Facts Don’t Seem To Matter – UBC Students Gaslights The Truth.
Gaslighting: a form of psychological manipulation in which a person or a group covertly sows seeds of doubt in a targeted individual or group, making them question their own memory, perception, or judgment, often evoking in them cognitive dissonance and other changes including low self-esteem. Using denial, misdirection, contradiction, and misinformation, gaslighting involves attempts to destabilize the victim and delegitimize the victim’s beliefs. Instances can range from the denial by an abuser that previous abusive incidents occurred, to the staging of bizarre events by the abuser with the intention of disorienting the victim.
When it comes to regional transit and regional transit planning, UBC Students, abetted by TransLink’s gas-lighting, rules.
Three issues which TransLink’s gaslighting has been a success.
- SkyTrain is not a proprietary transit system.
- Broadway is the most heaviest used transit route in Canada, no North America
- LRT is in inferior
The SkyTrain Light-Metro system includes a proprietary transit system.
The question those claiming that SkyTrain is not a proprietary transit system, must ask; “Since when did the proprietary Movia Automatic Light Metro cease to be a proprietary transit system?“
SkyTrain is the name of the regional light-metro network and not the commercial trains used.
The Canada line uses conventional EMU’s made by ROTEM.
The Expo Line used the the proprietary Advanced Light Rail Transit (ALRT) system, renamed from the original Intermediate Capacity Transit System (ICTS), developed by the Urban Transportation Development Corporation (UTDC), an Ontario Crown corporation. The later Advanced Rapid Transit (ART) cars (MK.2’s), which came with the Millennium Line, were produced by Bombardier after it acquired the remains of the UTDC after it was returned to the Ontario government when Lavalin went Bankrupt.
Lavalin briefly owned the proprietary railway, renaming the proprietary transit system Advanced Light Metro (ALM) but the UTDC was returned to the Province of Ontario, after Lavalin went bankrupt trying to sell the often renamed proprietary transit system to Bangkok.
Montreal rebuilt the curs using their Innovia light-metro body-shell.
The Mk.5 cars, TransLink boast about, are Innovia 300 cars with open vestibules and have been on the market for about 20 years.
Bombardier’s Innovia line of light-metros, due to lack of sales was folded into the Movia heavy-rail metro line, with the proprietary system called Movia Automatic Light Metro.
MALM is now owned by Alstom, when they acquired Bombardier’s rail division.
The key to the MALM system being proprietary is the use of Linear Induction Motors and the steerable axle trucks as no other company offers an “off the shelf” product compatible to operate son the MALM Lines.
As one German Engineer told me; “One just cannot slap on a pair of LIM’s on a conventional bogie (truck) and expect it to operate!“
The steerable axle truck, and LIM, are the key to the proprietary light metro.
Broadway is not the busiest transit corridor in Canada.
The hype and hoopla that Broadway being the the heaviest used transit route in Canada, no North America is a common refrain one reads in the mainstream media and hears on the radio or TV, made by politicians and bureaucrats.
Sorry it’s not true as the following from TransLink confirms.
“Finally, on January 31, 2019, you contacted several news organizations and this Secretariat raising concerns over TransLink’s assertion that the 99 B-Line is the busiest bus route in the US and Canada.
This is our region’s most overcrowded bus route. Pass ups are already common, as our regular riders on that route are fully aware. TransLink projects that the 99 B-Line from Arbutus to UBC will be at capacity in the peak when the Millennium Line extension from Commercial-Broadway to Arbutus opens.”
Cutting through the TransLink speak of this reply, TransLink only admits to Broadway being “our region’s most overcrowded bus route” and nothing more. What seems to be causing overcrowding is not heavy use, rather poor management because the capacity offered by B-line buses is under 2,000 persons per hour per direction at 3 minute headway’s.
The 99 B-Line bus only had 10,623,737 hoardings in 2024. That’s 34,161 to 40,861 passengers per business day, depending on your daily numbers conversion calculation method. Which puts it in at best, 4th in Toronto in 2024 or 9th if you use the lowest number, compared to other T.T.C. surface routes. Second place in 2024 Ottawa, if you use the arithmetic mean.
