ai??Tram lines are more convenient for users and statistically cut the commuting for users, also.Ai?? Talking about funding more s-train lines for the zombies at TransLink to continue to have jobs is not worth any sort of discussion and is distracting from the job at hand, ridding Vancouver of the zombies at TransLink, in my opinion.
Iai??i??d appreciate any comments, especially, on the math. Ai??I plan to send this to the Mayorsai??i?? Council and Todd Stone (minister of TransLink) for an explanation of TransLinkai??i??s waste of time and resources to produce its fraudulent study favouring s-train based on its supposed increased capacity.
Hey Eric,
I made the similar point about the capacity of both LRT and BRT being somewhat off from reality and somewhat arbitrary. To me their biggest faux pas was the under estimation of the vehicle capacity for LRT. They choose to model a 2 car LRT consist. Each individual car would be around 40 metres and have a capacity of about 240 passengers each. The problem is that most LRV’s around 40 metres in length (checked 6 manufacturers) designed for sale in North America have a range of passenger capacities from 280 to 320 or lets say a median value of 300. That’s a considerable difference between 240 to 300 on a per car basis.
Their acceleration/deceleration data was also considerably off, especially for buses. I have been trying to reread earlier Translink studies and I still find that they have a definite problem of inconsistency when it comes to what they choose to study/model and what they don’t and it is quite telling.
Also, putting aside the indifference Translink shows towards non Skytrain modes of transit for a second, I still have never found an adequate explanation of why they chose to spend their very limited capital funding on a Skytrain line extension to essentially a distant outer suburb (Evergreen Line) instead of closing a big hole in their operating rail network. Extending the west end Millennium Line from VCC its current end to or past the Canada line Station on Broadway so passengers can at the least transfer to another downtown bound line (adding system capacity by transferring to another line heading downtown) closing a deadly gap in their system and then extending the remainder of the line west as far as possible (till they run out of money) on what they claim is their busiest passenger corridor. Very strange indeed.
Zwei replies: Our transit system is designed to win elections, not to efficiently to move people. Just after the Millennium Line was built, TransLink wanted it to connect with Main Street station, providing a faster trip to town. It is Vision Vancouver that is driving a Broadway Subway and they are using every incompetent NDP hack to further their cause. It must be remebered, that the Millennium Line was a NDP project.