Canadian LRT/RT projects U/C

[esquire]

^ I can see the resemblance to Vancouver's system. It's a good model to follow.

[Mr. Blue]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

I'm happy that Ottawa has for the most part taken the Vancouver approach of building a cost-efficient, but functional system. Full grade separation using what's available, elevated, trenched and surface where possible and tunneling where necessary.

REM and the Ontario Line seem to be taking this approach as well. Too often we see over-built or under-built lines in Canada (massive low-ridership suburban underground stations in Toronto and Montreal for example) or a weird mix of both (Eglinton Crosstown).

Our system is certainly not perfect, high platform's along the Confederation Line would have been best, for example. For the most part though, I'm quite satisfied.

Perhaps but it was short-sighted of Ottawa to use low-floor LRVs when they should've used REM-style vehicles. The line could've been fully automated + they could've had higher capacity as a result. But other than that, the O-Train will be absolutely fantastic. It might surpass Calgary as my favourite LRT system in Canada when expansions are done.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Mr. Blue

Perhaps but it was short-sighted of Ottawa to use low-floor LRVs when they should've used REM-style vehicles. The line could've been fully automated + they could've had higher capacity as a result. But other than that, the O-Train will be absolutely fantastic. It might surpass Calgary as my favourite LRT system in Canada when expansions are done.

I agree low-floor vehicles was a poor choice based on first hand experience. Light-Metro rolling stock like the REM or what is commonly seen in Scandinavia would have been far superior. My hope is that one day we can order a new train fleet that is better adapted to our needs, with more and evenly spaced doors and fully open concept (as opposed to two linked cars). Low floor has its limitation do to the wheel wells sticking out of the floor, but I have seen other low-floor trains with better layouts than what we have here.

Maybe we could do better when ordering Stage 3 trains. Maybe it will be another 30 years. We'll see.

EDIT: even high-floor LRT like Calgary and Edmonton would have been far better than what we have today.

[Hybrid247]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

I agree low-floor vehicles was a poor choice based on first hand experience. Light-Metro rolling stock like the REM or what is commonly seen in Scandinavia would have been far superior. My hope is that one day we can order a new train fleet that is better adapted to our needs, with more and evenly spaced doors and fully open concept (as opposed to two linked cars). Low floor has its limitation do to the wheel wells sticking out of the floor, but I have seen other low-floor trains with better layouts than what we have here.

Maybe we could do better when ordering Stage 3 trains. Maybe it will be another 30 years. We'll see.

EDIT: even high-floor LRT like Calgary and Edmonton would have been far better than what we have today.

I agree, low floor rolling stock is the biggest drawback in what I otherwise see as fantastic light metro system. I'm curious, though, as to what low-floor LRVs you think have better layouts than the citadis.

Personally, I find the the siemens S70s in Seattle to be quite nice. I like how they kept the low floor section of the LRVs open and spacious for accessibility and standing room, which appears to make up around 60% of the interior space, while concentrating most of the seating in the high floor sections near the cabs.

The only issue that comes to mind with the high-floor/low-floor mix is that such LRVs might not be able to achieve lengthy configurations like the citadis.

[Mr. Blue]

Originally Posted by Hybrid247

I agree, low floor rolling stock is the biggest drawback in what I otherwise see as fantastic light metro system. I'm curious, though, as to what low-floor LRVs you think have better layouts than the citadis.

Personally, I find the the siemens S70s in Seattle to be quite nice. I like how they kept the low floor section of the LRVs open and spacious for accessibility and standing room, which appears to make up around 60% of the interior space, while concentrating most of the seating in the high floor sections near the cabs.

The only issue that comes to mind with the high-floor/low-floor mix is that such LRVs might not be able to achieve lengthy configurations like the citadis.

If Ottawa did go high-floor but still decided to use LRT tech, the S200s would be a great canadate.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Hybrid247

I agree, low floor rolling stock is the biggest drawback in what I otherwise see as fantastic light metro system. I'm curious, though, as to what low-floor LRVs you think have better layouts than the citadis.

Personally, I find the the siemens S70s in Seattle to be quite nice. I like how they kept the low floor section of the LRVs open and spacious for accessibility and standing room, which appears to make up around 60% of the interior space, while concentrating most of the seating in the high floor sections near the cabs.

The only issue that comes to mind with the high-floor/low-floor mix is that such LRVs might not be able to achieve lengthy configurations like the citadis.

