Why Do University Professors Get it all Wrong?
I shake my head in utter despair, when academics, get it all wrong.
Zwei, probably knows more about Karlsruhe’s Zweisystem or TramTrain than most in BC and or Canada. Karlsruhe’s famous TramTrains are powered by electricity, delivered from an overhead supply. What Karlsruhe’s Zweisystem Trains are famous for is the ability to operate on the railway mainline, as well as on tram or streetcar tracks in the city.
In operations since 1992, Karslsruhe’s TramTrain system has been built on success after success as evidenced by massive ridership increases.
Hydrogen powered trains are still in their developmental stage and despite one sided reporting in the media and/or environmental groups, there is still a lot of expensive bugs to work out.
Zwei has been told that all the routes using hydrogen powered trains, operate on lines with little or no grades as the hydrogen powered trains still have many issues dealing with gradients.
A lesson for the good professor, Karlsruhe’s success story is the TramTrain or Zweisystem and the ability to use streetcar/tram tracks and operate on the mainline railways; not hydrogen powered trains.
A basic cost (my estimation) for a light Diesel Multiple Unit Service from Salmon Arm to Kelowna, using the former CNR Railway R-o-W, would be in the neighbourhood of $2 billion, for a service with a maximum three trains per hour per direction.
Photo: A Karlsruhe TramTrain on a country route, operating on a mainline railway.
The German term Zweisystem, refers to the fact that the trains can operate under two different power supplies as used by the DBB or federal railways and by the city tram system.
Environment & Sustainability, Research
UBCO professor researches electric passenger light rail for Okanagan Valley
Feasibility plan introduces 342-kilometre route linking Kamloops and Osoyoos
July 10, 2024
A conceptional illustration of the Okanagan Valley Electric Regional Passenger Rail shows the tram running alongside Okanagan Lake. Photo credit: Andrew Halfhide.
Anyone who has ever been stuck in gridlock while driving over Kelowna’s William R. Bennett Bridge or any Okanagan community can appreciate the thought that there has to be a better alternative than Highway 97 to navigate the busy corridor.
And a UBC Okanagan professor says there is.
Dr. Gordon Lovegrove, who teaches in UBCO’s School of Engineering, has studied the feasibility of an affordable passenger train patterned after a similar concept started in Karlsruhe, Germany 40 years ago.
“Hydrail tram-trains—powered by a hydrogen fuel cell/battery—is a passenger rail that acts like a tram in cities and like a train between communities. This is a new concept to North America,” explains Dr. Lovegrove. “They are self-powered, low-floor and a zero-emission technology, which differs from typical heavy-rail, high-floor, locomotive-pulled passenger cars. This gives hydrail the advantage of being able to climb hills and more affordable than highway widening.”
Dr. Lovegrove says the Okanagan’s booming tourism and population growth affect the more than 500,000 residents in communities connected mainly by Highway 97. The majority of travel is by cars, which increases the highway’s gridlock and risk of collisions. He cites recent surveys of residents, First Nations communities and businesses, coupled with joint municipal and provincial government studies that reveal the Okanagan Valley needs more than traditional auto-oriented solutions such as road widening and bypasses—options he calls ineffective and costly.
That opened the door for the researchers to study the technical and economic feasibility of an Okanagan Valley Electric Regional Passenger Rail (OVER PR) service. The study, published recently in the journal Sustainability, is the first of its kind in North America and one of the first published worldwide.
“To address growing inter-city transportation, safety, congestion and climate resilience challenges in the Okanagan Valley, we found that even in our Canadian climate and hilly terrain, hydrail tram-trains are technically feasible. And they would be more affordable than widening our highways and promoting more pollution and congestion. However, it is up to communities to decide if and where it would run.”
Dr. Lovegrove notes he deliberately analyzed the undulating Highway 97 route with its steep hills, as opposed to conventional near-flat freight routes, as the toughest test of its feasibility.
Assuming Highway 97 was chosen, OVER PR would connect cities and airports throughout the valley with a one-way trip from Osoyoos to Kamloops taking about four hours, comparable to driving a car. The tram-train could travel at higher speeds, about 90 k/h between cities, but at lower tram-specific speeds in cities, with modern transit priority signals designed to bypass delays at intersections.
“Using embedded rails, sharing existing and HOV lanes as well as highway rights-of-way, or medians, between cities, would drastically reduce the need for land acquisition without taking away capacity. The route would also be designed to integrate with regional bus services to construct an optimal arrival and departure schedule,” he says.
With OVER PR ridership expected to be more than 13,000 passengers per day, there is something in it for even those who could not make the jump from driving to using the tram-train, as it would mean less traffic congestion and travel delays.
“Hydrail combined with tram-train technology has never been tried in Canada, yet hydrogen trains present advantages compared with electrification by eliminating the requirement for expensive infrastructure such as catenaries (above ground wires) and substations. It also grants the flexibility to operate in remote rural areas or difficult terrain where electrification might pose challenges, which improves its overall effectiveness and adaptability. When hydrogen production is coupled with other forms of renewable energy generation, the environmental benefits are favourable.”
