The future of Ottawa's Transit

[Cre47]

Originally Posted by bradnixon

I'm a little concerned about the decision taken on the West Transitway:



Sooner or later, if LRT is going to run out to Kanata, a dedicated ROW will be required, unless LRT runs on some other corridor.

I'm not sure how just making bus lanes along the Queensway can be a long-term solution; in addition, it means that there will likely never be a station in the vicinity of Pinecrest mall.

I understand that we don't want to throw people out of their homes if it can be avoided, but I don't see how bus lanes can be the ultimate solution. It's a stop-gap at best.

I have an impression that they will eventually have to be torn down or moved elsewhere especially considering many of the Councils such as Wilkinson complaining of no rail to Kanata and also considering some people are requesting improvements and widening to the 417, even though there is no urgent need for that section. While I like the fact they would eat 417 lanes, I think this is another episode in which this Council is too much weak and influenced and by NIMBYs.

[c_speed3108]

Originally Posted by Franky

Look, it doesn't work the way you describe, that's why it doesn't make sense to you. Let me explain...

The advantage of Personal Automated Transit is that it takes you from any station to any station without transfers or frequent stops. Because only one party is in a vehicle it doesn't have to stop every time someone wants to get on or off. You don't have to wait for a transfer because there are none. You don't have to wait for a big bus or train because the vehicles are there waiting for you to board. Also, high speeds are possible and travel time is much shorter because there are no stops.

Nobody made robot arms for the space shuttle either before we built it.

Doesn't make stops...what happens if the guy and front of you wants out at the next station...you are pretty much stuck behind that car. (unless you want to build a virtually ridiculous array of passing tracks and switches)

Vehicle is there waiting for you. Where the heck would it be stored? You would require a place to put tens of thousands of these things downtown in order to have that. And at that point all you really have are cars on rails. What would be the point? You might as well just buy a whole bunch of smart cars or Toyota priuses or something....it would be considerably more flexible.

Sounds like a ridiculous idea to me. Plus these little train cars will take up more room per pax than the big train cars. The big trains also will require less power to operate (per pax).

The best way to do forward thinking on transit is to look at cities that are larger than us. Say about 50 years or so ahead of us in development. You can then see into the future and look at what types of equipment they use as well as what sorta of troubles and bottlenecks they have.

If I look to big cities...Toronto, New York, Montreal, Vancouver...etc...I see large train systems that work very well. As was pointed out a while ago by someone. Toronto started digging it's subway when they were around our size.

[Franky]

Originally Posted by Justin10000

The O-train is not free, and it is not LRT. It's more like a light railway using commuter DMU's. Get your facts straight.

I rod it for free, I would not pay for it as it goes nowhere I need to go.
O-Train is not LRT?! Better let OC Transpo know.

Originally Posted by Justin10000

Buses that will.. 10 years at most?

"Average life of a bus (years) 18"
http://octranspo.com/contact_menue.htm

[Franky]

Originally Posted by c_speed3108

Doesn't make stops...what happens if the guy and front of you wants out at the next station...you are pretty much stuck behind that car. (unless you want to build a virtually ridiculous array of passing tracks and switches)

Each station has a siding, otherwise you get ridiculously long travel times.

Originally Posted by c_speed3108

Vehicle is there waiting for you. Where the heck would it be stored? You would require a place to put tens of thousands of these things downtown in order to have that. And at that point all you really have are cars on rails. What would be the point? You might as well just buy a whole bunch of smart cars or Toyota priuses or something....it would be considerably more flexible.

No, the vehicles are reused. Once someone is dropped off, the car goes to where it will be needed. The whole system would use about 4,000 vehicles.

Originally Posted by c_speed3108

Sounds like a ridiculous idea to me. Plus these little train cars will take up more room per pax than the big train cars. The big trains also will require less power to operate (per pax).

They do take up more space, but patrons will all be guaranteed seating The vehicles are run in such a way that long rows of vehicles will be unnecessary.
Actually, they will use about the same amount of energy. Big trains have to accelerate and decelerate a large mass at every stop. The Personal Automated Transit vehicles will not.

