Montréal Transit Developments

[nfitz]

This fare integration will include the REM, STM, RTL, STL, and exo. Fares will probably be by zone, but the ARTM has not announced a decision yet (they will by year-end I believe). So you'll be able to transfer from the bus to the REM and then to the metro with a single ticket, which shouldn't cost more than what people are paying today in their respective zones.

Fares seemed well integrated 30 years ago, when I used to commute on the Rigaud line, and occasionally use the Deux-Montagnes line, all with the same monthly pass (with a relatively small additional monthly charge) that I was using to ride the Metro - and it's only improved since then. It was light-years ahead of Toronto, even with Presto. Back then, the cost of a monthly pass that included all the buses and metro, and commuter trains at least as far out to Beaconsfield, was still less than a regular TTC pass - and I think that's still true today! Gosh ... it's has gone up some now in Montreal ... with more on-island zones. Point-Claire and Cedar Park are only $116 a month - compared to $86.50 for a regular metro/bus monthly pass. But Beaconsfield is now $141! Yikes! Gosh, if I did that commute again, I'd be getting off at Cedar Park and taking a different, slightly-longer bus. Still - compare to the $151.15 regular Toronto TTC pass. Adding even the cheapest same-zone GO monthly cost ($132), increases that to over $283 - even after the recent big fare cut!

Though it seems unlikely that the fare zones for the further-away Deux-Montagnes line stations, particularly on Laval and the North Shore, will ever be the same as a Metro trip. I don't think that fare zones means not a metro.

Which would mean very tradition subway lines and relatively short rides in cities like London,Tokyo, and Seoul aren't metro!

 

[SFO-YYZ]

by that definition... the St. Clair street car qualifies, but half of the soon to be built LRT on Eglington won't.

I had no idea that St. Clair 512 streetcar had become "grade separated" rapid transit metro. Dedicated right of way, yes. Grade separated? Not in our lifetime.

And yes, half of Crosstown ("line 5") won't fit the bill, along with the entirety of Finch West ("line 6").

 

[begratto]

An interesting read about the REM's and Hurontario LRT's impact on real estate, in the G&M:

Transit fuels building surge outside of downtown core

 

[nfitz]

And yes, half of Crosstown ("line 5") won't fit the bill, .

Eglinton is 11.5 km from Mount Dennis to the first road crossing at Leslie. It's only 6.6 km from the first road crossing at Leslie to the final one at Ionview. That's about 2/3 of the 18.6 km line (and by far the busiest piece) that's grade-separated.

Other than the unfortunate and badly designed Leslie crossing (I've been commenting for years, that it could all have been on the south side of Eglinton between the two portals), there's only 5 km that has regular intersections.

 

[SFO-YYZ]

Eglinton is 11.5 km from Mount Dennis to the first road crossing at Leslie. It's only 6.6 km from the first road crossing at Leslie to the final one at Ionview. That's about 2/3 of the 18.6 km line (and by far the busiest piece) that's grade-separated.

Other than the unfortunate and badly designed Leslie crossing (I've been commenting for years, that it could all have been on the south side of Eglinton between the two portals), there's only 5 km that has regular intersections.

Alright, Crosstown Line 5 is a full subway-style rapid transit metro

 

[nfitz]

Alright, Crosstown Line 5 is a full subway-style rapid transit metro

I wouldn't say that either - though there's no reason that the trip on Eglinton from Mount Dennis to Science Centre wouldn't be faster than the same length trip on Bloor-Danforth (about High Park to Woodbine), given that it's 15 stations, compared to 21 stations on Bloor-Danforth, with stations being closer together on Line 2 - even with the Leslie intersection.

Line 2 though wins, because east of Woodbine, the station spacing gets much further apart - with only 4 more stops to Kennedy, compared to 10 on Eglinton. Coincidentally, they both have the same number of stops to Kenendy from High Park/Mount Dennis.

The main section though of Line 5 should be as fast than subway (or faster, with the wider spaced stops than central Line 2).

