HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Ottawa-Gatineau > Transportation


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #781  
Old Posted Jun 27, 2020, 1:58 PM
roger1818's Avatar
roger1818 roger1818 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Stittsville, ON
Posts: 6,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aylmer View Post
I agree that removing all motor vehicle traffic from the bridge would face some resistance. I argue that it would be worth it for a number of reasons such as cost, downstream lane capacity, and urban design. But it's not even a necessary disagreement since the bridge is set to be replaced in any event. If it were really important to have car lanes on it, the new bridge could be built to accommodate both two tram lanes and bi-directional car lanes.
As I said in the Interprovincial bridge crossing discussion thread when discussing removing vehicles from the Alexandra Bridge:
Quote:
Originally Posted by roger1818 View Post
I would argue that it is even more important is reducing the number of lanes on the MC bridge (if not eliminating it altogether). It funnels way too much traffic into Lower Town, most of which is destined elsewhere.

I am not altogether opposed to the closing of the Alexandra to cars, but it is more of a link between Lower Town and Hull.
I don't have stats to back it up, but I can't see many people using the Alexandra Bridge who's origin/destination isn't either Hull or Lower Town. Even then, if they are coming from or going to somewhere further away, the MC bridge is likely a more popular choice.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #782  
Old Posted Jun 28, 2020, 7:43 PM
Hybrid247 Hybrid247 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,196
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aylmer View Post
From the get-go, the Rapibus was always supposed to be converted around the 2030s. The downtown infrastructure should be thought of as being the principal transit link for all of Gatineau. First the western portion of the city, likely followed by a converted Rapibus from the east, and probably some future northward branch through Hull.
Doesn't that reinforce the case for the tunnel under Sparks, though? If the downtown infrastructure will eventually accommodate 2 and possibly even 3 LRT lines, wouldn't the tunnel make more sense to minimize potential surface level disturbances and to maximize capacity and reliability for that section?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #783  
Old Posted Jun 28, 2020, 9:12 PM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 23,845
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #784  
Old Posted Jun 28, 2020, 9:27 PM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 23,845
Quote:
Originally Posted by Horus View Post
I had these cases, where Allumettières is used, in my head as I wrote that.
Watching the presentation to the NCC, they show both scenarios. They may not have made a final decision on where the line will split. It's unclear.

EDIT: I get it now. The all tram scenario splits at Alexandre-Tâché and St-Raymond while the hybrid scenarios don't share the corridor at any point, with one heading down Alexandre-Tâché and the other down Allumettières.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #785  
Old Posted Jun 28, 2020, 10:06 PM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 23,845
New piece of information from the NCC presentation. It seems Portage will have to go through a significant rebuild to accommodate the tramway due to the increased load. I’m a little surprised to hear that considering how few trams will cross compared to buses and cars presently.

NCC Board Members’ opinion seem to be mostly positive. Support for surface vs. tunnel seemed to be about 50/50 from those who commented.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #786  
Old Posted Jun 29, 2020, 2:10 PM
Hybrid247 Hybrid247 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,196
Quote:
Originally Posted by J.OT13 View Post
New piece of information from the NCC presentation. It seems Portage will have to go through a significant rebuild to accommodate the tramway due to the increased load. I’m a little surprised to hear that considering how few trams will cross compared to buses and cars presently.

NCC Board Members’ opinion seem to be mostly positive. Support for surface vs. tunnel seemed to be about 50/50 from those who commented.
I was surprised by the load issue with Portage as well. That really changes things. I'm not so sure the total cost of rebuilding the bridge and tunneling under Sparks would be all that different from tunneling under the Ottawa river into downtown Ottawa directly.

