Jump to content
webfil

Réseau express métropolitain (REM)

Recommended Posts

24 stations - 67 km - 20 hours a day - 7 days a week - 5 billion $. It's pretty much the end of the world as we know it (and I feel fine).

Cgpv_4pWsAABxUZ.jpg:large

Quote

Montréal, April 22, 2016 – CDPQ Infra, a subsidiary of Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec, unveiled plans today for its Réseau électrique métropolitain (REM), an integrated, world-class public transportation project. Launched 288 days after the creation of CDPQ Infra, the proposal marks the beginning of a series of consultations to be held over the next few months with stakeholder groups and interested citizens.

As proposed, the REM will link downtown Montréal, the South Shore, the West Island (Sainte-Anne-de-Bellevue), the North Shore (Deux-Montagnes) and the airport in a unified, fully automated, 67-km light rail transit (LRT) system comprising 24 stations and operating 20 hours a day, 7 days a week.

Once completed, the REM will be the third largest automated transportation system in the world after Dubai (80 km) and Vancouver (68 km), and just ahead of Singapore (65 km). For the metropolitan area, the REM also represents the largest public transportation infrastructure since the Montréal metro, inaugurated in 1966. Combined with existing transportation networks (metro, trains and buses), the REM opens a new era of public transit development in the Greater Montréal area.

The solution proposed by CDPQ Infra will:

  • offer an integrated, efficient and reliable service
  • constitute Québec’s first “public-public” partnership project
  • build a new network of strategic importance for the Greater Montréal area and for Québec
  • foster environmentally sustainable transportation

Integrated, efficient and reliable service
As a single, integrated transportation network, the REM will offer a number of efficient travel options in the Greater Montréal area. Connections between the new network and existing bus, metro and train systems have also been designed to simplify itineraries.
With frequent and reliable service running from 5:00 am to 1:00 am – 20 hours a day, every day – the REM represents a new paradigm and significant time savings for commuters in the metropolitan region. The decision to use dedicated tracks will allow for quick and uninterrupted travel, and passengers will have Wi-Fi connectivity and access to live status updates.
New stations will be integrated into their urban environment and designed to allow easy access for pedestrians, bicycles, cars and buses. All stations will be covered, climate-controlled, equipped with elevators, and will meet the principles of universal access.
Finally, by choosing the Highway 40 route to the West Island, the project allows for the creation of a dedicated corridor for public transportation, without the need to share tracks with freight trains.

[...]

map_en_161130.png

tableaux-en.png

CDPQ Infra will begin a consultation process with various stakeholders in the coming weeks. Information and discussion sessions will also be organized for the general public in all areas affected by this extensive new network. CDPQ Infra is committed to providing open, regular and timely communications through each phase of the project.
CDPQ Infra plans to submit this project to the environmental impact public hearing (BAPE) process at the end of the summer of 2016.
CDPQ Infra is committed to rigorously managing the procurement process by issuing open and transparent international calls for tenders. This process will be based on global best practices for efficiency and transparency.
If all these steps are taken successfully, construction is currently expected to begin in the spring of 2017, so that the first trains can be in service towards the end of 2020.

For more information, citizens are encouraged to consult the new Project section in the CDPQ Infra website: cdpqinfra.com.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So based on the map, are they planning on building a new station in the middle of the Mont Royal Tunnel to connect with the Edouard Montpetit station?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Transitfan39 said:

So based on the map, are they planning on building a new station in the middle of the Mont Royal Tunnel to connect with the Edouard Montpetit station?

Yes. The conversion of the Deux-Montagnes line to a surface metro with stations at McGill and Montréal universities has been planned and studied since 1961. 

reseau_original_1961.png

The initial Drapeau metro proposal had 3 lines : two undeground lines with rubber-tyred rolling stock, one ground-level line with two branches replacing the Sainte-Gertrude and Cartierville commuter rail with steel-wheel rolling stock. CN had even rebuilt coach cars with handlebars and center-facing seats as a pilot-project for this line.

In 1963, the branch towards Sault-au-Récollet was abandonned. A 1964 study suggested the extension of Line 3 towards Chomedey and Cité-du-Havre, south of Griffintown. Meanwhile, Montréal is scheduled to host Expo 67, and a rubber-tyred line serving the Expo site is preferred to Line 3.

