Posted by zweisystem on January 3, 2013 · Leave a Comment
There has been a lot of discussion that light rail can’t climb steep grades, despite the fact that there are scores of examples elsewhere that they can.
A tram descending a 9.5% grade in Mainz, Germany.
Steepest ever in Germany was Neunkirchen/Saar with 11.2%:
While in the USA, the Pittsburgh streetcars climbed a 12.5% grade.
Posted by zweisystem on December 28, 2012 · 1 Comment
It seems Bombardier Inc. had designed a new Advanced Rapid Transit car for each new ART system builtAi??in Vancouver, New York, and Kuala Lumpor having different designed cars. Now the Evergreen line is getting a new and improved ARTAi??Mk. 3 car.
Though Vancouver and Kuala Lumpur ART cars look similar, the KL cars are taller and shorter than the Vancouver edition. Now, with the Evergreen line, a new Mk.3 ART car has appeared and this poses the question; “How is Bombardier Inc. going to recoup the development costs for the new ART Mk. 3 car?”.
The Mk. 3 SkyTrain/ART car was built for the Honolulu light-metro, a project that Bombardier Inc. felt sure it would win (their confidence was high because they spent a lot of money convincing people to build withAi??their automatic metro instead of light rail)Ai??but Ansaldo pipped Bombardier at the post for the contract leaving Bombardier with a new metro car, with noneAi??being ordered. Instead of cheaper Mk. 2 cars, TransLink was forced to buy the more expensive Mk. 3 model because it was the only car Bombardier offered for the Evergreen Line bid.
Designing new rail cars is not cheap and the developmental costs must be recouped through sales of the car, yet the market does not seem to support a Mk. 3 car, unless there is an agreement, by one of the transit authorities using SkyTrain for a large order, which leaves only Vancouver and Kuala Lumpor. The Yongin Line Line in Korea, uses the much cheaper Mk.2 car built for the JFK ART.
The new cars being built for the Evergreen Line are being advertisedAi??Mk.3Ai??metro cars -Ai??four car train-sets gangwayed throughout. This gives rise to an interesting thought; are the new metro cars being delivered for the Evergreen Line now, aAi??pre-production metro cars for the Broadway subway? Bombardier Inc. must recoup its investment with theAi??Mk.3 metro car and the City of Vancouver, the provincial MOT, and TransLink seems hell bent in helping Bombardier to achieve this goal.
Will the Broadway subway be a package deal be announced when the Mk.1 cars are retired within the next decade and replaced with a large order of Bombardier Mk.3 metro cars – is thisAi??TransLink’s end game?
You heard it here first!
The Vancouver SkyTrain Mk.2 ART car -married pair.
The Kennedy Airport ART car – married Pair
The Kuala Lumpor ART car -married pair
Posted by zweisystem on December 27, 2012 · 6 Comments
The following bit of misinformation comes from the SkyTrain for Surrey folks, who seem to continually to embarrass themselves with their ignorance of transit matters.
Bombardier Wins TransLink Contract for 28 new Trains TransLink and the Government of BC have signed a contract with Bombardier for 28 new SkyTrain cars, a contract valued at $90.7 million. The contract also includes the possibility of an additional 28 cars for June 2017.
The cars will be four articulated trains that riders can walk from one end of the train to the other. Current SkyTrain stock allows rider to walk between two cars but not all four. The cars will be used on the Evergreen Line, Expo and Millennium.
The new cars will be completed for the Evergreen Line and delivered by January 2016. The contract was awarded as a result of request for expressions of interest in February 2012. According to a representative from the Ministry of Transportation, Bombardier was the only company that responded to the Request for Expressions of Interest.
SkyTrain is a proprietary technology owned by Bombardier. The province conducted market sounding on vehicle procurement in 2010. Other companies said that unless the order was for 100 cars or more, they would not be interested.
Now let us look at the italic & underlined items.
