Waterloo Region Connected
ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Printable Version

+- Waterloo Region Connected (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com)
+-- Forum: Waterloo Region Works (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=14)
+--- Forum: Transportation and Infrastructure (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=25)
+--- Thread: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit (/showthread.php?tid=14)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 832 833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 862 863 864 865 866 867 868 869 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 894 895 896 897 898 899 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910 911 912 913 914 915 916 917 918 919 920 921 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 963 964 965 966 967 968 969 970 971 972 973 974 975 976 977 978 979 980 981 982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 1152 1153 1154 1155 1156 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 1165 1166

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - plam - 11-19-2020

(11-19-2020, 01:10 PM)ac3r Wrote: Oops, didn't realize I had linked the French version! Mais...nous l'apprenons tous passionnément pendant de nombreuses années à l'école, no? :')

Certains d'entre nous sont québeçois d'origine.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - KevinL - 11-19-2020

(11-19-2020, 03:34 PM)jeffster Wrote: I didn't realize the Keolis was a French company. Now I know.

They're a 'French company' in the deepest sense... owned by France's national railway, SNCF.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Coke6pk - 11-24-2020

The Press Release Wrote:With Cambridge stops to be added within a few years.

Well that's good news! Much faster than I was expecting!

Coke

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - ac3r - 11-24-2020

Well stage 2 hasn't yet been confirmed I believe, but I sincerely doubt Cambridge will vote against it. It's the only thing that could save that place.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - catarctica - 11-24-2020

I heard it wouldn’t be coming till 2025 or 2028? I low key already want a new line going thru king/Columbia and st jacobs farmers market (this one is more like a wishful hope).

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - jeffster - 11-25-2020

(11-24-2020, 10:30 PM)catarctica Wrote: I heard it wouldn’t be coming till 2025 or 2028? I low key already want a new line going thru king/Columbia and st jacobs farmers market (this one is more like a wishful hope).

I know the OG plan was to have it run to St. Jacobs Farmers Market, and I believe, to the Galt Terminal. The 2nd Line was suppose to be along Victoria from roughly IRA and Bingemans (Lackner).

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Bytor - 11-27-2020

(11-25-2020, 03:43 AM)jeffster Wrote: I know the OG plan was to have it run to St. Jacobs Farmers Market, and I believe, to the Galt Terminal.

Not quite. That was only the potential maximum. The studies looked along the Region's entire Central Transit Corridor to see where it was likely to be needed, based on job & resident density, public transit use, and what residents thought of the route. The route from St. Jacobs to Ainslie was still in the 2011 documents as option L9, but if you go through everything you can see that how after 2007 most of the effort was focused on what in 2011 was called option L3 and which is what we got. But until 2011 there was no plan to have it run anywhere as it was still all hypothetical before then.

(11-25-2020, 03:43 AM)jeffster Wrote: The 2nd Line was suppose to be along Victoria from roughly IRA and Bingemans (Lackner).

In the original planning process that went on from 2004 to 2014, Victoria St. was never considered as area under consideration was only the CTC.

Are you thinking of the "Moving Forward: 2018 Master Transportation Plan" documents that mention Erb/University/King and Highland/Victoria as hypothetical ION Stage 3 after 2041?

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Bytor - 11-27-2020

(11-24-2020, 10:30 PM)catarctica Wrote: I heard it wouldn’t be coming till 2025 or 2028? I low key already want a new line going thru king/Columbia and st jacobs farmers market (this one is more like a wishful hope).

When Stage one was finished, and we went through 2 years of "any day now" thanks to Bombardier, the quasi-official word from councillors and senior staff when asked was that the earliest Stage 2 would be started was 2025 based on ability to get funding from senior levels of government in a timely manner, and how fast ridership along the 302 would increase. 2028 is the new date given recently and seems to be merely a simple adjustment based on the Bombardier-induced delays in starting operations, and now CoViD-19 their effects on ridership.

Left unstated, however, has been what those ridership targets are that would trigger the process to move into final route plans, start expropriations, order more trams, open up RFQ and then RFP, and then finally construction. (Assuming funding is there, of course.)