In 1967,

included the creation of a metropolitan transit board that would plan the construction and operations of a 3-line regional express rail network :
  • Deux-Montagnes ― Iberville via Central Station;
  • Rigaud ― Joliette via a new tunnel between Windsor and Viger stations;
  • Sainte-Adèle ― Saint-Hyacinthe via Victoria bridge and a new tunnel between Parc and Central stations.

The lack of a metropolitan governance killed the project.

trramm_zpsnqrmfrq4.png

Source : Canadian rail, n° 272

In 1969, it is decided to build the Mirabel international airport. A regional planning agency, the CTRM, received in 1972 the mandate to plan a passenger train connection between Mirabel and Montréal. It proposed in 1974 the TRAMM (Transport rapide régional et aéroporturaire Montréal-Mirabel, "Montréal-Mirabel Rapid Transit System"), with a revenue service due for 1981. It is projected that the service would use the CN tracks up to Jacques-Cartier junction, then the CP tracks to Parc station and a new tunnel towards Windsor station. Price tag : 500 million 1973 dollars.

sousPDA_zps2vljqk9u.png

Place-des-Arts station for the original REM. Source : BAREM, reproduced in Barrieau

In 1974, the BAREM (Bureau d'aménagement du réseau express de Montréal, "Montréal Rapid Transit Planning Office") is mandated to complete the studies and build a 5-line REM (Réseau express métropolitain, "Metropolitan Rapid Transit Network") pointing towards Mirabel, Rigaud, Châteauguay, Belœil and Repentigny. The final studies are published in 1977. The need to reorganize the greater Montréal growth when the new Green Zone Bill was passed forced the government to rethink the whole mobility schemes in the greater Montréal.

In 1978, the CTRM, now COTREM, proposes to :

  • nationalize Deux-Montagnes (CN) and Rigaud (CP) commuter rail lines;
  • create 3 "surface metro" lines (lines 3, 5, 6) pointing towards Deux-Montagnes, Laval and Repentigny.

The BTM (Montreal Transportation Office) proposes instead the creation of a new "underground metro" line (line 7) under Pie-IX boulevard. Nobody gets along. Projects are thrown in a black hole. Nevertheless, the CTCUM (ex-STM) assumed the ownership of the commuter rail rolling stock and stations, but the trains still ran on private railways.

1980's austerity policies almost killed every passenger train in Canada. The only project kept alive is the improvement of the Deux-Montagnes line, as a commuter rail line; the whole REM project is abandonned in 1984. COTREM is disbanded in 1990, replaced by a temporary structure, the CMTC, whose mandate is to modernize the two sole commuter rail lines remaining (Rigaud, Deux-Montagnes) ― whereas Montréal counted 23 commuter rail lines before 1961. Only Deux-Montagnes was modernized. CMTC is made permanent in 1995, renamed AMT.

Since then AMT comes back once in a while with the idea of an Édouard-Montpetit intermodal station, with studies showing it is technically feasible, safe and not too expensive. The government's and its agencies' desire for a performant, modern, rapid, high-capacity Deux-Montagnes line has been constant over the years. This is just the realization of what should have been done 50 years ago.

Édouard-Montpetit.png

The Édouard-Montpetit station, 18 level under ground. Source : Lamarche, 2007

Adapted from Barrieau, P. (2013) Montreal's Commuter Rail Revival : 50 years in the making, Transportation Research Board and Barrieau, P. (2015) La planification, prise en charge et modernisation des trains de banlieue montréalais par l'État, Agence métropolitaine des transports.

571c024d37293_douard-Montpetit.png.47458

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We will believe it when we see it!

For those of you that care about the fate of RTL bus drivers, don't worry! Resources shall be distributed elsewhere and we are not predicting hiring freezes and mass layoffs! So if you are an aspiring bus driver:

Joint our team

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/23/2016 at 7:20 PM, webfil said:

In 1963, the branch towards Sault-au-Récollet was abandonned.

Actually, the electrified Montreal North branch, which included Sault-au-Récollet (at about Iberville street, BTW), lasted until November 8, 1968. That station was not resurrected with the current Mascouche line.

Much of the time, effort, and money would be better put into beefing up current commuter train service. BTW, what's the latest on AMT's proposed order for new cars? About all I've picked up is that BBD was the only bidder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Mark Walton said:

Actually, the electrified Montreal North branch, which included Sault-au-Récollet (at about Iberville street, BTW), lasted until November 8, 1968. That station was not resurrected with the current Mascouche line.

