By Rail to Simon Fraser University
In a private email to Zweisystem, a question was asked: “other than buses, how else could Simon Fraser University be serviced by public transit?” The email went on to discuss the merits or pitfalls of various transit modes including Funiculars (not enough capacity) and a high speed Gondolas (again, questionable capacity and high maintenance costs). What wasn’t discussed was light rail because as every one knows, according to TransLink “Ai??Ai??light rail can’t climb steep grades” or can it?
A transit expert from Europe once told Zweisystem that: “If one builds popular transit destinations in extraordinary places, one must use extraordinary methods to service them.”
There is a LRT solution:Ai??Ai??the rack & pinion tram.
Stuttgart Germany also has an university located on a steep hill andAi??Ai??transit authorities operate Ai??Ai??rack & pinion trams on that route, enabling them toAi??Ai??climb the steep grades to service the institution. The service has been in operation for a very long time and works well in all weathers, especially in the snow. The cost of a LRT rack & pinion tram is about 10% to 15% more to install and only on the rack portions of the route; the maximum speed while racking, depending on motor size is about 60 kph and up to 80 kph when not.
A nice touch is thatAi??Ai??the university tram service also offers a bike trolley for customers to take the tram up the hill and then bike down later.
What this post demonstrates, that unlike SkyTrain and light-metro, where costs prohibit even small spur lines to service destinations; (in Richmond the closest station on RAV/Canada Line for the Olympic Skating Oval is about one and a half kilometers away, yet the Oval is built adjacent to an old railway formation which means LRT could have directly serviced it if light-rail had been built instead), thus expensive shuttle buses must be employed or customers face a long walks which makes the decision to take the car instead all the more easier.
For almost every transportation problem, there is an affordableAi??Ai??light-rail solution, something that bureaucrats a TransLink continue to ignore.
New Westminster’s Interurban station C.1949
Here is a vintage video of BC Electric’s New Westminster depot.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9nlBa-4SIU]
Last of the interurbans – Part 5 A video of the South Shore interurban.
Courtesy of U-Tube, a video of the South Shore interurban.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Hd4qqWZM4s]
From the LRTA – Karlsruhe orders Bombardier TramTrains
Good news for Rail for the Valley, Bombardier is now producing TramTrains for the famous Karlshrue Two-System light rail network. One would guess that Bombardier Inc. would love to demonstrate this product here. Imagine, the “Great Tram Train Trials” for the Fraser Valley, with Alstom, Siemens, Bombardier, Stadler all competing for orders here; it would give much international credence for the ‘interurban’ project.
Karlsruhe orders tram trains : The Albtal-Verkehrs-Gesellschaft mbH (AVG) and the Verkehrsbetriebe Karlsruhe GmbH (VBK) have between them ordered 30 dual-system FLEXITY Swift tram-trains from Bombardier at a cost of about 129 million euros (CAD $203 or $6.77 million per vehicle). The vehicles are expected to be delivered between August 2011 and September 2013. An option for up to another 45 vehicles has also been agreed.
The new vehicles will be manufactured in the Bombardier sites of Bautzen and Vienna. the will use the BOMBARDIER MITRAC propulsion and control system which will be provided by Bombardier Mannheim and have the BOMBARDIER FLEXX Urban 2500 bogies manufactures at the Bombardier site in Siegen
The Flexity Swift tram is a light-rail vehicle manufactured by Bombardier Transportation. Most models follow a 70% low-floor design in order to allow access to those in wheelchairs without requiring the construction of high platforms, though some of Cologne’s fleet use a high-floor format (900 mm) with level boarding platforms instead, in order to retain compatibility with stations built for older trams.
They are bi-directional, with cabs at both ends and doors on both sides, and are articulated with three sections. The centre section is very short on most trams, but can be replaced with a longer piece in order to increase capacity, as London is considering doing for future lines.