The claims that the 99 B-Line route on the Broadway Corridor moves 60,000 customers per day, are just, claims.
To increase capacity, why not offer peak hour 2 minute headway’s for the 99 B-Line and increase capacity by 50%; much simpler and affordable than a $4 billion subway.
Light rail is not inferior.
TransLink’s anti LRT screed is laughable and in the real world, they would be “thrown off the stage” with the drivel they peddle.
It seems TransLink’s six figured salaried bureaucrats can’t or won’t read transit history for if they had, they would know that only seven of the now called Movia Automatic Light Metro proprietary transit systems have been built over the past 40 years, under six different names. During the same period well over over two hundred and fifty new build Light rail lines have been built and most of the existing streetcar/ram systems have been upgraded or partially upgraded to light rail standards.
No MALM system has been sold in the past two decades.
Modern trams, today can obtain capacities beyond 20,000 pphpd on portions of their routes at peak hours. This is why modern light rail has been so successful due in part for its ability to carry heavy passenger loads when need be. This is part of the flexibility of service inherent in modern light rail.
According to Thales, who has won the $1.47 billion re-signalling contract for the Expo and Millennium lines, the present maximum capacity of the Millennium Line is a mere 4,000 persons per hour per direction and after re-signalling, the maximum capacity of the Millennium Line will be only 7,500.
Toronto streetcars were obtaining peak hour capacity of over 12,000 pphpd on select routes in the late 1940’s and early 1950’s!
Today, the modern tram can operate as a mainline passenger train, a light-metro, light-rail and a streetcar all on the same route! Modern LRT has a proven record of attracting motorists from the car creating a viable modal shift from car to transit.
The last forty years has seen an unprecedented investment either building new or refurbishing existing transit systems around the world. It is a field where success is eagerly copied and what is deemed poor avoided. During this time, no other city has copied Vancouver’s transit planning, nor has copied Vancouver’s exclusive use of light-metro.
Sadly, TransLink’s “gaslighting” has so perverted transit planning in the region, that there is absolutely no hope of any coherent transit planning for the foreseeable future. UBC Students demanding a $8 billion subway to UBC, continue gas-lighting the media and public, continuing the Goebbels Gambit, of repeating lies often enough that the public begin to believe it!
The end result; Vancouver continues building with a “museum piece” transit system, too expensive to deal with today’s transit ills.
1- skytrain is custom
MK series.
OG steerable axle truck by UTDC. Self steerable bogie and suspension develop V2 by BCRTC can manufactured BC and another in ontario. LIM Motor supply by a local BC company from the beginning. Motor controls, electric inverter, AC, and other things have been off the shelf components. On board computer system being provided by Thales. Proprietary To Bombardier is aluminum body(same width constraints as London), wiring harness and fault detection system(communication out to OCC).
It set up to be a Canadian interest to keep self steerable bogie and LIM
Hyundai Rodom transsets full proprietary.
Some components are made in North America. But specialty components are made in Korea. Costs are dependent on how well Hyundai Roden suppliers in Korea. Powertrain, bogie ,body shell and suspension system.
It set up to be protected canadian invention self bogie and LIM. Difficult to export to other operators or countries.
2-UBC Bus Capacity
R4 and 99 B 3 min 20 x 75-100 = 1,500-2,000
49 4 min 15 x 75-100 = 1,125-1,500
8 8 min 7.5 x 75-100 = 562-750
84 10 min 6 x 75-100 = 450-600
9 10 min x 57-65= 342-390
14 10 min x 57-65= 342-390
44 10 min 6 x 57-65 = 342-390
33 12 min 5 x 57-65 = 285-325
UBC Bus capacity per hour: 6,106-7,955
The Broadway or adjacent to it hourly capacity UBC: 4,000-5,000 pphpd during peak time. Pass up The full buses happen daily with people waiting between 2 – 4 buses. Level of bus service not sustainable to the student discount to UBC of Translink. R4 and 99-B line around $30 Million annually in operation. $35 million annual operation cost for the skytrain.(VCC To UBC)
3-LRT not best option for UBCX
Proposed LRT would be like the Scarborough RT add end of a subway line. Higher the normal operational costs for an LRT due to the low Fleet and up wage beyond skytrain attendant cost. And Vancouver city council was against putting operations in maintenance in false creed flats and steele against all day, bus lands on Broadway.