I meant to say "dropped from the metro proposal", rather than the line ceased operation. Also, Sault station was just west of De Lille. Anywhere further east, it would have been a nonsense to call it Sault, since the core of the ancient village (older than Ville-Marie/Montréal) is corner Papineau and Gouin.

4 hours ago, Mark Walton said:

Much of the time, effort, and money would be better put into beefing up current commuter train service. BTW, what's the latest on AMT's proposed order for new cars? About all I've picked up is that BBD was the only bidder.

Well, they basically built up the tender to the 2000-series specs as I rigorously and vigorously demonstrated before, so no surprise there... <_< 

They might anyways wait for a move from the government (either Bill 76 or a REM BAPE) before handing over the money to their good friends in La Pocatière.

If the REM gets ever built, the 3000-series will have been quite a loss of money. They were supposed to serve the Mont-Royal tunnel and another one connecting to Parc, though I never got why they wouldn't expropriate/relocate the Marché Central Home Depot to reinstate the CN/CP interchange ― that would have saved them quite a few hundred millions of dollars, as the property is valued to 16 M$ and a tunnel ~300 M$.

I mentioned the saturation of the railroads around Montréal, so « beefing up » was not an option. The CP does not give a scheiße about giving trackage to the AMT since the cargo rail is on the upside Canada-wide, and the CN is less and less prone to share its assets with cumbersome passenger rail either. Also, the government mandated the CDPQ to study an integrated system between the west island and the Champlain bridge. The ownership of the Deux-Montagnes line is a good card to play, in this case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 2000s are really oddballs in AMT's fleet, only 22 cars including 4 cabs in a total fleet of 206 hauled cars (that total assumes the gallery cars are retired, if not, make it 215). They can only run on St. Jerome (for now) or Vaudreuil; CP probably doesn't want them on Candiac, having already banned the 3000s (along with double-stacks) from its bridge when winds are 85 km/h or more. The 3000s are almost 80% of the fleet, 160 cars including 26 cabs. Except for Candiac, they can run almost anywhere on AMT's system, including the Tunnel, and high or low platforms. Not to mention the development cost, though those  (and the ALP45DPs) were a joint development with NJ Transit for similar clearances. More thoughts on AMT's fleet here.

Yes, the removal of the old Gohier connection makes bringing St. Jerome trains into Central much harder. I guess every railfan in Montreal knows where NOT to shop. Yes, I know only too well CN and CP's attitude toward passenger trains.

Quote

I meant to say "dropped from the metro proposal", rather than the line ceased operation. Also, Sault station was just west of De Lille. Anywhere further east, it would have been a nonsense to call it Sault, since the core of the ancient village (older than Ville-Marie/Montréal) is corner Papineau and Gouin.

Michael Leduc's book "Railway Stations of Montreal Island: CN and Constituent Companies" (1994) said Sault-au-Récollet was at Iberville, which is about 2 blocks east of de Lille.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mark Walton said:

Michael Leduc's book "Railway Stations of Montreal Island: CN and Constituent Companies" (1994) said Sault-au-Récollet was at Iberville, which is about 2 blocks east of de Lille.

I am afraid Leduc might have been wrong.

Here is an aerial picture of the area in 1945, around line inauguration. The picture is pointing towards Prairies river (montrealer north). De Lille street is to the left (underpass), Iberville is not built yet. Stairs and shelter are clearly visible.

lille.jpg

Same area, 20 years later. Shelter and staircases still visible, although less clearly. Still nothing near Iberville, only an informal crossing that has made its way.

1965.jpg

It is possible that the station moved near Iberville in between 1945 and 1965, or shortly before the line ceased. However, I strongly doubt that.

--------------------

2 hours ago, Mark Walton said:

The 2000s are really oddballs in AMT's fleet, only 22 cars including 4 cabs in a total fleet of 206 hauled cars (that total assumes the gallery cars are retired, if not, make it 215). They can only run on St. Jerome (for now) or Vaudreuil; CP probably doesn't want them on Candiac, having already banned the 3000s (along with double-stacks) from its bridge when winds are 85 km/h or more. The 3000s are almost 80% of the fleet, 160 cars including 26 cabs. Except for Candiac, they can run almost anywhere on AMT's system, including the Tunnel, and high or low platforms. Not to mention the development cost, though those  (and the ALP45DPs) were a joint development with NJ Transit for similar clearances. More thoughts on AMT's fleet here.