 

[Streety McCarface]

I wouldn't say that either - though there's no reason that the trip on Eglinton from Mount Dennis to Science Centre wouldn't be faster than the same length trip on Bloor-Danforth (about High Park to Woodbine), given that it's 15 stations, compared to 21 stations on Bloor-Danforth, with stations being closer together on Line 2 - even with the Leslie intersection.

Line 2 though wins, because east of Woodbine, the station spacing gets much further apart - with only 4 more stops to Kennedy, compared to 10 on Eglinton. Coincidentally, they both have the same number of stops to Kenendy from High Park/Mount Dennis.

The main section though of Line 5 should be as fast than subway (or faster, with the wider spaced stops than central Line 2).

The biggest factor will be dwell time per station, which will definitely be higher on the crosstown. The only question is, how bad will the dwell be and whether it reduces the overall speed of Line 5 in that section to less than that of Line 2.

 

[nfitz]

The biggest factor will be dwell time per station, which will definitely be higher on the crosstown.

Why would it be higher? With the initial (2031) demand of only 5,500 PPHD at peak, and capacity double that, you'd expect shorter dwells at peak - and far shorter as soon as there's a hiccup and Line 2 starts to hit crush capacity.

I'd think acceleration would be a bigger issue - and I'm not sure how the acceleration of a Flexity compares (though the TTC variants can certainly accelerate, based on the speed trials they did on a closed Queen Street East a few years ago).

 

[Hopkins123]

Regardless of whether or not REM is what we traditionally locally call a subway, there's no question that it's a metro by any definition.

REM being fully grade separated makes it a bona fide metro in my book, same way we include the Scarborough RT on our metro maps.

 

[nfitz]

REM being fully grade separated makes it a bona fide metro in my book, same way we include the Scarborough RT on our metro maps.

The Union Pearson train is also fully grade separated and runs the same off-peak frequency as the REM.

Is RER also bona fide metro? Or just pseudo-loblaws?

 

[Streety McCarface]

Why would it be higher? With the initial (2031) demand of only 5,500 PPHD at peak, and capacity double that, you'd expect shorter dwells at peak - and far shorter as soon as there's a hiccup and Line 2 starts to hit crush capacity.

I'd think acceleration would be a bigger issue - and I'm not sure how the acceleration of a Flexity compares (though the TTC variants can certainly accelerate, based on the speed trials they did on a closed Queen Street East a few years ago).

The number of doors, the length of time it requires to open the doors, and the way passengers enter and exit the vehicle are all important factors to consider. There are fewer doors on the flexities and they are further spaced apart than those on the subway cars, adding to the dwell. There are also choke points throughout the car that add time to them as well. Finally, the doors just take forever to open (especially when the button is used). I'm not sure if it will add up to significant travel losses across the entire line because of projected ridership levels (still have my doubts on those), but even then, 2 car trains coming every 3 minutes only equates to 5200 PPHPD (130 passengers per LRV). They can carry a bit more crush loaded but even then those aren't easy conditions a flexity can deal with.

 

[nfitz]

The number of doors, the length of time it requires to open the doors, and the way passengers enter and exit the vehicle are all important factors to consider. There are fewer doors on the flexities and they are further spaced apart than those on the subway cars, adding to the dwell.

There's 4 doors for 30 metres, compared to 4 doors per 23 metres on the subway. But also the cars are significantly narrow, and have less capacity per metre length - so you don't need to have the same number of doors. Also, that's not really a factor unless you are exceeding design capacity.

There are also choke points throughout the car that add time to them as well.

Only in the middle, between the doors. Most riders would not be still standing there when they are about to get off - except under overloaded conditions, which won't happen before 2031.

Finally, the doors just take forever to open (especially when the button is used).

Even the streetcars rarely rely on the button, when there's people standing on the platform. If the train is stopping, I assume the TTC operator will open all door, just like they do on the TRs and streetcars. I really don't notice the TTC Flexity doors being particularly slow compared to the TRs - they are certainly faster than either the Orion or Nova rear doors on buses. (And the CLRV/ALRVs, by the time you count the time to get on/off the steps - but that's not relevant).

but even then, 2 car trains coming every 3 minutes only equates to 5200 PPHPD (130 passengers per LRV).

