drum118
Superstar
True, but do you expect the consortium giving an contract to CAF or Siemens over Alstom when this is an ML project in the first place?? The length of the cars could be shorter, but we will have to wait and see. My bet is Alstom.
Hamilton Hamilton Line B LRT | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx
- Thread starter Kiwi
- Start date
EastYorkTTCFan
Senior Member
Hopefully they come up with a better design then the one that Metrolinx overpaid for, although I doubt they will.
drum118
Superstar
What you see on Finch will be seen on other ML lines now under construction and future needs. Don't think there is enough BBD cars to do the full Crosstown line once all the extensions are built as well increase of service.
W. K. Lis
Superstar
Bombardier and Alstom are now the same light rail company. With a variety of different models that can be customized to a customers' needs.
EastYorkTTCFan
Senior Member
It's unfortunate because they need a major redesign to make them a better LRT..
drum118
Superstar
Better get Stadler cars as they are better than Alstom cars. Have ridden Ottawa cars as well a number of systems in Europe who use Alstom Trams.
SaugeenJunction
Senior Member
MX has said more vehicles will be ordered to serve Line 5 once the Crosstown West Extension opens. You think those will be Alstom Citadis Spirits like Finch?
drum118
Superstar
Bureaucromancer
Active Member
In reference to the A line discussion, I’m a long way from convinced that reviving the ICTS plan wouldn’t be one of the better options.
I’d probably drop the loop it extend north to West Harbour and obviously diverting to Mohawk proper Makes more sense than the straight shot up James, but even putting the first phase terminal at Mohawk still makes a lot of sense to me.
I’d probably drop the loop it extend north to West Harbour and obviously diverting to Mohawk proper Makes more sense than the straight shot up James, but even putting the first phase terminal at Mohawk still makes a lot of sense to me.
W. K. Lis
Superstar
Subway cars, streetcars, and light rail vehicles have a life of over 30 years. Usually longer with rebuilds. They undergo upgrades and improvements during their lifespan. For example, the CLRV streetcars did not have CCTV cameras originally, which were added over time.
EastYorkTTCFan
Senior Member
I'm not really sur if they can use the Alstom Cidantas sprit on the crosstown as the stations were all designed for the Flexity and not the Alstom cars with it's terrible door placement. Metrolink was incredible dumb and wasteful when they made the deal for them and everyone of the people who made that decision should be fired and the cost of breaking the contract with bombardier should be withheld from their severance.
EastYorkTTCFan
Senior Member
there is a defiance between adding security camaras and digital display boards though, sometimes its;' cheaper to just relace them at some point the rebuld them. Plus I don't think we arer going to see them around for as long as the CLRV's and ALRV's were
SaugeenJunction
Senior Member
I heard that the Hamilton LRT project has undergone some “improvements” with these changes being made public in May, anyone else hearing this?
Sunnyside
Active Member
Yes, ward 8 councillor Paul Danko confirmed that the updated design was presented to council today (now yesterday, March 31st) and he called it “much better”. It appears the updated/proposed HSR network also had access to this updated design.
Looking at said map, what I think they may be alluding to is dedicated bus facilities (loops or otherwise) given the serious amount of high frequency/rapid routes converging at LRT stations. Another point of contention was the removal of trees through the Gore… that may no longer be necessary.
innsertnamehere
Superstar
I would love if they could figure out a way to keep the trees in the International Village.
I put a bit of thought into some potential improvements to the alignment, and I think this may be a good one which may actually save costs or at least be generally comparable:
Orange = Existing Alignment, including the orange hatched area which will be the MSF.
Red = new grade separated alignment
Basically instead of a huge bridge over the 403 and Cathedral Park, as well as rebuilding the Longwood Road bridge, it would have a smaller bridge starting west of Longwood Road. a new underpass underneath Longwood road with a grade seperated stop better serving the McMaster Innovation Park would then replace the currently planned Longwood Rd Station, before the line ran along the 403 to an underpass underneath Main Street. Finally, it would run along the CP corridor beside Cathedral Park instead of through it, before rising and meeting King St at grade like currently planned.
There is probably a similar amount of structure, if not less structure, involved, and it would allow the LRT to dodge 3 stoplights it'll have to navigate on it's current alignment. Would make travel times on the core segment of the LRT, between McMaster and Downtown, much quicker. Plus the connecting track to the MSF would be shorter, runing behind the McMaster Innovation Park instead, and allowing the Longwood Rd bridge to not have to be completely rebuilt to support LRT tracks.
I put a bit of thought into some potential improvements to the alignment, and I think this may be a good one which may actually save costs or at least be generally comparable:
Orange = Existing Alignment, including the orange hatched area which will be the MSF.
Red = new grade separated alignment
Basically instead of a huge bridge over the 403 and Cathedral Park, as well as rebuilding the Longwood Road bridge, it would have a smaller bridge starting west of Longwood Road. a new underpass underneath Longwood road with a grade seperated stop better serving the McMaster Innovation Park would then replace the currently planned Longwood Rd Station, before the line ran along the 403 to an underpass underneath Main Street. Finally, it would run along the CP corridor beside Cathedral Park instead of through it, before rising and meeting King St at grade like currently planned.
There is probably a similar amount of structure, if not less structure, involved, and it would allow the LRT to dodge 3 stoplights it'll have to navigate on it's current alignment. Would make travel times on the core segment of the LRT, between McMaster and Downtown, much quicker. Plus the connecting track to the MSF would be shorter, runing behind the McMaster Innovation Park instead, and allowing the Longwood Rd bridge to not have to be completely rebuilt to support LRT tracks.