Either way, the tunnel option seems less likely now. The cost of rebuilding Portage bridge alone will surely be quite significant.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #787  
Old Posted Jun 29, 2020, 2:15 PM
p_xavier p_xavier is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 3,568
Quote:
Originally Posted by J.OT13 View Post
Missing as a con: battery trams. Seriously, the NCC is such full of itself.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #788  
Old Posted Jul 2, 2020, 6:15 AM
Baybreeze12 Baybreeze12 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by p_xavier View Post
Missing as a con: battery trams. Seriously, the NCC is such full of itself.
Are battery-powered trams that bad? I know Birmingham is rolling them out similarly to how the STO has proposed - part overhead catenary and part wire-free. I would imagine the energy density per unit weight/volume/cost for a battery has become more favourable in the past few years.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #789  
Old Posted Jul 2, 2020, 2:38 PM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 23,845
I don't understand why battery trams would be a con, other than price. Compromising in speed? Even with a overhead centenary, there's a limit of how fast trams will be able to go through downtown Ottawa and Gatineau.

Nice Line T2 runs with overhead centenary in the tunnel (3.2 km) and without above ground (8.1 km). It's about as fast as I would expect tramways to run in the central core should the surface option be chosen.

Video Link
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #790  
Old Posted Jul 3, 2020, 5:49 PM
Richard Eade Richard Eade is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Nepean
Posts: 1,946
If one of the options for the STO is an elevated line, maybe they should be looking at some different technologies. The German company Max Bögl Group (MBG) has something that might be interesting; an Urban Mag-Lev. See the article at Urban Transport Magazine. From what I can make out, the technology is adapted from the defunct Transrapid Mag-Lev that runs in Shanghai. MBG have just flown two cars to China for testing on a 3.5 km test track.

The specifications look like something that STO might be interested in:
• Relatively short cars, at 12 metres, that can be coupled into 2 to 6-unit trains;
• Speeds up to 150 km/h;
• Curves as tight as 45 metre radii (300 metre vertical radius);
• Grades up to 10%;
• Pier spacing up to 72 metres (so, only 5 piers in the water to cross the Ottawa River, if the island is used);
• The tracks somewhat protect the technology from the elements;
• Estimated cost of 30-50 Euros per kilometre with pre-fab track sections.

It is interesting that the STO estimates $2.1B for about 26 kilometres of track - which works out to about $80M/k (which is around the 50M Euros per kilometre mark). Of course, the STO number will include stations and other works needed, while the 30-50 Euro/k estimate by the mag-lev manufacturer is likely for running line only.

Still, as the first installation in North America, and a great test-bed for winter operations, maybe the company will offer STO a deal that they can't refuse.

The STO line could even draw in customers as a tourist attraction. Imagine the views as the tram leaves the elevated Chaudière Station (with its own look-out tower/restaurant, perhaps built in conjunction with ZIBI, its 'skywalk' to Les Terrasses, and its access to the start of the new Ottawa Hydro path past the falls to the War Museum), sweeps over ZIBI to a stop above the north end of the Portage Bridge (with connection into Place du Portage), and then rises further in a graceful arc over the River, giving excellent views of the Museum on History, the new Interprovincial Bridge (which will replace the Alexandra Bridge), the Chateau Laurier's new rear addition (OK, maybe we want to skip that view), and the back of the Parliament Buildings (arguably its best side), before entering the portal in the side of the cliff to stop above the Confederation Line under Bank Street, with access down to both the Lyon and Parliament/Parlement Stations (and, perhaps, form the start of the Bank Street Subway).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #791  
Old Posted Jul 3, 2020, 6:20 PM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 23,845
That's what Ottawa should have built. That or REM technology. LRT, even semi-automatic, is outdated at this point. Really a lost opportunity.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #792  
Old Posted Jul 7, 2020, 5:09 PM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 23,845
Based on Gatineau's plans, this may not be feasible, but I would love to see a revival of this proposed entrance at Confederation Square. The NAC could finally be linked to underground transit and with the possible addition of a tunnel to the Convention Centre, it would provide an indoor link to Rideau station.


https://perkinswill.com/project/otta...deration-line/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #793  
Old Posted Jul 8, 2020, 4:27 PM
Uhuniau Uhuniau is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 7,980
Quote:
Originally Posted by J.OT13 View Post
That's what Ottawa should have built. That or REM technology. LRT, even semi-automatic, is outdated at this point. Really a lost opportunity.
In what possible way is LRT "outdated"?
__________________
___
Enjoy my taxes, Orleans (and Kanata?).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #794  
Old Posted Jul 8, 2020, 5:05 PM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 23,845
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uhuniau View Post
In what possible way is LRT "outdated"?