Originally Posted by c_speed3108

The best way to do forward thinking on transit is to look at cities that are larger than us. Say about 50 years or so ahead of us in development. You can then see into the future and look at what types of equipment they use as well as what sorta of troubles and bottlenecks they have.

Then you will get systems that were designed 50 years ago. It's time to move away from large box of packed patrons and on to something more humane.

Originally Posted by c_speed3108

If I look to big cities...Toronto, New York, Montreal, Vancouver...etc...I see large train systems that work very well. As was pointed out a while ago by someone. Toronto started digging it's subway when they were around our size.

Your standards are too low. We need to start attracting car drivers to transit. Public transit could be so much better for similar investments.

[Justin10000]

Originally Posted by Franky

I rod it for free, I would not pay for it as it goes nowhere I need to go.
O-Train is not LRT?! Better let OC Transpo know.

The O-train is NOT LRT. But it is easier to sell it to the mass as LRT. To be more correct, you can even say it is DLRT. But the correct term for the O-train is a light railway using DMU's.
Either way, the O-train ridership is pretty decent for a short line, and it's only major trip generator being a university. Considering that the students prefer the O-train over the 4, and 7 bus says a lot about the ability of rail to attract new riders. Not to mention, it is easier to use the O-train to reach the stores at GreenBank.

"Average life of a bus (years) 18"
http://octranspo.com/contact_menue.htm

Only in Canada. And that is mainly due to the severe lack of transit funding. Most agencies are now looking at a 12 year life for buses. GO transit is in implementing a 10 year life for their buses now.

In the US it is around 12-13.

[c_speed3108]

Originally Posted by Franky

Each station has a siding, otherwise you get ridiculously long travel times.

Fair enough....but it could still bottle neck in high loads. Similar to the way buses get backed-up at certain stations at certain times of the day. Once the siding is full the main line is block. A slow-poke getting out at a busy station would screw the whole thing up.

No, the vehicles are reused. Once someone is dropped off, the car goes to where it will be needed. The whole system would use about 4,000 vehicles.

If the vehicle is not stored at my stop I will have to wait for it to arrive. Can't have this one both ways. Either it is already here or I have to wait for it.

They do take up more space, but patrons will all be guaranteed seating

This has more to do with the policy of running the system. Trains could be guaranteed seating. Even buses can...if the city really wants. It all depends on how much we want to spend. On the flip side we could stuff these little guys full too.

Actually, they will use about the same amount of energy. Big trains have to accelerate and decelerate a large mass at every stop. The Personal Automated Transit vehicles will not.

If that were true, cars would be better for the environment than buses and public transit in general. Yes the train and the bus are a bigger mass, but there is a heck of a lot more people on it than a car or these things.

Then you will get systems that were designed 50 years ago. It's time to move away from large box of packed patrons and on to something more humane.

Many of the systems designed 50 years ago like the New York Subway are considerably better than much of what is being proposed now.

Your standards are too low. We need to start attracting car drivers to transit. Public transit could be so much better for similar investments.

Getting people out of car: New York has succeeding in this with a centry-old system. I would much prefer riding it daily, then the mess we have in Ottawa. It was much less crowded. I was sitting virtually every morning...

Another problem with the these little cars is security. Do we really want for example a young girl or women riding alone in a car with some weird guy or guys who happen to get on at the same stop. Bigger cars/vehicles at least bring a few more people into the picture.

Ottawa's major issue is along routes where they need to move huge numbers of people. Bigger vehicles are the more efficient means of doing this.

[c_speed3108]

Originally Posted by Justin10000

...

Only in Canada. And that is mainly due to the severe lack of transit funding. Most agencies are now looking at a 12 year life for buses. GO transit is in implementing a 10 year life for their buses now.

In the US it is around 12-13.

In deed. The 18 year figure on OC's website is rather old. It has been there for many years, despite all the years of buying new buses and retiring the really old ones. We hardly have a bus from the 80's now.

It is also widely believed that there is no way the vehicles made today are going to last as long as some of the ones from the decades past...

[Franky]

Originally Posted by c_speed3108

Fair enough....but it could still bottle neck in high loads. Similar to the way buses get backed-up at certain stations at certain times of the day. Once the siding is full the main line is block. A slow-poke getting out at a busy station would screw the whole thing up.