The study states the system, similar to ones that operate in California’s Napa Valley or the Karlsruhe region in Germany, can have economic, social and ecological benefits for tourists and residents.
Dr. Lovegrove’s research suggests that over 30 years, and using the same cost-benefit analysis template used by provincial policy analysts, OVER PR benefits total more than $45 billion, and outweigh its capital and operating costs by nine to one, with many more benefits than widening Highway 97.
“The Okanagan Valley is expected to continue with significant population growth, tourism and traffic congestion which leads to increased greenhouse gas emissions, as well as more vehicles and highway fatalities,” Dr. Lovegrove says. “If communities agree to proceed with OVER PR planning this valley-long zero-emission, passenger rail service could significantly enhance transport equity, safety and congestion while also providing a more affordable, resilient and environmentally friendly choice for valley residents, businesses and tourists.”
The North Shore’s “Hobson’s Choice”
From: Rail for the Valley
For the past 17 years, Rail for the Valley has advocated for the “return of the interurban” on the former Vancouver to Chilliwack BC Electric interurban line that still connects Vancouver to Chilliwack, via Surrey/Cloverdale; Langley; Abbotsford and Vedder/Sardis. Rail for the Valley, due to the soundness of the plan, secured Leewood Projects (UK) to do a study on the viability of such a service, with the result, the Leewood Study done for Rail for the Valley, released in 2010.
The Leewood Study is unique, in that it is a fully independent study, free of political and bureaucratic meddling.
Rail for the Valley, through its blog, tries to present viable and affordable transportation options-and being advised by real transportation experts and engineers who have “hands on experience” with transit projects, not only in Canada, but the USA, the UK and Europe. Having professionals who live outside the Metro Vancouver bubble advising on transit issues, gives a more realistic look at Metro Vancouver’s transit and transportation issues.
In 2010, the Leewood Study concluded that a full build, 138 km electric rail service, using modern articulated rail-cars, from Vancouver to Chilliwack would cost $998,519,424.00 or $7,235,648.00 per km. Accounting for inflation and updated to 2024 dollars, this would amount to $1.37 billion or $10.5 million/km to install.
In comparison, the current cost of the proposed Expo Line extension to Langley is now over $300 million per km. and the Broadway Subway is now said to surpass $500 million/km. The cost of the combined Expo Line extension and the Broadway subway is now over $7 billion for a mere 21.8 km of light metro and does not include a further $5 billion to complete the Broadway Subway to UBC, nor the much needed multi billion dollar rehab of the Expo and Millennium Lines.
In 2022, TransLink and Thales signed a contract for $1.47 billion to resignal the Expo and Millennium Lines. This does not include the much needed electrical rehab of the E&M Lines, which is now estimated to exceed $2 billion!
Also not included is the complete fleet renewal for the soon to be retired MK.1, ALRT, stock.
VICTORIA, WE HAVE A PROBLEM
A short recap.
Metro Vancouver’s SkyTrain light-metro system operates two very different railways: the Canada Line which is a conventional railway, built as a light metro and the Expo and Millennium Lines which operate the proprietary and now called Movia Automatic Light Metro (MALM) system, the sixth rebranding of this obsolete mini-metro. Only seven MALM systems have been built in over 40 years, with Alstom now being the fourth owner of the proprietary railway. Previous owners were Bombardier, Lavalin and the Urban Transportation Development Corporation.
Canada Line operation is incompatible with the Expo and Millennium Lines and vice versa.
Only Vancouver continues to build with MALM.
Today, MALM is considered obsolete as it lacks capacity, costs more to operate and maintain than comparative light rail systems and lacks flexibility which is very important in the 21st century.
The $2.4 billion Canada line was the BC Liberals foray into transportation Private Public Partnership or P-3. The Canada Line a capacity-constrained heavy rail metro, built as a light-metro, costing much more to build than a modern tram, with less capacity. Internationally, the Canada line is considered a classic transit “White Elephant”.
The cost to have the Canada Line rehabbed to match the present maximum legal capacity of 15,000 persons per hour per direction (as stated in Transport Canada’s Operating Certificate) for the Expo and Millennium Lines, is now between $1.5 to $2 billion dollars.
This must be done before any extension to the Canada Line can be considered.
A big problem for TransLink is rumblings from Alstom indicating that production of MALM cars may cease when the last production orders have been filled in 2025. No sales for the past 15 years may speed up the decision to abandon the proprietary railway, which would both drive up the cost of new vehicles as no other company makes MALM compatible cars and the cost of replacement parts.
The cost for light metro, especially MALM extensions, is rapidly increasing, quickly making such extensions not cost effective.
There may be no further extension to the MALM Lines after the completed Broadway subway to Arbutus! Talk of extending rapid transit to the North Shore is nothing more than political posturing, for photo-ops and sound bytes at election time.
“The problem with TransLink is that you can never believe what it says; TransLink never produces a report based on the same set of assumptions.”
Former West Vancouver Clr. Victor Durman, Chair of the GVRD (now METRO) Finance Committee.