With skytrain being proposed to ubc in 2 parts. Part 1 would be finished 2027. Part 2 in business case. Province has a long track record delivering skytrain projects in 2 parts. A small gap in between before construction will start on part
Mr zwei
Vancouver is rated to be in the top 30 of global cities. To be a world-renowned city, you need to be in the top 50. And to be a world-class city best in planning/design others want to replicate.
World Class transit system.
Adhere to a strict standard of level of service, safety and beyond certain categories. Translink is known for multimode integration. BCRTC is known as the first and most knowledgeable in automatic train operations.
World famous transit agencies are known for being the biggest or oldest systems. What’s the difference between a rapid transit light, medium and heavy?
Light 0-19,999 pphpd
Medium 20,000-39,999 pphpd
Heavy 40,000+
Calculated on a 6 passengers per square meter.
Canada line is in the light category.
Skytrain LIM is in the medium category.
Zwei replies: You do not have a clue what you are talking about and what you present is a mishmash of a word salad, crafted to pretend you know something, which you do not.
Everything in your screed is not factual and based on false assumptions.
Define world class? Define rapid transit? Define light rail?
As for Broadway, capacity for the 99-B Line bus is a maximum of 2,000 pphpd, but you confuse it with traffic flows which of course is higher. You then compound your nonsesne by including buses that do not operate on Broadway and if Translink thinks this will add to the customers using the subway, think again, it won’t and like the Canada Line, ridership will erode away, with many taking the car instead.
The steerable axle trucks were designed by the UTDC and they may have licensed production elsewhere but, Alstom holds the patents now and they my not allow continued licensing of specialty parts, which means cost will increase because of extra costs.
Again, I have been told by real professionals that a European style tramway (LRT) could be built connecting BCIT to UBC and Stanley Park for about one quarter the cost of the Broadway subway, offering real solutions for transportation and not a money pit that the Broadway subway is.
Tell your Translink employers that the big problem is the now $8 billion to build this, because it will lose the next election for the NDP!
@ Legoman you call Skytrain custom, you can call it anything you want but unless 2 or more rail car manufacturers have “off the shelf” or ready to go designs that can immediately (defined as no more than a year of product development/engineering and production planning required to start saleable production vehicles), then you have a proprietary rail vehicle. By the way, this is how Bombardier and now Alstom define it. This is assuming a production facility with the capacity to build the design is available. Often, this is the primary reason rail vehicles take longer than expected to build.
Nobody other than Bombardier North America (now Alstom North America) has a design ready to go, even China’s CRRC admitted it would take 2 years for them to just design /build and test a functional prototype for Vancouver, not a full production vehicle. Prototypes aren’t cheap to make and add huge cost to production vehicle contracts.
When I worked there at Bombardier they were desperate to get rid of the LIM technology simply because it was far too specialized or custom (insert any adjective you want to use) compared to other standardized Bombardier rail products. Standardized designs generally made big money for Bombardier! Any good design can be modified for customer requirements but if it’s too specialized, it rarely sells. It often got in the way other Bombardier products slowing down their sales but not generating any itself.
Before Bombardier’s rail division was sold to Alstom, the Movia Automated Light Metro Transportation System design was grouped into Bombardier’s airport people mover and monorail catalogue of products. Any product moved that catalogue was refered to by people who worked there, as being given the “kiss of death”.
There were and still are several big problems Bombardier had with the LIM designs and Skytrain. The biggest being If a product like the Skytrain (the Movia Automated Light Metro Line of products) generally only moves half the passengers of both Bombardier’s and Alstom’s existing Metro vehicle designs but costs more than 50% of their capital costs to put into an operational rail line, then you as a vehicle manufacturer, have a problem.
