HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1041  
Old Posted Aug 1, 2008, 1:25 AM
vid's Avatar
vid vid is offline
Identity Condiment
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Thunder Bay
Posts: 38,860
GLT is a terrible system. I don't even know why Bombardier wastes their time with it. It's quite possibly the worst mass transit system ever invented.

Honestly, you would be better off with a BRT than GLT.
__________________
Thunder Bay Updated 2018!other photos | my geofiction | my cities | random things | skyscraper diagrams
It's not about what you don't have—it's the little you're given, and how far you can run with it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1042  
Old Posted Aug 1, 2008, 1:48 AM
Andy6's Avatar
Andy6 Andy6 is offline
Starring as himself
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Toronto Yorkville
Posts: 7,952
Could they just paint a fake rail on the street and run ordinary buses over it? Maybe they could give the bus driver a conductor's hat and he could say "All Aboard!" at each stop and toot a fake train horn. I have a feeling this is mostly about the image anyway so why not concentrate on the appearance rather than the extremely expensive reality of LRTs.
__________________
crispy crunchy light and snappy
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1043  
Old Posted Aug 1, 2008, 2:36 AM
Greco Roman Greco Roman is offline
Movin' on up
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 3,449
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy6 View Post
Could they just paint a fake rail on the street and run ordinary buses over it? Maybe they could give the bus driver a conductor's hat and he could say "All Aboard!" at each stop and toot a fake train horn. I have a feeling this is mostly about the image anyway so why not concentrate on the appearance rather than the extremely expensive reality of LRTs.
Ya fine whatever. Tell me a city that doesn't have such systems with even a small amount of image in mind. It really isn't fair to single out Winnipeg in that regard.

Anywho, why can't anyone answer this question:

If smaller cities like Spokane and Saskatoon are planning for LRT's in their future, why can't Winnipeg?

No one seems to want to respond with an answer to this question. Strange, eh?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1044  
Old Posted Aug 1, 2008, 3:40 AM
h0twired's Avatar
h0twired h0twired is offline
Dynamic Positivity!
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 2,888
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy6 View Post
Could they just paint a fake rail on the street and run ordinary buses over it? Maybe they could give the bus driver a conductor's hat and he could say "All Aboard!" at each stop and toot a fake train horn. I have a feeling this is mostly about the image anyway so why not concentrate on the appearance rather than the extremely expensive reality of LRTs.
LMAO!

That is SO TRUE about Winnipeggers.

They want an LRT because it is will be a shiny new train and hate the BRT idea because they hate riding the bus to begin with.

Winnipeggers don't want a new faster form of public transit. They just want a train at all costs.

If they really cared about rapid transit they would be happy about the possibility of a BRT system.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1045  
Old Posted Aug 1, 2008, 3:41 AM
Andy6's Avatar
Andy6 Andy6 is offline
Starring as himself
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Toronto Yorkville
Posts: 7,952
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greco Roman View Post
Ya fine whatever. Tell me a city that doesn't have such systems with even a small amount of image in mind. It really isn't fair to single out Winnipeg in that regard.

Anywho, why can't anyone answer this question:

If smaller cities like Spokane and Saskatoon are planning for LRT's in their future, why can't Winnipeg?

No one seems to want to respond with an answer to this question. Strange, eh?
Possible reasons might be the varying physical layouts or work/traffic patterns of the cities, climate considerations, etc. And politicians talking about planning for LRT in the future isn't the same as having an LRT.
__________________
crispy crunchy light and snappy
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1046  
Old Posted Aug 1, 2008, 3:59 AM
Greco Roman Greco Roman is offline
Movin' on up
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 3,449
Quote:
Originally Posted by h0twired View Post
LMAO!

That is SO TRUE about Winnipeggers.

They want an LRT because it is will be a shiny new train and hate the BRT idea because they hate riding the bus to begin with.

Winnipeggers don't want a new faster form of public transit. They just want a train at all costs.

If they really cared about rapid transit they would be happy about the possibility of a BRT system.
Alright man. That's enough. No need for mocking and ridicule.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1047  
Old Posted Aug 1, 2008, 4:02 AM
Greco Roman Greco Roman is offline
Movin' on up
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 3,449
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy6 View Post
Possible reasons might be the varying physical layouts or work/traffic patterns of the cities, climate considerations, etc. And politicians talking about planning for LRT in the future isn't the same as having an LRT.
Actually, from what I understand, Spokane will begin construction in the next few years, and if approved in Saskatoon, they will start construction when the pop hits about 400,000 or so.