Depending on local conditions, including like salaries for your staff, fuel/energy costs, etc…, LRTs become competitive with bus routes on an operational cost per ride somewhere between 5,000 and 10,000 boardings per day, usually around 7,000, and outperform about 25-50% later. We left implementing our LRT until significantly later. As recently as 2018, the Region had been hinting that it would not wait as long in terms of the 302 getting crowded as it had for the iXpress 200 and 7, and that it might even be willing to do it slightly before it was fully viable in terms of that operating cost per ride. Those hints were always couched in terms of hurrying along densification being worth Stage 2 underperforming for a few years. Reading between the lines between of what local politicians said on the record or in just talking to people, a lot of people felt the Region was implying that it would do so in order to pacify Cambridge. After all, Cambriding having had to pay the extra property tax levies for Stage 1 while only being indirectly served by it is an undeniable political hot potato. Also, the usual 7% average annual growth for GRT ridership that is mentioned in Regional transportation documents wouldn't put what is now route 302 over 5,000/day until 2026  and over 10,000/d day until 2036, and that was seen by some as more evidence that Stage 2 would be built before it was viable in terms of that operational cost. (Numbers given to me by GRT for 2015-2018 showed an average of 10% annual growth, which would have brought the 302 to just under 6,500/day in 2025, do not know what recent, precoid numbers were.)

Maybe it's just me being cynical, but I think we have at least 2 and probably 3 municipal elections to go before we see a council authorise an RFQ for Stage 2 construction, because even if they get funding I cannot see political appetites (i.e., getting reelected) before the 302 reached 7,000 to 10,000 riders a day on average, likely some time after 2030. I will be highly surprised if the Council authorises Stage 2 construction at 5,000/day or fewer.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - ac3r - 11-27-2020

(11-27-2020, 01:24 PM)Bytor Wrote: after 2041?

For the sake of everyone in WR, I hope we build a second line before 2041...it shouldn't take a region of over 600'000 roughly half a century to simply build two "rapid" transit lines. eyerollemoji

Also, maybe this disaster that we call the ION could...you know...NOT use Bombardier for anything going forward? When is the last time you ever read anything about them that wasn't bad news? They're a terrible company. I think we only went with them because we or they or someone got some breaks if we bought Canadian, but that turned out to be a complete waste of time and money. Alstom may have had some wonky doors on the newest Otrain line, but at least they got trains in time - not 2-3 years later, incomplete with no APT and welding that was cracking after a few weeks.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - dtkvictim - 11-27-2020

(11-27-2020, 07:17 PM)ac3r Wrote: Also, maybe this disaster that we call the ION could...you know...NOT use Bombardier for anything going forward? When is the last time you ever read anything about them that wasn't bad news? They're a terrible company. I think we only went with them because we or they or someone got some breaks if we bought Canadian, but that turned out to be a complete waste of time and money. Alstom may have had some wonky doors on the newest Otrain line, but at least they got trains in time - not 2-3 years later, incomplete with no APT and welding that was cracking after a few weeks.

Well, depending on what Alstom does with Bombardier, using Bombardier in the future may not even be a choice (at least nominally). But if you think "wonky doors" is the best way to describe the O-train saga then I don't think you've been following it. The wikipedia page for the LRVs sums it up fairly well (in terms of vehicle issues, which are only part of the system's issues):

Quote:By early October 2019, the automated doors of the vehicles used by Ottawa's Confederation Line experienced faults if pried open or held back by passengers; this resulted in numerous service disruptions, some lasting up to 90 minutes due to a lack of proper procedures to isolate and disable the faulty doors while a train was in service. The vehicles also began encountering integration issues with Thales' SelTrac train control system that led to the on-board computer for some trains in service needing to be rebooted, causing delays of up to 20 to 30 minutes.[10]