The Skytrain has capital costs anywhere from 60% to 80% compared to Bombardier’s successful Movia Line of Metro vehicle products and their associated capital costs but still, only moves half the number of passengers. On top of this, the Skytrain requies expensive extra infrastructure just to move the G** D** TRAIN as well as prohibiting the use of many cheap off the shelf support technologies that could be added to any other design that Alstom or Bombardier uses but not yours, again you have an expensive problem.
I found out through friends that, this issue became serious for Bombardier in the 2010’s when designs for a Skytrain tunnel under Broadway in Vancouver was costing per kilometer, almost 80% of the capital cost of the latest over built, way too deep and over budget full scale, all tunnel, subway metro extension in Toronto. While only moving half the passengers of a TTC subway line using at the time, a 60 year old signaling system, not the modern CBTC technology that line currently uses.
Never mind that the current owners Alstom, have publicaly said it has no interest in advancing or developing further designs of any of the main operational systems that Skytrain uses. Not to mention several Alstom designed products conflict with the Skytrain for sales.
Lastly, although I expected this to happen when Alstom bought Bombardier’s rail division, it still kind of sad. The Bombardier Kingston, Ontario site is being closed and potentially sold off by Alstom.
This is where they built and did final assembly for several orders of Light Rail Vehicles for the North American market. The Kingston site is also the location of the site for the final vehicle assembly, static production and prototype testing facility as well as the only dynamic test track for the Skytrain designs used by Translink! That means no more protype or production Skytrains tested or run at Kingston. Again, its the only existing test track for Skytrain compatible vehicles in the world, you guys may have to build one yourself.
While I was on Line#1 yesterday (formerly the Confederation Line), I was talking to a rather stunned Vancouverite. She was shocked by the sheer size and length of Ottawa’s LRV trains and the Stadler FLIRT DMUs on Line#2 (formerly The Trillium Line). “I thought Light Rail trains were supposed to be small! These are much bigger than our new Skytrains”.”What can we say”, I said, “we like them big here. If we could actually build and open line extensions on time, that would be truly amazing. ”
I said that, “big expandable trains as well as big expandable stations help future proof your lines. O.C. Transpo can relatively easily, make the existing trains longer and cheaply expand most of the stations, without having to run more trains to expand Line#1’s capacity”. She didn’t realise that, running more trains, greatly increase operating and maintenance costs, that’s why railways avoid doing it”. She asked me,”how long are the trains and stations?””The tunnel stations downtown however are at their maximum length about 120 metres long, I don’t think the city can afford to make them any longer. All the surface LRT stations are 95m to100 m long but are expandable to 120m”.
I continued, “the Line#2 trains are the same size as your new Skytrains about 82m long but the station platforms are 85m long and expandable beyond 120m”. The rest of the conversation was pleasant but mundane.
1. I know I have said this before @Legoman, 6 passengers per square metre is only for engineering maximum axle loads and has nothing to do with actual passenger counts, in North American planning anyway. Any passenger density beyond 4 passengers per square metre in North America and you are losing huge amounts of choice passenger for every 10 minutes you operate like that, its far too uncomfortablefor most people. Don’t even think that 6 pass/sq. m density is even considered as a realistic or actual passenger capacity, in actual transit or transportation planning. If your planners actually include that number as a possible passenger load, as a professional planner, a review should done immediately!
2. Until you get to bus corridor capacity numbers of 8500-10000 p/h/d, using 150-180 plus buses per hour per direction don’t even think of building tunnels, you are waisting huge amounts of money if you do. Surface LRT or BRT would avoid that problem, work fine and cost way less.
3. I hope @Legoman, you are only including the buses that operate on Broadway or parallel routes within spitting distance of it. If your including buses that run along other corridors to UBC you are making a big assumption not to mention, a common rookie mistake in transportation planning.
