Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by briguychau

  1. Probably related to the Rogers outage that seems to be affecting a whole lot more of everything else...
  2. I think the 84 uses around 15 buses at peak. My guess is that probably some will be extra spares for E60LFRs, especially in the summer since they don't have AC.
  3. Any idea what these minor upgrades are? Also how many Mk IIIs are being upgraded to Mk IV?
  4. https://buzzer.translink.ca/2021/11/take-a-sneak-peek-of-translinks-new-mark-v-skytrain/ https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/mark-v-skytrain-design-translink They're calling it "Mark V" I guess? Skipping IV?
  5. The extension is "funded" but not officially going ahead yet, so I don't think the 30 has officially been ordered yet. Also, since it's likely an exercise of options under the order of 205, it might not get an official press release.
  6. As for how it would work on the SkyTrain, here is a mockup. Blue-framed doors ("Expo Line") are standard-size doors which can fit 5-car, 4-car, and 2-car trains. Yellow-framed doors ("Millennium Line") have 4 sets of wide doors, and can fit 5-car, 4-car, 2x2-car, or 2-car trains. The grey bars on the left/right is what's outside of a 80-metre platform. Sorry the resolution is low...
  7. You're right, I made an edit to my post. Telescoping doors can be used so that more of the door can fit inside the post. Now if TransLink will ever invest in them..... But also, I'm just excited for the Mk Is to be gone soon. Maybe we can finally have consistent stopping points on the platforms, and then they can mark door positions on the ground so we can line up right where the doors will be...
  8. Pretty sure they considered ordering middle cars for the Mk IIs but concluded that it'd be unfeasible economically to have a large age gap between cars in the same consist.
  9. I made my diagrams from this source (with some edits): http://www.railforthevalley.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/1-mk22.gif I used a 1600mm door width (green) and a 350mm buffer on each side (yellow) to account for slight inaccuracies in stopping position (350mm is what JR East uses in Japan for their platform door margin of error; their trains (e.g. Yamanote Line E235) have a door opening size of 1300mm and a platform door size of 2000mm). This would mean that a 2300mm wide opening is required. For four of the cars, the width is offset by 650mm (first two cars is at -650mm, next two at +650mm), which makes those openings 2950mm. It does seem like that the white space in between is less than half the entire door width (i.e. 1475mm). The platform door width would have to be at most 2/3 the door-to-door spacing (from centerline to centerline) in order for the doors to be able to open without sticking out the other side. The door spacing on the Mk II/III trains is around 4200mm (I don't have a source on this number, this is just based on counting pixels in the chart), so a maximum platform door spacing of 2800mm is possible. Unfortunately, this probably won't fit the requirements for the 2x2-car Mk II with 4-car Mk III door opening (unless we shrink the buffer to 275mm on each side). Of course, if someone can supply me with more accurate Mk II/III dimensions it would be great, but as it stands all I have to work with is that source above which is not 100% to scale. EDIT: I forgot to account for the fact that telescoping doors can be used. So theoretically it would be possible. E.g. https://youtu.be/zpl9x4sKEfk?t=15
  10. Not sure if this is exactly the right place to ask, but could the "driving cab" on some of the Mk II cars be removed (say, during a refurbishment program)? For example, with cars 201-202 + 203-204, the "driving cabs" would be removed on 202 and 203, the cars would be shortened (coupler to coupler) by 650mm each, and a new gangway would be added. 202 and 203 would then become "middle" cars in a 4-car 201-202-203-204 set. The car/train lengths would match the 4-car Mk III trains The door spacings would match the 4-car Mk III trains Presumably the 5-car "Mk IV" trains would have matching door spacings (but they would just be one car longer) With unified door spacings, platform doors can finally be installed
  11. It'd be great if it happens, because currently the Expo and Millennium Line frequencies are dependent on each other due to the overlap between Lougheed and Production Way. Removing that shared track would mean that the two lines can have frequency adjustments separate from each other. However, with the 235 train cars on Expo being 47 5-car trains, I don't see how train frequencies will work. At current peak two-minute intervals, around 45 trains are needed, plus spares. If we replace 4-car trains (assuming 6-car Mk 1s are more-or-less equivalent to 4-car Mk 2s/3s) with 5-car trains but keep the overall capacity of the system, we can reduce peak train intervals to 2.5 minutes (36 trains), and with 5- or 7.5-minute intervals for the King George - Langley portion (one in every two or three trains) we're looking at an additional 9 or 6 trains. That would get us to between 42-45 trains at peak, but there would not be a service increase from current levels, and there would not be any additional capacity to expand. This calculation assumes that the current service pattern of 1/3 peak trains to Production Way continues, but moving the Production Way train to King George would only decrease the required trains by one. And then, on the Millennium Line, 192 trains is 48 4-car trains. Arbutus to Lafarge Lake is around 48 minutes, and based on the future service levels of the M-Line at 7500 pphpd it would equate to appromately one 4-car train every four minutes (15 trains per hour). This would only require 24 trains in total. If we move every other train to Columbia instead of Lafarge Lake then even fewer trains would be required. That is a tremendous amount of spares. So I think the statement in the Board Meeting Report is a mistake, unless there are other service reconfigurations that we don't know about yet.