Well, AMT clearly wants them to be less regarded as oddballs. If the tender is accepted, then they will double their 2000 fleet, with 20 additional trailers and 4 new cabs. As I said, the original plan was to have a wall-to-wall 3000 fleet, with shiny new tunnels connecting CP and CN. Things have changed. It is now clear to me that the AMT wants to cut on formation and maintenance costs, sending all the 3000s to their future maintenance center in Pointe-Saint-Charles (CN), and having only 2000s and 700s in Lachine (CP).

24 cars of the 700 setries is largely enough for Candiac. 3 trains are required to operate the schedule, and all consists operate with 5 or 6 cars, thanks to the recent consist length rationalization policy. CP's order suspension on Saint-Laurent bridge for high cars has damaged the line's reliability in the past.

Deux-Montagnes needs VH and SJ multilevels because trains are crammed full with people now anyways. And the MR-90 are somewhat nearing their pre-refurbishment life. Enough said.

Buying overpriced 2000-series is not the only step back from the AMT. 700 series came back from ON with their low/high platform trapdoors renovated... I mean... Are they really gonna use them on DM or MSH lines?.. And are they really going to go forward with that order, knowing that DM could be converted to light rail?

lille.jpg.e0e67080453e60357807934df5fc31

1965.jpg.bc24ff9f89f6b8dbcfb9d874311d9ea

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, webfil said:

I am afraid Leduc might have been wrong.

Here is an aerial picture of the area in 1945, around line inauguration. The picture is pointing towards Prairies river (montrealer north). De Lille street is to the left (underpass), Iberville is not built yet. Stairs and shelter are clearly visible.

lille.jpg

Same area, 20 years later. Shelter and staircases still visible, although less clearly. Still nothing near Iberville, only an informal crossing that has made its way.

1965.jpg

It is possible that the station moved near Iberville in between 1945 and 1965, or shortly before the line ceased. However, I strongly doubt that.

Thanks for those aerials. I took Leduc's word mainly for lack of anything else.

 

Quote

Well, AMT clearly wants them to be less regarded as oddballs. If the tender is accepted, then they will double their 2000 fleet, with 20 additional trailers and 4 new cabs. As I said, the original plan was to have a wall-to-wall 3000 fleet, with shiny new tunnels connecting CP and CN. Things have changed. It is now clear to me that the AMT wants to cut on formation and maintenance costs, sending all the 3000s to their future maintenance center in Pointe-Saint-Charles (CN), and having only 2000s and 700s in Lachine (CP).

24 cars of the 700 setries is largely enough for Candiac. 3 trains are required to operate the schedule, and all consists operate with 5 or 6 cars, thanks to the recent consist length rationalization policy. CP's order suspension on Saint-Laurent bridge for high cars has damaged the line's reliability in the past.

Deux-Montagnes needs VH and SJ multilevels because trains are crammed full with people now anyways. And the MR-90 are somewhat nearing their pre-refurbishment life. Enough said.

Buying overpriced 2000-series is not the only step back from the AMT. 700 series came back from ON with their low/high platform trapdoors renovated... I mean... Are they really gonna use them on DM or MSH lines?.. And are they really going to go forward with that order, knowing that DM could be converted to light rail?

"Overpriced 2000-series cars"?

"700 series came back from ON with their low/high platform trapdoors renovated " I didn't know the 700s ever had those. Most trips I took on them were on VH, long before the rebuild; I don't remember them having traps as built. Those are basically clones of the NJ Transit Comet III fleet.

Are the 900s officially retired? The current Trackside Guide still lists them as active.

Yes, I've heard about the rush-hour crowding on DM, and the MR-90s needing refit. They're 20+ years old now, and showing their age (if not the outright decrepitude of their "MR-52" ancestors!) I hope part of any refit is adding cabs to all MR-90 trailers; I never thought just 4 of 29 was enough. Most weekends AMT can probably manage with just 2 cars.

Another consideration: Not only will DM need the 3000s, but also ALP-45DP dual-mode locos. Are there enough of those to go around? Or will AMT have to wait until the current F59PHI rebuild is done, and shuffle units between lines?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Mark Walton said:

"Overpriced 2000-series cars"?