- SkyTrain is a proprietary light-metro system owned by by Bombardier Inc. and only SkyTrain vehicles can operate on the guideway. The cost ofAi??one Mk.3 vehicle, with a maximum capacity of about 125 personsAi??per vehicle, works out to about $3.25 million a copy. A modular light rail vehicle or tram, with a capacity of about 250 persons, costs an average of $4 million aAi??car.Ai??Ai??It would be cheaper to operate couples pairs of trams, costing around $8 million, but having the same capacity ofAi??500 personsAi??of aAi??four car SkyTrain train-set, costing $13 million.Ai??TransLink would need only fourteen LRV’s or trams costing about $56 million to do the same work as twenty eight SkyTrain metro cars, costing $90.7 million.
- The SkyTrain cars are not articulated and operate as a permanently married quadruple set. The cars are gangwayed, permitting communication throughout the train-set. The Mk.3 ‘quadruple set’Ai??hasAi??now made the Bombardier’s ART system a heavy-rail metro as the light metro market has all but collapsed. Articulated cars are rail vehicles which consist of a number of smaller, lighter cars which are semi-permanently attached to each other and which share common bogie or truck.
- Of course no other company made a bid on supplying cars, ART is a proprietary transit system and only Bombardier built cars can operate on the Expo and Millennium Lines!
- To absorb the development costs for SkyTrain compatible cars, companies like Alstom and Siemens need to build a minimum of 100 cars. As the MOT and Bombardier keep ordering small lots of MK.3 cars, all other companies are effectively shut out of the bidding process.
Transit companies buying proprietary transit systems fall prey to predatory marketing, where only the one company can provide replacements carsAi??and at muchAi??higher costs. TransLink and the provincial MOT have been suckered by Bombardier and in turn continue to sucker the taxpayer to ante up more and more money for an outdated and obsolete product!
Posted by Cardinal Fang on December 26, 2012 · Leave a Comment
In the intervening 18 months, little has changed; the Vancouver City Council and Translink have learnt little except that the opposition and objectors can be Ai??worn down by threats & strong arm tactics. Sadly Translink & the Vancouver Engineers department have conspicuously chosen to ignoreAi??the examples of urban transportationAi??best practise from Europe andAi??particularlyAi??from Canada’sAi??two former colonial mastersAi??- Britain & France. It is to be hoped that they might take more notice of policy and practise from south of the 49th parallel – the US of A, where @ grade Light Rail, Streetcar & Tramway development is going from strength to strength.
Posted by Cardinal Fang on December 26, 2012 · Leave a Comment
Much like any group, passenger rail advocates split into subsections or specialties of interest or belief, such as high speed rail, Amtrak, regional/commuter, rapid transit, LRTai??i??and streetcars.
Add to that the human element of being interested primarily in one’s home turf first (you can get yours later, thank you very much), and the disparate viewpoints multiply.
Still, I was slightly taken aback this week during an ongoing e-debate over the proposed MTA New York City Transit No. 7 line into New Jerseyai??i??New Yorkers largely despise the idea; New Jerseyans like it; who’s paying?ai??i??when the conversation veered into streetcars and their worth, and, apparently, their place: Not on the street.
One advocate, someone I know and trust on many matters, flatly insisted that all passenger rail needs to be grade-separated, all the time, no matter what (including no matter what the cost? He didn’t say). “Careful on streetcars, Doug,” he admonished. “The logical extension of what you’re suggesting is that NYC would be a thriving metropolis it is if the ‘subways’ were all at grade level.”
I’m not aware of that logical extension at all, let alone my advocacy of it. As noted earlier, I ride the subways, mostly in New Yorkai??i??a lot. New York couldn’t function as it does without the subways, no doubt. But it wouldn’t hurt some of the streets of New York, or anywhere else, if some streetcars were added to the mix. (Or, as another advocate asserted, returned to that mix; they did exist once.)
For argument’s sake, let’s buy into the very reasonable assertion, made by rail activists and anti-rail voices alike, that the world isn’t New York, nor should it be. I’m good with that. By extension, it means among other things that most of the world’s municipalities don’t have subways, nor (perhaps) should they automatically have same. I’m still with that.
