Vancouver looking at double deckers?

[Blue Bus Fan]

4 minutes ago, Stormscape said:

I imagine if they bought them to replace the Orions they'd get GO Transit style ones with only one door

I agree with you but I would image they would be be used on other routes such as the 480, 620, and 701. I do not see high capicity with a single door on the 351 not the best idea due the ridership and all the local stops in White Rock. 

Edited September 24, 2016 by Blue Bus Fan
Specific will the local stops are.

[TranslinkKid]

1 hour ago, GORDOOM said:

Soooooo, anyone bored and want to do a paper-bus or something of an Enviro500 Super-Lo in Sweep-R suburban livery? I think it'd be gorgeous, honestly.

Currently in process of drawing one

[Express691]

On 24/09/2016 at 2:11 PM, kmb3asv141 said:

Here are some height clearance information

ADL Enviro 500 Go-anywhere is 4115mm(4.1m) tall, super lo is 3.9m tall

Massey Tunnel 4.15m, can be use 3.9m super lo or wait for the replacement bridge.

Lougheed Town Center bus loop, 4.15m should be okay, not 4.3m

Metrotown, no issue as there was a E500 demo back in 2008

Lonsdale Quay, 4.2m,

VCC-clark, I don't think double deck can go thru because of the skytrain bridge is too low

SFU 3.96m, but can by-pass the building as the traffic around the campus is bi-direction since 2015.

Northshore Marine drive and Lion's gate bridge on/off ramp. no issue

West Vancouver, Park Royal mall over pass across Marine drive(4.26m) and overpass across Taylor way.(4.62m)

West Vancouver Marine Drive and BC Rail overpass(Marine and 31 Street) 4.4m

North Vancouver Main Street and Highway 1, West bound toward Philips Exchange 4.32m to 4.36m depending on which lane, East Bound 4.4m

New West Station, 3.75m, the problem is the dropped ceiling, can be removed

22nd Street Station, too low at the unloading area

Vancouver Knight and Marine drive, cannot enter to the 22 terminus

Richmond, Bridgeport Road and Oak Bridge, East bound 4.2m

Port Coquitlam Shaughnessy St and CPR, 3.96m

Im sure Coquitlam Station is something like 4.4 meters. 

King George, Scott Road, and Surrey Central should be well over 4.5 meters

Not sure about Downtown - Dunsmur at the Pacific Centre Overpass

EDIT: Coquitlam Station from Mariner Way underpass 5.0 meters 

[Stormscape]

The Pacific Centre one is high enough that it's not marked despite being a truck route. Might just be mall administration being irresponsible though.

[kmb3asv141]

Is Marine Drive station has enough clearance?

Also, Highway 99 northbound at Cambie Road, merging lane should have 4.36m, but not the HOV lane

Highway 1 under Gilmore, HOV on-ramp from Grandview Highway 4.38m

[Express691]

How about Government Street underpass? I suppose it falls under that exception of truck routes and such

Underpass at Carvolth Exchange 5.5 meters

[SidneyTransitfan]

I was just thinking about this the other day. With the 2001-built Orion Vs due for replacement within the next four years and capacity being an recurring issue on the suburban commuter routes out of Bridgeport, the 503 and the 555 Port Mann Express, and also longer distance routes like the 701 especially with the upcoming extensions to Mission; it would be ideal for TransLink to seriously consider obtaining double-decker buses for these routes. The 2008-built Orions will last a little longer, so those could continue to be used on less-busy commuter routes until they're replaced up to eight years later.

Personally I love the idea of an ADL Enviro 500 in TransLink's Sweep-R scheme. If the tunnel-replacement does go ahead and is completed on schedule, the new buses could theoretically just be the 4.1m model in order to keep the entire fleet the same height and specs, as opposed to having one order 3.9m and the other 4.1m.
 

[translink]

Sorry (Not really) for the reality check; but... where would you have these buses maintained? No, you can't just build a new transit centre just for a small number of buses.  Since they just spent several hundred million dollars with HTC. TransLink is crazily underfunded and way too cheap to upgrade any depot and raise the roof. I'm sorry, but I just don't see it happening.

[Large Cat]

I would love to see this too! But I'd like to see them in the charcoal paint scheme lol. 

[TranslinkKid]

6 hours later, it's finally done. Drawing of a SuperLo in the Sweep-R scheme.

[8800GTX]

20 minutes ago, TranslinkKid said:

6 hours later, it's finally done. Drawing of a SuperLo in the Sweep-R scheme.

Would the charcoal black not at least extend up top? (Or is the cost too high for that, or some other barrier?)

Anyway I wonder if there would be any clearance issues with these buses passing under the Guildford Mall overpass. Through service from the Fraser Valley to Surrey Centre via 104th on these double deckers could be a future possibility (the routes could run nonstop from Guildford-Central like the 337/509 already do).

EDIT: Just checked, the underpass is 4.8m lowest point so it should be doable!

[TranslinkKid]

1 hour ago, 8800GTX said:

Just checked, the underpass is 4.8m lowest point so it should be doable!