We just have to compare the Confederation Line with the REM. All around the world, new rapid transit lines are fully automated with platform screen doors. We have light-rail with too few doors and drivers because our semi-automation is a half measure. It's just not a modern rapid transit system.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #795  
Old Posted Jul 8, 2020, 5:18 PM
Blackburnian's Avatar
Blackburnian Blackburnian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Location: Gloucester
Posts: 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by J.OT13 View Post
Based on Gatineau's plans, this may not be feasible, but I would love to see a revival of this proposed entrance at Confederation Square. The NAC could finally be linked to underground transit and with the possible addition of a tunnel to the Convention Centre, it would provide an indoor link to Rideau station.
It's a shame the NAC changed it's logo, the old logo could've mixed well with the O-train Lollipops
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #796  
Old Posted Jul 8, 2020, 5:37 PM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 23,845
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackburnian View Post
It's a shame the NAC changed it's logo, the old logo could've mixed well with the O-train Lollipops
Welcome to the forum!

I much preferred the old logo as well. Here's a short piece on the origins of the old logo and reasoning for changing it:


https://www.theglobeandmail.com/arts...ticle17120483/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #797  
Old Posted Jul 9, 2020, 12:06 AM
Uhuniau Uhuniau is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 7,980
Quote:
Originally Posted by J.OT13 View Post


We just have to compare the Confederation Line with the REM. All around the world, new rapid transit lines are fully automated with platform screen doors.
Some are, sure. That's a design choice or constraint. It's also something that says nothing about whether the technology is "outdated". The wheel is thousands of years old - does that make all transit outdated?

Quote:
We have light-rail with too few doors and drivers because our semi-automation is a half measure. It's just not a modern rapid transit system.
There are too few doors? Too few for what or whom?

Semi-automation? That's a running method used in systems all over the world, including ones that have gone into service this decade.
__________________
___
Enjoy my taxes, Orleans (and Kanata?).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #798  
Old Posted Jul 9, 2020, 1:25 AM
lrt's friend lrt's friend is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 11,823
Quote:
Originally Posted by J.OT13 View Post


We just have to compare the Confederation Line with the REM. All around the world, new rapid transit lines are fully automated with platform screen doors. We have light-rail with too few doors and drivers because our semi-automation is a half measure. It's just not a modern rapid transit system.
The C-Line probably would still not have opened if we added full automation and platform screens into the mix. More possibilities for failure.

We will see how REM launches.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #799  
Old Posted Jul 9, 2020, 4:00 PM
Acajack's Avatar
Acajack Acajack is offline
Unapologetic Occidental
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Province 2, Canadian Empire
Posts: 67,773
Quote:
Originally Posted by J.OT13 View Post
Welcome to the forum!

I much preferred the old logo as well. Here's a short piece on the origins of the old logo and reasoning for changing it:


https://www.theglobeandmail.com/arts...ticle17120483/
I liked the old logo too.

I do quite like the new tagline - in both languages.
__________________
Amber alerts welcome at any time
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #800  
Old Posted Jul 9, 2020, 5:09 PM
p_xavier p_xavier is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 3,568
Quote:
Originally Posted by lrt's friend View Post
The C-Line probably would still not have opened if we added full automation and platform screens into the mix. More possibilities for failure.

We will see how REM launches.
Low floor vehicles were the bad choice. Full automation and platform doors should have been coupled with Metropolis trains, as with the REM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Ottawa-Gatineau > Transportation
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 7:45 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.