Location: Close enough to make a beer run during a TV timeout
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by GioforPM
The obvious danger of that suggestion: Zombies.
Fun fact for the day- the Ctrain tunnel does not go under the cemetery. It goes under MacLeod. Until very recently I thought it did as well.
If you go here: https://maps.calgary.ca/Crowchild/
And click on History: 1979 you can move the map over to see MacLeod. You will see it torn up as they are building the tunnel.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to ken0042 For This Useful Post:
Even if you look at current views from google maps, it turns towards Macleod before heading underground and is clearly coming from Macleod on the north side.
The Red Line will eventually go under 8th ave. A small amount of infrastructure is already there for that.
CP Rail/HSR tunnel is a non-starter. WAY too expensive for the benefit you would get. Virtually impossible to make it work to have significant benefit anyway.
Seems a little silly to only do one of the lines underground, but not both? Even if Blue/red are tripping over each other a little bit right now, it's not like they'd be able to increase the rush hour frequency of either by much if they were separate? For travelling within downtown, it's really nice to be able to hop onto either train any time of day...so it's one slight improvement at the cost of another, plus infrastructure costs...
If the tunnel runs under 8 ave right to City Hall, I'm curious how it routes down to Victoria Park station? Perhaps it's already starting to make the turn south at City Hall? I've never been able to find a drawing of what exists today, and what the original plan was (admittedly only ever tried a few google searches) - just keep finding the same few blog posts and tv news clips...
I know HSR is still pretty close to a pipe dream, but it would at least be prudent to plan a ROW accordingly. Perhaps self-driving cars actually make it moot, but it's also possible that self-driving cars turn out to be only as functional and revolutionary as segways (once touted as the greatest revolution in transportation since the combustion engine). It's possible that automation will not achieve the 360 degree speed/efficiency in all conditions that we expect...perhaps the long distance/linear advances will only be achievable in more closed/controlled systems (such as a railway ROW - and to be clear, I'm not even saying the physical tracks will be relevant to either passengers or freight). In other words, maybe autonomous vehicles top out at a really smooth/efficient 40kph in high density, 60 kph in med. density, and only 80 kph in low density (ie. HWY 1 - still an open system with lots of entrances, exits, variable conditions, and most importantly, human drivers)...
If autonomous vehicles cannot both:
1. Deal with weather conditions, including ice and wind gusts on winding roads
2. Deal with human operators
at speeds greater than 120kph, then they will be close to useless for long distance use across Canada, much of the USA, and much of Europe. But, I could imagine them easily getting over 150kph in ideal conditions by eliminating #2 (ie. a closed system), and still maintaining 100kph+ in adverse conditions.
I think it may be very important to have a good ROW running at least 4 directions in/out of any city's core.
Fun fact for the day- the Ctrain tunnel does not go under the cemetery. It goes under MacLeod. Until very recently I thought it did as well.
If you go here: https://maps.calgary.ca/Crowchild/
And click on History: 1979 you can move the map over to see MacLeod. You will see it torn up as they are building the tunnel.
That's just what they are telling you... I saw Poltergeist.
If the tunnel runs under 8 ave right to City Hall, I'm curious how it routes down to Victoria Park station? Perhaps it's already starting to make the turn south at City Hall? I've never been able to find a drawing of what exists today, and what the original plan was (admittedly only ever tried a few google searches) - just keep finding the same few blog posts and tv news clips...
You can see where the tunnel splits off from the current route in this video at around 1:01.
__________________
Turn up the good, turn down the suck!
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to getbak For This Useful Post:
Do we really even need a C-Train stop at City Hall? I mean, who would even use it? Its not like the City Councillors or the Mayor take the train, they all get sweet, sweet downtown parking.
Sounds like a wasted expense.
__________________ The Beatings Shall Continue Until Morale Improves!
This Post Has Been Distilled for the Eradication of Seemingly Incurable Sadness.
The World Ends when you're dead. Until then, you've got more punishment in store. - Flames Fans
If you thought this season would have a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention.
Do we really even need a C-Train stop at City Hall? I mean, who would even use it? Its not like the City Councillors or the Mayor take the train, they all get sweet, sweet downtown parking.
Sounds like a wasted expense.
What? the whole track would be adjusted if it went under 8th ave, including having to replace the 1st st. station. Of course it would be at City Hall, that was in the master plan.