DARK CLOUDS
There has been a change in scope for the Expo Line Extension Project to Langley, from 2 stages into a single stage project due to escalating costs.
The cost to go 16km from Surrey Centre to Langley is now creeping close to $5 billion.
From the last news release regarding the Expo Line extension to Langley, the guideway was said to have a firm cost of $4.01 billion, but the signalling, the electrical overhead and stations were still under negotiations. Obviously the cost of the Langley extension will surpass $4.5 billion and if the needed Operations and Maintenance Centre #5 is built, the cost of the 16 km line will exceed $5 billion!
Translink may not be capable of being a full financial partner in this project or any other large capital project for some time, due to its current budget issues. This is not good news for the Surrey Extension and even worse news for the North Shore.
A dark financial cloud on the horizon is beginning to appear larger. TransLink had to begin serious final planning and engineering on the second stage of the Broadway Millennium Line extension from Arbutus to UBC by 2024, if construction is to begin in 2026.
They estimate this extension project to cost between $4.98 to $5.12 Billion for the planned 7.3 km long tunnel and above grade structure into UBC and those costs were estimated in 2021, Just accounting for inflation, the UBC extension project will cost between $5.7 to $5.9 Billion in 2024 dollars.
The question facing TransLink and the province is whether they pay $5 Billion for the Langley project or wait and fund the near $6 Billion for UBC extension, both will not be funded at the same time.
Unless something drastically changes soon, the current Langley Skytrain extension project in its present form is dying and may be put off, well into the next decade.
This bodes ill for any SkyTrain light metro connection to the North Shore.
RAIL FOR THE VALLEY’S SOLUTION
It is widely accepted that only a rail solution will attract the motorist from the car; buses have proven disappointing in operation, as they get stuck in traffic and true Bus Rapid Transit costs only a little less to build than LRT with none of the operating or capacity benefits. Only politicians think buses can be rapid transit, yet sadly for the transit customer, a bus is a bus, is a bus.
Rail for the Valley’s Leewood Study provides an affordable alternative, operating a regional passenger service using existing railways. As there is a railway connection from Vancouver to the North Shore, Squamish and beyond to Whistler, a passenger rail service must be considered.
Modern articulated rail cars can travel at higher speeds on curving track, giving realistic travel times and properly signalled with passing loops (double track), trains could operate up to three times an hour per direction.
This is not fanciful thinking, rather it’s what is currently happening in Europe where the huge cost of new metro and highway construction has forced planners to use existing railways for a regional rail service that people will use! In Europe and now even in the USA, disused railways are being refurbished and abandoned railways are being rebuilt as a much cheaper alternative than stand alone metro lines or new highways.
The modern articulated railcar, powered by clean diesel or electricity from by fuel cell or by overhead wires, can obtain commercial speeds acceptable by customers on even the most difficult routes. The modern articulated railcar can contain amenities such as a WC and or a ‘bistro’ offering light refreshments for the longer trips. The modern articulated railcar can also operate in multiple units, thus capacity can be increased when needed.
The modern articulated railcar can also increase vehicle capacity by adding additional modules at a much cheaper cost than buying a new vehicle.
Based on the Leewood Study and taking into consideration that the track is in excellent condition, the cost for the approximately 80km Vancouver to Squamish regional passenger railway, using the Canadian National Railway and the former BC Railway right-of-way, with a maximum of three trains per hour per direction would be in the neighbourhood of $1 billion.
The new regional railway would have stations at the Squamish, Britannia Beach, Lions Bay, Horseshoe Bay, Caulfield, West Bay, Ambleside, Capilano, Lonsdale, Lynn Creek, and Vancouver, Pacific Central Station.
The province and region are now in a climate emergency, combined with worsening regional traffic congestion. The current transit planning based on light metro and the hub and spoke philosophy of transit (where buses bring customers to transit hubs) is failing as pre covid, regional mode share for transit is dropping. Planning and building more SkyTrain light metro lines is akin to doing the same thing over and over again ever hoping for different results.
Metro Vancouver must plan cheaper, user-friendly transit options in order to attract the motorist from the car, as the present light metro system has failed to do so and despite an over $15 billion taxpayer investment.
For less than the cost of a now $3 billion, 5.8 km Broadway subway or just over half the cost of the over $5 billion, 16 km Expo Line extension to Langley, we could build two regional railways, connecting Vancouver to Chilliwack and Vancouver to Squamish, with a possibility of a 210 km regional rail service, with through service from Squamish to Chilliwack, via Vancouver.
There are many obstacles to overcome and all levels of government must be on board but….. the time has come to stop transit planning for politically prestigious projects and plan for the region’s future and the future is an affordable and user friendly transportation network, which the present transit system is definitely not.
The North Shore city government’s faces a Hobson’s Choice for transit planning, either advocate for what could be affordably built or advocate for ‘pie in the sky’ rapid transit solutions that will not be built.
We Have Done It All Wrong
I am recovering from a classic “heart attack” and after four stents and severe lectures from the surgeons, it was made amply clear, I had it all wrong.
Three days in bed at Royal Colombian Hospital, gave me much time to think.