Reliability gradually improved in November and December 2019. However, on December 31, 2019, electrical problems caused by improperly cleaned electrical contacts on the roof of the trains caused disruptions to passengers.[11][12] Then, throughout January 2020, service continued to suffer due to a combination of train and track switch failures. The trains' interior heating systems have been reported to be insufficient in Ottawa's sub-zero winter temperatures, forcing OC Transpo to consider adding heaters to the vehicles.[13] A manufacturing defect with the inductors used by the vehicles led to numerous electrical failures in inclement weather.[14] On January 30, 2020, the Confederation Line reached an all-time operational low when it was short five trains due to "recurring mechanical and electrical issues". Only eight to nine trains ran during the day.[15] The Confederation Line is expected to field 13 working trains during rush hour.

On July 2, 2020, cracks were found on two wheels of a vehicle during routine maintenance activities. A subsequent inspection of all vehicles found two more wheels with cracks, for a total of four across three different vehicles. As a result, half of the fleet is currently kept out of service each day so that every wheel on each vehicle can be inspected before the vehicle can be put back into service. On July 10, 2020, the Transportation Safety Board of Canada launched an independent investigation into the matter.[16] On September 16, 2020, the City announced that Alstom had determined that the root cause of the issue was an improperly aligned screw that caused stress on the wheel, resulting in the cracks. Alstom said it would replace every wheel in the fleet by early 2021.

If I'm not mistaken, a big part of why we chose the vehicles we did was to piggy-back on Toronto's order. Perhaps ironically, Toronto has ordered some of the same vehicles as Ottawa now because they fear Bombardier won't fulfill their order in time.

But anyways, from cursory reading of systems around the world, it seems like delays on new/custom vehicles is the norm, not the exception.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - ijmorlan - 11-27-2020

(11-27-2020, 07:50 PM)dtkvictim Wrote:
Quote:By early October 2019, the automated doors of the vehicles used by Ottawa's Confederation Line experienced faults if pried open or held back by passengers; this resulted in numerous service disruptions, some lasting up to 90 minutes due to a lack of proper procedures to isolate and disable the faulty doors while a train was in service. The vehicles also began encountering integration issues with Thales' SelTrac train control system that led to the on-board computer for some trains in service needing to be rebooted, causing delays of up to 20 to 30 minutes.[10]

I read an article which said that any train with a door that wouldn’t close would be locked out by the ATP (automatic train protection) and could only be moved under old-school procedures essentially involving written authorization to use sections of track.

Total engineering fail; ATP has no business absolutely preventing a train from operating just because of door problems. There should be a procedure to inform the system that the door has failed, possibly install a temporary barrier, and continue on, even in service if appropriate.

What horrors lurk in the design away from areas where I can confidently assert the designers screwed up?

I hope this isn’t the way of the future: software industry practices applied to other industries. By this I mean products which, while technically meeting the spec, fail to operate in the way which anybody who actually thought about the problem for a few minutes would realize they should operate. The customer should not be responsible for thinking of all the obvious, goes-without-saying, features and putting them explicitly in the spec.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - tomh009 - 11-27-2020

(11-27-2020, 07:50 PM)dtkvictim Wrote: If I'm not mistaken, a big part of why we chose the vehicles we did was to piggy-back on Toronto's order. Perhaps ironically, Toronto has ordered some of the same vehicles as Ottawa now because they fear Bombardier won't fulfill their order in time.

Even more ironically, Metrolinx had a whole lot to do with the delays, as they turned uncooperative once they were fighting BBD in court.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Bytor - 11-28-2020

(11-27-2020, 07:17 PM)ac3r Wrote: Also, maybe this disaster that we call the ION could...you know...NOT use Bombardier for anything going forward?

"Disaster" is an unnecessarily hyperbolic mischaracterisation of ION.

Yes, Bombardier being so late on delivery was very frustrating, but once we had the working trams Keolis had things up and running in short order, and they have been reliable ever since. The problems with the EasyGO fare card system were also frustrating, but I am of the opinion that at least some of the problems were with users not paying attention and using the system incorrectly. Presto has had far more problems on almost every one of their installs. The TTC for example, has been having problems with their implementation for more than 5 years.

