Light Rail Vehicles - LRT, ICTS, Monorail, and more

[ijmorlan]

Sorry, too many years on the defensive with all the monorail haters out there (it's exhausting).  Every transit technology has advantages and disadvantages.  Jamincan's outlined them perfectly.  I've been following the Rennes ligne b project for years because it's exciting to me; I think the vehicles are very attractive, and I like rubber tires.

Thanks, and no problem. His points do make some sense. I very much appreciate the photos and will definitely have to ride the system if I visit some day. I wouldn’t call myself a monorail fan exactly, but I’m also far from being a hater. My opinion of the appropriateness of monorail has improved in recent years with the large installations going in place like Malaysia — the fact that they are building large systems make it look less like a gimmick and more like serious transportation. If I remember correctly, in 2011 if our system had been built as monorail it would have been the 2nd longest in the world, and all the way to Cambridge would have made it the longest. I don’t believe that’t the case any more. People are funny about overhead structures though — I’ve seen “view obstruction” given as a significant downside of monorail. I mean, OK, I guess there is some overhead structure, but as you’ve pointed out, it’s really quite slim compared to the alternatives.

[Canard]

19 or 37 km wouldn't touch Chongqing, with almost 100 km. There, there absolutely was no alternative - no other technology could handle the topology. Maybe back in 2011, 37 km would have put us at second longest? Osaka has 28 km and IIRC it was the longest before Chongqing.

Whenever I look down Charles from the Benton St. parking garage, I shake my head. The OCS/Catenary is so thick and dense. It's really about as ugly as you could possibly get.  And yet,people throw up their arms about a single, slender, smooth concrete beam. I'll never get it (and don't want to)!

Changsha, China just announced today that they're building their second maglev line! The first opened last year and was built completely domestically. It's the same type of system as Linimo in Aichi, Japan (my favourite!) - electromagnetic, where the train wraps around the guideway and uses electromagnets to lift up toward the T-shaped guideway from below.

[timc]

I know it's not the same thing at all, but when I think of monorail and overhead concrete structures, I think of massive eyesores like the Gardiner Expressway. And I'm sure I'm not the only one. It's a hard image to get out of ones mind.

[Canard]

...you're thinking of elevated LRT!

Elevated LRT:


Suspended Monorail (SIEMENS Sipem at Dortmund University):

(A two-fer! Switch myth debunked as well.)

[KevinL]

I can see the pearl-clutchers getting worked up about the suspended one - no matter how safe it is (and I'm sure it's very safe) someone will be irrational about the possibility of it falling.

[Viewfromthe42]

I would think that monorail design requires a civil engineering failure for a vehicle to fall, due to physical interlocking of vehicle and rail. Meanwhile, even with the extra rails in curves, I would think that a driver pushing the LRT a bit too fast could lead to it tipping off the tracks (incredibly unlikely, but a possible human error).

[tomh009]

Whenever I look down Charles from the Benton St. parking garage, I shake my head. The OCS/Catenary is so thick and dense. It's really about as ugly as you could possibly get.  And yet,people throw up their arms about a single, slender, smooth concrete beam. I'll never get it (and don't want to)!

While catenaries are not pretty, a bidirectional monorail would also need to be wider (two trains need to fit) -- and isn't a walkway a requirement as well, for emergency exit in case of train engine failure?  That would make the monorail beam pretty much as wide as our LRT embedded track concrete, I think.

[Canard]

Regulations typically now require a walkway, yes - and it's ugly. But it can allow light to trickle through (see Sao Paulo for Bombardier's latest). So, LRT here gets hideous massive crossbucks everywhere, and monorail gets a catwalk... we do go a bit overboard on the safety end of things now. Haneda and other legacy monorails get away with it because they have excellent, well-thought-out evacuation plans in place, including bringing another train along side and lowering a connecting bridge between trains, or towing the failed train off to the yard with a diesel tug.

Viewfromthe42 - this is exactly what happened recently in Croydon.