  12. The new train order is for a base firm order of 205 cars (41 sets), with delivery in 2023-2027. There were options for an additional 400 cars as follows (based on the first post in this thread): Option exercised by end of 2021: up to 30 additional cars (6 sets), delivery by end of 2025 Option exercised by end of 2024: up to 70 additional cars (14 sets), delivery by end of 2028 Option exercised by end of 2026: up to 100 additional cars (20 sets), delivery by end of 2032 Option exercised by end of 2028: up to 100 additional cars (20 sets), delivery by end of 2034 Option exercised by end of 2030: up to 100 additional cars (20 sets), delivery by end of 2036 Likely that the first option has been or will soon be exercised (the announcement today included funding for 30 new cars), so the total train order should now/soon be for 235 cars (47 5-car sets). See also: https://bombardier.com/en/media/news/bombardier-supply-205-new-rail-cars-vancouvers-skytrain-network
  13. Does this mean that the issue at Lougheed with Mk 1s timing out has been resolved?
  14. The board meeting report says "new end cap design", whatever that means...
  15. Going to assume this isn't finalized, but the rendering looks like a Mk III v2 instead of a Mk IV. I guess we'll have to wait until Bombardier's press release before we find out more details about what model is being ordered...
  16. Based on the timeline, let's assume that the first 16 trains (arriving by August 2025) are "expansion" trains and the next 25 are "replacement" trains. After the 16 arrive, the fleet numbers are: 25x 6-car Mk I 27x 4-car Mk II 21x 4-car Mk III 16x 5-car Mk IV My theory is that this 16-car expansion can support both the Broadway extension and the Fleetwood extension. Operating the entire Millennium Line at that point (~48 minutes one-way) at a peak capacity of ~7500 pphpd (4-car trains running at 4 minute intervals) would take around 25 trains (so all the Mk II fleet, if you include some spares). Operating the Expo Line with 1/3 trains to Production Way, 1/3 to King George, and 1/3 to Fleetwood will take around 50 trains at the current 120s headways. If the headways are decreased to 108s, 55 trains will be required at peak, which can be covered with the 62 total Mk I/III/IV trains with enough spares. This scenario will represent a 50% capacity increase on the Millennium Line over current numbers, and 20% for the Expo Line. The remaining 25 cars will likely replace the 25 Mk I trains. The RFP has the options structured in a way such that trains for the Langley extension, if approved by the end of 2021, will be delivered by 2025 (presumably that will mean 2025 will see 18 trains instead of 12 trains). These additional 6 trains are sufficient for Fleetwood to Langley. If approved after the end of 2021 but before 2024, then the Mk I retirement schedule can be shifted by 6 months to allow for 6 6-car Mk I trains to remain until the additional vehicles arrive by 2028 using 6/14 trains of Option year 2. The other 8/14 should be for the UBC extension (again, shuffle 4-car Mk IIIs to the Millennium Line and keep the 5-car Mk IVs for Expo). Option years 3-5 are too far out in the future for me to want to think about them.
  17. Yes the platforms are constrained at 80m 5-car trains, but do note that the train frequency can be increased as well. I think the Expo Line can theoretically run at 75 seconds, but let's assume an operational peak frequency of 90s (vs current 120s) and an increase to 5-car trains (vs current "4-car"). That would be a 66.6% capacity boost compared with now. Afterwards, yes there will be a constraint, but at that point I believe that building additional lines into downtown will be better - it could serve a wider catchment of passengers, provide an alternative route during rush hour if one line gets shut down (e.g. medical emergency, maintenance issue), perhaps incorporate rapid trains that stop at major hubs only, and even allow for a line to close during the weekend for large scale maintenance. But is it that slow? The latest Mk III order of 14 trains took 22 months to arrive (first train arrived Sep 2018, last Jul 2020), so if anything a rate of 1/month is fast!
  18. What's the Expo/Millennium Line headway these days at weekday peak? Is Expo at 120s or 133.333s? Millennium at 180s or 200s?
  19. Expo operates at around 45 trains at rush (at least before the pandemic) and if the Langley extensions go ahead there will be even more trains running on Expo. Also, you'd have to make the entire switch (enter new trains in service, retire old trains, remove platform edges) all in one night, or else you'll end up with a gap issue. I think it's highly unlikely that it'll happen.
  20. For crying out loud, just put compass ticket dispensers on all the buses. Bonus is that they'd work on the SkyTrain too.
  21. I would also like to see this happen as it would be better to gradually increase capacity on the M Line, but I believe someone has previously said that Mk 1s time out on the switch just east of Lougheed Town Centre station going towards Burquitlam. Not sure if that issue still persists or not. If it does happen I believe it will happen September 2020, as that's when the next service increase is scheduled for according to previous press releases.
  22. I'm inclined to assume that there will just be more spares until a further announcement is made, similar to what happened when the 2018 Mk 3s started coming in.
  • Create New...