HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Photography Forums > My City Photos


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Feb 17, 2012, 5:01 PM
Coldrsx's Avatar
Coldrsx Coldrsx is offline
Community Guy
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Canmore, AB
Posts: 66,638
Exceptional tour of transport. thanks
__________________
"The destructive effects of automobiles are much less a cause than a symptom of our incompetence at city building" - Jane Jacobs 1961ish

Wake me up when I can see skyscrapers
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Feb 17, 2012, 5:20 PM
ambiguoustraveller ambiguoustraveller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Berkeley, CA/Vancouver
Posts: 122
I was originally miffed by the "way out" thing, but then someone reasoned with me that it may actually be more logical, due to the fact that most of these signs are located far from the actual exits. Instead they are literally pointing the way you get out, rather than a specific door.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Feb 17, 2012, 8:48 PM
novaCJ novaCJ is offline
Stuck in the Suburbs
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Northern Virginia (DC Suburbs)
Posts: 360
I am jealous of you Canadians. Very jealous.
__________________
"The pessimist complains about the wind. The optimist expects it to change. The realist adjusts the sails."
-William A. Ward
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Feb 17, 2012, 9:09 PM
Metro-One's Avatar
Metro-One Metro-One is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Japan
Posts: 16,803
Great pics!

I ride the Canada Line nearly everyday and i love it! The good news is capacity can be easily increased simply by increasing the frequency. Currently peak frequency is once every 3 minutes, but it can be eventually increased to once every 90 seconds. Also the stations can be expanded by 10 meters (35 feet) for another c-car to be added.
__________________
Bridging the Gap
Check out my Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/306346...h/29495547810/ and Youtube channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCV0...lhxXFxuAey_q6Q
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Feb 17, 2012, 9:23 PM
Cirrus's Avatar
Cirrus Cirrus is online now
cities|transit|croissants
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,324
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metro-One View Post
capacity can be easily increased simply by increasing the frequency. Currently peak frequency is once every 3 minutes, but it can be eventually increased to once every 90 seconds. Also the stations can be expanded by 10 meters (35 feet) for another c-car to be added.
90 seconds is about as low as you can go, because you need time for trains to slow down, stop, unload passengers, load up again, start, and get up to speed. If you're at capacity and you're already running every 90 seconds, then what?

We have this very problem in Washington. At the peak of rush hour we cannot increase train frequency any more than we already have, because of how long it takes to get people on and off at the major downtown stations. We have mostly 6 car trains, with platforms long enough for up to 8 cars, so the most obvious solution is to buy more rail cars and go to 8 car trains. There might be some benefit to changing the design of rail cars to have 4 or 5 doors instead of 3, but that's less desirable because it reduces the number of seats you can provide.

Anyway, like I said, I love the off-peak frequency of SkyTrain, but the shorter trains definitely limit the peak capacity considerably, as compared to more traditional subway systems.
__________________
writing | twitter | flickr | instagram | ssp photo threads
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Feb 17, 2012, 9:34 PM
OhioGuy OhioGuy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: DC
Posts: 7,648
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirrus View Post
90 seconds is about as low as you can go, because you need time for trains to slow down, stop, unload passengers, load up again, start, and get up to speed. If you're at capacity and you're already running every 90 seconds, then what?
When they get to that point, I guess they'll just have to expand the stations so that another car can be added to each train.

Quote:
We have this very problem in Washington. At the peak of rush hour we cannot increase train frequency any more than we already have, because of how long it takes to get people on and off at the major downtown stations. We have mostly 6 car trains, with platforms long enough for up to 8 cars, so the most obvious solution is to buy more rail cars and go to 8 car trains. There might be some benefit to changing the design of rail cars to have 4 or 5 doors instead of 3, but that's less desirable because it reduces the number of seats you can provide.
So tired of the 6 car trains during rush hour. I switch from the yellow to red every afternoon at Gallery Place and the 6 car trains are generally fine if they keep the headways no bigger than 3 minutes. But when they happen to have a gap of 5 minutes between red line trains during the afternoon rush, it's an immense nuisance having a 6 car train pull in after that lengthy gap. Typically the cars are jammed full, meaning it takes a long time for people to exit the train, thereby leaving barely any time to squeeze customers waiting on the platform onto the train before the doors close. Hate hate hate Gallery Place. It would be nice to avoid switching to the red line at Gallery Place and instead switch at the Convention Center to an entirely new subway line that travels west along M Street through Dupont/Golden Circle area.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Feb 17, 2012, 9:56 PM
Metro-One's Avatar
Metro-One Metro-One is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Japan
Posts: 16,803
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirrus View Post
90 seconds is about as low as you can go, because you need time for trains to slow down, stop, unload passengers, load up again, start, and get up to speed. If you're at capacity and you're already running every 90 seconds, then what?

We have this very problem in Washington. At the peak of rush hour we cannot increase train frequency any more than we already have, because of how long it takes to get people on and off at the major downtown stations. We have mostly 6 car trains, with platforms long enough for up to 8 cars, so the most obvious solution is to buy more rail cars and go to 8 car trains. There might be some benefit to changing the design of rail cars to have 4 or 5 doors instead of 3, but that's less desirable because it reduces the number of seats you can provide.