Just because planners and engineers identify a particular planning study corridor border line, like they did with the Broadway Corridor reports, it doesn’t mean all those parallel bus routes inside that study area will empty out to ride your new rail line. I remember those studies, that Broadway Corridor Study border was multiple kilometres parallel to Broadway and way too large an area. In fact, I guarantee that once your Skytrain tunnel to UBC does open many of those other bus passengers will stay on those parallel bus routes especially, if the parallel bus line is greater than 1 km away from Broadway. Traveling even a single km out of the way from there normal parallel bus or surface transit line, to get to a new rail rapid transit line, historically doesn’t attract many passengers away from those existing surface lines. If it’s within 5 minutes either walking or transit travel time yes, some will transfer away to the new Skytrain line. Anything further away, forget it historically, the numbers are too small and get smaller the further away the passengers are.
4. Also remember there’s no money for the extension to UBC and you will only get 1/3 (33%) at most of the total cost, from the Federal Government! Vancouver and the Province of B.C. must pay for the rest and B.C. can’t afford to keep paying 2/3 (67%) of these Skytrain projects, it just doesn’t have the money! That’s why historically, roughly, only 1 major Skytrain line extension per decade has been built. Assuming there are no more Olympics or World Fairs for the next little while. This is what your province can actually afford. If they end up actually building the extension to UBC expect many cost cutting measures, like surface and above grade rights of way replacing tunnels and far fewer stations than expected and no new Skytrain lines for a very long time afterwards.
Thank you for this!
ART(global) and MK(vancouver) series of trains similar in construction, but different in support of systems and specification.
A difference between availability and capability with rail rapid transit manufactures have built a custom train set non standard subway design. ART consistent design standard W vehicle. The height of the passenger captain has been different across ART. There was only 2 systems with the same limitations Scarborough RT and Detroit people mover. Not including the structural changes for crash protection. The program was for R&D spending of the Canadian R&D fund!
CRRC LIM trains in China have the same noise problem as the Canada line. Skytrain is a bit more than just some LIM.
Vendor lock/ repair ability.
Yes LIM, on a bored computer system and axles are immediately replaceable by a different vendor. Everything else can be switched to a new vendor. Every year there’s new small manufacturers that want to make components for the LIM skytrain. Canada Line has a contracted supply chain with Hyundai Rodom. Does not provide the same flexibility of changing suppliers or competitive pricing. It’s like a private vehicle that has OEM support and aftermarket parts(skytrain). Have Tesla selective on parts availability in pricing(hyundai rodam). Disclaimer depends on how the transit agency wants to maintain fleet*.
Skytrain car cost.
Aluminum body frame designed to be lightweight and custom. Adjustments to make it more economical and maintenance friendly. long service life design. Vancouver skytrain ART standard. Cost to be higher than an off the shelf model of metro train sets. Last custom, the better is cheaper cost.
Capital costs vary within Canada and globally. No good comparison of constant, benefits and time saved to the taxpayer.
Mk 5 84.5 M overall length of the train set.
Minimum platform length 82 M
Longest platform length is 90 M
Floor w 2.45 M and L 82.8 M
LIM Floor area 202 square meters roughly.
4 car hyundai rodam EMU overall length 83 M
Floor W 3 M and 79 M
Canada line floor area 237 square meters roughly.
just off of the floor area of 35 square meters for less between rolling stock.
If LRV
Similar lengths to the MK 5
I’m the only difference being the w 2.8 M and L 83 M
Floor area 232 square meters.
Caviar would need to open gangways one end to other end of 85 M long LRV.(high floor) and low floor elevators have less floor room and flexibility in layout. Yes, avoiding talking about layouts and configurations. Personal opinion for people’s preferences.
Why does everything feel more roomy than a MK train?
Low floor LRT 2.7-2.9 meters wide. I have a lot of verticality, making it feel like an open space. High floor LRT and canada line wide 3m wider seats and additional standing room feel small like you in the space.
Contact MK trains small compared to other metro systems but connect with the old London tube standard with a bit more headroom.
