Single Track Operation & Level Crossings – Dutch Style
Dutch country road protected crossing.
Some of the detractors of Rail for the Valley’s TramTrain or light DMU line from Marpole to Chilliwack cite that only one train can operate on the line at one time. With properly placed passing loops, preferably at stations, trains can be safely operated going in both directions on a single line. this due to modern signalling and passing loops.
Up to three trains per hour per direction can operate quite safely with modern signalling and strategically laid passing loops or double tracking.
Another man-of-straw argument is that the many level crossings will slow the trains.
Not so, as the video’s of the Dutch railways will show.
A modern regional railway will be very safe and if our transit planners are unable or unwilling to plan for such a rail line, then, maybe, we import some Dutch rail planners with ample experience in planning and operating regional rail lines with plenty of level crossings.
Dutch road crossings.
Dutch Urban rail crossing protected by gates for both cars n cyclists and pedestrians.
https://youtu.be/tGxz0vj6YdM?si=nSrolT_2XYAjas1b
Dutch single track operation.
Dutch single track line and station.
https://youtu.be/OAfxX0EsEQI?si=iz3LBuoJ-n86c_GT
There are a lot of benefits to Providing a passenger train to the Fraser Valley. Report that you mention the Leewood Valley. Some problem relating to this paper study. Timetable and stops are unrealistic in some places and slow Long stretches In between Stops. Travel time 98 minutes, one way from end-to-end. Since you want to run 3 trains 66 Minute frequency is more reliable than the current bus services. Which are a joke during rush hour delays counted in hours. Outside of rush hours slower than the bus FVX. The root is not direct straight line connect Skytrain in lower mainland. No time advantage for the transit customers if they traveled on train to Chilliwack.
But tracks are not in the best state of repair and signaling is constraining the taught speed. Cost of operations would be higher than the current West Coast express due to the length 100 KM.
Zwei replies: Leewood projects are experts at this, you are not. Remember the $1.5 to $1.7 billion (inflation) includes track improvements and signalling. The speed and timing has taken this into account.
You can with passing tracks get frequency as low as 8 to 10 minutes on a single track mainline railway. If you don’t believe me we are doing it in Ottawa with Line #2, (the Trillium Line). When Line #2 opens, hopefully this November or December, the 20 km long mainline (not including the 4km long airport branch) will have roughly 6.5 km to 6.75 km of single track service, with a starting service frequency of 12 minutes but with the ability to go down to eventually, 8 to 10 minutes.
If you put in a few bus shelters and a pedestrian bridge connection to an existing Transitway Station, the station platform picture with the white DMU approaching is pretty similar to the new and improved Greenboro or Mooney’s Bay Stations on the upgraded Trillium Line.
Translink is mandated Lower mainland. BC transit mandated manage regional transit agencies(outside the metro Vancouver area) and Interfere or hamper Translink.
WCX Travel time 75 min and Driving time, non rush hour 72 min. More competitive service. Fraser Valley rail Travel time down a little from 90 min And driving on rush hour 60 min. Yes, more money would be needed to give in to both services to cut down on travel time. Fraser Valley rail not an express service it Local service. Less time-traveling more productive work force can be. Simply put, the economy can grow faster. Problem with having 2 separate Transit agencies running one service is what’s the split and what is fair? or Which transit agency would be responsible Operations? There’s 2 things holding back the project for Fraser Valley rail 1. Operational funding. 2. Capital cost on Transit agency portion to kick start project. Existing right away is more windy and twisty than the highway or CN tracks. Building new infrastructure would be the better solution. at more costly, but would convenient and Faster being suggested. Transit should be comparative if not better than the alternatives.
Haveacow Yes, the designers can follow the same thing they did in Ottawa. DMU a good to upgrade electric eventually. Frequency can be improved over time. But Take a while for scheduling to allow freight trains and passenger trains to share Same right away without problems or delays.
Zwei And where’s your so-called proposal documents For the arbutus quarter(Canada line LRT)? Are they available or can you make them available?
Zwei replies: I have never mentioned the Arbutus line ans i feel it is one of your man of straw arguments.