That time on my back also made it amply clear, that we are doing it all wrong transit wise as well.
The same denial, the same lies, the same arrogance was on open display.
We are doing transit all wrong and their will be no medical crisis to make one rethink, one’s potion, instead it will be a financial crisis, that will compel government to rethink what they are doing and that is still some time ahead.
The symptom’s are there, like the former Vancouver bureaucrat who was the lead champion of the Broadway subway, now earning over $700K as CEO of Metro Vancouver or the current Premier’s density crusade, destroying livable and affordable housing for pre election photo-ops at high rise development sites.
The ICBC “dumpster fire” continues, only with the present premier stoking the fires.
One of the key phrases for the next election will be “Transit Oriented Development” or TOD and will be used by the NDP to sell their hackneyed schemes, yet I doubt any one who speaks about TOD, has any clue about the meaning.
When our politicians spend more money on spin doctors and not on real experts in transportation, you know they are in denial.
When the mainstream media, both print, electronic, and social, ban people’s peoples letters and/or comments on transportation issues, you know they are in denial.
When politcans force people to buy electric cars as the real cure for global warming, you know they are in denial.
It is not going to end well!
Regional Passenger Service reinstated In Ontario
It is interesting that Ontario is reinstating the Northlander Passenger service in Ontario, yet the BC government ignores reinstating, at least three regional railways.
The prediction that the service would see 40,000 to 60,000 passengers a year; three BC regional railways could easily reach the same passenger loads a day, per line!
Rail for the Valley’s Marpole to Chilliwack regional railway, using the existing and still in use former BC electric interurban line, could easily reach 40,000 passengers/day by 2041.
The E&N railway, again, with proper planning, could surpass 40,000 passenger a day, connecting cities from Victoria to Courtney and Port Alberni.
The proposed Salmon Arm (or even Kamloops) to Kelowna regional railway, could again, with proper planning see over 40,000 passengers/day.
What is lacking in BC is the political will to plan for regional railways simply because rubber on asphalt solutions are deemed politcal winners and rail, except for SkyTrain are politcal losers.
In an age of global Warming and climate change, political cowardice reigns supreme.
Ontario Northlander passenger train revival contracts awarded
Railway Age
CANADA: The government of Ontario has awarded contracts for infrastructure works to enable the reinstatement of Ontario Northland’s Northlander passenger service between Toronto Union station and a new Timmins-Porcupine station.
Enseicom is to design and manufacture shelters with seats, lighting and heating for the stations at Matheson, Kirkland Lake, Temiskaming Shores, Temagami, South River, Huntsville, Bracebridge, Gravenhurst and Washago. Ontario Northland CEO Chad Evans said these would be ‘safe, comfortable and accessible, providing a consistent, modern passenger experience’.
Remcan is to undertake track improvements to enhance safety and decrease maintenance requirements.
X-Rail will complete warning system upgrades along the corridor north of North Bay.
Track upgrading and the construction of station platforms, car parks and paths is to begin this summer.
The previous Northlander service was replaced by buses in 2012, however a business case for a revival was published in 2021 with traffic predicted at 40 000 to 60 000 passengers/year by 2041.
In 2022 Siemens Mobility was awarded a C$139·5m contract to supply three loco-hauled trainsets. Manufacturing began this May.
The future service will operate four to seven days a week, according to seasonal demand.
‘People and businesses in northern and central Ontario deserve the same access to safe and reliable transportation as the rest of the province’, said Associate Minister of Transportation Vijay Thanigasalam on May 31. ’Reinstating the Northlander will not only support our northern industries and resource sectors, but it will also pave the way for a more integrated transportation network that connects communities from the north to the south.’
By Train From St. Gallen to Geneva
The fastest trains from St. Gallen to Geneva take around 3 hours and 49 minutes, covering a distance of approximately 280 kilometres. One third of the population (3 million) of Switzerland lives within 5 kilometers of the main train line crossing the country.
Something to think about.
A Marpole to Chilliwack passenger service, either light rail or a light DMU service would certainly see living up to 5 km of the line, very desirable. Cloverdale, Langley, Abbotsford, Sardis/Vedder and Chilliwack residents would find reasonable travel times to various local city centres, post secondary campuses and business parks.
A recent reconnoiter of the former interurban line, from surrey to Chilliwack sees much new residential development along the line but ill served by a user-friendly transit alternative
A Marpole terminus would give give valley residents an almost direct service to YVR and downtown Vancouver. A good incentive to take the train instead of fighting traffic and endemic gridlock in Metro Vancouver.
The very same is true for Vancouver Island and the E&N Railway, where established population centres, created by the railway, would ensure a well patronized service from Victoria to Courtney.
In an age of global warming and climate change, both passenger services would be a popular addition for those who wish not to or cannot drive. The term “no-brainier” would be applicable here.
It is time our politcans and the planning bureaucracy actually plan past “20 minutes into the future” and plan for generations to come.
The current round of pre-election vague promises for more SkyTrain, abetted by incompetent planning, anti-car tirades and ‘puff’ stories in the media are growing tiresome. The provincial and Federal governments uses the “Carbon Tax” as a revenue generator and has nothing to do with climate change.