Well, while the AMT ordered 160 multilevel cars for 386 M$ in 2009, the estimated value of the actual contract is 103 M$ for 24 bilevel cars. That is, in my opinion, slightly overpriced for a design that is over 40 years old.

4 hours ago, Mark Walton said:

"700 series came back from ON with their low/high platform trapdoors renovated " I didn't know the 700s ever had those. Most trips I took on them were on VH, long before the rebuild; I don't remember them having traps as built. Those are basically clones of the NJ Transit Comet III fleet.

700-series are in fact Comet II, as they were ordered in 1988 ― shortly after Bombardier took over. emdx) has post-refurbishment pictures on his website, showing those babies are old enough to leave the nest.

cTQTzHi.png

4 hours ago, Mark Walton said:

Yes, I've heard about the rush-hour crowding on DM, and the MR-90s needing refit. They're 20+ years old now, and showing their age (if not the outright decrepitude of their "MR-52" ancestors!) I hope part of any refit is adding cabs to all MR-90 trailers; I never thought just 4 of 29 was enough. Most weekends AMT can probably manage with just 2 cars.

Another consideration: Not only will DM need the 3000s, but also ALP-45DP dual-mode locos. Are there enough of those to go around? Or will AMT have to wait until the current F59PHI rebuild is done, and shuffle units between lines?

Yes, there are only 4 trailer-cabs, but add to that 28 motor-cab and that makes half of the MR-90 fleet equipped with cabs. Make it 4 cars minimum, on the weekends.

The AMT currently needs 5 trains to get around the schedule. I assume there is enough power for everybody (I'd bet on a 2-phase refurbishment of the MR-90's), and AMT still has an option for 10 more dual-powered tractors from their 2009 order ― but that seems a long time ago, back when the Saint-Jérôme tunnel thing was studied, and back when the AMT thought they'd convince the CN and CP into electrifying most, if not the whole network...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Mount royal tunnel is converted to automated light rail, what happens to the Mascouche commuter train line? Somehow I don't imagine track sharing...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mascouche line would be shortened to the "Correspondance A-40" station between Est junction and Mont-Royal station (see map in first post).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2016-04-29 at 2:00 PM, webfil said:

Well, while the AMT ordered 160 multilevel cars for 386 M$ in 2009, the estimated value of the actual contract is 103 M$ for 24 bilevel cars. That is, in my opinion, slightly overpriced for a design that is over 40 years old.

In fairness, the Multi-level cars were ordered in 2007, and that price was converted from USD. If you factor in the exchange - the Canadian dollar was doing quite a bit better than it was today, and I would bet you that the budgetted amount was calculated months and months ago - you'll see that the prices aren't exactly out to lunch.

 

Dan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/29/2016 at 2:00 PM, webfil said:

Yes, there are only 4 trailer-cabs, but add to that 28 motor-cab and that makes half of the MR-90 fleet equipped with cabs. Make it 4 cars minimum, on the weekends.

The AMT currently needs 5 trains to get around the schedule. I assume there is enough power for everybody (I'd bet on a 2-phase refurbishment of the MR-90's), and AMT still has an option for 10 more dual-powered tractors from their 2009 order ― but that seems a long time ago, back when the Saint-Jérôme tunnel thing was studied, and back when the AMT thought they'd convince the CN and CP into electrifying most, if not the whole network...

Actually, that's 29 sets: all 29 motors have cabs - but I still think only 4/29 trailers is not enough. All 12 trailers in the old MR-52 CN fleet had cabs, IMO there's no reason the MR-90s shouldn't.

On top of everything else, AMT's future as an entity is probably still up in the air - and that, in its 20th anniversary year. They don't seem to be recognizing it at all. If they wanted a logo, they could just put a 2 above the loop surrounding the M an AMT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey guys, anyone interested in going to the open houses for this project?

Quote

In order to present the people of greater Montréal with its proposed REM and encourage discussion, CDPQ Infra is organizing an open house tour, to take place throughout the month of June. These meetings are a first step in CDPQ Infra’s plans to initiate a long-term dialogue with the population concerned by the project.