The trams can be coupled together into trains, and can safely reach speeds of 80Ai??Ai??km/h (50Ai??Ai??mph) when running on dedicated lines. Systems using the Flexity Swift tram include Cologne (for which it was originally designed), south London’s Tramlink, Istanbul, Rotterdam, Stockholm (lines 12 and 22), and the Minneapolis Hiawatha Line. Merseytram in Liverpool/Merseyside plan to use the same model as London if it is built.
A total of 40new Flexity Swift trams have been ordered for use on Manchester Metrolink in England.
The Flexity Swift’s closest competitors are Alstom’s Citadis, the Siemens Combino and Avanto, Sirio from Ansaldobreda, and Bombardier’s other Flexity trams.
The Dreseden Schwebebahn – A monrail funicular
Of course, let us not forget Germany’s other Schwebeban (hanging railway), Dresden’s unique monorail funicular. Though not a true rapid transit system, the historic funicular does predate the Wuppertal Schwebeban by a few years and is worthy of a look.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ezsn4D_mKyA]
The Wuppertal Schwebebahn – Let’s take a ride!
There has been a lot of interest shown in the RFV blog about the Wuppertal Schwebebahn so I have included this video to give the full flavour of this historic monorail transit system.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfE8SKK-ms4]
The Chicago "El"
Since we are on the subject of elevated metro’s, This U-Tube item showing Chicago’s famed “El”Ai??Ai??may prove interesting.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a0xfzGtgd2w]
The Greer Report – Review of Rapid Transit Project Claims. We didn’t need an American consultant to tell us TransLink is ‘off the rails’.
Over ten years ago the Greer Report, done byAi??Ai??Greer Consulting Services, issued a scathing report on the Broadway/Lougheed Rapid Transit Projects, later to be know as the SkyTrain Millennium Line. The report found:
- cost comparisons appear to have been contrived to favour SkyTrain over LRT
- Ai??Ai??no ridership (demand) analysis was reported to justify the high capacity system
- Ai??Ai??air quality and transportation benefits are unsubstantiated
- accelerated construction advantages of SkyTrain were clearly unrealistic
- risks associated with the SkyTrain car manufacture have not been assessed.
Fast forward to 2009, has anything changed?
Nada, nope, not a chance!
How can TransLink be trusted with any honestAi??Ai??rapid transit planning, especially when they want hundreds of millions more in taxpayers money to pay for ‘pie-in-the-sky’ light-metro planning based on contrivedAi??Ai??planning and phony studies? The RAV/Canada line is just a symptom of a major problem: TransLink refuses to plan for affordable light-rail and instead invents statistics to suit their in-house light-metro planning. The 100,000 passengers a day, quoted by RAV officials and Liberal politicians, needed so the RAV/Canada line will operate subsidy free is ‘stuff-and-nonsense’ as TransLink has absolutely no mechanism in place to apportion fares between SkyTrain, RAV/Canada line, Seabus, and the regular buses. TransLink doesn’t know what percentage of fares are full fares, concession fares, and the deeply discounted U-Pass, nor do they have a formula for allocating fares between bus, seabus and metro.
Example: A South Surrey student (3 zone fare) going to UBC via transit pays justAi??Ai??$25 a month for a U-Pass; he/she takes a bus to Casino/Bridgeport Junction, transfers to the RAV/Canada LineAi??Ai??and then transfers againAi??Ai??to a bus going to UBC. The apportioned fare should beAi??Ai??$8.33 for the RAV/Canada line and $16.67 for the bus system.Ai??Ai??The RAV/Canada Line’s share of an U-Pass (1,2,or 3 zones) would be $8.33 a month or about $0.41.5 cents a day (based on 20 days use)! There is absolutely no way with the current fare structure that RAV will pay for itself with 100,000 passengers a day; especially when other metros need 400,000 to 500,000 passengers a day to justify construction.
Clearly TransLink hasn’t a clue about apportioned fares or even how the RAV/Canada line will determine what percentage will be paid to the metro and buses. What may happen is that TransLink will count all ridership on RAV as full adult cash fares andAi??Ai??‘fiddle away’Ai??Ai??monies that rightfully should go to the bus system’s coffers.