If freight and passenger services can manage with single track operation in Europe, they can here. At most, there are two freights a day using the line and can be easily accommodated by a passenger service. As for TransLink, I would rather they not be involved as they do not have the knowledge or the will to operate such a service. TransLink is both disingenuous and deceitful in their operation and I just do not trust them.
You also forget the Canada Line operated by the SNC Lavalin/Caisse consortium and Translink pays this outfit over $100 million annually to operate the line. Even the operating unions are different.
I would also like to mention that the WCX uses CP Rail tracks and adheres to the maximum speed limits on those tracks. Oh by the way there is no non rush hour operation of the WCX as it is 5 trains in the morning and 5 trains out every afternoon during the rush hours. We are talking 90 kph operation, 30 second dwell times at stations, using modern articulated DMU/EMU’s (which can travel faster than the double deck cars of the WCX. 90 minutes from Chilliwack to Scott Road station.
There’s a solution to this problem running the tracks down the highway. Mostly stop Near the existing FVX bus stop. Hop off the highway in Chilliwack and at Carvolth Exchange
Project will be only Cost millions. Existing space to expand like a highway. Should add rails cheaper than upgrading or changing something old Indirect routes. With having a line speed greater than highway, it will be more competitor for transit. Instead of wasting money on new equipment WCX train set would be easy to start with eventually EMU. Overhaul 901-905 There’s going to be an extra unit used. WCX have 7 locomotives. Currently, the highway 1 with clearing space new lanes and time to add rails to this existing project. No direct link to the skytrain speed up the travel time overall. It can be Starting and done right in 1-2 Years from now. Any money raised would go Installing Installation of the rails and signaling. F59PHI or Author locomotos for WCX 150 km h top Speed. Travel time between Chilliwack and carnival In a rough ballpark 30-40 min. Limiting factors, how many Passenger cars effect on acceleration and Bylevel cars max 150 Kilometers per hour. Eventually, it could run live in the RAM In Montreal. A legoman can dream.
Zwei replies: This is the most stupid idea yet, running rails down the median of HWY.1, stupid, stupid, stupid. It would be hugely expensive as the as the highway curvature, both vertical and horizontal would be expensive to deal with. All overpasses and interchanges would need to be rebuild and I would hazard a guess it would cost well over $200/km to build.
We are not planning a commute railway, rather a regional railway directly serving universities, colleges, and city centres, plus tourist destinations.
It is all very well citing it would be faster, but add in the time to get to stations, etc. and door to door travel times would probably be higher using the highway.
I do not know what you are smoking but a rough guesstimate, going 75 km from Scott Road Station “greenfields” on highway 1 would be in the neighbourhood of $15 billion (including viaducts, tunnels and renewal of all interchanges), versus 130 km Marpole to Chilliwack using the existing and former BCE route, costing around $1.5 to $1.7 billion.
@Legoman0320, running on federal mainline railways require a federal mandate or special dispensation and regulatory approval from Transport Canada. Considering Translink already has this, running the WCX. It would seem to me quite logical that since they have the operational knowledge already, simply allowing them to operate a service outside their current boundaries would be fine. BC Transit can run feeder buses to meet the trains at the station. If jurisdictional issues still are a problem, create a special provincial service to do this like GO Transit in Ontario.
Most freight routes in Canada never have more than 2 or 3 trains per hour at most. What the real difficulty is that transit agencies don’t like to have to negotiate with anyone for operating space. The railways don’t like it if they have to stick to someone else’s operating schedule, it stresses them out, they can’t make mistakes.
GO Transit has had to do this since starting in 1967 and still must negotiate for space on 45% of its network with both CN and CP. Once the railways get use to negotiating with your transit agency they learn to trust your expertise and schedule. This is just government bureaucrats and railway managers whom don’t like to change the way they operate, it scares them, they worry about getting fired.
Eventually though, the railways get so use to having your services on their lines, they become dependent on the cash you give them. This is the trick GO learned. Having a government transit service on your line, paying a yearly sum to operate on it becomes far more valuable then any individual freight customer will ever be. Government agencies put huge amounts of infrastructure spending into mainline railways that a private company would never do unless, truly enormous profits can be realized from certain customers and that is exceedingly rare.