Upcoming open houses:

- Saint-Laurent Borough, June 1, 2016, from 5:00 p.m. to 8:30 p.m., Salle Le Crystal | 5285 Henri-Bourassa Boulevard West 
- Brossard, June 2, 2016, from 5:00 p.m. to 8:30 p.m., Centre socioculturel de Brossard | 7905 Avenue San-Francisco 
- Île-des-Sœurs, June 8, 2016, from 5:00 p.m. to 8:30 p.m., Centre communautaire Elgar | 260 Elgar Street 
- Pointe-Claire, June 9, 2016, from 5:00 p.m. to 8:30 p.m., Holiday Inn & Suites | 6700 Trans-Canada Highway 
- Deux-Montagnes, June 15, 2016, from 5:00 p.m. to 8:30 p.m., Veteran's Hall | 141 Grand-Moulin Street

Source: http://cdpqinfra.com/en/Reseau_electrique_metropolitain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The BAPE hearings brought out that this project is polarizing the different stakeholders in the metro area. Some are even trying to place good as the enemy of perfect ― yet this project, far from perfect, is somewhat good IMHO. But that's another story, and CDPQ showed it is open to improvements and willing to change its project :

  • CN will allow the REM to run on the viaduct near the Gare Centrale, avoiding the destruction of heritage buildings in Griffintown;
  • Édouard-Montpetit and McGill stations shall be included in the first phase tender, but the funding parameters are being validated;
  • The Bridge-Wellington stations has been moved to Bassin Peel under the Lachine Canal, and included in the first phase tender, but the funding parameters are being validated;
  • The Airport station might have to be built from zero, under the multilevel parking. The current station stub (under the terminal C, gates to US flights) has been built for access from the south. Options are currently being studied;
  • Route through Technoparc has been modified so that the tunnel portal is not built in wetlands
  • CDPQ will do its maintenance in Pointe-Saint-Charles, reducing the needs for land on south shore
  • Kirkland shall get one station, instead of two;
  • Sainte-Anne-de-Bellevue station has been moved west, at Morgan Road instead of Anse-à-l'Orme

Some facts sheet (in French) :

cdpq-facts.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shortlist for the bids :

  • Construction
    • SNC-Lavalin + ÆCOM
    • WSP Global + Parsons
  • Operation & rolling stock
    • Hyundai Rotem + Parson + Thales
    • Bombardier Transport
    • Alstom Canada + SNC Lavalin

I am guessing the choice of trainsets will pretty much be between Bombardier Innovia, Alstom Metropolis and Hyundai Rotem driverless EMUs. Just hoping Bombardier is left out, so that the project is not delayed for 5 years :P

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/light-rail-montreal-companies-shortlisted-contract-1.3846266

If anybody is interested, open houses will be held throughout the next weeks.

CxUrhZBWIAAjfnx.jpg:large

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, webfil said:

 

  • Operation & rolling stock
    • Hyundai Rotem + Parson + Thales
    • Bombardier Transport
    • Alstom Canada + SNC Lavalin

I am guessing the choice of trainsets will pretty much be between Bombardier Innovia, Alstom Metropolis and Hyundai Rotem driverless EMUs. Just hoping Bombardier is left out, so that the project is not delayed for 5 years :P

On the one hand, I think the Innovia looks the best, but the Hyundais have 4-abreast seating (on the Canada Line, anyway) which is better than the 3-abreast Innovias. Not sure about the Alstrom model, though... the more seats the better, given the length of most trips. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Orcair said:

On the one hand, I think the Innovia looks the best, but the Hyundais have 4-abreast seating (on the Canada Line, anyway) which is better than the 3-abreast Innovias. Not sure about the Alstrom model, though... the more seats the better, given the length of most trips. 

There are some potential capacity issues, at least for the Brossard leg (see page 113) of the network, where the expected ridership is over 26,000 in AM peak for 2031. The minimal capacity requirement is 500 customers per 4-cars trainset. With 10 trains per hour, some saturation might happen sooner than 2031 if the capacity is lower than that with, let's say, rows of 4 seats (Vancouver's Rotems have a capacity of 334, vs 532 for the Innovia/Mark IIIs).