I thought a) they were staring with some 3-car operation at day one. b) design capacity was closer to 150 for the Metrolinx variant of the Flexity, with less seating, and slightly wider than the TTC version. 130 is the TTC Flexity design standard. I'm not sure we even know the planned frequency.

Even if you are right, and this is an issue at day one,if you look at the projected distribution of demand - there's only a handful of stops where they'll be approaching 5,000 per hour. I'd guess it's only Eglinton and Eglinton West that might suffer a bit of extra dwell.

I'm not quite sure what the final Metrolinx Flexity configuation is - but don't the Ion Flexity cars only have 56 seats compared to the 70 on the TTC Flexities?

 

[Streety McCarface]

I thought a) they were staring with some 3-car operation at day one. b) design capacity was closer to 150 for the Metrolinx variant of the Flexity, with less seating, and slightly wider than the TTC version. 130 is the TTC Flexity design standard. I'm not sure we even know the planned frequency.

Even if you are right, and this is an issue at day one,if you look at the projected distribution of demand - there's only a handful of stops where they'll be approaching 5,000 per hour. I'd guess it's only Eglinton and Eglinton West that might suffer a bit of extra dwell.

I'm not quite sure what the final Metrolinx Flexity configuation is - but don't the Ion Flexity cars only have 56 seats compared to the 70 on the TTC Flexities?

They only ordered 70 vehicles, for a 45-minute route like Eglinton, you require 30 trainsets (15 each direction). if each has 2 cars, that leaves 10 spares (5 train spares). They don't have enough trains fro 3 car operation.

There's only one section on the outlook where the layout is a little different. They really only have more seats because there is only one set of doors and one cab, actual standing room isnt really removed overall. For that reason, I used 130 since the only number they provide for the freedom is 250 per vehicle (which we all know is BS).

 

[felix123]

The Union Pearson train is also fully grade separated and runs the same off-peak frequency as the REM.

Is RER also bona fide metro? Or just pseudo-loblaws?

And how different is the on-peak UPX frequency to the off-peak UPX frequency?

 

[nfitz]

They only ordered 70 vehicles, for a 45-minute route like Eglinton, you require 30 trainsets (15 each direction). if each has 2 cars, that leaves 10 spares (5 train spares). They don't have enough trains fro 3 car operation.

I think it was 70 more, after the initial 6 that were delivered . 76 in total. So 25 trainsets. Say 21 with over 20% spares.

So they could do 14 three-car trains an hour. Every 4.25 minutes (if the 45-minutes is enough - and it's probably about right. That's 6,300 passengers an hour.

Alternatively, you could do 30 (with 27% spares) or 32 (with 19% spares) two-car trains. With 30 it's every 3 minutes with a 6,000 passenger capacity. With 32 it's every 2.8 minutes with a 6,400 passenger capacity.

Number of cars per train doesn't effect capacity. It just effects frequency.

Why run shorter trains every 3 minutes when they can run longer trains every 4.25 minutes? It's still very frequent service (Line 4 only runs every 5.5 minutes at peak). ANd it's cheaper.

There's only one section on the outlook where the layout is a little different. They really only have more seats because there is only one set of doors and one cab, actual standing room isnt really removed overall. For that reason, I used 130 since the only number they provide for the freedom is 250 per vehicle

The Eglinton Flexities also only have one cab. The Kitchener Flexities and Finch West Alstoms have 2 cabs.

150 is a just a guess, but with the slightly larger width, and larger areas around the doors, I'd be surprised if they can't fit 5 extra passengers in each of the four segments with doors. Passengers take less space when they are standing versus sitting - and there's 14 less seats per train, if they use the Waterloo seating.

(which we all know is BS).

On that we can agree! Doesn't work unless everyone is carrying a baby in a carrier on their chest!

And how different is the on-peak UPX frequency to the off-peak UPX frequency?

It's the same frequency, but there's additional trains serving most stations - closer to 6 an hour rather than 4.

Which is the same as the REM is planning, on the three branches west of Bois-Franc. 6 trains an hour.

Hopefully in Toronto there's 8 trains an hour on that corridor off-peak by the time the REM branches all open 2023.