Anyway, like I said, I love the off-peak frequency of SkyTrain, but the shorter trains definitely limit the peak capacity considerably, as compared to more traditional subway systems.
Well the line currently hauls between 100 000 and 110 000 people daily. The potential increases built into the system currently (doubling frequencies and adding a third car) can take capacity up to around 250 000 - 300 000 riders daily.

And by that time a major retrofit could be done (which gives a nice excuse to modernize and re-vamp the entire line) or as many have suggested, relief LRT lines would be built down major corridors to the east and west of the line.

So in all honesty I have never seen it as a problem. During the Olympics, without the third car and max frequencies (to enable max frequencies more train sets would need to be ordered), the line was able to handle well over 200 000 daily.
__________________
Bridging the Gap
Check out my Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/306346...h/29495547810/ and Youtube channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCV0...lhxXFxuAey_q6Q
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Feb 18, 2012, 4:40 AM
nname nname is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,649
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirrus View Post
90 seconds is about as low as you can go, because you need time for trains to slow down, stop, unload passengers, load up again, start, and get up to speed.
Expo Line actually ran at 80s peak headway during the Olympics. I think current Expo/Millennium Line system can run as frequent as 77 seconds. The main constraints is not the intermediate stations. It is the reversing of trains at terminus station.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Feb 19, 2012, 12:52 AM
novaCJ novaCJ is offline
Stuck in the Suburbs
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Northern Virginia (DC Suburbs)
Posts: 360
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirrus View Post
90 seconds is about as low as you can go, because you need time for trains to slow down, stop, unload passengers, load up again, start, and get up to speed. If you're at capacity and you're already running every 90 seconds, then what?

We have this very problem in Washington. At the peak of rush hour we cannot increase train frequency any more than we already have, because of how long it takes to get people on and off at the major downtown stations. We have mostly 6 car trains, with platforms long enough for up to 8 cars, so the most obvious solution is to buy more rail cars and go to 8 car trains. There might be some benefit to changing the design of rail cars to have 4 or 5 doors instead of 3, but that's less desirable because it reduces the number of seats you can provide.

Anyway, like I said, I love the off-peak frequency of SkyTrain, but the shorter trains definitely limit the peak capacity considerably, as compared to more traditional subway systems.
Yeesh, they STILL run 6 car trains at rush hour?
__________________
"The pessimist complains about the wind. The optimist expects it to change. The realist adjusts the sails."
-William A. Ward
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Feb 19, 2012, 11:37 AM
Dr Awesomesauce's Avatar
Dr Awesomesauce Dr Awesomesauce is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: BEYOND THE OUTER RIM
Posts: 5,889
Quote:
Originally Posted by novaCJ View Post
I am jealous of you Canadians. Very jealous.
It's less a Canadian thing and more a Pacific North West 'thing.' Trust me.

Great tour. I have really enjoyed your photo essays.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Feb 19, 2012, 6:00 PM
J. Will J. Will is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 3,882
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirrus View Post
Once you know where you're going, SkyTrain is *awesome*.

The main reason it's so awesome is that even at off-peak hours trains are super frequent. They're all automated, which means they don't have to pay a unionized operator to drive each one, which means they're cheaper to operate, which means they can run more trains for not much more cost. Even in the middle of the day trains were like 3 minutes apart. It was i-m-p-r-e-s-s-i-v-e.
A lot of the light rail systems built in the last 20-30 years could learn a thing or two from Vancouver about service frequency. Vancouver is not a large metro (2.3 million), yet still maintains very high service frequency on it's system throughout the day, ESPECIALLY on the interlined stretches (downtown to New West, and downtown south to the south end of the city limits). They build these new systems with comparatively terrible service frequency, then everyone wonders why they do under 30,000-40,000 ppx/day. People DO NOT want to stand around waiting, nor do they want to plan their trip according to a schedule. They want to show up whenever they show up, and have a train almost immediately.

Service frequency is everything. Even more important than speed (except for very long trips).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Feb 19, 2012, 10:04 PM
entheosfog's Avatar
entheosfog entheosfog is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 3,709
Wow, great set and very informative, I even learned a thing or two!
__________________
Latest photo thread: Coney Island, Christmas Day
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2012, 5:41 AM
deasine deasine is offline
Vancouver Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 5,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by ambiguoustraveller View Post
I was originally miffed by the "way out" thing, but then someone reasoned with me that it may actually be more logical, due to the fact that most of these signs are located far from the actual exits. Instead they are literally pointing the way you get out, rather than a specific door.
I believe the reasoning behind "Way Out," which is the term first used in London, was to not confuse people with "Exit" as in Emergency Exit.

But in all honestly, it doesn't make sense in Vancouver. Why? Because we use three terminologies: Exit, Out, and Way Out. Exit was used in the Expo Line (the first line), Out for the Millennium Line (second line built), and Way Out for the Canada Line (third line built). Not surprisingly, each of this line used its own signage design. Coincidence? I think not. Lack of a design plan and system consistency? I think so.
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Photography Forums > My City Photos
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 2:23 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.