One only has to look at the St. Gallen – Geneva mainline to see how rail transit works and how government properly spend tax monies. It is time to copy success instead of our hackneyed doing the same thing over and over again, ever hoping for different results.
A Letter To North Shore Mayors
Continues from my previous post. Zwei sent the following Email to the North Shore Mayor’s and Councils one week ago.
I would also like to thank Mr. Cow for info used.
Interestingly I have been in communication with one of the North Shore Mayors who wants more information.
In this day and age, with so much information about light rail available, this study reverts back to the Evergreen Line’s business case, which American Engineer, Gerald Fox, easily shredded. In a SkyTrain only bubble of metro Vancouver, honest transit studies are few and far between.
Please Deliver to Mayor and Council;
The North Shore Rapid Transit Study reminds me of the earlier Evergreen Line Business Case, manipulated and slanted to favour the continued expansion of the now obsolete SkyTrain light-metro system.
I find it astounding, with all the material available about modern transit planning, that the study merely copied the earlier Evergreen Line Business Case’s pro SkyTrain hype and Hoopla and tried to pass it off as a credible study.
Translink and the provincial government have already said, “BRT first, Skytrain later”. This is government-speak for, “WE CANNOT AFFORD THIS AT ALL, NOT NOW ANYWAY, AND MAYBE NEVER!
The Evergreen Line Report made me curious as to how TransLink could justify continuing to expand SkyTrain, when the rest of the world is building LRT. So I went back and read the alleged Business Case (BC) report in a little more detail. I found several instances where the analysis had made assumptions that were inaccurate, or had been manipulated to make the case for SkyTrain. If the underlying assumptions are inaccurate, the conclusions may be so tooGerald Fox’s (a noted American Engineer who oversaw the construction of several US transit systems) opening paragraph of his 2008 review of the Evergreen Line Business Case.
Reviewing the District of North Vancouver recently commissioned and funded studies for a North Shore Rapid Transit Plan, I too found The analysis had made assumptions that were also inaccurate, or had been manipulated to make the case for SkyTrain. If the underlying assumptions are inaccurate, the conclusions may be so too
Capacity: A combination of train size and headway. For instance, TriMet's new Type 4 Low floor LRVs, arriving later this year, have a rated capacity of 232 per car, or 464 for a 2- car train. (Of course one must also be sure to use the same standee density when comparing car capacity. I don't know if that was done here). In Portland we operate a frequency of 3 minutes downtown in the peak hour, giving a one way peak hour capacity of 9,280. By next year we will have two routes through downtown, which will eventually load both ways, giving a theoretical peak hour rail capacity of 37,000 into or out of downtownFrom Gerald Fox’s review of the Evergreen Line Business Case
The maximum capacity of light rail in the Rapid Transit Study is wildly inaccurate.
The capacity of modern light rail can exceed 20,000 persons per hour per direction (Light Rail Transit Association) and ignores the singular fact that in the late 1940’s until opening of the first subway in Toronto, the Toronto Transit Commission operated coupled sets of PCC cars on select routes, obtaining peak hour capacities between 12,000 to 12,500 pphpd and that, operating in mixed traffic with no transit priority!
A two car Alstom Citadis LRV train used in Ottawa is 98 metres long and 2.86 m wide, has a larger capacity than Skytrain’s MK.5, 5-car train-sets width of 2.65 and 88 metres long. The Citadis LRV is 10 metres longer, has a 600 passenger capacity at 4 passengers per square metre. Operating at 5 minute headways, the 2-car Citadis LRV’s would have an hourly capacity of 7,200 pphpd and at 2.5 minute headways, would have a capacity of 14,400 pphpd.
Confederation LRT LIne Versus Skytrain 2.0.jpg
A comparison of Ottawa’s confederation Line and Vancouver’s light metro system.
The stated capacity of modern LRT in the study of only 4,500 pphpd is not just wrong; it borders on professional misconduct.
Ridership. Is a function of many factors. The Business Case report would have you believe that type of rail mode alone, makes a difference (It does in the bus vs rail comparison, according to the latest US federal guidelines). But, on the Evergreen Line, I doubt it. What makes a difference is speed, frequency (but not so much when headways get to 5 minutes), station spacing and amenity etc. Since the speed, frequency and capacity assumptions used in the Business Case are clearly inaccurate, the ridership estimates cannot be correct either.From Gerald Fox’s review of the Evergreen Line Business Case.
Another assumption is that light rail is slower and will carry fewer customers.
Again, inaccurate. Light Rail Transit is a modern tram or streetcar which operates on dedicated or reserved rights of way, with priority signalling at intersections and having no traffic interference. Only if the tram or streetcar operates in mixed traffic, the commercial speed would be slower, defined by the road speed limit, but LRT does not operate on the road, but on its own dedicated route. Thus a modern light rail with comparative Rights-of-Ways, with equal stations, would have comparative travel times. Another factor not considered is that dwell times for light rail vehicles are much less when compared to the driverless SkyTrain light metro cars and the cumulative savings with shorter dwell times do add up over a longer trip.