Two of the most lengthy branches are the ones with the lowest expected ridership, so no worries here, plenty of seats for everybody. I'd say the least seats the better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎2016‎-‎11‎-‎15 at 2:04 PM, webfil said:

Shortlist for the bids :

  • Construction
    • SNC-Lavalin + ÆCOM
    • WSP Global + Parsons
  • Operation & rolling stock
    • Hyundai Rotem + Parson + Thales
    • Bombardier Transport
    • Alstom Canada + SNC Lavalin

I am guessing the choice of trainsets will pretty much be between Bombardier Innovia, Alstom Metropolis and Hyundai Rotem driverless EMUs. Just hoping Bombardier is left out, so that the project is not delayed for 5 years :P

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/light-rail-montreal-companies-shortlisted-contract-1.3846266

If anybody is interested, open houses will be held throughout the next weeks.

CxUrhZBWIAAjfnx.jpg:large

Thanks for the news on the open houses. If Bombardier's bid is accepted, there ought to be a clause indicating stiff penalties for delays in delivery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, SMS said:

Thanks for the news on the open houses. If Bombardier's bid is accepted, there ought to be a clause indicating stiff penalties for delays in delivery.

There generally is for these kinds of projects, regardless of who the actual winning bidder is.

 

Dan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CDPQ, city of Montréal and MTMDET (former MTQ) announced big money (400 M$) for the realization of the three formerly "eventual" stations. These would provide access from the REM to Griffintown/Pointe-Saint-Charles (Cité du Multimédia, Quartier de l'Innovation, UQ's engineering school), north downtown (McGill U., underground city, Quartier des Spectacles) and north-of-the-mountain institutional area (Montréal U. campus, Sainte-Justine/St. Mary's/Jewish General hospitals, colleges, Saint-Joseph oratory, cemeteries and the "Third Peak Park").

But most importantly, two of these three stations will integrate the REM to the Metro network, akin to SEPTA/PATCO/NJTransit or PATH/MTA/NJTransit networks.

Édouard-Montpetit is quite impressive, with 4 high-velocity, high-capacity, high-rise-like elevators connecting the two sets of platforms, 20 storeys apart. McGill station will require high-rise building and undeground city stabilization work in order to dig for the new corridors. Bassin Peel will be built under the canal, with exits on both sides. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2016-11-16 at 1:49 PM, webfil said:

There are some potential capacity issues, at least for the Brossard leg (see page 113) of the network, where the expected ridership is over 26,000 in AM peak for 2031. The minimal capacity requirement is 500 customers per 4-cars trainset. With 10 trains per hour, some saturation might happen sooner than 2031 if the capacity is lower than that with, let's say, rows of 4 seats (Vancouver's Rotems have a capacity of 334, vs 532 for the Innovia/Mark IIIs).

Two of the most lengthy branches are the ones with the lowest expected ridership, so no worries here, plenty of seats for everybody. I'd say the least seats the better.

Wow I hadn't even realized that capacity was going to be that tight so soon - thanks for linking that document! I was able to scan through it and found the polling on 747 users rather fascinating as well... to see how stuck in their ways people are in taking a bus that is so unreliable (at least whenever I have to use it...). EDIT: Just saw this article too, seems I'm not alone: http://www.tvanouvelles.ca/2016/12/08/insatisfaction-croissante-sur-la-ligne-747-la-faute-aux-chantiers-dit-la-stm

Re: Rotem v. Mark III, the Rotems are only 2-car in Vancouver - I imagine they would be a 3-car set for the REM (501 pax), or would they go 4-car anyway, with a capacity of 668? Obviously it will be in the bidding protocol, but interesting to see how much the 2 designs differ in capacity per car.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/12/2016 at 8:35 PM, Orcair said:

Re: Rotem v. Mark III, the Rotems are only 2-car in Vancouver - I imagine they would be a 3-car set for the REM (501 pax), or would they go 4-car anyway, with a capacity of 668? Obviously it will be in the bidding protocol, but interesting to see how much the 2 designs differ in capacity per car.

I did not know that Rotems only ran in pairs.

CDPQ is asking for trains with 600 pax at 4 cars, with automatic coupling/de-coupling.

2016-12-15 12 33 42.png

The idea is to operate at full-size, full-frequency on the Brossard―Bois-Francs, then dispatch 1 out of 4 trains to the airport, 1/4 to Sainte-Anne, 1/4 to Roxboro and 1/4 to Deux-Montagnes (Roxboro being en route to 2-M, it ends up getting half the core-section frequency).

Decoupling (4→2-car trains) happens at 9:30. Trains are coupled back at 15:30, then de-coupled back at 20:00.

2016-12-15 12 38 34.png 2016-12-15 12 51 38.png

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...