ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit

[ac3r]

That may be the case. I know for a while, ATC was not working so the drivers were doing everything manually, but then that got fixed so I always assumed that they gained some speed since the driver was no longer needing to rely on signals/signs and entirely manual operation. It still goes ridiculously slow in certain areas though, particularly when it involves a turn or approaching at a grade crossing.

[danbrotherston]

The buses are faster for many loactions but then you feel like you're a rock in a shoebox being shaken around when you're in one. You feel every single bump. I find that really annoying since I am usually reading a book on the bus and that makes it hard. I'd prefer to spend an extra 10 minutes commuting by using the LRT for the majority of my trip versus a bus.

The buses can be faster, however, that's for sure. From where I usually live in Kitchener, the number 8 gets me downtown faster than any other bus or the LRT. But, unless I felt like sleeping in a little longer, I just take the 206 and transfer to the LRT for the more comfortable ride. Better seats, smoother ride, free wifi and more warmth.

Overall, the trains should be going faster and I'd love to hear what their engineers have to say as to why they can't seem to achieve that, but who knows if they'll ever address that at this point.

I was on the bus for the first time in a long time this past weekend and the thing I had forgotten about was just how loud it is. The LRT is so much more pleasant. It might just be me imagination, but I also though the train was going faster along King than when it first started.

Loudness of buses is a problem, although not one that is constrained to buses, (cars are noisy and that is one way in which they make our cities less livable).

But electric buses eliminate a lot of the noise you experience riding the bus. Heck, hybrid buses achieve this as well.

[KevinT]

That may be the case. I know for a while, ATC was not working so the drivers were doing everything manually, but then that got fixed so I always assumed that they gained some speed since the driver was no longer needing to rely on signals/signs and entirely manual operation. It still goes ridiculously slow in certain areas though, particularly when it involves a turn or approaching at a grade crossing.

ATC is only active for the off-street sections (Erb to Northfield, Ottawa to Fairway), on King it's still up to the operators. Unfortunately the ATC is still wonky for Hayward to Block Line. The southbound trains slow to ridiculous to cross the creek bridge 300 metres before they even get to Hayward, and northbound trains crawl from Block Line station to Hayward. They were faster when driven manually, and the powers that be seem to have no appetite to do anything about it.

The programming on the crossing gates needs tweaking too. I seem to recall that Transport Canada requires that the gates be fully down (solid lunar signal for the LRV drivers) 5 seconds (maybe even just 4) before the train arrives at the crossing, and I've counted 25 seconds at the Courtland/Balzer crossing on many occasions. The gate can also go back up 2 seconds after the train has cleared the crossing, and at most of the crossings I've observed they're quite poor on this metric as well. Drivers would be a lot less pissed off if they could get these dialed in, but again, no appetite to do anything.

[danbrotherston]

That may be the case. I know for a while, ATC was not working so the drivers were doing everything manually, but then that got fixed so I always assumed that they gained some speed since the driver was no longer needing to rely on signals/signs and entirely manual operation. It still goes ridiculously slow in certain areas though, particularly when it involves a turn or approaching at a grade crossing.

ATC is only active for the off-street sections (Erb to Northfield, Ottawa to Fairway), on King it's still up to the operators. Unfortunately the ATC is still wonky for Hayward to Block Line. The southbound trains slow to ridiculous to cross the creek bridge 300 metres before they even get to Hayward, and northbound trains crawl from Block Line station to Hayward. They were faster when driven manually, and the powers that be seem to have no appetite to do anything about it.

The programming on the crossing gates needs tweaking too. I seem to recall that Transport Canada requires that the gates be fully down (solid lunar signal for the LRV drivers) 5 seconds (maybe even just 4) before the train arrives at the crossing, and I've counted 25 seconds at the Courtland/Balzer crossing on many occasions. The gate can also go back up 2 seconds after the train has cleared the crossing, and at most of the crossings I've observed they're quite poor on this metric as well. Drivers would be a lot less pissed off if they could get these dialed in, but again, no appetite to do anything.

Perhaps our DBMOF contract didn't have the proper performance penalties here.

Which isn't a surprise, given that writing a complete contract is basically impossible.

[ijmorlan]

The programming on the crossing gates needs tweaking too. I seem to recall that Transport Canada requires that the gates be fully down (solid lunar signal for the LRV drivers) 5 seconds (maybe even just 4) before the train arrives at the crossing, and I've counted 25 seconds at the Courtland/Balzer crossing on many occasions. The gate can also go back up 2 seconds after the train has cleared the crossing, and at most of the crossings I've observed they're quite poor on this metric as well. Drivers would be a lot less pissed off if they could get these dialed in, but again, no appetite to do anything.

Should be 0, as far as I’m concerned, or even while the train is still fouling the sidewalk. There is a fundamental asymmetry between arriving and departing.

But 25s is really outrageous. I’m all in favour of transit priority, probably to an extent which would be considered fairly radical outside of this board, but if non-transit traffic is to be delayed it should be for an actual reason, not just sloppy and lazy implementation.