Spokane is just over 400,000 metrowise.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1048  
Old Posted Aug 1, 2008, 4:13 AM
Andy6's Avatar
Andy6 Andy6 is offline
Starring as himself
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Toronto Yorkville
Posts: 7,952
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greco Roman View Post
Actually, from what I understand, Spokane will begin construction in the next few years, and if approved in Saskatoon, they will start construction when the pop hits about 400,000 or so.

Spokane is just over 400,000 metrowise.
Even smaller cities could have big concentrations of population that lend themselves to a major transportation route. For example, I could see it in Halifax, where there is a heavy concentration of commuter traffic along a single linear corridor leading into a central core that has only a few points of entry. Winnipeg fans out in all directions without a critical mass of potential users in any one place, and the rivers get in the way of the feeder routes that would be necessary to create the critical mass of ridership. Possibly Pembina Highway comes close to a workable corridor for LRT but I have my doubts. It would be nice to have an LRT in Winnipeg, of course. But coming from Toronto, where the subway system is a major perpetual drain on the city's finances, it is perhaps easier for me to look at these things more sceptically.
__________________
crispy crunchy light and snappy
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1049  
Old Posted Aug 1, 2008, 4:23 AM
trueviking's Avatar
trueviking trueviking is online now
surely you agree with me
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: winnipeg
Posts: 10,865
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greco Roman View Post
Ya fine whatever. Tell me a city that doesn't have such systems with even a small amount of image in mind. It really isn't fair to single out Winnipeg in that regard.

Anywho, why can't anyone answer this question:

If smaller cities like Spokane and Saskatoon are planning for LRT's in their future, why can't Winnipeg?

No one seems to want to respond with an answer to this question. Strange, eh?
saskatoon can plan all they want...they will never build an LRT.....and their population wont be 400k for another 40 years at least....there will probably be something better by then.

i dont know about spokane, but how many cities of 700 000 or less have LRT?...not many.

Last edited by trueviking; Aug 1, 2008 at 4:50 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1050  
Old Posted Aug 1, 2008, 4:26 AM
flatlander's Avatar
flatlander flatlander is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 2,334
I don't understand you guys who can't tell the difference in ride quality between BRT and LRT. It is significant. You get what you pay for.
__________________
For best results play at maximum volume.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1051  
Old Posted Aug 1, 2008, 4:50 AM
Spocket's Avatar
Spocket Spocket is offline
Keep yo pimp hand strong
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Changchun , China
Posts: 2,737
I'm very glad to hear some forumers state unequivocably that they want the best for their city. I , for one, just don't understand why BRT seems so much less desirable than LRT though. Really it's a great idea and is the only realistic solution for a city that doesn't necessarily need any form of rapid transit in the first place. We "need" rapid transit only because it's something of a chicken and egg argument where somebody is going to have to build one first to get the other (in this case, the other being higher density corridors and therefore a more sustainable urban form)
__________________
Giving you a reason to drink and drive since 1975.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1052  
Old Posted Aug 1, 2008, 4:57 AM
LilZebra's Avatar
LilZebra LilZebra is online now
Spiritual
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Fort Garry, Man.
Posts: 2,227
Quote:
Originally Posted by flatlander View Post
I don't understand you guys who can't tell the difference in ride quality between BRT and LRT. It is significant. You get what you pay for.
The BRTers are those that consider a nice trip out of the city is one where they stay in a tent at a campground.

The LRT (and subway) people are those that consider a nice trip out of the city is one where they stay in a backpackers hostel, urban motel, or B&B inside a city.

Different strokes for different folks I guess.
__________________
Visit LilZebra.ca
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1053  
Old Posted Aug 1, 2008, 4:59 AM
LilZebra's Avatar
LilZebra LilZebra is online now
Spiritual
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Fort Garry, Man.
Posts: 2,227
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spocket View Post
I'm very glad to hear some forumers state unequivocably that they want the best for their city. I , for one, just don't understand why BRT seems so much less desirable than LRT though. Really it's a great idea and is the only realistic solution for a city that doesn't necessarily need any form of rapid transit in the first place. We "need" rapid transit only because it's something of a chicken and egg argument where somebody is going to have to build one first to get the other (in this case, the other being higher density corridors and therefore a more sustainable urban form)
Spoket, do you work for Winnipeg Transit or New Flyer or maybe have stock in one of the oil companies?
__________________
Visit LilZebra.ca
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1054  
Old Posted Aug 1, 2008, 4:59 AM
flatlander's Avatar
flatlander flatlander is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 2,334
Why is BRT less desirable? Let me begin by acknowledging that maybe BRT is all we can afford and is best suited for our context.

