Posts: 7,554
Threads: 36
Joined: Jun 2016
Reputation:
196
(05-03-2021, 06:48 PM)ac3r Wrote: (05-03-2021, 05:00 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: I dunno...have you seen Phase 1 ION?
While you might argue that some things weren't "missed"--that only bad choices were made i.e., not providing pedestrian access to transit stations. But other things absolutely were missed (Traynor access).
The LRT was a result of the region wanting to spend as little money as possible in order to reap the rewards of claiming they built an amazing rapid transit system as fast as possibly. It was a colossal fuck up, but they stood to make a lot of money off of it...which sadly is all that matters in the end. There's plenty of places along the LRT that could be improved, but alas, it would have cost money. The LRT was built to build condos and offices. Pedestrian access? No. Being able to turn a corner faster than a snail? No. They did the bare minimum.
Most of the issues I'm talking about are either free, or relatively inexpensive. Things like Traynor aren't expensive when done at the time, they were just missed because they didn't engage successfully with those people.
Things like pedestrian access are basically free, it's just a question of priorities.
Especially when it comes to road construction, it's often NOT money that is the obstacle, but priorities and competence of staff.
Posts: 4,297
Threads: 1
Joined: May 2015
Reputation:
178
(05-03-2021, 06:48 PM)ac3r Wrote: (05-03-2021, 05:00 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: I dunno...have you seen Phase 1 ION?
While you might argue that some things weren't "missed"--that only bad choices were made i.e., not providing pedestrian access to transit stations. But other things absolutely were missed (Traynor access).
The LRT was a result of the region wanting to spend as little money as possible in order to reap the rewards of claiming they built an amazing rapid transit system as fast as possibly. It was a colossal fuck up, but they stood to make a lot of money off of it...which sadly is all that matters in the end. There's plenty of places along the LRT that could be improved, but alas, it would have cost money. The LRT was built to build condos and offices. Pedestrian access? No. Being able to turn a corner faster than a snail? No. They did the bare minimum.
Around these boards, when people talk about mistakes or omissions from Ion they almost always are referring to definite screw-ups, not “wouldn’t it be nice to have a subway”. The incremental cost of the things that are pointed out around here is usually in the range of zero to trivial. They didn’t leave off the Traynor crossing because of cost-cutting; that was pure incompetence. East/north end access to Frederick station? Didn’t think about what was required and apply creativity to get a better result. And so on.
Probably by spending a bit more there are some areas that could have been improved, but even there, those issues aren’t why the LRT operates like a snail. There is almost straight track along Courtland that sees them move at a jogging pace, for example. Topping out not at the typical speed of traffic but at the speed limit on road sections is policy, not design.
Posts: 3,782
Threads: 61
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation:
186
(05-03-2021, 07:42 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: Around these boards, when people talk about mistakes or omissions from Ion they almost always are referring to definite screw-ups, not “wouldn’t it be nice to have a subway”. The incremental cost of the things that are pointed out around here is usually in the range of zero to trivial. They didn’t leave off the Traynor crossing because of cost-cutting; that was pure incompetence. East/north end access to Frederick station? Didn’t think about what was required and apply creativity to get a better result. And so on.
Probably by spending a bit more there are some areas that could have been improved, but even there, those issues aren’t why the LRT operates like a snail. There is almost straight track along Courtland that sees them move at a jogging pace, for example. Topping out not at the typical speed of traffic but at the speed limit on road sections is policy, not design.
The portion on Courtland boggles my mind. It goes sooooooooooo soooooooo soooo slow you'd think it was trying to descend down Mount Everest even before it gets to the two ridiculous 90ish degree turns on Hayward Ave. Why the hell does it need to slow down to 5 km/h for just to make these turns? I take it to work very often and think to myself...I could get out and jog from Block Line Station to Mill Station faster than the LRT takes to get around these corners and yet people on this forum tell me I don't know what I'm talking about?
Posts: 7,554
Threads: 36
Joined: Jun 2016
Reputation:
196
(05-03-2021, 08:46 PM)ac3r Wrote: (05-03-2021, 07:42 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: Around these boards, when people talk about mistakes or omissions from Ion they almost always are referring to definite screw-ups, not “wouldn’t it be nice to have a subway”. The incremental cost of the things that are pointed out around here is usually in the range of zero to trivial. They didn’t leave off the Traynor crossing because of cost-cutting; that was pure incompetence. East/north end access to Frederick station? Didn’t think about what was required and apply creativity to get a better result. And so on.