What is known for certain is that the 100,000 a day claim made by TransLink, Kevin Falcon and Gordon Campbell is completely bogus!
Certainly nothing has changed much at TransLink as American transit expert, Gerald Fox, stated in a Feb.2008 letter regarding the Evergreen line:
“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 too.” And adding: ” 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 analyzed honestly, and the taxpayers’ interests are protected. No SkyTrain project has ever passed this scrutiny in the US.”
Ai??Ai??Metro politicians take note, TransLink is about to take you and your taxpayers on a wild ride, “around, around, TransLink goes; where it will stop nobody knows!”
For the full Greer Report
http://www.bcgreen.com/~samuel/green/GREER_Rep-SkyTrain_April_12_1999.pdf
Gerald Fox’s letter
http://railforthevalley.wordpress.com/2008/12/26/can-translinks-business-cases-be-trusted/
Tramtrain trials in Sheffield UK – Should we not have TramTrain trials here?
The concept of tramtrain or light rail vehicles track-sharing with mainline railways is now being tried in the U.K. with a Rotherham to Sheffield demonstration Line. This is good news for Rail for the Valley as if TramTrain passes muster with the very conservative Her Majesties Railway Inspectorate, one can be well assured that TramTrain would be safe in operation here!
City tram-trains trial unveiled
The tram-train service would join up with the existing Supertram network
Passengers in South Yorkshire could be the first in the UK to use Continental-style tram-trains under plans announced by the Department for Transport (DfT).A trial of the electric vehicles is planned on a new service linking Rotherham and Sheffield.
Once a feasibility study has been completed, the project will take three years and Ai??A?24m to get up and running.
Five tram-trains will run on existing freight track from Rotherham and then join the Sheffield Supertram network.
The scheme replaces a previously-announced tram-train trial on the Penistone Line, linking Sheffield and Huddersfield via Barnsley, which would have used diesel-powered vehicles.
That phase of the trial is now due to go ahead at a later date after it was decided that the electric tram-trains were more economically viable.
‘Valuable addition’
Rail Minister Chris Mole announced the plans on a visit to Meadowhall in Sheffield, where tram-trains will connect to the city’s Supertram network.
He said: “Tram-train is a new concept for Britain, but it has already proved a valuable addition to rail fleets on the continent.
“Adapting tram-train to the UK requires some testing, but while that is under way, people in South Yorkshire will have the chance to experience this new type of vehicle for themselves, and I hope they will tell us what they think of it.”
David Brown, director general of the South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive, said: “If we can overcome the technical challenges then tram-trains would bring huge benefits to the travelling public in South Yorkshire.
“They would widen the options available to those people travelling between Rotherham and Sheffield and the technology could eventually be used elsewhere in the UK too.”
Train operator Northern Rail will buy the new vehicles for the Rotherham-Sheffield operation, while Network Rail is investigating what works would be necessary to safely accommodate the vehicles on the UK network.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/south_yorkshire/8257652.stm
Commuting is harder now – A letter to the Vancouver Sun
Vancouver SunSeptember 16, 2009Ai??Ai??The new commuting patterns have added 15 to 20 minutes each way to my commute from Ladner to the University of B.C. Most of this is due to poor connections, especially to the east-west lines on 41st and King Edward. The early 480 bus to UBC is jam-packed when it arrives at Bridgeport.As for columnist Pete McMartin’s pleasant trip from Tsawwassen to Vancouver (Commute goes smoothly – anticipated chaos fails to show, Sept. 9), he travels at rush hour, rides for almost the full length of the line and doesn’t connect outside the downtown area. His situation is perfectly suited for the train.
Unfortunately, I am resigned to that fact that a longer commute is my sacrifice on the altar of the Olympics.
http://www.vancouversun.com/opinion/letters/Commuting+harder/1998674/story.html
Recent Comments