[kps]

While catenaries are not pretty, a bidirectional monorail would also need to be wider (two trains need to fit) -- and isn't a walkway a requirement as well, for emergency exit in case of train engine failure?  That would make the monorail beam pretty much as wide as our LRT embedded track concrete, I think.

Yes, that's what I was trying to get at with my question — in an apples-to-apples comparison, how small can you go?. Elevated conventional rail *on its own* is not that big,

   

and possibly 2017 engineering could improve on 1917 engineering.

[Canard]

(I personally love the L, but it is a dark, unfriendly place underneath - especially at night.)

[ijmorlan]

19 or 37 km wouldn't touch Chongqing, with almost 100 km. There, there absolutely was no alternative - no other technology could handle the topology. Maybe back in 2011, 37 km would have put us at second longest? Osaka has 28 km and IIRC it was the longest before Chongqing.

Whenever I look down Charles from the Benton St. parking garage, I shake my head. The OCS/Catenary is so thick and dense. It's really about as ugly as you could possibly get.  And yet,people throw up their arms about a single, slender, smooth concrete beam. I'll never get it (and don't want to)!

I might have remembered wrong. Maybe Conestoga to Fairview was “long”, and all the way to Cambridge was 2nd longest in the entire world. But indeed, as you point out, there are a number of quite extensive systems now going in, so ours would only be a moderately large one now. Also I should have said “China and Malaysia”.

I have to admit being a little disappointed with the OCS system appearance. I was imagining something more like the Toronto streetcar system, which often just has span wires supporting the contact wires, and not much else. It leads to a bit of a spider web at intersections, but in straight sections it’s very unobtrusive. Ours by contrast seems to have an extraordinary amount of “extra” stuff up there, even more so where one segment gives way to the next. By the way, do you happen to know why they need multiple apparently redundant jumpers between the wires? In some places they really lead to a messy appearance. The system looks like a high-speed catenary, not urban transit.

At the same time I still wonder about anti-transit people who complain about the overhead. Where have they been all these years while Waterloo North Hydro installs above-ground instead of buried lines? Although I think my favourite was somebody who complained about the cost of the system, then said it should be elevated!

[Square]

19 or 37 km wouldn't touch Chongqing, with almost 100 km. There, there absolutely was no alternative - no other technology could handle the topology. Maybe back in 2011, 37 km would have put us at second longest? Osaka has 28 km and IIRC it was the longest before Chongqing.

Whenever I look down Charles from the Benton St. parking garage, I shake my head. The OCS/Catenary is so thick and dense. It's really about as ugly as you could possibly get.  And yet,people throw up their arms about a single, slender, smooth concrete beam. I'll never get it (and don't want to)!

Changsha, China just announced today that they're building their second maglev line! The first opened last year and was built completely domestically. It's the same type of system as Linimo in Aichi, Japan (my favourite!) - electromagnetic, where the train wraps around the guideway and uses electromagnets to lift up toward the T-shaped guideway from below.

Sadly, I don't believe I'll see any of this technology in my lifetime here.  I have my doubts now about high speed rail ever showing up here.

[Elmira Guy]

/\ I concur. I will be delightfully astounded if we see HSR between Waterloo Region in the next twenty years.

I guess I'll hope that in my next life I come back to this same part of the world.

I will be less surprised but surprised nonetheless if we see any significant increase in frequency of GO trains between here and Toronto within the next ten years.

[Canard]

Changsha' maglev isn't high speed (neither is Linimo). 100 km/h max. The advantage is significantly reduced maintenance (and a superior ride).

[tomh009]

/\ I concur. I will be delightfully astounded if we see HSR between Waterloo Region in the next twenty years.

I guess I'll hope that in my next life I come back to this same part of the world.

I will be less surprised but surprised nonetheless if we see any significant increase in frequency of GO trains between here and Toronto within the next ten years.

I, too, am pessimistic about high-speed rail.  Between track ownership, politics and costs, it's tough going, and so far all we have is talk, even with the additional federal infrastructure spending.

I do think we'll see all-day GO service by 2025, though.  And especially if they can do something about the level crossings, that would still be a significant improvement.