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 - tomh009 - 02-18-2018

(02-18-2018, 03:58 PM)ijmorlan Wrote:
(02-18-2018, 01:31 PM)Canard Wrote: ijmorlan, it is no different than pulling into a parking space on a street, getting out and walking to the meter to put your coins in.

Good analogy. I hadn’t thought of the analogy, but that’s the kind of thing I was getting at, and the way I think GO platforms work too. Except for the R&T park and part of the sidewalk aspect — those areas aren’t just platforms, they are also paths/sidewalks, completely independent of their function as platforms. It’s not obvious to me what a parking analogy to that would be — some space that was both a parking space and a turn lane? But that doesn’t work as a concept.

Pulling into a parking space to make a three-point turn?  Same as with a sidewalk, you are essentially staying mobile and not staying in the space.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - danbrotherston - 02-18-2018

(02-18-2018, 04:02 PM)tomh009 Wrote:
(02-18-2018, 03:58 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: Good analogy. I hadn’t thought of the analogy, but that’s the kind of thing I was getting at, and the way I think GO platforms work too. Except for the R&T park and part of the sidewalk aspect — those areas aren’t just platforms, they are also paths/sidewalks, completely independent of their function as platforms. It’s not obvious to me what a parking analogy to that would be — some space that was both a parking space and a turn lane? But that doesn’t work as a concept.

Pulling into a parking space to make a three-point turn?  Same as with a sidewalk, you are essentially staying mobile and not staying in the space.

The simplest analogy is simply a vehicle lane that also permits parking.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - KevinL - 02-18-2018

(02-17-2018, 10:54 PM)Pheidippides Wrote:
(02-17-2018, 05:04 PM)KevinL Wrote: Every station has at least one way in that ticks all those boxes - nothing there indicates there must always be more than one. (Particularly, neither Mill nor Northfield seem capable of more than one.)

The approaches we're talking about seem to be Grandlinq's acknowledgement that people will want to get to stations like Frederick, Kitchener Market, and Borden from the non-primary direction and give another method of access. It just seems to be built strangely given tactile strips on the station side of the crossings but nothing on the curb side.

After doing a bit more reading I now think the the approaches we are talking about, either by design or in error, are probably considered emergency exits:
(viii) Provide clear emergency exiting from platforms.
(xi) Exits shall provide safe exiting from trains and platforms under normal operational and emergency conditions. Platforms and exits shall allow passengers to completely clear the platform prior to the arrival of the next train. 

Fair enough, but they're not really marked like emergency exits - they're just exits...

[Image: 2oon.jpg]

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - JoeKW - 02-18-2018

You can tell we're getting close by all the minutiae we're endlessly debating Smile

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - ijmorlan - 02-18-2018

(02-18-2018, 07:34 PM)KevinL Wrote: Fair enough, but they're not really marked like emergency exits - they're just exits...

[Image: 2oon.jpg]

Thanks for the photo. I had no idea it was actually clearly signed as an exit. Simple practical solution for riders is just to walk along the tracks up to the intersection with Duke St. Shock! Horror! I know, but:

If you’re walking to the stop, you’re facing the LRT traffic and can either see that you’ve just missed it: Wait at the intersection, then proceed down the tracks once it’s gone. Or you don’t see the vehicle: it will stop at the station, so just walk along the tracks to the station and onto the platform.

If you’re walking from the stop, you’ve just gotten off and you can just follow behind the vehicle up to the traffic light. There isn’t another one coming for several minutes.

Of course the real solution is for the block to have been designed slightly differently so that the platform extends into a walkway between the tracks and roadway up to the Duke St. intersection. Tying into another topic of discussion here, such a design probably would have been much easier if the road had been rebuilt with one through lane in each direction, plus appropriate turn lanes. Those two southbound lanes don’t both need to be there and they are taking up space that could allow for the tracks to be further over in order to leave space for said walkway.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Pheidippides - 02-18-2018

(02-18-2018, 08:37 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: Simple practical solution for riders is just to walk along the tracks up to the intersection with Duke St.

OMG, you just killed Canard.

Yes, that is what the design in encouraging, but in no way should it be allowed as it is; it is basically breeding bad habits.

And you can't always assume the train will move south on one track and north on the other. That's like only looking one direction when crossing a one-way street; the one time you don't bother checking the other direction is the day you get smucked.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - danbrotherston - 02-18-2018

(02-18-2018, 09:58 PM)Pheidippides Wrote:
(02-18-2018, 08:37 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: Simple practical solution for riders is just to walk along the tracks up to the intersection with Duke St.

OMG, you just killed Canard.

Yes, that is what the design in encouraging, but in no way should it be allowed as it is; it is basically breeding bad habits.

And you can't always assume the train will move south on one track and north on the other. That's like only looking one direction when crossing a one-way street; the one time you don't bother checking the other direction is the day you get smucked.

Heh, well, the breading of bad habits it the fault of the designers.

That being said, the one (and there is only one) redeeming factor of the two southbound lanes is that I envision one day (and it *should* be soon, but probably isn't) a two way cyclepath all the way from Courtland to Lancaster, on the south side.  There is no good reason not to do so.

That being said, there was probably plenty of property to build a path, just look at the positioning of the utility boxes and the cat pole.  A path along the tracks would have fit.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - MacBerry - 02-19-2018

(02-18-2018, 01:23 PM)KevinL Wrote:
(02-18-2018, 12:14 PM)Pheidippides Wrote: In this set-up though, as someone new to the system, how does one look at a route map to see if the system will actually take me where I want to go, or when the next train is coming, or even buy a ticket without trespassing in to the paid fare zone?

