Jump to content

Calgary Transit CTrain Service Disruptions


Recommended Posts

On 10/1/2019 at 6:02 PM, Nick B said:

Just curious - to save money designing new stations in the future, and preventing stucco issues, would CT ever re-use a train station design for the new stations? Not that the Sunnyside/Lions Park/Banff Trail designs would look good on future NE or South extensions... but i was thinking, maybe the older stations such as Max Bell/Barlow, or Bridgeland and Frankin (with original and simple 80s designs), would be cheaper to build out, and with recycled plans (minus the bridges), could save CT millions with expansions. Especially with cookie cutter stations. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/13/2019 at 10:52 AM, armorand said:

Just curious - to save money designing new stations in the future, and preventing stucco issues, would CT ever re-use a train station design for the new stations? Not that the Sunnyside/Lions Park/Banff Trail designs would look good on future NE or South extensions... but i was thinking, maybe the older stations such as Max Bell/Barlow, or Bridgeland and Frankin (with original and simple 80s designs), would be cheaper to build out, and with recycled plans (minus the bridges), could save CT millions with expansions. Especially with cookie cutter stations. 

I'm not an architect, but I'll take Crowfoot and Tuscany stations as examples of why this may not be a good idea.

Only a few years apart, and superficially quite similar, there are still several changes in the design of both in order to accommodate their traffic demands. I don't have stats but from using it every day, Crowfoot is easily 2-3x as busy as Tuscany. Tuscany also does not have escalators, which from observation probably save hundreds of thousands in maintenance costs per year and CT probably wishes they'd done the same at Crowfoot, Dalhousie, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, chills_on_the_train said:

I'm not an architect, but I'll take Crowfoot and Tuscany stations as examples of why this may not be a good idea.

Only a few years apart, and superficially quite similar, there are still several changes in the design of both in order to accommodate their traffic demands. I don't have stats but from using it every day, Crowfoot is easily 2-3x as busy as Tuscany. Tuscany also does not have escalators, which from observation probably save hundreds of thousands in maintenance costs per year and CT probably wishes they'd done the same at Crowfoot, Dalhousie, etc.

But then you’ve got stations like Bridgeland and Franklin, which despite being virtually identical to Marlborough, Rundle, Whitehorn, don’t see much traffic at all compared to those stations. Then there’s Zoo and Barlow with their elaborate tunnel configurations which are even more dead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Nick B said:

But then you’ve got stations like Bridgeland and Franklin, which despite being virtually identical to Marlborough, Rundle, Whitehorn, don’t see much traffic at all compared to those stations. Then there’s Zoo and Barlow with their elaborate tunnel configurations which are even more dead.

Pretty much my point. Re-using designs to save money probably ended up costing more in the long run as far as capacity needs go. Although when building something as permanent as LRT you do need to take into account possible future development, and on my occasional trips out that way I do see Bridgeland increasing in density over time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
2 hours ago, chills_on_the_train said:

Passed a dead (no lights) SD160 consist stuck between Brentwood and Dalhousie this morning backing up the Red Line NB. I've been on a few of those that run into electrical and door problems, guess that's why they're going out for refurbs.

That was actually a broken down a refurb.

 

The SD160s are bulletproof. The only reason why they have been refurbed is because they have reached the middle of their life span and so they can run with the Series 8s. 

They also received a bit of an interior facelift and some modernizing.

They were never refurbed because of any technical issues.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
  • 2 months later...
  • 3 weeks later...
1 hour ago, Mark Walton said:

What kind of emergency repairs? Why?

2 massive signals cabinets were destroyed by a vehicle accident a couple weeks ago that essentially control everything between Kensington Bridge and 7 avenue. Operations were manipulated over the last couple weeks to continue running trains through there. They have been rebuilt and are being installed during the closures. The closure is to ease operations. Trains technically “could” run through there but not having train traffic makes it easier.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8234 and 8240 observed working the shuttle service this morning. There's probably a third bus, if past experience is any indication.

EDIT: Probably more than three buses, if service was every 5 minutes, now that I think of it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would normally agree with you — except during this public health emergency we are being told, by transit itself, that buses should not be filled in this way. The following is from their website. I believe it’s also on posters inside buses.

image.thumb.jpeg.d2601e71a65c17facad8ed18df538277.jpeg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...