A modern Paris Tram on a lawned reserved or dedicated R-o-W.
What is true is that LRT, because of it operating on much cheaper R-o-W’s has more stations or stops, thus attracting more ridership than elevated light-metros, which stations tend to be much further apart and mainly assccable by customers first taking a bus. More stations along a transit route will achieve slower commercial speeds but will attract more ridership.Over 80% of SkyTrain’s ridership first takes a bus and by taking a bus, increases door to door travel times, not reflected in the study.
Innuendos about safety, and traffic impacts, seem to be a big issue for SkyTrain proponents, but are solved by the numerous systems that operate new LRT systems (i.e., they can't be as bad as the SkyTrain folk would like you to believe)............................ But, eventually, Vancouver will need to adopt lower-cost LRT in its lesser corridors, or else limit the extent of its rail system. And that seems to make some TransLink people very nervous. Gerald Fox’s review of the Evergreen Line Business Case.
The SkyTrain Light Metro system operates two very different railways. The Canada Line is a conventional heavy-rail railway, operated as a light metro and the Expo and Millennium Lines operate the proprietary and last called Movia Automatic Light Metro (MALM) system, now owned by Alstom. The SkyTrain name for the light metro system was chosen in a radio contest (CKNW) in 1985. The study did not consider this and as each light metro system (conventional or unconventional/proprietary) has different costs and operating parameters and any reference to SkyTrain is based solely on assumptions and not fact.
As MALM is a proprietary railway and powered by Linear Induction Motors, it is incompatible in operations with any other railway, except its current family of 6 systems.
As Alstom is the sole supplier of the proprietary MALM cars and only seven such systems have been built in almost 50 years with only six remaining in operation; if Alstom ceases production, there will be no supplier of MALM compatible cars and parts.
Planning for MALM (SkyTrain) that may be built decades in the future, is a fool’s errand because there may not be a supplier for MALM cars in the future and vehicles will have to be custom built.
It is interesting how TransLink has used this cunning method of manipulating analysis to justify SkyTrain in corridor after corridor, and has thus succeeded in keeping its proprietary rail system expanding. In the US, all new transit projects that seek federal support are now subjected to scrutiny by a panel of transit peers, selected and monitored by the federal government, to ensure that projects are analysed honestly, and the taxpayer interests are protected. No SkyTrain project has ever passed this scrutiny in the US.Gerald Fox’s review of the Evereen Line Business case
It is interesting that the North Shore transit plan still opts for a “SkyTrain solution, even though no city has copied Vancouver’s exclusive use of light-metro and no transit authority has copied using the now called proprietary MALM system. In the realm of modern public transport, success is copied and failure is ignored; except in Metro Vancouver!
It is interesting that the North shore transit plan has either deliberately or for a lack of due diligence, had the capacity of light rail so low, that one wonders why over 420 light rail/tram systems are in operation around the world, operating well over 16,000 km of line.
What would be the cost of 19.5 North Shore to Metrotown MALM Line?
The current cost of the 16 km. Expo Line extension is $4.01 million, but that cost was from 2021 and accounting for inflation that cost is now $4.59 billion and it is interesting that the most recent news release regarding the Langley extension was the $4.01 billion was a firm cost for the guideway only and did not include the electrical supply, signalling and stations which were “still under negotiation”. The cost does not include the rail compatible Bridge replacing the current Ironworkers Memorial Bridge; the cars needed to operate the extension; nor the $500 million to $1 billion Operations and Maintenance Centre #5, which will be needed, especially for the 5 car MK.V stock.
If a SkyTrain extension to the North Shore is planned a similar cost OMC #6 will have to be built.
It is a fair estimate that the true cost of the 19.5 km SkyTrain extension from the North Shore to Metrotown will be around $10 billion!
Light Rail is not only cheaper to build, it is cheaper to operate and maintain; it has a higher capacity; it has many suppliers and it has operational flexibility, which MALM Skytrain does not have.
From MetroLinx (Ontario) showing the 50 year costs of various transit. As MALM (SkyTrain) is a four rail system, its fifty year operating costs are higher than elevated LRT.
It is clearly apparent that the North shore Rapid Transit study is of little or no value because it includes erroneous assumptions and even worse, false claims for modern light rail. It also ignores the singular fact that the current 21.7 km, $11 billion expansion of the Expo and Millennium Lines has literally sucked all transit monies off the table for the next decade, at least.
There will be no rapid transit from the North shore across the Burrard Inlet in the foreseeable future.
If I were the Mayor of the District of North Vancouver, I would demand a refund!
Addendum:
The whole study believed that LRT can only operate in curb or median road lanes like this.
http://www.trainweb.org/Tomsrailtravels/Kitchener%20ION%20trip.htm
See this is Hurdman Station an above grade station, notice the above grade concrete right of way leading into the station, wow just like the Skytrain!
Notice several surface LRT Rights of way that don’t involve operating in the central or curb lane of a road.
They can even operate in tunnels, just like the Skytrain can.