UBC is a destination lacking peak hour bus service capacity to go or leave the campus. Prevention student bus pass program has no sustainable way of increasing service capacity to the campus. Enough bus drivers and buses to operate more service, but we do not have the additional income to support it. Gonna overs the number. The city of Vancouver hasn’t moved on the all day bus lanes to make it more reliable and frequently without huge increase in operations funding.
Question?
Yes 6 people per square meter is the limit of a rail vehicle.
Why do rapid transit proposals and manufacturer promotional material use LRT at capacity 6 passengers per square metre?(van, otrain, ctrain, ttc & usa) And is it not fair to compare 4 vs 6?
If LRT was built where a maintenance storage yard up 100 flexity LRV 30M?
Rumored Thunder Bay alston plant closing. Kingston test track some upgrades and money put into it. Where in North America would they be testing the LRV and rail equipment?(annoying outside North America)
Wait for the UBCX business case. If the BC Government can get funding of targeted transit funds?(only federal funding rapid transit projects)
Mr zwei
Define world class? World class is ranked the best top of global excellence in this category.
Define rapid transit? Rapid transit is usually an express service that has a high capacity.
Define light rail? Light rail is steel wheels and steel rail service with a capacity 0-20,000 people per direction per hour. It pphpd is calculated on a max capacity of 6 people per square meter of universal comparison.
BC provinces in control of transportation projects like to build with skytrain or metro.
BCRTC redesigned bogies in the 90s due to noise, accelerated wear problems. At the same time they had electrical problems with the new trains. Still hold on to the engineering drawings or whatever or sell them off. IDK
Zwei replies: The word salads continue as it was reported here that Bombardier pulled a swithcheroo for the support systems, increasing the cost of the Innovia 300 cars.
So, I guess SkyTrain is the only “world class” system in the world that no one wants to buy; and one has to bribe people to build it. I think the only world class moniker one can use is a “world class” lemon, with only 7 sold in almost 50 years, with 6 remaining in operation.
Gives a whole new meaning to world class doesn’t it.
Better tell your TransLink employers that they are wasting money trying to sell “pigs in a poke”.
Cost sharing agreement as of 2017/18 is 40% Provincial, 40% Federal, 20% Local ( If the Feds do not provide 40% the Province will provide the top up ) It used to be one third each.
Zwei replies: Thant funding model is no more and in fact the Feds may not fund Skytrain construction in the near future.
It doesn’t matter the percentage, the Province of BC has been covering the cost increases for both the Langley extension (at the least up to the point when it was $6.01 Bilion but it’s much more now) and the invisible unannounced capital cost increases and site insurance cost increases for the Arbutus extension. In both cases, the Province is covering the local costs as well, they can’t afford to keep doing that and they have stated that. Whether it’s 20% or 33% of the capital funding, the local government can’t afford Skytrain projects anymore. Unless someone at the federal government screams, “its a project of national significance” you guys can’t afford the local component of the UBC extension either.
The Federal Government are preoccupied with building industrial and commercial infrastructure projects like, Quebec City to Toronto HSR, The National Energy Corridor, pipe lines and LNG terminals as well as having publicly stated already that, there will be less money spent on rapid transit infrastructure.
I suppose nobody’s noticed that other than the pre stated federal support for the Quebec Citty Tram/LRT project, split between, them, CDPQ INFRA and the Province of Quebec, there hasn’t been a whole lot of new rappid transit funding announcements lately.
Oh Legoman, because of political connections and a huge GO Train bi-level coach order/refurbishment order, Bombardier Thunder Bay was saved by the Province of Ontario, for now! However, the for sale signs have gone up on the Bombardier (former UTDC) site in Kingston, its very sad, its the end of an era. It is also believed CN will apply soon to the National RIlway Services Board to remove the rail lead from the CN Rail line that services the Kingston site
The Langley extension now over $6 billion?!? The rumour has it that the full cost is approaching $10 billion, including OMC#5 and the provincial government is hoping, in a vain hope, they can embarrass the feds to ante up more money.