We have quite a unique system. It's not often you see 97 meter trains. If I'm not mistaken, their max length of 118 meters will be one of a kind in the World. The max speed of 105 km/h distinguishes it as well.

Any manufacturer would have to come up with a new train design to meet our needs, as Alstom did. I think a model with high floor at the ends would be helpful, but as you mentioned, it might not be possible to have them anywhere near as long as we have (48.5 meters per car, expandable to 59 meters).

Looking at what's available on the market now, even Alstom seems to have vehicles with more doors/better door spacing and interior layouts like the 402 in Dublin, Bordeaux and Lyon, the 305 in Sydney or the 405 in Nice Although they come in slightly shorter formats (44 m and 33.4 m), they would offer better passenger flow.

Siemens has a few models that could work, but we would need to run 4 car trains. Max capacity could be compromised.

Looking at systems in Germany, France and other countries, there are a few others that could fit the bill with some modifications.

One of the tragedies with our current system, and that may or may not be fixed, is that the initial plan was to run double trains during the week and singles on weekends and late evenings. For this operational possibility, we ordered double ended units. Unfortunately, the uncoupling has not happened for various reasons and may never be implemented, which results in a massive waste of space with two unusable cabs in the middle of each train set.

[Hybrid247]

Originally Posted by Mr. Blue

If Ottawa did go high-floor but still decided to use LRT tech, the S200s would be a great canadate.

Agreed, but I can't see a switch to high floor happening, at least not in our lifetimes. I'm not sure it'd even be possible without a significant rebuild of the downtown stations.

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Looking at what's available on the market now, even Alstom seems to have vehicles with more doors/better door spacing and interior layouts like the 402 in Dublin, Bordeaux and Lyon, the 305 in Sydney or the 405 in Nice Although they come in slightly shorter formats (44 m and 33.4 m), they would offer better passenger flow.

I see what you mean with the door spacing on those models. They're much more consistently and symmetrically spaced. Seems to be a product of the smaller intermediate modules. One thing I noticed, though, is that the 402s seem to have similar wheel well layouts as the citadis spirit on the interior, which is a bit of a problem for passenger flow in Ottawa. The door spacing alone would probably make a big difference though, so that'd be welcome change in any future LRVs they purchase.

Originally Posted by J.OT13

One of the tragedies with our current system, and that may or may not be fixed, is that the initial plan was to run double trains during the week and singles on weekends and late evenings. For this operational possibility, we ordered double ended units. Unfortunately, the uncoupling has not happened for various reasons and may never be implemented, which results in a massive waste of space with two unusable cabs in the middle of each train set.

Very true, it is a waste of space. However I'm not sure alstom would've been able to configure the citadis spirit to be longer than the 59m anyway. It'd be pretty cool if they could though.

[J.OT13]

Ottawa's Confederation East extension.

The fly-over where trains will cross from the north side of the 174 past Blair to the highway median.



Future guideway heading east between Montreal and Jeanne d'Arc stations.



Site of the future Jeanne d'Arc Station.




https://otrain.railfans.ca/line-1-stations/jeanne-darc

Place d'Orléans Station. The existing stand alone Transitway station (full station not connected to an actual Transitway) on the south (left) side of the highway serving Place d'Orléans Shopping Centre will be largely retained, with the new rail station added to the median, along with a new fare gate entrance at the main bus station and a new fare-paid pedestrian bridge to the O-Train.


https://twitter.com/LEGOGuyCA/status...20327774048261


https://otrain.railfans.ca/line-1-st...place-dorleans

[J.OT13]

Trillium Stage 2 snapshots from O-Train Fans.

Gladstone, a new urban infill station between Bayview and Dow's Lake (formerly Carling).


https://otrain.railfans.ca/snapshot-...on-june-2-2021

Uplands, the intermediate station along the airport link which will serve Ottawa's main tradeshow space, the EY Centre. The airport is calling for proposals to redevelop the rest of the land adjacent to the station.






https://otrain.railfans.ca/snapshot-...on-june-1-2021

Dow's Lake, formerly called Carling 2001-2020.


https://otrain.railfans.ca/snapshot-...on-may-29-2021

[niwell]

Maybe it's because of the COVID time warp and the fact I actually haven't been in 9 months (somehow Labour Day seems like last week), but Ottawa's progress really seems to be flying. One day in the not too distant future I'll be able to visit the in-laws and walk to the LRT!