That's why the berths are set up like parking spaces. The vehicles back into a slot so the PAT vehicles can be accessed by either side for quick loading/unloading.

Originally Posted by c_speed3108

If the vehicle is not stored at my stop I will have to wait for it to arrive. Can't have this one both ways. Either it is already here or I have to wait for it.

There should always be vehicles waiting at the stations to pick people up.

Originally Posted by c_speed3108

This has more to do with the policy of running the system. Trains could be guaranteed seating. Even buses can...if the city really wants. It all depends on how much we want to spend. On the flip side we could stuff these little guys full too.

This is more than policy, there is no standing room. The worst case scenario is that you ride with others (like in a bus). This could be useful for stadium emptying or special events for example.

Originally Posted by c_speed3108

If that were true, cars would be better for the environment than buses and public transit in general. Yes the train and the bus are a bigger mass, but there is a heck of a lot more people on it than a car or these things.

Cars aren't electric, aren't (all) small, don't run on smooth guideways and don't have low rolling resistance tires. Cars don't run on exclusive rights of way without stop lights either.

Originally Posted by c_speed3108

Many of the systems designed 50 years ago like the New York Subway are considerably better than much of what is being proposed now.

Can't disagree, but NY has the population needed to make large vehicle transport efficient. LRT moves bus numbers of people.

Originally Posted by c_speed3108

Getting people out of car: New York has succeeding in this with a centry-old system. I would much prefer riding it daily, then the mess we have in Ottawa. It was much less crowded. I was sitting virtually every morning...

I wrote "attract", not "repulse". NY makes driving anywhere nearly impossible. It's not that transit is better, it's that driving is made worse. Calgary uses the same trick.

Originally Posted by c_speed3108

Another problem with the these little cars is security. Do we really want for example a young girl or women riding alone in a car with some weird guy or guys who happen to get on at the same stop. Bigger cars/vehicles at least bring a few more people into the picture.

There is no sharing of cabs typically. An emergency button that activates an on-board camera is possible if this is an issue. The vehicle can be brought directly to waiting police officers at the next station.

Originally Posted by c_speed3108

Ottawa's major issue is along routes where they need to move huge numbers of people. Bigger vehicles are the more efficient means of doing this.

You would think that, but it isn't strictly true. On a long commute or inter-city travel, PAT vehicle sharing could be arranged (if you want a cheaper ride). The vehicle would need to stop more of course.

[Franky]

Originally Posted by c_speed3108

In deed. The 18 year figure on OC's website is rather old. It has been there for many years, despite all the years of buying new buses and retiring the really old ones. We hardly have a bus from the 80's now.

It would be nice to see links to support these assertions. 10 years seems short.

Originally Posted by c_speed3108

It is also widely believed that there is no way the vehicles made today are going to last as long as some of the ones from the decades past...

I know the articulated buses will bring the average down, but hybrids have no transmissions and the engines only run at optimal speeds, so they should last longer. If we compare buses only used on the transitway like LRT cars would be, the picture probably changes in the bus' favour.

[eemy]

Just a point of order: could we please keep the PRT discussion in Franky's thread over here? There is enough going on with transit in Ottawa without having to get bogged down in discussion about something that is, quite frankly, never going to happen.

[Franky]

Operating and maintenance cost of buses compared to LRT cars.

According to the Delcan study: http://www.ottawa.ca/calendar/ottawa...14%20April.pdf

LRT vehicles cost $172/hour to operate and maintain and Buses cost $115/hour

If you compare with the numbers of riders per vehicle used by Delcan, you have 135/LRV and 90/bus.

$115/90 = $1.28 per passenger hour
$172/135 = $1.27 per passenger hour

[Franky]

Capital cost of LRT vs Bus

According to the Delcan study: http://www.ottawa.ca/calendar/ottawa...14%20April.pdf

Double-decker hybrid buses were priced at $900,000.
LRT cars were priced at $5,000,000.

Since DD buses only hold 90 riders, we'll bump up the cost to match LRT cars rider capacity of 135. This means $900,000/82*135 = $1,481,707.

Ontario savings bonds are at 4.75%
http://www.ontariosavingsbonds.com/osbrates.html
Assume this is the lending rate (good luck getting that on a real car loan).