Pipe Dreams
Transit studies are a “dime a dozen” in metro Vancouver, yet few are ever used for the simple fact that rapid transit is built for strictly politcal reasons and not for the needs of the transit customer.
Kennith Chan and the Hive is pro SkyTrain, yet he know very little about the local transit system, transit financing, which makes his reporting extremely questionable.
What is the cost?
What is the cost of SkyTrain to the North Shore?
$5 billion? $10 billion, including trains, bridges, complete?
The cost of the proposed 16 km Expo Line Langley extension is now fast approaching $5 billion and that is not including the cars, electrical instillation and stations and not including the Operations and Maintenance Centre #5.
The cost of a 19.5 km extension to Metrotown including new cars, and a new OMC #6, including a new bridge will top $10 billion!
NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.
The other blunder or intentional misinformation (take your pick) is that Light Rail’s Capacity is a mere 4,500 persons per hour per direction.
WTF!
Sorry about that but really, this absolutely idiotic claim tells me the study is not worth the paper it is printed on.
Modern light rail has a capacity of in excess of 20,000 pphpd,. In the late 1940’s, Toronto operated couple sets of PCC trams on selected routes obtaining capacities of 12,000 to 12,500 pphpd! to say a modern tram or light rail vehicle has only a capacity of 4,500 is professional misconduct on a vast scale.
The preceding graphic compares Ottawa’s Confederation LRV’s to both MK.1 ALRT UTDC cars and MK.2 Bombardier ART cars.
When a study is so fundamentally flawed, so ill researched, one can only surmise that this is nothing more than a crass politcal exercise for pre-election photo-ops and 10 second sound bytes. As a transit study, it fails badly.
As for North Shore civic politicians and residents you have been played.
North Shore-Metrotown SkyTrain would see 120,000 riders daily: study
May 27 2024
The use of SkyTrain technology for the North Shore rapid transit line is the clear winner in terms of potential ridership and speed, exceeding the figures of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and street-level Light Rail Transit (LRT).
The District of North Vancouver recently commissioned and funded two highly technical studies exploring the ridership potential of various modes of rapid transit, and the possibility of a multi-modal replacement of the aging Ironworkers Memorial Bridge.
In 2023, on behalf of the municipal government, transportation consultancy firm McElhanney completed an updated ridership study that compared the potential of SkyTrain, BRT, and LRT, while Spannovation Consulting performed an analysis of the optimal options to replace the existing Highway 1 bridge in the Second Narrows.
McElhanney’s latest study builds on their previous 2021 analysis of the Burrard Inlet Rapid Transit initiative jointly led by the North Shore’s three municipal governments and two First Nations, which was a process that identified the “Gold” and “Purple” lines. Some of Spannovation’s most recent major works entail contributing to the planning efforts of the new replacement Pattullo Bridge
For each of the SkyTrain, BRT, and LRT scenarios examined, the same rapid transit route was used — a 19.5-km-long route beginning at Park Royal in West Vancouver, which then runs west-east across the North Shore along Marine Drive, 3rd Street, and Main Street.
Upon reaching Phibbs Exchange near the northern end of the Ironworkers Memorial Bridge, the route turns south across the Second Narrows and reaches Hastings Park/PNE in Vancouver. It then briefly runs along Hastings Street before turning south along Willingdon Avenue for the remaining journey to Metrotown.
Route and station map of Burrard Inlet Rapid Transit between Park Royal in West Vancouver and Metrotown in Burnaby. (Spannovation)
Side-by-side twin cable-stayed bridges concept to replace the Ironworkers Memorial Bridge, including space for SkyTrain/LRT. (McElhanney)
In each of the three scenarios, there would be a total of 10 stations located in the general vicinity of Park Royal, Lions Gate (at Capilano Road and Marine Drive), Capilano Mall (on Marine Drive), Lonsdale (on 3rd Street), Moodyville (on 3rd Street), Phibbs Exchange, Hastings Park/PNE (on Hastings Street), Brentwood Town Centre Station (connecting with SkyTrain Millennium Line), BCIT Burnaby campus (on Willingdon Avenue), and Metrotown Station (connecting with SkyTrain Expo Line).
Travel time of 23 minutes on SkyTrain
By 2050, BRT would have a ridership of 41,000 boardings per day — equivalent to the present-day ridership of the 99 B-Line, Metro Vancouver’s busiest bus route. It would have an end-to-end travel time of 58 minutes and an average operating speed of 20 km/hr, based on frequencies similar to TransLink’s existing B-Line and RapidBus routes and the use of articulated buses. Its maximum capacity is about 1,300 passengers per hour per direction.
Street-level LRT would have a ridership of 100,000 boardings per day, with an end-to-end travel time of 47 minutes and an average operating speed of about 25 km/hr. With frequencies of up to every four minutes during peak periods and six minutes during mid-day periods, using LRT trains that can hold about 300 people, the maximum capacity of LRT is about 4,500 passengers per hour per direction.
To achieve BRT or LRT on the North Shore, the vast majority of the Marine Drive and 3rd Street corridor would be reduced to one general traffic vehicle lane in each direction to accommodate the bus-only lanes or LRT right-of-way.