On our side of the pond, rail companies are quietly purchasing and assembling former rail routes either completely abandoned or just derelict because it very much cheaper to build on an existing formation than building, as you say grunfleds. Using an existing and fully functional rail route is as we say GOLD because only minor investment is needed.
From my contacts with the LRTA I find that the route for RftV would be on existing rail routes that would be a planners dream on our side of the pond.
We have learned that highways and railways do not mix well as infrastructure to accommodate such is expensive, as railways are grade and curvature sensitive. May I remind you of the recent catastrophic passenger train derailment in you part of the world of a train entering a severe curve far too fast.
Google maps tells me that a highway route serves not very much and in my opinion those championing such a route are less than amateur.
Highway one expansion HOV Lanes of 218 st to Whatcom Rd. Money being thrown into changing interchanges, Bridges and Earth moving. Add Conventional Rail max top speed 150 kmh not High-speed rail. 20-26 Million per kilometer. New 7-8 km Elevator rail and 59-60 at grade In total 67 km. Magical estimate of 1340 to 1742 Million or 1.3 to 1.7 billion on top of the current Highway one expansion HOV Lane. Stop Yale Rd and Railway Ave, McCallum road(VFV) or Abbotsford hospital, High street mall, Glover Rd and Trinity Western University(Optional stop), end at Carvolth Exchange. Canadian national willing to lend track max top speed 90 kmh From 182a St to Patello bridge and Connection at New West Station 16 km add to the service Total length 84 km. Rough travel time of 48-58 min and By car 1 hour non rush hour. Time savings of 12-2 min. A Whole 30 minutes faster than the rail for The Valley. Estimates about the same price with inflation. Only avoid 5 stops rail of Valley: vedder crossing, yarrow, border, Industrial park and Cloverdale. Other stops have or get rapid transit lines built.
Zwei replies: you haven’t a clue what you are talking about and before you embarrass yourself any further, you should consult with real experts.
You also forget one important factor, travel to and from the stations on your mythical highway line, that will eat up any or all travel savings and dealing with Canadian national would be problematic at best and very expensive, best to use their trackage all the way to Hope.
By the way, do you know why the train stops at the locations you mention, to garner ridership. RftV deals with real experts, you do not and a revert back to my opening sentence.
Why would anyone want dangerous at-grade crossings that slow down traffic and trains, when that can be entirely avoided with the SkyTrain?
Zwei replies: At grade crossing are not dangerous, in fact they are ten times safer than light controlled intersections. Then in your book all light controlled intersections are dangerous.
You also seem to promote using CN or CP’s tracks. Why would they accommodate you?
What on earth could you possibly do to compensate them for the added inconvenience of running your proposed trains on their trackage?
Zwei replies: I never mentioned CN and CP trackage, except for the line in south Vancouver which is up for sale. You haven’t a clue, go read a book on the subject.
I would not expect that CN or CP would accommodate you, not on their ROW and certainly not on their own tracks which provide crucial freight service across Canada and into the United States.
In any event, I think it would be quite amusing to watch you try and negotiate with them. Please update us on your progress.
Zwei replies: I know you are a troll and your freight argument does not hold water. Safe train operation is the result of signalling.
@Jason in many parts of Canada both CP and CN do accommodate commuter rail and region railway operations like CP does with Translink. In fact, the railways like CN and CP heavily rely on them financially. You just have to have a transit agency that learns to negotiate and change the way they want to operate to take advantage of opportunity when you can..
At grade crossings are dangerous because drivers are to impatient. Drivers need to be slowed down and forced to transit, by more narrow roads and slower maximum speeds. With much tougher enforcement of the rules.
Skytrain is overly expensive toy. Why build a Light Metro system with less than half the capacity of real metro, heavy rail, subway, whatever you want to call it. Unfortunately the Skytrain forces you to build a system that is 80%-90% of the cost of a metro, with far fewer benefits.
What you also don’t realize is that, the Skytrain moves fewer passengers than most good sized LRT systems but costs up to 3 times as much as an LRT to build.