Ottawa Transit Developments

[Streety McCarface]

OC Transpo thinks they have 24k PPHPD and expect to be at 18K PPHD by 2031.

There is redundancy: R1 service. Just like when one of the subway lines faces a disruption in Toronto. Heck, most of the old Transitway through the core will still be preserved as a transit corridor. So it will retain the capability to act as a redundant corridor during disruptions.

They are completely delusional if they think they can hit those targets. The TRs can carry 1450 passengers in crush-loading (not extreme crush loading), and theoretically come every 2 minutes with ATC. That would give Line 1 a capacity of 43.5K PPHPD. Yet, the TTC never assumes capacities will be that high, we're shifting from 28K PPHPD to 32K PPHPD with ATC.

Even at rush hour, you don't assume crush-loading of every train when calculating hourly capacity.

 

[kEiThZ]

They are completely delusional if they think they can hit those targets. The TRs can carry 1450 passengers in crush-loading (not extreme crush loading), and theoretically come every 2 minutes with ATC. That would give Line 1 a capacity of 43.5K PPHPD. Yet, the TTC never assumes capacities will be that high, we're shifting from 28K PPHPD to 32K PPHPD with ATC.

Right. So a fully grade separated corridor has a theoretical capacity well over 20 000 PPHPD. I stand by my comment. They aren't close to maxing out. And right out they run at 4 min frequencies in Ottawa. And aren't using the full 120m trains the system was designed for. They could easily hit 20K PPHPD by lengthening the trains and going to 2.5 min frequencies.

Also, people seem fixated on rolling stock. Nothing says that can't be changed to accommodate more passengers.

 

[p_xavier]

What would normal service be for a fully segregated light metro?

95% on time -1min +3min, 80% of the time.

Analysis: Ottawa's four-month-old LRT system shouldn't have this many problems already

OC Transpo had to deliver afternoon peak service on the Confederation Line with three fewer trains than usual Monday, with worries the train shortage would continue Tuesday morning in what has been an abysmal start of the year for the $2.1-billion LRT system.

ottawacitizen.com

Most problems ARE expected in the first two years of service.

 

[kEiThZ]

I view a Bank St Subway as a replacement for the Trillium Line (at least north of Carleton). Use the existing alignment until Carleton, then veer under the Canal to Lansdowne, then up Bank into downtown.

This would never happen. There's no way all the folks north of Carleton who have existing rail service would tolerate losing it. And there's a lot of development going in now that will count on that transit being there. Even more opposition.

There's also the cost and time issue. It would cost maybe a billion to electrify and twin the entire Trillium corridor. It's a project that would take maybe 2 years. Would be minimally disruptive if Stage 3 to Barrhaven was already in place. A Bank St. Subway would be massively disruptive and would cost well over a billion just to get from Parliament Station to Carleton. When the Trillium Line is 1-2 km away from Bank for a lot of its length, I have my doubts that this kind of multi-billion dollar rail tunnel will be defensible.

Baseline BRT (I don't believe it was ever seriously considered as an LRT route)

You're correct. I got it confused with Carling, which is planned as LRT in the TMP.

 

[Kyle Campbell]

95% on time -1min +3min, 80% of the time.

Most problems ARE expected in the first two years of service.

I was hoping only the first year...

 

[OCCheetos]

While I agree with most of what you said...since when is the line not past 50% design capacity yet? The line is seeing peak loads of over 12K PPHPD. Light rail, even in the grade-separated form, generally only sees up to 15K PPHPD.

"Light rail" is really just branding. Think of it more like light metro, because that's how it behaves.

 

[OCCheetos]

OC Transpo thinks they have 24k PPHPD and expect to be at 18K PPHD

As far as I know, that max capacity doesn't even include platform extensions.

On paper, with headways of 90 seconds, a reconfiguration of the seats (we've configured them to carry less than advertised because SEATS!!) and platform extensions the max capacity is nearly 30K ppdph.

David Bellerive did the math on OTrainFans at some point.

 

[OCCheetos]

When it comes to a Bank Street subway I find it odd that the people who are generally strongly against "value engineering" often propose alignments that are value engineered to hell in some attempt to justify its costs.
Don't get me wrong, I'm typically in favour of something down Bank street. But ideas like cannibalizing the Trillium Line, or reusing the effectively destitute portion of the Transitway between Billings and Greenboro just to shave $$$ off the cost makes absolutely no sense to me especially considering the insane technical challenges they would bring.

If you're ever going to have the ridership to demand a subway, you're definitely going to need density on that corridor, and no where down that corridor is going to get as dense as right on that corridor. All the way from the core to the very edge of the airport development zone.
If you still can't justify it after packing literally as much into that corridor as possible, it may be time to think about other creative solutions. I can think of a few, though they might upset some car-users. Food for thought though?

 

[Streety McCarface]

As far as I know, that max capacity doesn't even include platform extensions.

On paper, with headways of 90 seconds, a reconfiguration of the seats (we've configured them to carry less than advertised because SEATS!!) and platform extensions the max capacity is nearly 30K ppdph.

David Bellerive did the math on OTrainFans at some point.

Math that is done by a transit advocacy group has no merit in the engineering world. If that system ever achieves 30K PPHPD reliably, I'll eat my hat. There are too many risks there:
1. Achieving 90-second headways requires not just grade separation, but track and platform separation.
2. Seat reconfiguration is not possible on LFLRVs.
3. 30K PPHPD is greater than the existing Toronto subway, which has an infinitely better seating layout, full open gangways, trains 1.5* as long as existing ones, and are more than half a meter wider. With ATC, it'll barely be above 30K PPHPD

Also, platform extensions are costly capital projects that can cost billions of dollars. With that in mind, it might have been cheaper building a heavy rail line, or high floor LRT line from the get-go.

