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 - MidTowner - 01-13-2016 (01-13-2016, 11:29 AM)chutten Wrote: (since I can't see how E-bound traffic could run afoul of the train any more often than running afoul of W-bound traffic) You're probably correct on this- but if the risk of a collision is the same, the impact of a collision is likely much worse. When a car is struck by another car, it's one thing; by a train, the outcome is likely to be much more serious. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - chutten - 01-13-2016 (01-13-2016, 11:40 AM)Canard Wrote: I guess what I'm getting at is that I'm kind of shocked that in this day an age the thinking could possibly be "Let's just see how many people die before we fix it" for the cost of an illuminated sign. I'm sorry, I forgot. Are we talking about cars, here? Or trains? ...okay, maybe that was a bit glib. But how many people die on intersections today? Maybe the stats we should be looking at are damageDollarsAndDeaths per 1000 people moving through an intersection? Then I would hope even Houston's numbers with the trains are better than they were without. I agree we can almost certainly do better. And if the cost is just for one or two (or a dozen) lousy lighted signs, then damn skippy we should already be doing this. Interestingly (at least to me), simply by building and running ION we already _are_ doing this: spending money to move more people more safely. Which is the correct direction we should be moving on this. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Markster - 01-13-2016 Well, those "as required based on collisions" ones are in places where there is nothing "out of the ordinary" about the track alignment. It's no different than a lane of regular traffic, except that it's a vehicle on rails instead of asphalt. For the most part, one should be able to assume that cars will be able to handle themselves just as well around a fixed-track vehicle, as they would a non-fixed vehicle doing the same thing. As you rightfully point out, the trains are not exactly the same as a regular vehicle, because they are quite heavy. But how heavy are they? And how does that compare to what's on the roads already? Toronto's new streetcars weigh about 48,200 kg (source) The LRV we'll be getting is a little larger, maybe ~65,000 kg Meanwhile tractor trailers are allowed to be 49,500 kg (source) in Ontario. A collision between a car and an LRV will be roughly the same, in terms of energy, as one between a car and a tractor trailer. Charles and King streets have been home to a lot of tractor trailer traffic. Was there an epidemic of vehicular collision deaths on those streets that I was unaware of? Or, more morbidly, what vehicular deaths we have had so far between trucks and cars on those streets are clearly established to be within accepted levels of the existing social contract that we are all signed up for by having cars and trucks on our streets at all. Looking to Toronto, where they have similar vehicles already plying their streets, they do not have anything beyond the regular level of traffic accidents. Queens Quay, where they have a unique track alignment that lends itself to LRVs sideswiping (illegally-)left-turning cars (impacting into the driver's side, no less) I have yet to hear of a fatality, despite many reported collisions. Is it suddenly so different, here in KW, now that this particular vehicle is fixed on a track that we necessarily need to restrict traffic movements more? Even beyond the amount they're already being restricted? Personally, I already feel safer with LRVs than I would with tractor trailers. I can trust that they won't swerve. That the driver knows they're dealing with the safety of 100 passengers in addition to their own. Everyone is going to have a different opinion on when something it just different enough that it starts to need special consideration, but I don't think this is it. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Canard - 01-13-2016 Well we hope we are - we don't have that data yet. If ion kills 10 people per year but only 6 people per year died at those same intersections before service began, that's a step backward. I really hope that won't be the case, but we just don't know yet. I don't know how widely reported pedestrian/cyclist and automobile collisions are, so it's really hard to gauge from the media where we stand today. You don't hear about it all that often, though, except for high-profile cases like the Block Line Roundabout/GRT one. Minneapolis just had a bad streak of 5 accidents in 10 days. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - ijmorlan - 01-13-2016 (01-13-2016, 01:19 PM)Markster Wrote: Well, those "as required based on collisions" ones are in places where there is nothing "out of the ordinary" about the track alignment. It's no different than a lane of regular traffic, except that it's a vehicle on rails instead of asphalt. Indeed. I think there is a definite double standard around LRT safety. They have to be extra super safe, not just reasonably safe, in a way that is never required of anything related to ordinary road construction. Having said that, I speculate that people have trouble really internalizing what it means to have a transit lane. I speculate that they don’t think of it as a traffic lane, so don’t properly check, explaining all those left-turn collisions that we see on YouTube. I wonder if a proper BRT would have the same problem. (01-13-2016, 01:19 PM)Markster Wrote: Toronto's new streetcars weigh about 48,200 kg (source) I believe our vehicles will be almost identical to the Toronto streetcars. Certainly I understand that is the case with respect to overall size and length. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Canard - 01-13-2016 I've outlined all the technical differences many times throughout this thread between Toronto's heavily-customized FLEXITY Outlook vehicles and and Waterloo's standardized FLEXITY Freedom vehicles; I'd be happy to run through them again if anyone's interested. I like how it's automatically the "driver's fault".