[craner]

J.OT13 - Thanks for the great coverage of Ottawa in all forums.

Are you able to post a map showing what is currently under construction in terms of Ottawa’s LRT system.

Apologies if you’ve already done so.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by craner

J.OT13 - Thanks for the great coverage of Ottawa in all forums.

Are you able to post a map showing what is currently under construction in terms of Ottawa’s LRT system.

Apologies if you’ve already done so.

No proplem!

Trillium is being extended 16 kilometers south, with the addition of 8 new stations (2 infill and 6 along the new route) including the 4 kilometer - 2 station airport link. Opening Fall 2022.

Confederation is being extended east by 12 kilometers and 5 stations, opening 2024, and west 15 kilometers and 11 stations, opening 2025.

The total Stage 2 scope includes 43 kilometers and 24 stations. The entire system will have 63.5 kilometers and 41 stations when Stage 2 is complete.



The Confederation Line and Trillium Line monikers will be phased out over time, replaced by colours and numbers. The system will be operated as a 4 line rapid transit network by the time all three extensions open.


https://www.railfans.ca/news/stage-2...rain-lines-1-3

[GeneralLeeTPHLS]

Wow. I knew a lot of infrastructure was going up in Ottawa, but I forgot that it was this substantial....holy doodle!

[jamincan]

Will the 97 still exist as a Transitway* route?

* what little remains of it.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

The Confederation Line and Trillium Line monikers will be phased out over time, replaced by colours and numbers. The system will be operated as a 4 line rapid transit network by the time all three extensions open.


https://www.railfans.ca/news/stage-2...rain-lines-1-3

I find it odd to force a transfer to get to the Airport. Are the expecting that much demand that the 2 lines couldn't be interlined to Bayview?

[Hybrid247]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

I find it odd to force a transfer to get to the Airport. Are the expecting that much demand that the 2 lines couldn't be interlined to Bayview?

No, it has more to do with the line having a significant amount single-track ROW and the scheduling/logistical complications that would come with interlining it. The airport spur stations will also be half the length of the other Line 2 stations, which will make it pretty much impossible to service the new FLIRT DEMUs and would require coupled LINT units to decouple at south keys.

[White Pine]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Dow's Lake, formerly called Carling 2001-2020.


https://otrain.railfans.ca/snapshot-...on-may-29-2021

Do you know if this will change to include widening for the hospital?

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Hybrid247

No, it has more to do with the line having a significant amount single-track ROW and the scheduling/logistical complications that would come with interlining it. The airport spur stations will also be half the length of the other Line 2 stations, which will make it pretty much impossible to service the new FLIRT DEMUs and would require coupled LINT units to decouple at south keys.

So, in other words, for the ROW, yes, there is too much demand.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

So, in other words, for the ROW, yes, there is too much demand.

Well, no. The issue is not demand, but frequency. Since 2014, the Trillium's frequency has been 12 minutes. Instead of adding double tracking to raise (maybe double) frequencies, the City opted to instead double the length of trains/platforms. If we were to interline the South end and airport spur, the branches would run at a terrible 24 minute frequency.

Had we raised frequencies at the north end to 6 minutes, maintaining the current 40 meter trains, we could have interlined while achieving the same upgraded capacity.

The City never provided any sort of reasoning for their decision. My guess is that they wanted to stretch the line as far into the suburbs as possible for the cheapest possible price. Longer trains also mean operational savings by only needing half the drivers.

I don't think it will be long before people realize the folly of the City's choices on this.

[craner]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

No proplem!

Trillium is being extended 16 kilometers south, with the addition of 8 new stations (2 infill and 6 along the new route) including the 4 kilometer - 2 station airport link. Opening Fall 2022.

Confederation is being extended east by 12 kilometers and 5 stations, opening 2024, and west 15 kilometers and 11 stations, opening 2025.

The total Stage 2 scope includes 43 kilometers and 24 stations. The entire system will have 63.5 kilometers and 41 stations when Stage 2 is complete.



The Confederation Line and Trillium Line monikers will be phased out over time, replaced by colours and numbers. The system will be operated as a 4 line rapid transit network by the time all three extensions open.


https://www.railfans.ca/news/stage-2...rain-lines-1-3

Thanks - massive expansion.
What is the overall budget ?