But most of those places, certainly most in North America, do have streets. Some of these places are wisely restoring “streetcars” on some of those thoroughfares, and the inveterate holdouts (San Francisco, New Orleans) are expanding what they never surrendered. Yes, yes, the latter is blessed with that nice center median along Canal Street, but all in all those streetcars can be found (yea, verily!) on the street. (And, per photo at left, for New Orleans even in the snow!)
As my fellow blogger Lyndon Henry notes, safety becomes a valid issue, and far be it for me to excuse streetcars from that issue. Still, why do streetcars in particular (and all rail, freight and passenger, in general) carry the burden unduly? Don’t automobiles have a safety issue? They sure should, given their better-but-still-lethal daily tally. The presumption today, however, is that streets are for cars first and foremost. No bicycles and, oh my gosh, no streetcars, please.
Buses, backed by 60-plus years of U.S. “give the poor suckers something” philosophy, get a bye, however, and backers of more buses (including Bus Rapid Transit) love pointing out to me that buses can circumvent auto obstacles on the streetai??i??no exceptions. They sure don’t live in my hometown, where double-parked cars on both sides of the main street can do a great job obstructing buses. Cars parked in the bus stops also force those magic buses to load and unload passengers in mid-streetai??i??more obstruction, more delays. But streetcarsai??i??they’re supposedly too inflexible for today’s motor madness, yessir.
I don’t buy it, and, fortunately, neither do some dedicated citizens across the continent, be they in Atlanta, Cincinnati, New Orleans, Portland, Salt Lake City, San Francisco, or Seattle (photo above right). Like me, they believe streetcars are aptly named, and one of their places is on the avenue. Expect that reality to occur more often in the decade ahead.
Posted by Cardinal Fang on December 26, 2012 · Leave a Comment
They’re coming. They’re actually now being built, not just planned, not just proposed. Streetcar lines are back.
Streetcars are still under the radar for most railroad folks, perhaps understandably, given the fledgling nature of the mode in the U.S. The lines established and under construction, are small in scope and distance. Ditto the streetcar order sizes, in the single digits.
But the growth, the seeding, of U.S. streetcar activity is there. We’re seeing it here at Railway Age as we compile our January Passenger Railcar Outlook. We’re seeing it, too, as we report on and monitor town after city that moves to reinstate, reinstall, resurrect streetcar service across the country, red state or blue state an irrelevant distinction.
During the week of Dec. 10, 2012, it was Kansas City making the commitment (or, if you’re a skeptic or cynic, taking the plunge). It’s following a host of other cities, including (but not necessarily limited to) Arlington, Va., Dallas, Fort Lauderdale, Fla., Milwaukee, Phoenix, Salt Lake City, San Antonio, Tex., and Santa Ana, Calif., committing to building a streetcar line.
That list doesn’t include those already building new lines (Tucson, Cincinnati, even Washington, D.C.) during 2012, nor those older (older! But it’s all relative, I guess) streetcar champions in the Pacific Northwestai??i??Tacoma, Seattle (shown above), and of course Portland, Ore.ai??i??adding or exploring add-ons to their current lines. Portland and Seattle, in particular, are forging ahead in creating streetcar systems, not just a line, and integrating those streetcars into “bigger brother” mode light rail transit.
Ai??
Here’s hoping all the friends & supporters of Rail for the Valley and also Translink & Vancouver Engineer’s department had a great festive season.
The Cardinal wishes you all a happy & prosperous 2013 – just remember street Tramways are the way!
… A toast to 2013Ai??- shiny rails in VancouverAi??–
Posted by zweisystem on December 24, 2012 · Leave a Comment
A very merry Christmas to all from Rail for the Valley!
Posted by Cardinal Fang on December 23, 2012 · Leave a Comment
Dead passenger found riding Berlin subway
By Reuters
BERLIN – A 65-year-old man thought to be sleeping while sitting upright on a Berlin underground train as it crisscrossed the German capital was actually dead, police said on Sunday.
“It’s tragic,” a Berlin police spokeswoman said. “We don’t know how long he was sitting dead on the train nor do we know the exact cause of death yet. There are no indications of foul play. He seems to have died of natural causes.”