 

[Streety McCarface]

Right. So a fully grade separated corridor has a theoretical capacity well over 20 000 PPHPD. I stand by my comment. They aren't close to maxing out. And right out they run at 4 min frequencies in Ottawa. And aren't using the full 120m trains the system was designed for. They could easily hit 20K PPHPD by lengthening the trains and going to 2.5 min frequencies.

Also, people seem fixated on rolling stock. Nothing says that can't be changed to accommodate more passengers.

So there's a 5% increase from making the trains one large Open gangway train. Adding 20 meters only adds 20% capacity. LRV capacities are always overstated to shit. Ottawa's per train capacity is closer to 500 passengers per train, probably less. With this all considered, with platform extensions and full open gangway cars, trains can reliably carry 625 passengers, perhaps up to 750 if they think full crush load is a good metric. At 2.5 minute frequencies, trains can only carry between 15K and 18K PPHPD, still below 20K PPHPD.

But that's not the issue, the fact of the matter is that this line if ridership will indeed grow, will cap out within 30 years, even if it could carry the fabled 24K PPHPD. Not a good lifecycle for any grade-separated rapid transit.

 

[Kyle Campbell]

Math that is done by a transit advocacy group has no merit in the engineering world. If that system ever achieves 30K PPHPD reliably, I'll eat my hat. There are too many risks there:
1. Achieving 90-second headways requires not just grade separation, but track and platform separation.
2. Seat reconfiguration is not possible on LFLRVs.
3. 30K PPHPD is greater than the existing Toronto subway, which has an infinitely better seating layout, full open gangways, trains 1.5* as long as existing ones, and are more than half a meter wider. With ATC, it'll barely be above 30K PPHPD

Also, platform extensions are costly capital projects that can cost billions of dollars. With that in mind, it might have been cheaper building a heavy rail line, or high floor LRT line from the get-go.

I'm curious what you mean by track and platform separation. PSDs? I'm not sure that's an absolute requirement

 

[OCCheetos]

1. Achieving 90-second headways requires not just grade separation, but track and platform separation.

All stations on the Confederation Line are designed to accommodate platform doors.

2. Seat reconfiguration is not possible on LFLRVs.

Alstom advertises a 4-module Citadis Spirit as being able to carry 340 per vehicle, Ottawa's are configured for 300. I know the seats above the bogies can't really be modified, but Ottawa has an obsession with two-across seating and there are dozens of aisle seats that could be knocked out to create so much more standing room.

Also, platform extensions are costly capital projects that can cost billions of dollars. With that in mind, it might have been cheaper building a heavy rail line, or high floor LRT line from the get-go.

Though I don't have any actual numbers to back it up, I doubt the cost of extensions in Ottawa will exceed a billion dollars. All stations we obviously built with extensions in mind, the tunneled stations are/will all be built to their ultimate lengths from the start leaving the biggest cost probably being the purchase of the extra modules for the trains.

Evidently any increase in capacity is going to require capital costs. That's a given.

 

[kEiThZ]

So there's a 5% increase from making the trains one large Open gangway train. Adding 20 meters only adds 20% capacity. LRV capacities are always overstated to shit. Ottawa's per train capacity is closer to 500 passengers per train, probably less. With this all considered, with platform extensions and full open gangway cars, trains can reliably carry 625 passengers, perhaps up to 750 if they think full crush load is a good metric. At 2.5 minute frequencies, trains can only carry between 15K and 18K PPHPD, still below 20K PPHPD.

Run trains at 2 min headways and you only need 667 riders in each train to meet 20k per hour. That is easily achieved with 120m trains. Should be noted that they built all the stations with 120m platforms or simple knockout walls to enable the capacity.

But that's not the issue, the fact of the matter is that this line if ridership will indeed grow, will cap out within 30 years, even if it could carry the fabled 24K PPHPD. Not a good lifecycle for any grade-separated rapid transit.

30 years is just fine. Especially if the alternative was no rail transit at all. People forget that there was a ton of skepticism in Ottawa about rail transit because they practically pioneered high capacity and frequency BRT.

I wouldn't be all that worried about them maxing out either. Ottawa's population and ridership would have to grow spectacularly while commute patterns stay the same for that to happen. And all of that seems a stretch. The largest employer in town, for example, is encouraging more telecommuting and moving offices out of the core. Trends that work very much against the Confederation Line maxing out.

And if they do see that growth? They can start planning and talking to upper level governments about funding a parallel line through the core.

 

[OCCheetos]

Should be noted that they built all the stations with 120m platforms or simple knockout walls

All above-ground stations require physical extension, though the space was left for it. Don't forget that all Stage 2 and possibly even Stage 3 stations will need to be extended too.

 

[kEiThZ]

All above-ground stations require physical extension, though the space was left for it. Don't forget that all Stage 2 and possibly even Stage 3 stations will need to be extended too.

Sure. But it really isn't expensive to extend the platform of a surface station by 20m. And I believe the underground stations already have 120m platforms with knock out walls built. It's certainly not billions of dollars. At $5M per station, the total bill for 41 stations after Stage 2 would be $205M. Not cheap. But not some large insurmountable obstacle.

And if ridership is trending towards 18k PPHPD by 2030, Stage 3 will stations will probably be built with 120m platforms from the start.