Probably by spending a bit more there are some areas that could have been improved, but even there, those issues aren’t why the LRT operates like a snail. There is almost straight track along Courtland that sees them move at a jogging pace, for example. Topping out not at the typical speed of traffic but at the speed limit on road sections is policy, not design.
The portion on Courtland boggles my mind. It goes sooooooooooo soooooooo soooo slow you'd think it was trying to descend down Mount Everest even before it gets to the two ridiculous 90ish degree turns on Hayward Ave. Why the hell does it need to slow down to 5 km/h for just to make these turns? I take it to work very often and think to myself...I could get out and jog from Block Line Station to Mill Station faster than the LRT takes to get around these corners and yet people on this forum tell me I don't know what I'm talking about?
Nobody is saying that the LRT doesn't go slowly here. It does, it's insane, idiotic. But it doesn't go slow because it's an LRT or because it has too many turns, or because it's not elevated. It goes slowly here because our engineers are...to be blunt...stupid. Yeah, I'm not a railway expert, but there is zero justification for the train going this slowly. It's a bad policy.
Posts: 313
Threads: 0
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
33
Has anyone asked why it goes so slow?
Posts: 4,297
Threads: 1
Joined: May 2015
Reputation:
178
05-04-2021, 07:42 AM
(This post was last modified: 05-04-2021, 07:46 AM by ijmorlan.)
(05-04-2021, 07:24 AM)creative Wrote: Has anyone asked why it goes so slow?
Probably, but experience shows that they aren’t responsive to questions. I would not expect to see any public explanation of that, and I would be very surprised to see any engagement at all with the details or with a deeper discussion. For example, suppose we had the following questions (paraphrased):
Q: why does the LRT go so slowly along Courtland?
A: for safety [wouldn’t expect to see this or any response, but they might say something vague like this]
Q: [supposing the previous reply was made] OK, but why specifically? There are lots of places more curved than that where it goes faster, and the cars on the adjacent road have no trouble going 50km/h faster than the LRT. What is different about this location?
A: … [would probably fall off my chair if I saw a meaningful reply here; my guess is the answer is some biffle-baffle about the curve at Hayward, but that is way too far away for that to make any sense]
I do understand that the LRT organization or any authority cannot be expected to engage indefinitely with argumentative questioners, but the above questions are entirely reasonable. Basically, I want the people running the place to act like people, not like robots. They should be pleased people are interested, and willing to actually re-think their opinions based on what they read; and responses shouldn’t just be PR babyfood but actual engagement. This is what I do at work every day: I often make a decision about how things need to work which doesn’t survive contact with client expectations; at which point I think some more.
Posts: 7,554
Threads: 36
Joined: Jun 2016
Reputation:
196
(05-04-2021, 07:42 AM)ijmorlan Wrote: (05-04-2021, 07:24 AM)creative Wrote: Has anyone asked why it goes so slow?
Probably, but experience shows that they aren’t responsive to questions. I would not expect to see any public explanation of that, and I would be very surprised to see any engagement at all with the details or with a deeper discussion. For example, suppose we had the following questions (paraphrased):
Q: why does the LRT go so slowly along Courtland?
A: for safety [wouldn’t expect to see this or any response, but they might say something vague like this]
Q: [supposing the previous reply was made] OK, but why specifically? There are lots of places more curved than that where it goes faster, and the cars on the adjacent road have no trouble going 50km/h faster than the LRT. What is different about this location?
A: … [would probably fall off my chair if I saw a meaningful reply here; my guess is the answer is some biffle-baffle about the curve at Hayward, but that is way too far away for that to make any sense]
I do understand that the LRT organization or any authority cannot be expected to engage indefinitely with argumentative questioners, but the above questions are entirely reasonable. Basically, I want the people running the place to act like people, not like robots. They should be pleased people are interested, and willing to actually re-think their opinions based on what they read; and responses shouldn’t just be PR babyfood but actual engagement. This is what I do at work every day: I often make a decision about how things need to work which doesn’t survive contact with client expectations; at which point I think some more.
