West LRT | 7 Stations | 8.0 KM | In Service

[ByeByeBaby]

Originally Posted by Full Mountain

[rant]
Given that most downtown commercial buildings in Calgary has an access control system, I'm confused as to how this is a hard project. Could we not purchase a copy of a successful implementation (i.e. Clipper)? I realize that IT projects are screwed from the get go, but what sort of system costs you half a billion? Have they forgotten the KISS principle for projects? Could they not borrow some development from the ParkPlus system, they seem to have the account management part down, add a card and some card readers instead of the road side stations and away you go.
[/rant]

Very few downtown commercial buildings move constantly, for one thing. Very few are visited by hundreds of thousands of people per day. It's not a trivial thing by any stretch. That said, we are behind St. John's, Saskatoon, Lethbridge and Spokane on this one.

I'm just a little surprised that given the relatively common requirements that I'm assuming most transit systems have, that a standard (or more likely, three competing standards) hasn't emerged yet. It seems like the equivalent of the age when every rail system had a different gauge.

[RicoLance21]

Originally Posted by ByeByeBaby

I agree with you on the need for smart cards (seriously, why is it so hard to implement something that everywhere else already has?) (Also, while on the subject, why is there no standard that has emerged? There are dozens of transit operators all doing the exact same thing with their smart cards, why can't a card from Calgary be usable on a PRESTO reader in Toronto or a Clipper reader in San Francisco?) Next stop announcements on buses are in my mind a lot less important than next bus announcements at stops. But both would be improvements; or even at key stops.

But I don't see any reason why you would insist on heavy rail. The South LRT is our busiest transit corridor and will likely always be the busiest. Sure, we need four cars to handle the volumes, and sure, we'll need to go to an underground subway on the line. (I think sooner rather than later, but the politics is hard on this.) With those two changes, the south LRT can handle well over double today's volume (let's say double today's with a little more elbow room during rush hour). So why would we have heavy rail, other than to check a box during transit nerd discussions? Either we shut down our busiest route and convert it to heavy rail, or we build much more expensive heavy rail on other lines that have fewer passengers than a line that uses light rail successfully.

When we have an underground line for the South/NW leg, I don't think it is wise to also increase the frequency. There may be more elbow room downtown, but not so outside of downtown, even with only one line. The current five-minute frequency is already putting a considerable strain on traffic flow at crossings of major roads like Heritage Dr. To double the capacity of this line, good luck waiting at the crossing--more grade separations are required. By then, I don't think there is a lot of infrastructure change left to classify the line as heavy rail--other than electrical/signal upgrades.

[Full Mountain]

Originally Posted by ByeByeBaby

Very few downtown commercial buildings move constantly, for one thing. Very few are visited by hundreds of thousands of people per day. It's not a trivial thing by any stretch. That said, we are behind St. John's, Saskatoon, Lethbridge and Spokane on this one.

I'm just a little surprised that given the relatively common requirements that I'm assuming most transit systems have, that a standard (or more likely, three competing standards) hasn't emerged yet. It seems like the equivalent of the age when every rail system had a different gauge.

My phone seems to do just fine on the move, hardly seems like you would need much more than off the shelf technology to complete this.

[ByeByeBaby]

Originally Posted by RicoLance21

When we have an underground line for the South/NW leg, I don't think it is wise to also increase the frequency. There may be more elbow room downtown, but not so outside of downtown, even with only one line. The current five-minute frequency is already putting a considerable strain on traffic flow at crossings of major roads like Heritage Dr. To double the capacity of this line, good luck waiting at the crossing--more grade separations are required. By then, I don't think there is a lot of infrastructure change left to classify the line as heavy rail--other than electrical/signal upgrades.

Ah, I think we might have been talking past each other a little here. Heavy rail is in transit planning circles a term for a specific type of technology; third rail power, heavy vehicles, long trains, and so on versus the ligher, overhead-powered vehicles in light rail. Grade separation is more what it seems like you're thinking about; heavy rail systems are 100% grade separated, while light rail may or may not be; the C-train is light rail, and this doesn't change once it goes northwest past 16th Ave NW. So heavy rail is a completely different technology, which I think is where the confusion came from.

And the grade separations I think will come in time; the plans for both Heritage/Macleod and 25th/Macleod involve grade separating the LRT. We don't need twice as many trains on the S-NW LRT right away; in 30 years we may, but by that point I think it'll be even more grade separated.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by RicoLance21

When we have an underground line for the South/NW leg, I don't think it is wise to also increase the frequency. There may be more elbow room downtown, but not so outside of downtown, even with only one line. The current five-minute frequency is already putting a considerable strain on traffic flow at crossings of major roads like Heritage Dr. To double the capacity of this line, good luck waiting at the crossing--more grade separations are required. By then, I don't think there is a lot of infrastructure change left to classify the line as heavy rail--other than electrical/signal upgrades.

Years ago I remember reading even the extra crossing time for 4-car trains would necessitate grade separation at Heritage Drive, so it isn't unexpected or not planned for.