* Many LRT accidents involve pedestrians and cyclists, too, who aren't paying attention, diddling on their phones or blasting their music in their headphones, unaware of anything going on in the world around them. * - I fully realize and was simply pointing out that you singled out motorists, not cyclists and pedestrians. I'm aware that virtually all crashes involving trains are the fault of the person who gets hit. I know it's fun as a cyclist or pedestrian to always blame car drivers for everything but the fact is all 3 are the ones at fault, pedestrians and cyclists too. I can't think of any Light Rail accident in recent history, except the Muni crash, which was caused by LRV operator error (and even that one was medical related, I think). I just want people to be aware that Waterloo Region isn't somehow magically excempt from the crash curse that follows surface-rail technologies operating in roadways (LRT). If we had chosen an elevated technology, we would not be having this discussion. This is the technology we chose.) RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - ijmorlan - 01-14-2016 (01-13-2016, 10:04 PM)Canard Wrote: I've outlined all the technical differences many times throughout this thread between Toronto's heavily-customized FLEXITY Outlook vehicles and and Waterloo's standardized FLEXITY Freedom vehicles; I'd be happy to run through them again if anyone's interested. I know there are differences involving gauge, doors on one vs. both sides, one vs. two cabs, and minimum turn radius. On top of this I assume identical floor plans will not be used and there will be smaller follow-on differences. But isn’t the overall length, width, and height very similar? It’s not clear to me what would account for a substantial difference in weight. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Canard - 01-14-2016 To the casual user, yes, they'll look and feel almost identical, except for the design of the nose/tail (since our trains are bi-directional). Seating arrangement is the same (but we get a bit of extra width, in the form of wider aisles). (To a transit fan the differences are much deeper.) RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Viewfromthe42 - 01-14-2016 The point being that from a crash perspective, someone cheating on a left turn hanging on tracks in a car, or blowing across the rails on a bike, or not looking while crossing rails as a pedestrian, and getting hit by a TTC Streetcar vs. ION LRV will not likely experience any appreciable difference, one collision from the other. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Canard - 01-14-2016 Oh absolutely, but the speeds are much lower in Toronto, both for the streetcars and the traffic around them. Our system is much closer to other Light Rail systems, not other streetcar systems. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Viewfromthe42 - 01-14-2016 I thought that in areas where cars were nearby (most of the route), ION was to be limited to their speed limit, much as TTC streetcars follow posted signs (whether traffic always lets them get up to that speed is another matter). Indeed though, a cyclist choosing a poor point to cross the tracks between UpTown and UW, or UW and Northfield, to them it would be a much more damaging collision, given the higher speeds attained there. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Markster - 01-14-2016 (01-13-2016, 09:55 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: I believe our vehicles will be almost identical to the Toronto streetcars. Certainly I understand that is the case with respect to overall size and length. The difference in weight I had was based on an assumption that they were a bit longer than the TTC streetcar variant. I could very well have misremembered. Bombardier's website is fairly sparse on data for the exact variant we'll be getting. If they are the same length, then they will be of comparable weight, meaning the comparison with a tractor trailer holds even better. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - chutten - 01-14-2016 (01-13-2016, 09:55 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: Having said that, I speculate that people have trouble really internalizing what it means to have a transit lane. I speculate that they don’t think of it as a traffic lane, so don’t properly check, explaining all those left-turn collisions that we see on YouTube. I wonder if a proper BRT would have the same problem. Well, how many traffic lanes with traffic coming up from behind are there to your left when you're making a left turn? None, I hope. I mean you're not making a left turn from the any lane but the leftmost, are you? (in Canada) In the (near!) future, you might have one train lane to your left that does come up from behind you, adjacent to you, on parts of the system where the trains are in the middle of the road instead of the edges. Drivers aren't necessarily used to shoulder-checking to the left when making a left turn, which I always presumed was the cause of those frequent left-turn collisions. (which in turn I presumed were the reasons for changing some streets along the corridor into right-in-right-out-exclusives) RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - clasher - 01-14-2016 Why not have a barrier on the left turn lane that comes down when a train approaches in that case, to at least keep the driver from turning into the train's path? Heavy rail seems to have the whole gate thing figured out and it seems to help reduce collisions. RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - chutten - 01-14-2016 (01-14-2016, 01:09 PM)clasher Wrote: Why not have a barrier on the left turn lane that comes down when a train approaches in that case, to at least keep the driver from turning into the train's path? Heavy rail seems to have the whole gate thing figured out and it seems to help reduce collisions. Because this light rail is running lengthwise through an intersection, not crossing a street. If you put down a barrier between your car and the tracks, you have now trapped opposing left-turning traffic on the tracks. Barriers on heavy rail crossings are only on the upstream side so you don't suffer this problem. I may have misunderstood you. Upon reading it again, you propose a barrier on the traffic lane. Like an arm that comes down over the stop line? That wouldn't have my stated problem, and would suffer only from the problems of heavy rail crossing barriers. That being said, our light rail is going to be much more frequent and short than heavy rail, so I wonder if the economics of it don't work out or something... |