The man was found in the U-8 underground train line that runs all night at the Weinmeisterstrasse station at 5:45 a.m. when a rail worker tried wake the man up by gently shaking him. Medics were called in but could only pronounce the man dead.
A preliminary investigation showed no indications of the man being murdered. A more detailed autopsy is planned for Monday.
http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/12/23/16105169-dead-passenger-found-riding-berlin-subway?lite&ocid=msnhp&pos=7
Tragic the news is, especially at this time of the year;Ai??the Cardinal hopes that Translink will not dismiss the human element of subterranean human transit, in their ambition Ai??for a fully automatic metro.
Posted by Cardinal Fang on December 21, 2012 · 3 Comments
In other words a few inches of snow doesn’t stop @ grade LRT/street level Tramways; a foot and so long as the snow sweaping is effective the LRV/Trams keep on operating.
Croydon Tramlink
TransLinkai??i??s bus company is expensive, inefficient and dysfunctional in inclement weather; US & European Tramways operate without a doubt in snow conditions.
Spotlight on trams: Helsinki
Helsinki’s modern tram operating in snow | picture: Creative Commons
Helsinki is a city of 480,000 people with a surrounding metropolitan area of around 1.3 million people. It is very similar in size to Edinburgh (478,000) and it also the capital of its country with a population slightly less than that of Scotland at 5.3 million.
It is a remarkable and beautiful city with big plans for the future which include a fast rail link to St Petersburg, promoting and developing its airport as a European hub to China and investigating a 50 mile tunnel link to Tallinn in Estonia. This is a city in which seventy percent of the land area and almost all development land is owned by the City Council. This is a city with big plans and the ability to implement them.
The city also has ambitious plans for its own expansion, particularly on to waterfront areas previously occupied by docklands and inner harbours which have moved out to a new complex at Vuosaaric on the eastern edge of the conurbation. It is expected that an additional 100,000 people will be accommodated in these new developments. A key factor in planning these new development areas is integrated public transport by Metro in part but mainly by tram.
Helsinki’s tram network is one of the oldest electrified tram networks in the world. It forms part of the city public transport system organised by Helsinki Regional Transport Authority and operated by Helsinki City Transport. The trams are the main means of transport within the city centre and 56.6 million trips were made back in 2004, which is more than those made with the Helsinki Metro.
The first tram network was established in 1890 and electrification took place in 1900. In common with many other European cities, the tram system was under threat from buses in the mid 20th century and the city decided to close the system in the early 1960s. However this decision was reversed during the early 1970s and by 1976 the network was being expanded again. Today the tram is a key part of the city’s infrastructure.
The city has a current total of twelve lines with a further six lines planned over the next few years. As well as owning almost 70% of the land area of the city, the Helsinki authorities also own the public transport system and critically, the energy company that supplies power for the tram network. This degree of ownership of the core elements of the system means that it is relatively easy to extend the network and guarantee connections to new housing areas without having to haggle with different land owners, developers, public utility owners and contractors.
Another aspect of infrastructure provision in Helsinki is the way in which it seems to happen efficiently and painlessly. Not for them the contractual disputes, delays in implementation or flaws in construction which are leapt upon by a triumphant public and trumpeted in the media elsewhere.
Perhaps it is in the dour uncomplaining Finnish character to just let other people get on with things in the knowledge that they will eventually be successful. Or perhaps they are just used to doing infrastructure provision really well.
Posted by zweisystem on December 21, 2012 · 1 Comment
It seems Tuesday’s and Wednesday’s disastrous showing of its public transit service is beginning to raise eyebrows within the TransLink friendly mainstream media.
SkyTrain did work, my god it should, there was hardly any snowAi??to speak of to impede service, but it was the failure of the buses that was embarrassing. TransLink’s entire transit philosophy is to force feed the SkyTrain light-metro with tens of thousands of commuters and if the buses fail to do their job, then the transit system collapses and collapse it did.
Unlike other cities transit systems like Seattle and Portland, TransLink does not have a snow plan, except forAi??management toAi??run in circles exclaiming; “shock and disbelief”.
Buses servicing SFU, which is located on top of a mountain, are not chained; there is no coordination with city engineering departments to ensure cleared snow routes for buses; abysmal management abounds! Where is the TransLink board? Nothing but silence from the so called Board of Experts.
