[officedweller]

Smallspy is just referencing the process of exitting and entering the train - not headways generally (so not crowding on platforms, not crossovers at terminus stations, etc.). So number and width of doors in proportion to the length, not the length itself, are important.
Add to that, the internal configuration of the seats (longitudinal or transverse), setback of leaning areas inside the doorways, placement of handholds/poles and bike and wheelchair spaces on the trains which may impede flow on and off of the trains (where people crowd inside the cars).

 

[Kyle Campbell]

How realistic, assuming proper vertical movement and doors, is the 30k? Line 1 often exceeds it's design capacity, but I kind of feel like these days capacity planners wear rosier glasses then they did in days past. They often rely on extremely tight headways to make those capacity numbers

 

[nfitz]

How realistic, assuming proper vertical movement and doors, is the 30k? Line 1 often exceeds it's design capacity, but I kind of feel like these days capacity planners wear rosier glasses then they did in days past. They often rely on extremely tight headways to make those capacity numbers

Every 90 seconds isn't unusual for a modern system. Even the existing lines with the old signalling system can easily sustain every 140 seconds. Didn't they achieve 31 trains an hour through Bloor with their gap trains stored at Davisville - which is the bottleneck - pre-Covid.

In London they have some of old tube lines down to every 100 seconds at peak.

Isn't Vancouver to sustain every 90 seconds, with a theoretical every 75 seconds?

 

[Kyle Campbell]

Every 90 seconds isn't unusual for a modern system. Even the existing lines with the old signalling system can easily sustain every 140 seconds. Didn't they achieve 31 trains an hour through Bloor with their gap trains stored at Davisville - which is the bottleneck - pre-Covid.

In London they have some of old tube lines down to every 100 seconds at peak.

Isn't Vancouver to sustain every 90 seconds, with a theoretical every 75 seconds?

The 90 seconds is achievable yes. I just mean it's a number given by on paper crush loads and very tight headways. It's also higher than Line 1 which runs trains 33% longer and a 0.2m wider at a still quite respectable design limit of 128 seconds. It's also a fair bit higher than the theoretical max capacity of the Expo line running 5 car Mark V trains at 98 seconds.

I just feel like the numbers very optimistic, not so much in the frequency, but in the actual passenger capacity .

 

[nfitz]

The 90 seconds is achievable yes. I just mean it's a number given by on paper crush loads and very tight headways. It's also higher than Line 1 which runs trains 33% longer and a 0.2m wider at a still quite respectable design limit of 128 seconds.

It has nothing to do with the length or width of the car; it has everything to do with the door spacing and size. And what the percent/volume of passenger changeover is.

Also, they never design for crush loads. That slows down the dwell time a lot. They design for peak loads. Sure, you can shove more people in a train, until you are at the point that people have to get off, just to let the person off. And if a train is only scheduled once per hour that would maximize ridership.

But as soon as you get to very frequent service, your capacity is greater with less people in the car.

Which is why the TTC always publishes (and designs service) to the peak load for a vehicle. Not the crush load.

 

[officedweller]

A while back some people were asking about how a TBM transits an open station box excavation.
Here's graphic posted today for the Broadway Subway extension in Vancouver mentioning that only half tunnel rings are needed.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1917277915898654914

 

[81-717]

It has nothing to do with the length or width of the car; it has everything to do with the door spacing and size. And what the percent/volume of passenger changeover is.

How does it not have anything to do with the length & width of the car? Assuming equal number of doors & equal volume of people passing through them, and equal % passenger changeover, if the total number of people on the train is different, how would that not affect things?

 

[smallspy]

Every 90 seconds isn't unusual for a modern system. Even the existing lines with the old signalling system can easily sustain every 140 seconds. Didn't they achieve 31 trains an hour through Bloor with their gap trains stored at Davisville - which is the bottleneck - pre-Covid.

In a modern system built from the ground-up for it? It can happen, but it's uncommon enough that I wouldn't call it "not unusual".

In London they have some of old tube lines down to every 100 seconds at peak.

Only on one line that has had massive investments to the track configuration, power and signals - the Victoria Line. All the rest of the deep-tube and sub-surface lines are running far less frequently than that, with upgrades scheduled to try and get them to 120 second headways.

Isn't Vancouver to sustain every 90 seconds, with a theoretical every 75 seconds?

Vancouver has only run that kind of headway for very short spurts, such as after special events. The current headways at rush hour are more like every 135 seconds on the joint section of the Expo Line.

Dan

 

[81-717]

The size or lack thereof of any train has no bearing on how easy or hard it will be to load or unload the train. The number of doors per length of train and the size of those doors are what matter.

If the TTC were to order a train that had 5 doorways per car instead of 4, and the total length of those doorways was greater than that of the T1s and TRs, then the TTC would find it easier to decrease their headways (keeping in mind that there are existing limitations with the rail geometry on the system).

It has nothing to do with the length or width of the car; it has everything to do with the door spacing and size.

Are these doors big enough (the absolute maximum possible size (Ultra Pro Max™) vs. that of the T1)? They might as well do this then.


Or this (absolute minimum possible door spacing):


In both cases the ratio of total door length vs total train length is 1/2, the maximum possible value. While I personally am not a fan of plug-type doors or sliding doors that are on the exterior of the carbody (like on the original G-car prototype), they seem to be becoming more popular in other subway systems, and eliminate the need for door pockets (thus allowing extra room for windows between doors), but they still don't allow a ratio of higher than 1/2 since the doors from adjacent doorways would collide with each other.

 

[officedweller]

Gull wing!!
Stand clear of the doors!!
(miniature zoo train)

https://flic.kr/p/2n3ic13

https://flic.kr/p/2n3jB2Z

RapidoRail Systems 15" APT-E

 

[nfitz]

London Metropolitan Line

 

[nfitz]

How does it not have anything to do with the length & width of the car?

Fair enough - with can be an issue. But if there's a 4-car train or 6-car train with peak capacity, and a 50% change-over, then it's not going to make a difference. The doors are the bottleneck, and the egress time doesn't change.

(the assumption is that there are less people on the platform for a smaller train - if there were more, then that's a completely different issue.

Vancouver has only run that kind of headway for very short spurts, such as after special events. The current headways at rush hour are more like every 135 seconds on the joint section of the Expo Line.

I've waited a lot longer than that for the Canada Line after special events. However that's probably a different issue.

The Skytrain lines aren't at capacity yet. I thought they had the ability to increase the frequency on the Expo and Millennium lines. Though presumably they hope that day never comes, as it only takes the slightest hiccup for the whole thing to become messy (as on the Yonge line pre-Covid).

 

[smallspy]

The Skytrain lines aren't at capacity yet. I thought they had the ability to increase the frequency on the Expo and Millennium lines. Though presumably they hope that day never comes, as it only takes the slightest hiccup for the whole thing to become messy (as on the Yonge line pre-Covid).

Pre-COVID, they were very close. That's why they're currently undergoing the whole ordeal of having purchased a brand new train fleet that is longer than any of the existing configurations - and all of the resultant changes elsewhere through their system to handle them.

Dan

 

[skycandy]

Not sure but I assume this is the proper thread for this? Dundas St bridge demolition (near Logan) going gangbusters this weekend (west side only as new east side bridge is nearing completion).

 

[kotsy]

Dundas Bridge demolition

Riverdale Shopping Centre Demolition/Gerrard Portal

East Harbour Station

Lower Don Portal

Corktown Station

Moss Park

King-Bathurst

Exhibition Station North Entrance

and portal