But as someone who rode the 78 Waverley to University along Bishop Grandin, it's pretty hard to get excited about a bumpy, noisy ride. Compare that to the quite, clean, smooth ride of an LRT. There is no comparison.
__________________
For best results play at maximum volume.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1055  
Old Posted Aug 1, 2008, 5:01 AM
LilZebra's Avatar
LilZebra LilZebra is online now
Spiritual
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Fort Garry, Man.
Posts: 2,227
Quote:
Originally Posted by trueviking View Post
^portage for sure....it really makes little sense to end at the forks...the most important destination would be to the graham avenue transit corridor....traffic to the forks is 1% of commuter traffic to downtown every day.

i hear rumours that this could be a system that is being considered.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombard..._Light_Transit
I hear teleportation is another system being considered. However it may not happen within our lifetimes.

Hence, the next best solution for moving people in metropolitan Winnipeg -- underground rail rapid transit.
__________________
Visit LilZebra.ca
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1056  
Old Posted Aug 1, 2008, 5:28 AM
hexrae's Avatar
hexrae hexrae is offline
Armchair urbanist
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 921
At $187 million, undergoing rail transit will get us from The Forks to...Confusion corner, if that? I understand the issues surrounding BRT, but do we think a dedicted busway won't get it's own dedicated snow and ice removal?
__________________
[Insert profound statement here]
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1057  
Old Posted Aug 1, 2008, 5:39 AM
trueviking's Avatar
trueviking trueviking is online now
surely you agree with me
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: winnipeg
Posts: 10,865
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimj_wpg View Post
Hence, the next best solution for moving people in metropolitan Winnipeg -- underground rail rapid transit.
meanwhile, in the real world....
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1058  
Old Posted Aug 1, 2008, 6:55 AM
Reed Solomon's Avatar
Reed Solomon Reed Solomon is offline
Celebrating 50 Years
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: WIN A PIG, MAN A TUBA
Posts: 783
having looked more into it, the Bombardier things seem to use a proprietary rail system that isn't compatible with LRT lines, so that eliminates it immediately for me. If we had to get these things, I'd want to have the option of eventually using light rail. Plus if they don't work in the snow (You'd think Bombardier of all companies could get over that hangup) then meh. Still, People hate the bus. People will ride light rail that won't take the bus.

What makes LRT so much more expensive?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1059  
Old Posted Aug 1, 2008, 7:03 AM
Reed Solomon's Avatar
Reed Solomon Reed Solomon is offline
Celebrating 50 Years
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: WIN A PIG, MAN A TUBA
Posts: 783
Quote:
Originally Posted by trueviking View Post
meanwhile, in the real world....
options for Winnipeg rapid transit:

Light Rail
Bus rapid transit
Giant slingshots
Series of Tubes
Teleportation Pods
Subway
Monorail
Great Glass Elevator
Unicorns.

I think we can eliminate a Subway, Monorail, Light Rail, and Unicorns as prohibitably expensive. The rest though, are easily achievable.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1060  
Old Posted Aug 1, 2008, 11:41 AM
tygunn tygunn is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by flatlander View Post
I don't understand you guys who can't tell the difference in ride quality between BRT and LRT. It is significant. You get what you pay for.
Agreed completely. Having rode the LRT in Calgary and the subway in Toronto, both offer infinitely better rides than a bus can. In the case of LRT I noticed that the system is also so much more silent than a bus system.

Another reason I've always been disappointed with BRT as a solution for Winnipeg is that doesn't take advantage of our province's inexpensive and green hydroelectric (and wind) power. The price of gas and diesel is only going to keep going up. What better way to showcase our "green" province than an ell electric LRT system.

Sure BRT _COULD_ be upgraded to LRT down the line. But we all know that will NEVER happen. Temporary solutions in this city have a proven track record of becoming permanent.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:46 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.