eclair14 Posted November 19, 2015 Report Share Posted November 19, 2015 I was looking on the AMT website and I was wondering, say I buy a fare zone 3 ticket for the MSH line and I transfer to another train, would I be allowed to travel up to zone 3 or would I have to buy a new ticket You can transfer between line, the only restriction is that you must complete your trip within 2 hours of the ticket validation time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Transitfan39 Posted November 19, 2015 Report Share Posted November 19, 2015 yeah I meant can I travel between zone 1 and zone 3? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eclair14 Posted November 19, 2015 Report Share Posted November 19, 2015 yeah I meant can I travel between zone 1 and zone 3? Yes, you can travel from zone 3 to 1, take another train then travel from zone 1 to zone 3 * Altough now that i read the AMT rules, you CANNOT do a return trip on the same ticket (Ex: Saint-Lambert -> Montréal -> Saint-Lambert) would be forbidden, but a Saint-Lambert -> Montréal -> Canora trip is OK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Transitfan39 Posted November 19, 2015 Report Share Posted November 19, 2015 Oh I didn't know about the AMT rules forbiddening the return trip, that's good to know Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMS Posted December 8, 2015 Report Share Posted December 8, 2015 Is that a new rule? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dowlingm Posted December 21, 2015 Report Share Posted December 21, 2015 http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/news/n-america/single-view/view/montreal-to-call-tenders-for-commuter-operator.html CANADA: Montréal commuter rail operator Agence Métropolitaine de Transport announced on December 17 that it plans to call tenders for contracts to operate the network and supply new rolling stock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webfil Posted January 11, 2016 Report Share Posted January 11, 2016 New rolling stock to be procured consist of bilevel cars for CP lines. Multilevels would be transferred onto CN lines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMS Posted January 11, 2016 Report Share Posted January 11, 2016 Good! About time for Deux-Montagnes to have a taste of the action! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Walton Posted January 14, 2016 Report Share Posted January 14, 2016 New rolling stock to be procured consist of bilevel cars for CP lines. Multilevels would be transferred onto CN lines. I had the impression AMT was looking to standardize around the multilevles, which they can use practically anywhere, on any line, high or low platform (except Delson, which is till single-level country). The bilevels are oddballs, and can be used only on CP lines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smallspy Posted January 15, 2016 Report Share Posted January 15, 2016 New rolling stock to be procured consist of bilevel cars for CP lines. Multilevels would be transferred onto CN lines. Is this fact, or are you stating an opinion? Because there have been absolutely no announcements one way or another about any new equipment. Dan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webfil Posted January 15, 2016 Report Share Posted January 15, 2016 Fact. Yes, there were announcements. September 2015, Paul Côté announced multilevel would hit Deux-Montagnes line in 2017. Those cars would be taken from "other lines'" pool. This is many, many years late versus what was originally planned in 2009 ― thus thoroughly announced (and postponed). December 2015, AMT announced going into tender to procure bilevel cars. Seems like an announcement to me. December 2015, quotation include technical definition for CP lines (Saint-Jérôme, Candiac, Vaudreuil). This just confirms Bruno Bisson's paper from last September. Since this is only the tender stage, exact model is unknown. However, bilevel as well as multilevel cars could comply to quotation ― lacking time and interest, I have not browsed through the 650 pages. Max height required is 15' 11", which is bilevel height. Required door height is for low platforms only. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smallspy Posted January 15, 2016 Report Share Posted January 15, 2016 Fact. Yes, there were announcements. September 2015, Paul Côté announced multilevel would hit Deux-Montagnes line in 2017. Those cars would be taken from "other lines'" pool. This is many, many years late versus what was originally planned in 2009 ― thus thoroughly announced (and postponed). December 2015, AMT announced going into tender to procure bilevel cars. Seems like an announcement to me. December 2015, quotation include technical definition for CP lines (Saint-Jérôme, Candiac, Vaudreuil). This just confirms Bruno Bisson's paper from last September. Since this is only the tender stage, exact model is unknown. However, bilevel as well as multilevel cars could comply to quotation ― lacking time and interest, I have not browsed through the 