As noted above, fare inspectors are human. If your purpose on the platform is to absorb this information, that will likely be clear and easily explained to them, and if they're not otherwise busy I imagine an inspector would be happy to help with a concern. They're not constant enforcement gatekeepers, they have a broader customer service and education role as well.
I believe this makes it easy to ensure that these platforms  are "no camping zones" for people seeking permanent shelter.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Canard - 02-19-2018

I don’t think I’d ever noticed that directions were actually signposted at the East end of the Frederick platform! That’s crazy! And, as Dan points out, it’s a bad design just inviting people to misbehave...

Urban sections of tramways and light rail get a bit fuzzy sometimes when it comes to where you’re allowed to walk and where you’re not.

So, assuming on Tuesday they pop down to Fairway again and finish off clearance testing that one section of the NB track between Fairway and Mill they missed, and the Northfield curve gets unveiled soon so they can do their powered testing up there, what does everyone think will happen next? A slow ramp-up of speeds for a single LRV? A pair of LRV’s out at once, either separate or coupled? Enabling of traffic and railway signals so the police procession isn’t required? Burn-in of a single LRV so Bombardier can be allowed to start shipping the remaining 11 vehicles?

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - ijmorlan - 02-19-2018

(02-19-2018, 08:02 AM)Canard Wrote: I don’t think I’d ever noticed that directions were actually signposted at the East end of the Frederick platform! That’s crazy! And, as Dan points out, it’s a bad design just inviting people to misbehave...

Urban sections of tramways and light rail get a bit fuzzy sometimes when it comes to where you’re allowed to walk and where you’re not.

I find it interesting that you think of it as bad signage encouraging people to misbehave. Why not think of it as bad design (of the curbs and pavement markings) making it inconvenient to use the authorized and signed routes? (also making it unclear where the authorized route actually is) The problem here (unlike at the north end of the Willis Way platform, but similar to the north end of the GRH platform) is that the design is self-contradictory, and therefore definitely wrong, regardless of what one thinks about where platform accesses should be.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - ijmorlan - 02-19-2018

(02-18-2018, 09:58 PM)Pheidippides Wrote:
(02-18-2018, 08:37 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: Simple practical solution for riders is just to walk along the tracks up to the intersection with Duke St.

OMG, you just killed Canard.

Yes, that is what the design in encouraging, but in no way should it be allowed as it is; it is basically breeding bad habits.

And you can't always assume the train will move south on one track and north on the other. That's like only looking one direction when crossing a one-way street; the one time you don't bother checking the other direction is the day you get smucked.

Good point. I’ll be interested to see how often they actually run backwards. The system isn’t really set up with crossovers for convenient reverse operation: to get from the normal-running track to the reverse-running track you need to back through a crossover and then continue forward (except along the Waterloo Spur where a facing-points crossover is present just south of Northfield). In San Diego, where they sometimes (at least once, when I was there!) use only a single track to bypass track work, they have crossovers in both directions. Even on the TTC where I understand the signal system doesn’t allow single-track operation almost all of their crossovers are double crossovers.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Canard - 02-19-2018

Trailing-point half-crossovers like ours are inherently safer - a mis-thrown switch doesn't have the possibility of leading to a head-on collision between vehicles, like leading-point half-crossovers do.

There's no need to have full-full crossovers, either, unless you want to reverse-run for a short section of a route due to platform or track maintenance in a short section and have a pinch (not an issue when your headways are as big as ours, but that's another discussion...). Our system was never designed with that capability in mind (otherwise there would be full crossovers at much more frequent intervals).

The trailing-point setup we have will be just fine for ion. Simple, cheap, and effective - the motto of the entire system, really, and an excellent model for others to follow.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Canard - 02-19-2018

1/1 - Thursday, February 15, 2018

   
Approaching King/Frederick.

   
Trains really do the limbo under the overpass here.  Note how compressed the pantograph is!

   
Speaking of pantographs...

   
Making a list, checking it twice...

   
Back up through Waterloo.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Canard - 02-19-2018

1/1 - Friday, February 16, 2018

   
History is made:  Crews on Friday made it all the way to Fairway!

   
Heading back North on the SB alignment.  Some rail equipment was parked on the NB tracks at Overland, so they proceeded to the crossover at Mill, before switching back to the NB tracks.

   
Flying along (not really, but it's fun to pretend!) on Courtland.

   
Can't get enough of that nose profile. I love these vehicles so much!

   
Approaching Block Line.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Pheidippides - 02-19-2018

Great photos (as usual) Canard!

I came across a section of the project agreement this weekend that I had not read before. It deals with performance measures GrandLinq has to submit to the region that affects how much they get paid.

For example, for a train to be considered to have departed on time it has to leave between 15sec earlier or 60sec late of the scheduled departure time, and for a train to be considered arriving to arrive it has to arrive within 60sec early and no more than 180sec late of the scheduled arrival time (train trip cancelled is also earns 0 points - just wouldn't fit in the screen capture).
       

It also says that after the simulated service work during testing, "Project Co shall provide an augmented Baseline Service Plan which includes the arrival times for each LRT Stop along the Route." and that the, "Plan will include a general layover time of 4 minutes and not less than 3 minutes,"

There are all kinds of detailed calculations for various metrics (KPIs) with complicated names like:
Monthly Operations Performance Factor (MOPF) 
Scheduled Service Performance Factor (SSPF)
Completed LRT Trips Performance Factor (CLTPF) 
Daily Scheduled Service Performance Factor (DSSPF)
Monthly Maintenance Performance Factor (MMPF)
Fleet Functionality Performance Factor (FFPF)
Maintenance and Inspection Performance Factor (MIPF) 

And complicated formulas like:
   


The document I referenced in the winter walking thread also defines, among other things, non-compliant track geometry and spells out the fines for non-compliance for track geometry ($20,000 per non-compliance event).