Similarly, there would also be lane reductions for the roadways of Hastings Street and Willingdon Avenue.
As BRT or LRT would not have its own fully separated right-of-way, running through intersections, its maximum travel speed is limited to the same speed limits of general vehicle traffic.
As Zwei Has Predicted…..
After all the raspberries that came my way about the Broadway Subway, I have been somewhat vindicated.
The construction delays also translates into increased costs and with an election around the corner, the current government will wait until after the election to give the bad news.
It also explains the puff piece in the Tyee (the feisty one that now has lost all its feist!) last week, exhorting the virtues of the subway.
No wonder they banned Zwei from commenting.
The Broadway subway will remain a subway to nowhere, which will generally increase travel times because of inconvenient transfers and driving up the cost of transit. The last laugh is so clearly evident, as TransLink is only going to signal the Millennium Line to have a maximum capacity of 7,500 pphpd, about half of what is normally considered the minimum capacity needed for building a subway.
Even TransLink thinks the subway is nothing more than an expensive White Elephant and this is for what the city of Vancouver has been all who would listen that Broadway is the busiest transportation corridor in North America.
Sadly the joke is on BC taxpayers as TransLink, The city of Vancouver and David Eby’s NDP have “Trumped” everyone with not only the Broadway subway but regional transportation as well!
Broadway subway, Pattullo bridge replacement projects delayed
Posted May 24, 2024
The B.C. government has announced delays to two major infrastructure projects in the Lower Mainland.
In a release Friday, the province says commuters can expect months of delays on both the Pattullo Bridge Replacement and Broadway Subway projects.
The release said design and construction activities on the Broadway Subway Project have “taken longer than originally expected, including work to relocate major utilities and install traffic decks, while keeping traffic moving along Broadway.”
he province claims that the most technically complex part of the process is over with the completion of the tunnel boring under Broadway, but that progress was delayed in part due to a five-week concrete strike in 2022.
While the subway line was once slated for 2026, the province now says it will open in fall of 2027.
Meanwhile, the release said the main tower for the new bridge — and now the tallest bridge tower in B.C. — connecting Surrey and New Westminster, is complete. But the replacement for the Pattullo bridge, which started in 2020, has also reportedly faced challenges like global supply issues.
“Despite facing significant global challenges, we’ve seen tremendous progress on both of these projects,” said Rob Fleming, B.C.’s minister of transportation and infrastructure. “These projects will move people and goods more quickly and safely around the Lower Mainland.”
As a result, the ministry says the new bridge is expected to open in fall of 2025.
“On projects of this size, delays have the potential to affect other construction activities,” the ministry said. “While mitigation efforts were made to recover both project schedules, it wasn’t always possible.”
Ottawa’s O-Train
Part 1
Ottawa’s Trillium Line is often miscaptioned by the media as LRT, it is not. The Trillium Line is a DMU service. The Trillium Line is a good example of providing quality transit at a much lower cost than more expensive tramways and unrealistic and hugely costly light-metro.
Monthly operating costs of the 24 km line is $3.5 million ($42 million annually), including the $2.1 million paid to TransitNext, the project-specific group run by SNC-Lavalin which was chosen to build and maintain it.
This should give pause for those who claim that Rail for the Valley Marpole to Chilliwack proposal would cost more than SkyTrain to operate. In 1993, just the Expo Line was subsidized $157 million (GVRD) annually which amounts to almost $300 million in 2024 dollars!
Stadler Delivers Trains Almost Anywhere!
An interesting article.
Improvements to railway serving car-free village near completion
By Railway Gazette International13 May 2024
SWITZERLAND: Stadler is delivering new rolling stock as part of the final stage of a programme to increase capacity and accessibility on Bergbahn Lauterbrunnen-Mürren’s metre-gauge railway.
Jungfraubahnen company BLM operates a cable car from Lauterbrunnen to Grütschalp, where passengers change to a 4 km adhesion railway running to Mürren via Winteregg. Freight is also carried.
The first of three new two-car EMUs arrived in November 2023 for what Stadler described as ‘extremely challenging’ winter testing at 1 600 m above sea level. The second was delivered on May 13, and the third will follow shortly.
Stadler said delivery is running behind schedule because several of its suppliers are struggling with supply bottlenecks as a result of the war in Ukraine and the pandemic, as well as limited track capacity at testing and stabling facilities.
From July the new EMUs will run in mixed operation with the existing BDe4/4 railcars from 1966-67.
‘The new multiple-units not only offer maximum comfort with spacious panoramic windows and comfortable seats, but also a modern passenger information system’, said CEO of Stadler Bussnang Dennis Laubbacher.
The introduction of the EMUs will complete a project lasting more than four years and costing SFr63m for the total renovation of the railway. This will increase the maximum speed from 30 to 50 km/h, reducing journey times and enabling more frequent services. The stations have also been modernised to meet federal accessibility rules.
‘We are delighted that we can offer locals and guests even more comfort and quality on this important and unique panoramic connection to the car-free village of Mürren’, said Jungfraubahnen director Urs Kessler.
Recent Comments