Using a mortgage calculator, we can figure out what the cost of borrowing money is.
Bus - 10 years = $187,256.42/year
Bus - 15 years = $137,967.41/year
Bus - 18 years = $121,851.01/year

LRV - 25 years = $337,195.14/year
LRV - 30 years = $306,957.71/year

25 year LRV minus Bus
10 - $149,938.72/year
15 - $199,227.73/year
18 - $215,344.13/year

30 year LRV minus Bus
10 - $119,701.29/year
15 - $168,990.30/year
18 - $185,106.70/year

So buses end up costing much less than rail vehicles by $120,000 to $215,000 per year per LRT vehicle equivalent in capital costs.

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by Franky

Capital cost of LRT vs Bus
So buses end up costing much less than rail vehicles by $120,000 to $215,000 per year per LRT vehicle equivalent in capital costs.

No, because you calculated for individual LRT cars compared to indivual double decker cars. The operating LRT trains will not be used in single units, this is why I was so critical of the previous project. So basically yes, LRT is cheaper with 3-4 trains and more, and metro even cheaper because of its higher capacity (250).

(I was talking about operating costs, and not about the trains themselves, because yes they cost more).

[Franky]

Originally Posted by d_jeffrey

No, because you calculated for individual LRT cars compared to indivual double decker cars. The operating LRT trains will not be used in single units, this is why I was so critical of the previous project. So basically yes, LRT is cheaper with 3-4 trains and more, and metro even cheaper because of its higher capacity (250).

(I was talking about operating costs, and not about the trains themselves, because yes they cost more).

No, if you look at the Delcan study, the numbers are from Calgary transit and include a mix of train lengths averaged out. I also accounted for the difference in riders per vehicle.

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by Franky

No, if you look at the Delcan study, the numbers are from Calgary transit and include a mix of train lengths averaged out. I also accounted for the difference in riders per vehicle.

They probably got their numbers wrong somewhere, because there is no way it can cost that much per car in a train set. These are numbers similar to individual trains. Especially when Calgary boast that their LRT costs are 3 times lower than their buses numbers in their official documentation.

If there's anything, their numbers scream "automate me".

[Justin10000]

Where are you getting that 5 Million cost from?

OK I found the costs for the vehicles in the report. One thing Franky "failed" to state is that this is the ASSUMED cost.
And that there is no cost for hybrid DD buses. The 900K cost is for ARTICULATED buses. I have not found any cost for hybrid DD buses.

Get your facts straight. You cannot just assume a double decker will cost the same as an articulated. It might cost more, it might cost less. But unless the report states a number, do not use it. I did not find any costs for DD in that report.

Once again Franky shows a talent for twisting the numbers. A good talent, if you want to fool clueless people, but won't work here.

You trying to show that buses cost less with numbers that are not factual.

[Franky]

Originally Posted by d_jeffrey

They probably got their numbers wrong somewhere, because there is no way it can cost that much per car in a train set. These are numbers similar to individual trains. Especially when Calgary boast that their LRT costs are 3 times lower than their buses numbers in their official documentation.

If there's anything, their numbers scream "automate me".

They even spell out $668/hour for 4 car trains.

The $115 comes from OC Transpo, not Calgary Transit.

Operation includes fuel and maintenance I guess. If drivers are paid anywhere near $115/hour, sign me up!

[Franky]

Originally Posted by Justin10000

Where are you getting that 5 Million cost from?

Off the shelf LRV's tend to cost between 2-3 Million.

Only Toronto's new streetcars will cost 5 Million, and that is because they are being built from scratch.

Once again Franky shows a talent for twisting the numbers. A good talent, if you want to fool clueless people, but won't work here.

I posted the Delcan study link - read it before you make stupid comments!

[m0nkyman]

Can we please get back to discussing what might actually happen in Ottawa, instead of this farking PRT nonsense, or the nonsense from it's proponents. I swear to god they are paid by the auto manufacturers to fuck up any intelligible conversation about transit with their drivel and complete inability to allow a reasonable conversation to take place.

[Justin10000]

Originally Posted by Franky

I posted the Delcan study link - read it before you make stupid comments!

I found the numbers, and they are ASSUMED, and there is no costs for DD buses.

You are pulling numbers out of your ass!