Part of the problem, I suspect is that this is one of those things that someone somewhere decided...the people following the regulations now might also notunderstand the reasons, but have to follow them.
Certainly the drivers won't know, the OPs people probably don't either. Senior leadership MIGHT have an idea, but even if they felt it was wrong, they'd need to hire a P.Eng at exorbitant rates to evaluate if it's appropriate.
Posts: 313
Threads: 0
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
33
Posts: 7,554
Threads: 36
Joined: Jun 2016
Reputation:
196
05-04-2021, 09:17 AM
(This post was last modified: 05-04-2021, 09:17 AM by danbrotherston.)
(05-04-2021, 08:55 AM)creative Wrote: So the answer is No?
Can you define "ask".
What forum should we ask in? I've certainly tweeted the question before...and gotten no response.
Other's here may have done similar. Ultimately, there isn't a forum for the public to ask engineers these questions.
What *MIGHT* be worth asking is if any regional councillors (like Tom Galloway) have asked.
Posts: 313
Threads: 0
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
33
Have any regional councilors asked? Has any one reached out to there regional councilor to ask? It’s just really frustrating on this site when people complain about things or blame people without reaching out to find the why! I’m here to learn, not listen to endless complaining. I don’t use the Ion but I would still like to know why it runs so slow.
Posts: 711
Threads: 5
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
33
It seems that they have been doing weekend shutdowns of iON between Mill and Fairway to address some deficiency in that stretch. The most recent once was April 23rd. There was one in March and another one in January if I recall.
https://www.grt.ca/en/rider-information/...ption.aspx
May be a coincidence but I don't think any other segments have had this much work since opening.
Posts: 313
Threads: 0
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
33
Posts: 7,554
Threads: 36
Joined: Jun 2016
Reputation:
196
(05-04-2021, 11:09 AM)creative Wrote: Ion trains could move faster with tweaks to system
https://www.therecord.com/news/waterloo-...ystem.html
This is one specific section. But for example, the article mentions that the ION is restricted to 50km/h on road sections....even when that road has a 60km/h limit.
They won't answer this.
Posts: 711
Threads: 5
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
33
The only on road section along the route that is 60km/h is King North by Conestoga mall and Northfield. The distance is approx 1.3km so 2.6km/both ways.
2.6 mins if going the speed limit or 3.1 mins if going 50km/h its pretty insignificant.
Courtland I would consider off road but I do think it crawls far slower than 70km/h (or even 50km/h)
As was mentioned turns are very slow but I feel that the biggest time waste is the signal signal timing. I see the LRVs waiting for lights so often in the urban sections, specifically near stops. If this could be eliminated so that the schedule wasn't so conservative around them and there was true signal priority a fair bit could be cut off the trip time. They should be running it with a frequent schedule rather than trying to keep schedule adherence. If the vehicles were frequent enough they just would have to look at avoiding bunching rather than scheduled time adherence.
Posts: 7,554
Threads: 36
Joined: Jun 2016
Reputation:
196
(05-04-2021, 11:54 AM)neonjoe Wrote: The only on road section along the route that is 60km/h is King North by Conestoga mall and Northfield. The distance is approx 1.3km so 2.6km/both ways.
2.6 mins if going the speed limit or 3.1 mins if going 50km/h its pretty insignificant.
Courtland I would consider off road but I do think it crawls far slower than 70km/h (or even 50km/h)
As was mentioned turns are very slow but I feel that the biggest time waste is the signal signal timing. I see the LRVs waiting for lights so often in the urban sections, specifically near stops. If this could be eliminated so that the schedule wasn't so conservative around them and there was true signal priority a fair bit could be cut off the trip time. They should be running it with a frequent schedule rather than trying to keep schedule adherence. If the vehicles were frequent enough they just would have to look at avoiding bunching rather than scheduled time adherence.
Yes, I'm not expecting this to save minutes here, but the idea that the train, in the middle of a road of traffic going 70-90km/h (with a limit of 60km/h) is restricted to 50km/h is the kind of idiotic insanity that our engineers have implemented.
Courtland it appears that there are physical problems that are justifying the absurdly low limit, and those are being corrected. The same is not true on Northfield, it's just a normal expectation that the LRT will be 20-40% slower than driving for no reason.
You are right that signal timing should be improved. AFAIK the trains only get priority when they are behind schedule, which is absurd.
|