Frustrating? Sure. A disaster? Hardly.

(11-27-2020, 07:17 PM)ac3r Wrote: When is the last time you ever read anything about them that wasn't bad news? They're a terrible company.

I'm guessing that you don't follow rail news, like, at all? Alstom, Siemens, Kinki Sharyo, they've all had their problems at one time or another. Alstom's clusterfuck with the Citadis Spirit for Ottawa. Siemens was forbidden from bidding on contracts for the London Underground for more than a decade from the early 2000s because a previous delivery was just as bad as Ottawa's from Alstom.

Prior to mid 2013 or so, well after Waterloo Region had decided to join the contract with Metrolinx, Bombardier Transportation was one of the top three largest rail manufacturers and had a highly respected reputation, 180° from Bombardier Air's. That had produced literally tens of thousands of locomotives and cars for the previous 40+ years, include more than 3,000 LRT trams. Unless you were expecting the Regional Council to have been psychic and able to tell the future, there were some very good reasons to go with Bombardier.

(11-27-2020, 07:17 PM)ac3r Wrote: I think we only went with them because we or they or someone got some breaks if we bought Canadian, but that turned out to be a complete waste of time and money.

One of those good reasons was cost. The only other manufacturers who reportedly showed any interest in supplying trams for the ION were Alstom, Siemens and Kinki Sharyo, and if you go and google their contracts for the five to ten years prior to 2012 that got mentioned in the news, you'll quickly see that we probably would have paid close to twice as much for trams from one of them, based on those other known contracts. Even with the extra $20-25M in other costs caused by Bombardier being so late, we are still cheaper than what those three would have been.

(11-27-2020, 07:17 PM)ac3r Wrote: Alstom may have had some wonky doors on the newest Otrain line, but at least they got trains in time - not 2-3 years later, incomplete with no APT and welding that was cracking after a few weeks.

If you think Ottawa only had a few problems with "wonky doors" then you weren't paying attention to what happened there.

They also had problems with control system integration the required 20+ minute reboots, various problems with the electrical systems which caused the trams to stop working in inclement weather, and issues persisted into January of this year when on one day they were short 5 trams due to recurring mechanical and electrical issues. They are supposed to have 13 trams on during peak, and 8 the rest of the day. And a whole bunch more.

Now contrast that to our trams. Bombardier may have been very late, but once we got all of them Keolis had the system up and running in short order and it has been reliable ever since.

So twice the price and all those problems? No thank you!

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Bytor - 11-28-2020

(11-27-2020, 07:17 PM)ac3r Wrote:
(11-27-2020, 01:24 PM)Bytor Wrote: after 2041?
For the sake of everyone in WR, I hope we build a second line before 2041...it shouldn't take a region of over 600'000 roughly half a century to simply build two "rapid" transit lines. eyerollemoji

Not if there isn't the ridership to make it warranted.

None of the remaining iXpress routes have riderships of more than 1,500 per day, pre-covid. Only the 201 was that high, the rest were at about 1,000/day. At 7% per year average annual growth that will take a minimum of ~18 years before the 201 reaches the lower end of the range where LRTs start to have a comparable operating cost per ride to a bus route, and ~23 years to the middle of the range. So we are, realistically, looking at 2038 to 2043 before Stage 3 would be warranted based purely on operational cost. None of the numbers that I have gotten over the years from the GRT has suggested that the other iXpress routes ever had growth rates above system average like the 200/302 has had.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - tomh009 - 11-28-2020

Lots of unknowns in predicting the future: will more people work from home, how many people will live in the downtowns, will there be less parking available for cars, will more people walk or use bicycles, and more. Very hard to know.

And, whatever the actual numbers, we should remember that the LRT was built not only to carry people but also to promote intensification along its route. Building a stage 3 should mean building it wherever we expect the next stage of intensification to be. And at the moment we still have a lot of capacity to intensify along the current stage 1 route, so that urgency is not there yet. 10+ years before we start going down this path, I expect, subject to change of course! Big Grin