What? the whole track would be adjusted if it went under 8th ave, including having to replace the 1st st. station. Of course it would be at City Hall, that was in the master plan.
I dont even know what to say. Green text?
__________________ The Beatings Shall Continue Until Morale Improves!
This Post Has Been Distilled for the Eradication of Seemingly Incurable Sadness.
The World Ends when you're dead. Until then, you've got more punishment in store. - Flames Fans
If you thought this season would have a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention.
Do we really even need a C-Train stop at City Hall? I mean, who would even use it? Its not like the City Councillors or the Mayor take the train, they all get sweet, sweet downtown parking.
Sounds like a wasted expense.
Bow valley college is right across, so I would say yes that station is pretty important.
Seems a little silly to only do one of the lines underground, but not both? Even if Blue/red are tripping over each other a little bit right now, it's not like they'd be able to increase the rush hour frequency of either by much if they were separate? For travelling within downtown, it's really nice to be able to hop onto either train any time of day...so it's one slight improvement at the cost of another, plus infrastructure costs...
The potential capacity increases would be significant. The bottleneck for both lines is 7th Ave. Separating the lines basically frees up a lot of headway. If you're on 7th Ave now, replace every Red Line train with a Blue Line Train (or vice versa), and the frequency increase would be noticeable.
Now that is just a potential capacity increase since actually maxing that frequency with the necessary cars would be a multi-billion dollar endeavor on it's own.
Seems a little silly to only do one of the lines underground, but not both? Even if Blue/red are tripping over each other a little bit right now, it's not like they'd be able to increase the rush hour frequency of either by much if they were separate? For travelling within downtown, it's really nice to be able to hop onto either train any time of day...so it's one slight improvement at the cost of another, plus infrastructure costs...
If the tunnel runs under 8 ave right to City Hall, I'm curious how it routes down to Victoria Park station? Perhaps it's already starting to make the turn south at City Hall? I've never been able to find a drawing of what exists today, and what the original plan was (admittedly only ever tried a few google searches) - just keep finding the same few blog posts and tv news clips...
The Blue line is much harder to get into the tunnel, especially at the east end, as it wasn’t planned for initially and when City Hall was built. The west side is going to be complicated anyway, but would be even more complicated if both lines had to come out of the tunnel. Now with the West line elevated track, the Blue line would have to get to grade before that.
Quote:
I know HSR is still pretty close to a pipe dream, but it would at least be prudent to plan a ROW accordingly. Perhaps self-driving cars actually make it moot, but it's also possible that self-driving cars turn out to be only as functional and revolutionary as segways (once touted as the greatest revolution in transportation since the combustion engine). It's possible that automation will not achieve the 360 degree speed/efficiency in all conditions that we expect...perhaps the long distance/linear advances will only be achievable in more closed/controlled systems (such as a railway ROW - and to be clear, I'm not even saying the physical tracks will be relevant to either passengers or freight). In other words, maybe autonomous vehicles top out at a really smooth/efficient 40kph in high density, 60 kph in med. density, and only 80 kph in low density (ie. HWY 1 - still an open system with lots of entrances, exits, variable conditions, and most importantly, human drivers)...
If autonomous vehicles cannot both:
1. Deal with weather conditions, including ice and wind gusts on winding roads
2. Deal with human operators
at speeds greater than 120kph, then they will be close to useless for long distance use across Canada, much of the USA, and much of Europe. But, I could imagine them easily getting over 150kph in ideal conditions by eliminating #2 (ie. a closed system), and still maintaining 100kph+ in adverse conditions.
I think it may be very important to have a good ROW running at least 4 directions in/out of any city's core.
Fully grade separated heavy rail along the CP rail line from the North and West isn’t all that complicated - much, much easier than tunneling it anywhere. There are very few level crossings as it is, and anything remotely close to a major crossing has already been pondered. The full route from the North, through downtown, and out to the west currently has these level crossings:
50th Ave N (serves a small area of industrial business park) - build underpass
41st Ave N (serves a small area of industrial area) - build underpass
40th Ave N - essentially an inessential dirt road here - easy to close.
17th Ave S - probably would just be closed
15th Street SE - underpass or closure
8th Street SE - likely be closed with the Green Line LRT anyway
11th Street SW - will likely get an underpass at some point anyway
32nd Ave NW - Either will be closed, or a simple underpass.