TransLink is an embarrassment and it is time that the province fix it or get rid of it!
Barbara Yaffe: No other transit system in Canada plays dead at the first lick of snow
TransLink’s bus company is expensive, inefficient and dysfunctional in inclement weather
VANCOUVER ai??i?? Take a public transit system that delivers mediocre service at the best of times, sprinkle some snow and a dash of wind and what you get is a recipe for chaos.
Thatai??i??s exactly what got served up Wednesday to bus riders in Metro Vancouver who, in too many cases, were left to fend for themselves.
The simple truth is, Coast Mountain Bus service let its customers down in meteorological circumstances that would be considered no big deal in Montreal or Toronto.
Transit spokesman Derek Zabel blamed accidents, road and intersection closures, fallen trees and branches, one fire and two bridge closures. He might have added poor snow-clearing operations.
Zabel added that the staff ai???is focused on delivering service for our valued customers as best we can in the conditions we face.ai???
I waited one hour for a No. 41 bus Wednesday, even as non-bus vehicles whizzed past on a road which, at that point, had turned slushy.
A friend taking the same bus two hours later wound up walking an hour to get home, witnessing not one passing bus during her ordeal.
This, despite the fact TransLink has a ai???Snow Planai??? it implements at the first sign of the stuff.
When things get slippery, particular problem areas for the company include the North Shore, Coquitlam, Simon Fraser University and Victoria Drive.
Chains arenai??i??t used on bus tires because they are inappropriate on bare roads, says a company statement that warns: ai???Customers themselves need to be prepared for any eventuality, including longer than usual waits for buses or SkyTrain and the possibility of having to walk if a bus is … rerouted.
ai???One should dress appropriately for the elements and wear proper footwear.ai???
But surely, when weather turns harsh, thatai??i??s when citizens most need transit. It might be reasonable to argue that services might falter in a hurricane or blizzard, but Wednesdayai??i??s fluffy snowfall?
Metro Vancouver should be able to keep its $1.28-billion transit company functioning when some snow falls ai??i?? as it does most every year; this is Canada.
The situation grew more absurd Wednesday afternoon when a spanking new $3.3-billion Port Mann Bridge started raining down ice chunks on cars, forcing its closure.
Both taxpayers and transit users, who incidentally are facing a Jan. 1 hike in transit fares, have reason to feel thoroughly fed up. Half of Coast Mountainai??i??s budget comes from citizensai??i?? taxes; another 35.6 per cent is derived from fares.
The truth is, in both bad weather and good, Coast Mountain ai??i?? when set against counterparts in Victoria, Edmonton, Calgary and Toronto ai??i?? scores poorly on a host of measures.
A March 2012 report on Coast Mountainai??i??s operations by Shirocca Consulting revealed: ai???compared to Canadian peers, the bus division exhibits an abundance of equipment and staffing levels that help to explain its generally higher costs and lower cost efficiency and effectiveness than most of the peers, even after taking into account its large service areas.ai???
The report noted ai???two disturbing trends [in] the rising cost per passenger carried and decline in the number of passengers carried per hour.ai???
It further reported outsized administrative costs as well as the highest fares when multi-zone pricing is factored in.
Shirocca Consulting called on Coast Mountain to improve ai???productivity in both bus service delivery and maintenance.ai???
While the transit company bears blame, governments need to own some of the mess on display Wednesday.
In an October 2011 report, A Blueprint for a National Transit Framework, the Mowat Centre pointed out that efficient transit is crucial to the success of ai???large city regionsai???.
Canadaai??i??s cities lack resources to expand and maintain their transit systems, and ai???there has historically been insufficient financial support from other levels of government, particularly the federal government.ai???
Canada is the only G7 economy failing to provide predictable, dedicated funding for transit systems.
That said, itai??i??s hard to believe transit systems elsewhere in Canada would collapse under the weight of a few centimetres of snow as Coast Mountain did this week.
byaffe@vancouversun.com
Ai?? Copyright (c) The Vancouver Sun
Recent Comments