Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Blake M

Airport Rapid Transit Link

Recommended Posts

Higher rez of that is on slide 11 of this PDF from the Airport Transit Study Phase 2: https://www.calgary.ca/content/dam/www/engage/documents/airport-transit-study/airport-transit-study-phase-two.pdf

 

 

I find it highly amusing they consider Vancouver's Canada Line a mere "people mover" - certainly by some standards, it's only that, but for the traffic the YYC corridor gets, I doubt we'd be getting anything with the Canada Line's capacity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, TimmyC62 said:

I find it highly amusing they consider Vancouver's Canada Line a mere "people mover" - certainly by some standards, it's only that, but for the traffic the YYC corridor gets, I doubt we'd be getting anything with the Canada Line's capacity.

Honestly... if CT extended this APM further into the NE or dare even extend it to the NW LRT as a transfer - ridership would at least approach a sustainable level for frequent service. Also gives the North considerably more TOD opportunities, if its done like that as well & reallocates buses for elsewhere in the city (like the Centre Street BRT upcoming)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, armorand said:

further into the NE

As in?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There’s so much about Airport People Mover recommendations that don’t make sense. It needs ~30x today’s ridership to even consider a rail option over bus – this won’t happen for decades and assumptions made today will be completely outdated.

The way they justify not to connecting to the Green Line are ridiculous. APM because it takes too long for drivers to switch ends? Passengers might get confused about which train to take? I can understand not wanting to build a 4-car platform. But why not run a 1-car floater train and save the trouble of building another maintenance facility.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Nick B said:

As in?

NW* i haven't been on CPTDB on an actual computer in ages. That was totally a typo. Theres tons of residential in the far north of the city, that could use rapid transit links to the other two (future three) LRT lines. Thats where the TOD i mentioned would kick in, along with ridership potential.

Now that you mentioned it though - CrossIron/Balzac would be a good place to extend the APM towards (particularly with its two malls and thousands of workers nearby), while freeing up the LRT for higher capacity and more frequent trains, if it doesn't have to go any further north. One of the complaints I've been reading in various sources has been the overextension of the CTrain system, enabling sprawl and costing billions to expand. Maybe if there was an APM built northwards instead, it would save some money while also allowing the CTrain to focus on existing coverage, frequency and capacity issues by reallocating service for future NE expansions, into increasing capacity and frequency instead? 

1 hour ago, lucx said:

The way they justify not to connecting to the Green Line are ridiculous. APM because it takes too long for drivers to switch ends? Passengers might get confused about which train to take? I can understand not wanting to build a 4-car platform. But why not run a 1-car floater train and save the trouble of building another maintenance facility.

 

Agreed - one car trains would be better for frequency and ridership early to middle term. Imagine the cars pulled off the road, if theres an APM running every few minutes, especially feeding to three LRT lines... it would actually be possible to live in suburban Calgary without a car, or traffic jams, or anything of the sort lol.

And confusion about trains... isn't that the idea behind Luminators and rollsigns, to tell people of their destinations?! Agreed as well - it can't be that confusing to have an APM covered in screens, luminators and audio equipment to broadcast its destination. Maybe for APM airport purposes, multiple languages might be useful (French, Mandarin etc.)?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

a Skytrain like system would enable more frequency without the attendant increase in operators (and their pay) to run them.  The train could come into the airport and be gone within 30 seconds.  I doubt operators would like running that sort of turnaround time if they have issues with a homeless person or washroom break...

And given we're talking a reasonably small vehicle means we can have smaller stations that don't cost as much to build, though admittedly, if we did run 1 car trains, that would save a lot on the maintenance facility, provided there's capacity within the OBMF for this.

As for which train to board at the airport, go left at the platform to go to the Green Line, go right at the platform to go to the Blue Line.  So long as the crossovers are set properly for each train coming in to crossover before arriving, it'll be easy enough to know which way the train is going.

Jon

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

a Skytrain like system would enable more frequency without the attendant increase in operators (and their pay) to run them.  The train could come into the airport and be gone within 30 seconds.  I doubt operators would like running that sort of turnaround time if they have issues with a homeless person or washroom break...

And given we're talking a reasonably small vehicle means we can have smaller stations that don't cost as much to build, though admittedly, if we did run 1 car trains, that would save a lot on the maintenance facility, provided there's capacity within the OBMF for this.

As for which train to board at the airport, go left at the platform to go to the Green Line, go right at the platform to go to the Blue Line.  So long as the crossovers are set properly for each train coming in to crossover before arriving, it'll be easy enough to know which way the train is going.

Jon

The minimum amount of turnaround time that can be given to a CTrain operator (at least by schedule) is 3 minutes - with the way the airport terminal is setup (dead-end), you basically have 3 spots where the operator would need to get up and switch ends of the vehicle in every trip - that's 9 wasted minutes compared to a driverless vehicle.  You'd also have much more flexibility to simply bring extra vehicles out of the MSF if you experience larger than expected crowds; you wouldn't need to keep extra operators on standby waiting around, just bring it up on the computer and send it out.  And like Jon mentioned, the human factor (washroom breaks, illness, etc.) always adds an element of unknown and possible delay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, CTrainDude said:

The minimum amount of turnaround time that can be given to a CTrain operator (at least by schedule) is 3 minutes - with the way the airport terminal is setup (dead-end), you basically have 3 spots where the operator would need to get up and switch ends of the vehicle in every trip - that's 9 wasted minutes compared to a driverless vehicle.  You'd also have much more flexibility to simply bring extra vehicles out of the MSF if you experience larger than expected crowds; you wouldn't need to keep extra operators on standby waiting around, just bring it up on the computer and send it out.  And like Jon mentioned, the human factor (washroom breaks, illness, etc.) always adds an element of unknown and possible delay.

The way I see it, there are dozens, if.not hundreds of airports around the world with automated trains to take you between parking garages and terminals, I feel like perhaps a heavier duty version of those would suffice

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, CTrainDude said:

The minimum amount of turnaround time that can be given to a CTrain operator (at least by schedule) is 3 minutes

That factor I was not aware of.  Many times I've seen operators get out of the cab on one end of a train, walk to the other end, get in, sit down and hit the buttons needed for departure and we're out in less than 2 minutes.  If they have to schedule 3 minutes at each end, that is definitely a lot of time.  You realistically don't need more than a minute at each end if the frequencies are good.

Jon

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
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...