650 pages. Max height required is 15' 11", which is bilevel height. Required door height is for low platforms only. Well.... There were announcements, yes. But no hard contracts, and thus no hard facts. AMT has not yet awarded the contract for the new cars, so none of us have any idea what exactly will be purchased. Does it make sense that they would buy BiLevels for this tender? Yes. But that is also an opinion, and until they sign a contract, not a fact. Dan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webfil Posted January 17, 2016 Report Share Posted January 17, 2016 According to Fanie Clément Saint-Pierre, spokeperson for the AMT, the new cars that are yet to be procured will not fit into the Mont-Royal tunnel. Multilevel cars will be transferred onto Deux-Montagnes line before the car featuring in the present tender enter service. Having read more deeply the specs in the tender, I see that the AMT is asking for cars that match bilevel specs, to the conductors and passengers, i.e. that must fit into a 2000-series convoy or can replace another 2000-series car in a 2000-series convoy and must feature exact same commands and fuctions at the exact same place as the 2000-series in the driving cabins or for door operations. They want something that looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck. I hardly see how they could get a hen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Walton Posted January 21, 2016 Report Share Posted January 21, 2016 Quote http://journalmetro.com/actualites/montreal/900024/lamt-veut-acheter-24-nouvelles-voitures-multiniveaux/' rel="external nofollow"> , spokeperson for the AMT, the new cars that are yet to be procured will not fit into the Mont-Royal tunnel. Multilevel cars will be transferred onto Deux-Montagnes line before the car featuring in the present tender enter service. Is there any decision yet? A lot of the buzz on metrodemontreal, among other forums, is that AMT will go for more 2000-series bilevels. When did/will bids close? Fanie's statement about the tunnel also applies to the Mascouche line - only multilevels will fit the tunnel portion of that route. Not to mention that Repentigny, Terrebonne, and Mascouche stations all have high platforms - another reason AMT can use only multilevels on that line. Let's not forget Mont St. Hilaire; AMT can run only multilevels into Central Station, and a shortage of those cars may very well force AMT into interlining at least some MSH and Mascouche trains. Or St. Jérôme, which in the longer term AMT wants to reroute into the tunnel (BTW What's the latest, if anything, on that?) .Both types have basically the same floor plan anyway, with different carbodies. AMT would be far wiser to go for multilevels, because those already make up almost 80% of its fleet of 206 locomotive-hauled cars, some 160 cars, 26 of which have cabs (and washrooms). They can run almost everywhere on the system, including the tunnel, whose structural gauge is limited to 14.5 feet or 4.42 meters, and at high or low platforms. . Economies of flexibility in service, training, and maintenance should at least partly offset any higher capital costs or weight penalties. (Cab cars weigh about 63 tonnes each, and regular cars ~ 60 t). The bilevels number only 22, of which 4 have cabs. That makes them oddballs, which are seldom popular in large fleets. While the may be cheaper and lighter (~ 50 t each) than the multilevels, they can run only on low-platform lines, limiting them to Vaudreuil and - for now - St. Jérôme AMT would do better to sell these cars, which are probably in great demand. They are young enough (2004) and in good enough condition to have a good resale value. (The same constrains apply to the 900-series gallery cars, if those are still in service; there are/were 9, of which 2 have/had cabs. They're not accessible, and can't be made so; plus they're 47 years old, with little or no resale value). That leaves the 700-series single-level cars, 24 of them, 8 with cabs. Those seem to be dedicated almost exclusively to Candiac these days. CP no longer wants the multilevels on its bridge in high winds (85 km/h or more), deeming them potentially unstable, so AMT must have decided to use only 700s there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webfil Posted May 17, 2016 Report Share Posted May 17, 2016 http://m.ledevoir.com/article-471120 AMT cancelled its tender for new bilevel cars. Official reason given : Bombardier would not deliver inside 24 months, and presented a product that differed from the specs provided by the AMT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack 47 Posted May 17, 2016 Report Share Posted May 17, 2016 Is the future LRT network a factor in this decision? With the reduced load on the Vaudreuil-Hudson line, the extra cars may no longer be justified. What will happen to the MR-90's and the 25 Kv catenary once the Deux-Montagnes line is converted to LRT configuration? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Transitfan39 Posted May 18, 2016 Report Share Posted May 18, 2016 3 hours ago, Jack 47 said: What will happen to the MR-90's and the 25 Kv catenary once the Deux-Montagnes line is converted to LRT configuration? I'm about 98% sure that the LRT will be electrified but I could be wrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smallspy Posted May 18, 2016 Report Share Posted May 18, 2016 11 hours ago, Transitfan39 said: I'm about 98% sure that the LRT will be electrified but I could be wrong That's not at all what he asked. If the LRT service is operated with similar equipment as seen in many other cities, the Mascouche line will have to be terminated somewhere short of the tunnel (and probably right at the Jonction de l'Est) as the two types of equipment can not be operated together on the same tracks. If this plan goes ahead, I wouldn't be surprised if the MR90s are stored for a couple of years until another line is able to be electrified. Dan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webfil Posted May 18, 2016 Report Share Posted May 18, 2016 What we know know is that the REM is not a project but rather a proposition. There were none to minimal discussion with the stakeholders and La Caisse. A large amount of details and shenanigans remain unknown or unaddressed in this bold, coarse, broad idea. Details like "hey do we really want to give to the private sector the province's second-largest public transit asset we just bought?" (i.e. Deux-Montagnes line and Mont-Royal tunnel) or "hey do we want to tear down the only monuments of heritage remaining in Griffintown because La Caisse said it's too complicated to build the line on the vacant median of Bonaventure boulevard?" or "What will we do with our TWO sparkling new, eventually oversized maintenance centres we just inaugurated?". Perhaps the AMT applied the brakes because of the REM, but that is just assumptions and, first of all, improbable -- seeing the drafty status of La Caisse's proposition. I believe the official version; the calendar is probably really tight for the MR-90 refurbishment. Will they lease? Will they go into tender for multi level cars instead? I really don't know for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webfil Posted June 11, 2016 Report Share Posted June 11, 2016 Life of the AMT is coming to an end. Bill 76 was adopted on May 19th. A structural transition committee was already put in place in January by the AMT and the CMM. The new entities are aimed to be fully functionnal by January 2017. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webfil Posted October 31, 2016 Report Share Posted October 31, 2016 A new lookout in Pointe-Saint-Charles provides view on good ol' 900-series. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webfil Posted November 22, 2016 Report Share Posted November 22, 2016 It's Bombardier that's got the operation deal over Genessee & Wyoming/Québec-Gatineau. There are not that many teams on the ballpark now, if you know what I mean... http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/passenger/single-view/view/bombardier-takes-over-montreal-commuter-services.html http://www.bombardier.com/fr/media/nouvelles/detail.bt-20161122-bombardier-wins-fleet-operations-and-maintenance-con.bombardiercom.html No confirmation on AMT side, though the contract started last friday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webfil Posted May 23, 2017 Report Share Posted May 23, 2017 Bombardier lost the bilevel tender to China Railway Rolling Stock, over a 50% gap in bid. Questions remain over how and when will the Chinese cars be approved by Transport Canada. For CRRC, it's a revenge from the 2009 metro car bid lost to Bombardier-Alstom. AMT had asked for a 24-months delivery delay, while Bombardier could only deliver its products over 36 months. IIRC, all driving and operating commands had to be the exact same as the 2000-series Bombardier bilevels. Perhaps CRRC will buy these from Bombardier? Tender asked for 15% of Canadian content. http://www.lesaffaires.com/bourse/nouvelles-economiques/trains-de-banlieue-bombardier-echappe-le-contrat-de-l-amt/594936http://www.lesaffaires.com/bourse/nouvelles-economiques/contrat-a-la-chine-bombardier-en-colere/594943http://www.lapresse.ca/le-soleil/affaires/actualite-economique/201705/17/01-5099048-contrat-de-lamt-a-un-concurrent-chinois-bombardier-nentend-pas-baisser-les-bras.php Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheAverageJoe Posted June 4, 2017 Report Share Posted June 4, 2017 http://www.caixinglobal.com/2017-05-17/101091696.html 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dowlingm Posted March 15, 2018 Report Share Posted March 15, 2018 When RTM are kicked out of the Mont Royal tunnel: MR-90s are done ALP45s are for sale (and in all likelihood some/all BBD multilevels since NJT might buy) "Low GHG" locomotives to be acquired http://www.lapresse.ca/actualites/grand-montreal/201803/14/01-5157270-trains-de-banlieue-pres-de-500-millions-pour-ameliorer-le-service.php 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now