There’s a couple other pathway and service road crossings, nothing too serious.
You can see where the tunnel splits off from the current route in this video at around 1:01.
It would seem more apt for the Blue Line, then? It would be almost a 315 degree angle to turn back to Vic Park station from there? Compared to a 135 degree angle to link up with the Blue Line...
Probably a similar problem at the west end of DT, too?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roughneck
The potential capacity increases would be significant. The bottleneck for both lines is 7th Ave. Separating the lines basically frees up a lot of headway. If you're on 7th Ave now, replace every Red Line train with a Blue Line Train (or vice versa), and the frequency increase would be noticeable.
Now that is just a potential capacity increase since actually maxing that frequency with the necessary cars would be a multi-billion dollar endeavor on it's own.
Do we really need that massive of an increase? Wouldn't getting away from stop lights alone be enough that you could run both Red and Blue on the same line a whole lot more efficiently?
It all still seems crazy to me - I would have thought that drilling the actual tunnel would be the biggest expense? Building indoor stations and access points would of course be more expensive than what we have now, but by how much?
Seems a little silly to only do one of the lines underground, but not both? Even if Blue/red are tripping over each other a little bit right now, it's not like they'd be able to increase the rush hour frequency of either by much if they were separate? For travelling within downtown, it's really nice to be able to hop onto either train any time of day...so it's one slight improvement at the cost of another, plus infrastructure costs...
If the tunnel runs under 8 ave right to City Hall, I'm curious how it routes down to Victoria Park station? Perhaps it's already starting to make the turn south at City Hall? I've never been able to find a drawing of what exists today, and what the original plan was (admittedly only ever tried a few google searches) - just keep finding the same few blog posts and tv news clips...
Quote:
Originally Posted by powderjunkie
It would seem more apt for the Blue Line, then? It would be almost a 315 degree angle to turn back to Vic Park station from there? Compared to a 135 degree angle to link up with the Blue Line...
Probably a similar problem at the west end of DT, too?
Do we really need that massive of an increase? Wouldn't getting away from stop lights alone be enough that you could run both Red and Blue on the same line a whole lot more efficiently?
It all still seems crazy to me - I would have thought that drilling the actual tunnel would be the biggest expense? Building indoor stations and access points would of course be more expensive than what we have now, but by how much?
I used to have a more official drawing, but this is the rough location of the tunnel in blue, the partial station shell in green, and the existing line in red.
That is all of the tunnel infrastructure that exists.
On the east end, connecting the existing red line to the eventual fully-built 8th Avenue tunnel is (basically) as simple as taking down the cinderblock wall in the CP Tunnel.
The west end to connect the northwest line is much trickier, but not impossible.
There's been some other things brought up and discussed. Probably best to point-form my responses:
- The most important reason for building the 8th Avenue tunnel is to de-bottleneck 7th Avenue by not having the blue and red lines share track. It is a much bigger problem than them "tripping over each other a little bit." 7th Avenue is at (actually over) capacity and has been for a couple decades. Therefore, achievable ridership on all existing corridors is stunted. Theoretically, capacity on all existing lines would be doubled or more. Not all of that capacity may ever be needed, but a good lot of it is needed.
-The red line is the much better option to move into the tunnel. Firstly, the south line is already connected to the tunnel. The south line also has the highest ridership by a fair margin, and the west line has the least. Northwest and Northeast are about equal.
-Not sure about relative expense exactly, but the stations on a subway line would be much more complex and disruptive than boring the tunnels. More space and works near the surface are needed for the station boxes. In subways built in the past, large areas at the surface have been excavated to build the stations. This may be mitigated a bit by a newer technique of "mining" out the stations. Still complex and not absent of surface disruption though.
-You mentioned High Speed Rail to Banff. Honestly, the only high speed rail corridors that will ever make sense in Canada are Quebec City to Windsor and Calgary to Edmonton. Rail to Banff is a good idea, but it need not be (super) high speed rail for the traffic it will see and the distance it will cover. Rail to Banff, a return of Via rail, and commuter rail to the satellite communities can do with agreements and upgrades to the current surface heavy rail corridors. Land for station locations in Edmonton and Calgary and some right of way has been purchased by the Province of Alberta for a high speed rail line.