[danbrotherston]

The programming on the crossing gates needs tweaking too. I seem to recall that Transport Canada requires that the gates be fully down (solid lunar signal for the LRV drivers) 5 seconds (maybe even just 4) before the train arrives at the crossing, and I've counted 25 seconds at the Courtland/Balzer crossing on many occasions. The gate can also go back up 2 seconds after the train has cleared the crossing, and at most of the crossings I've observed they're quite poor on this metric as well. Drivers would be a lot less pissed off if they could get these dialed in, but again, no appetite to do anything.

Should be 0, as far as I’m concerned, or even while the train is still fouling the sidewalk. There is a fundamental asymmetry between arriving and departing.

But 25s is really outrageous. I’m all in favour of transit priority, probably to an extent which would be considered fairly radical outside of this board, but if non-transit traffic is to be delayed it should be for an actual reason, not just sloppy and lazy implementation.

Or even the road. There is no gate needed when the train is there because the train blocks the crossing.

[ijmorlan]

Or even the road. There is no gate needed when the train is there because the train blocks the crossing.

I have mused about that myself. On the one hand, I’m concerned that people would have a tendency to go when the gates rise; on the other hand, if this were universal, everybody would know (not just intellectually, but in their habits and unconscious expectations) that you don’t go when the gates rise; plus as you point out there would be a great big honking (literally!) train occupying the crossing. And getting people out of the habit of going when the gates rise would be a benefit at locations where there are both regular traffic lights and railway crossing protection.

The one tricky bit would be the situation where the train stops while it’s partially fouling the crossing and then reverses. The gates would of course go down again before it starts moving but in the meantime people might try to sneak past centimetres from the end of the train.

[danbrotherston]

Or even the road. There is no gate needed when the train is there because the train blocks the crossing.

I have mused about that myself. On the one hand, I’m concerned that people would have a tendency to go when the gates rise; on the other hand, if this were universal, everybody would know (not just intellectually, but in their habits and unconscious expectations) that you don’t go when the gates rise; plus as you point out there would be a great big honking (literally!) train occupying the crossing. And getting people out of the habit of going when the gates rise would be a benefit at locations where there are both regular traffic lights and railway crossing protection.

The one tricky bit would be the situation where the train stops while it’s partially fouling the crossing and then reverses. The gates would of course go down again before it starts moving but in the meantime people might try to sneak past centimetres from the end of the train.

I'd say that if a person is paying so little attention to their surroundings, that when the gates go up they drive straight into the side of a train, well, frankly, I'm glad they've destroyed their vehicle in a way that is unlikely to injure someone.  Of course pedestrians may do the same thing.

But, I think the LRT is again, different from a train, especially a freight train, which is significantly more dangerous to even be near, and may have flat cars and other things which could be missed. Again, part of the problem is in treating the LRT the same as the train.

I suspect a significant problem with our road systems is oversimplification. Which is ironic, given over complication is also a problem. But various readings of occam's razor and related quotes all generally include "only as complicated as necessary"...oversimplification as we see it here introduces additional complexity by trying to unnaturally force unlike objects into the same category in the quest to have fewer categories. Same with bikes and cars (or bikes and pedestrians).

[ac3r]

Police investigating collision involving pedestrian, LRT: https://kitchener.ctvnews.ca/police-inve...-1.5708952

[dtkvictim]

Police investigating collision involving pedestrian, LRT: https://kitchener.ctvnews.ca/police-inve...-1.5708952

I noticed as a result of this that stations near the other end of the line (where service was still running) don't display the expected departure time. Does this always happen in the case of service disruption? It seems like they could do better, as others at the station were confused if trains were still running or not.

[jeffster]

Police investigating collision involving pedestrian, LRT: https://kitchener.ctvnews.ca/police-inve...-1.5708952

Unsure if some simply don’t understand physics — trains can’t stop on a dime, too damned heavy. Luckily she wasn’t hurt badly.

[ijmorlan]

Police investigating collision involving pedestrian, LRT: https://kitchener.ctvnews.ca/police-inve...-1.5708952

Unsure if some simply don’t understand physics — trains can’t stop on a dime, too damned heavy. Luckily she wasn’t hurt badly.

Not just physics — politeness and ethics neither. Even if it could stop, it wouldn’t be fair to the occupants of the train to make it do so.

[ac3r]

I've been on the LRT when it has had to slam on the brakes hard. It's jarring experience, especially when it's full and people are standing.

[ijmorlan]

I've been on the LRT when it has had to slam on the brakes hard. It's jarring experience, especially when it's full and people are standing.

I would go so far as to say that in some circumstances the train should not use its emergency brakes. If a toddler runs out from the sidewalk onto a street-running section then emergency brake application is appropriate; but if people are trespassing on an exclusive right of way section, then they’re responsible for their own injuries and/or death and have no business imposing injuries and/or death on fragile occupants of the train.

[Acitta]

I've been on the LRT when it has had to slam on the brakes hard. It's jarring experience, especially when it's full and people are standing.

I would go so far as to say that in some circumstances the train should not use its emergency brakes. If a toddler runs out from the sidewalk onto a street-running section then emergency brake application is appropriate; but if people are trespassing on an exclusive right of way section, then they’re responsible for their own injuries and/or death and have no business imposing injuries and/or death on fragile occupants of the train.

Except that it would take an emotional toll on the operator no matter who is at fault.