As long as it's greater than 3.9m, it'll make it through.

Here's another version with the charcoal black extended to the top

[Large Cat]

Ah, so the sweep-r design just is the charcoal livery. Beautiful drawing!

[cmbc2008]

George massey tunnel will be replaced by a 10 lane bridge ,,,,

[GORDOOM]

But wouldn't the double-deckers be in the suburban livery, like the Orion Vs?

(I can't believe we're talking this much about a bus that is barely a gleam in the eye of some planner at TransLink!)

[SidneyTransitfan]

11 hours ago, translink said:

Sorry (Not really) for the reality check; but... where would you have these buses maintained? No, you can't just build a new transit centre just for a small number of buses.  Since they just spent several hundred million dollars with HTC. TransLink is crazily underfunded and way too cheap to upgrade any depot and raise the roof. I'm sorry, but I just don't see it happening.

We all need a reality check from time-to-time. For the moment you're right, TransLink does not have any facility with the means of maintaining a bus greater than 12ft tall. However - we are talking four years down the road from now, and with HTC opened up RTC does have a lot more free space. Theoretically a maintenance facilty with the ability to maintain 'deckers isn't that far out of touch with reality.

Community Transit and Sound Transit operate both Deckers and Artics. The Artics have more overall capacity, but the Deckers have more seats without the higher maintenance costs of artics. For suburban routes like those out of RTC, more seated passengers (compared to an Orion V) means more revenue without the maintenance costs of artics. Yes they would need a new maintenance shop at RTC/HTC/PTC, but such expenses are minimal in comparison to building a whole new transit facility.

The former Oakridge Transit Centre is being sold-off, and will likely be turned into residential condos and towers.

Basically the point of my post is - for the moment, yes you are correct that TransLink can't maintain a whole new fleet of buses like this as such. Four years down the road however, things may change - and with Seattle having led the way with its' suburban routes using Double Deckers (and artics) for the past six years now, it's not so far out of touch with reality.

[Dane]

I've found this discussion intereting. But here's the quote from the CEO for some more grounding, "It’s the kind of thing our bus folks and TransLink should look at in the future". As in they're planning to plan. 

[cmbc2008]

Double decker can almost double the capacity with the same 40 foot length.....Artic 60 foot takes a lot more space, more artic will take up a lot of road space...more traffic congestion

Increase in revenue .....double decker will definitely increase ridership...........potential to make money with Charter works

Most passenger would love to ride on a double decker     just the view and comfort of a double decker       luxury

[Express691]

On 24/09/2016 at 8:04 PM, Express691 said:

How about Government Street underpass? I suppose it falls under that exception of truck routes and such

Underpass at Carvolth Exchange 5.5 meters

Pinetree Way at Evergreen Extension crossover: 4.0m?

Highway 17 Pedestrian overpass 4.94m

[NotQuite]

On September-24-16 at 7:51 PM, Blue Bus Fan said:

I agree with you but I would image they would be be used on other routes such as the 480, 620, and 701. I do not see high capicity with a single door on the 351 not the best idea due the ridership and all the local stops in White Rock. 

Having driven the 351 many times over the years, I have found single door coaches not to be much of a problem.  Nor has it been that much of a problem on the 601.  However the single door restricts the bus to routes that are primarily pick up at one end and drop off at the other end.  Much like intercity routes rather than local ones.

[cmbc2008]

Double decker skytrain

[Blue Bus Fan]

Just now, cmbc2008 said:

Double decker skytrain

That would be interesting to see; but, as right now for foreseeable future impossible due the stations and tunnels roofs only being high enough for single decker trains.

[8800GTX]

41 minutes ago, Blue Bus Fan said:

That would be interesting to see; but, as right now for foreseeable future impossible due the stations and tunnels roofs only being high enough for single decker trains.

Funnily enough I was recently reading about a proposal in Tokyo (it wasn't official but it was brought forward by a candidate for governor there) for turning their busiest subway and JR train lines into double-decker trains, with both top and bottom deck loading. I recall that as part of the plan, in order to keep the train height similar, the 'lower deck' would be dropped in height by lowering the platform gauge and adopting - yes - our SkyTrain technology (linear motors)

(For anyone who wants to read about this I believe it was posted on SkyscraperCity)

Hey, the idea isn't so bad, but it's certainly a pie-in-the-sky idea - and the idea of it on our system is even more crazy as basically everything would need to be rebuilt at a cost we wouldn't be able to afford for 100 years (i.e. the Dunsmuir tunnel is just tall enough for our trains and our trains are already smaller than usual).

[Express691]

Not a bad idea, but these 2 deck cars would be trailer cars right? In order to maximize space I'd think they would need to remove spme of that undercarriage stuff

[Cimon8000]

On 9/24/2016 at 7:48 PM, Stormscape said:

I imagine if they bought them to replace the Orions they'd get GO Transit style ones with only one door

That sounds most likely to be the case, purchase the SuperLo "coach" version with luggage rack like GO Transit does to replace the aging suburban Orion V, and the 3.91m tall would fit underneath the Massey Tunnel