[frinkprof]

Sorry for the delayed response, been busy.

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Great numbers, and it does put my mind at ease a bit,but consider a few things:

Calgary Transit estimates PRACTICAL single direction capacity per car is actually 162. 162 people x 3 cars per train x 10 trains per hour = 4860 capacity.

A full train (shoulder-to-shoulder) would be = 226 x 3 cars per train x 10 trains per hour = 6780 capacity.

Of course, this is assuming three cars, and that we are using the newer models, which half the trains are not (Older models have a load capacity of 200). Therefore, lets assume, to support your side of the argument, half are old trains, half are new:

200 x 3 x 5 = 3,000
226 x 3 x 5 = 3,390

Which is to say, 6390. Slightly smaller, but still a difference.

As someone above noted, I was comparing apples to apples (well sort of, considering many assumptions which worked against my own argument, 112, 108 routes being replaced mostly with reworked bus routes, handicapping the new train route's headway, etc.). Crush load to crush load. Not sure why you're bringing "practical" numbers into this for only one side. Do you or do you not currently board predominantly crush-loaded buses (which I understand the 101, 104 and 301 buses to currently be during rush hour)?

I concede the older trains with less capacity point. Meant to account for that in my previous numbers.

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Now, that is assuming 3 cars. Of course, 4 cars would increase load capacity, but now they will likely be delayed until at least 2014.

4 car train implementation was never going to happen by the time West LRT opened, nor was it necessary to be (at least not for the purposes of the low West LRT catchment and projected ridership - for the south line, certainly). Not sure if that's what you are implying, but that's how I'm reading what you've said.

It has been delayed though. Probably until 2015 from the original timeline of 2014.

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

You also forgot to add the 72 / 73 crowd, which also feeds through the West LRT area, and many regulars will adjust now to take these buses to catch the LRT route downtown. Let's assume half of each bus gets off at Westbrook to go downtown, and that 6 buses run during peak hour:

2 bus routes x 12 buses per hour x 35 passengers : 840 extra passengers.

So, 4,445 + 840 = 5285 passengers per hour.

This number doesn't include the "snow crowd" that take the LRT on cold days because they don't want to drive. So lets bump that up to about 6,000 assuming 700 more fair-weathered transit users.

These two factors are being added to one side of the ledger (post LRT) but they are existing conditions which influence the current bus ridership in the catchment area. I have assumed in my comparison (incorrectly in favour of your side of the argument I will add) that all current buses in the catchment area are running crushloaded (i.e. no more people can fit on). You are then taking those numbers and adding people to them, which is impossible. I don't recall any "snow crowd" people hopping on the roof of a 104 departing the core at 17:30.

This leaves pent up demand as the X factor (those who are currently waiting on either any increased capacity that LRT would bring or people who would take an LRT but not a bus). Growth over time too of course, which you've noted. I would contend that these two factors together will not amount to significant crowding issues between the time of opening and the time of capacity improvements brought by 4 LRV trains and 8th Avenue Subway.

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

But I hate crowds, I hate standing shoulder-to-shoulder with people, and I don't exactly see how this is going to improve my commute.

Do you currently stand shoulder-to-shoulder on the buses? If so, would you then agree that my assumption using crushload numbers for both pre and post LRT would result in less crowding post LRT? If you don't currently experience crushloads on buses, would you then agree that it is an even better scenario (from a "crowding" perspective) post LRT?

Originally Posted by Muta

Cool numbers, but did you mean Ozy? LOL.

I suppose I did, but it seems not to matter in this case. I think you share pretty much a carbon-copy opinion.

Originally Posted by Muta

Tell you what frink, you are an intelligent poster; however, if my commute to work turns out to be just downright more inconvenient when the train opens, I will let you know. Deal? I think that is pretty fair.

Fair indeed. Will you also share the results if it is more convenient or little perceivable change?