Last edited by frinkprof; 12-04-2018 at 07:46 PM.
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to frinkprof For This Useful Post:
I'm not sharing what I heard as this person was part of a closed door meeting. From what was mentioned to me is the news is coming in the new year. Was also informed there is some bad news that plays into the arena.
If mods want to message me directly to clarify I have no issue with that.
So we’re to start hammering F5 beginning January 1?
-You mentioned High Speed Rail to Banff. Honestly, the only high speed rail corridors that will ever make sense in Canada are Quebec City to Windsor and Calgary to Edmonton. Rail to Banff is a good idea, but it need not be (super) high speed rail for the traffic it will see and the distance it will cover. Rail to Banff, a return of Via rail, and commuter rail to the satellite communities can do with agreements and upgrades to the current surface heavy rail corridors. Land for station locations in Edmonton and Calgary and some right of way has been purchased by the Province of Alberta for a high speed rail line.
Between your drawing and looking at the video again, I see now that Red Line is plug and play in the east (I had made a false assumption that the tunnel ran perpendicular to the existing line, when it's clear in the video that they have already smoothed the corner out from 8th ave).
So it sounds like City Hall station is the only one bored out and remotely close to becoming a functional station? That was part of my thought process on the tunnel being a possibility for a long distance 'rail-like' option to escape the densest part of the core...no additional stations would be needed.
I should have been more specific that my mention of HSR was not at all specific to what we know today as HSR. As you've rightly said, the economics of neither HSR nor conventional passenger rail make much sense today or in the near future. What I'm imagining is a future where we determine that autonomous vehicles are safe, effective, and efficient as lower speeds in higher densities, but cannot guarantee the necessary safety at the higher speeds and extremely variable conditions involved in distance travel. Something like a hyperloop will likely have the same huge infrastructure costs that preclude it from being effective anywhere HSR is not already viable...
I'm wondering if there will be a middle ground - where something perhaps as simple as an enclosed 1 lane road (perhaps with a physical connection to vehicles instead of or in addition to tires/asphalt) would permit an autonomous vehicle (whether it could be a personal vehicle, or a conveyance specifically designed for this purpose) to travel at faster speeds because it would have almost no other variables to worry about (very limited opportunities to enter/exit the system). Adding a couple of 3M wide lanes parallel to existing train tracks could probably be achieved in a lot of places without a ton of disruption or expense (proportional to a full blown HSR...it's still going to cost a lot, but it would likely fit into most existing underpasses and need comparatively simple bridges)
Basically I'm talking about building a simple long distance toll highway (or BRT route, if you will). If personal vehicles could use it, then the exact place that it starts and ends isn't terribly important, as you would simply rejoin the regular system at that point.
To go further into this sci-fi land, I could imagine this being a situation where you are forming your own 'train' with other users. Once you enter and 'entrance zone', you are probably sitting for 5-10mins as other vehicles accumulate. The system arranges the vehicles in the most aerodynamic order, and they physically link up. The system finds the appropriate slot for your train to join the 'fast lane' (ie. the only lane for most of it, aside from form up/accelerate entrance points & decelerate/disengage exit points). Within each lane, everything is moving at the exact same speed and direction.
Two big challenges might be: you can't take the next exit to go pee, and you can't turn around to grab the ski boots you managed to forget. The former is solved with a low-tech wide-mouthed nalgene bottle; for the latter, you ask your robot butler to have a drone fly your ski boots to your destination, because it will be the future and that will all be easy.
-You mentioned High Speed Rail to Banff. Honestly, the only high speed rail corridors that will ever make sense in Canada are Quebec City to Windsor and Calgary to Edmonton. Rail to Banff is a good idea, but it need not be (super) high speed rail for the traffic it will see and the distance it will cover. Rail to Banff, a return of Via rail, and commuter rail to the satellite communities can do with agreements and upgrades to the current surface heavy rail corridors. Land for station locations in Edmonton and Calgary and some right of way has been purchased by the Province of Alberta for a high speed rail line.
If HSR isn't viable, I wouldn't mind either a dedicated autonomous car lane on the QEII (covered, maintained to maximize sensor safety), or possible adding the Boring Company's high-speed tunnel technology applied at ground level (moving cars on "skates" on a track; this is "Loop" technology, not "Hyperloop").
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Ozy_Flame For This Useful Post:
