fromyeg
Active Member
Will we be getting more Siemens LRVs?
Which other manufacturers produce LRVs that are compatible with the existing fleet?
|
|
|
Siemens (S200), Alstom (Citadis & Flexity), Stadler (CITYLINK), CAF (They might hate Alberta now), Hyundai Rotem?...Will we be getting more Siemens LRVs?
Which other manufacturers produce LRVs that are compatible with the existing fleet?
No. I can only confirm 100% no pass through trains, and that they're heavily considering longer cars depending on what comes back from the RFP.
My guess is that they're going with option #3.View attachment 596960
I would assume the plan will be to go with Siemens S200 trains, like what they have in St. Louis and Calgary.
View attachment 596972
Yeah bench seating is the highest capacity. People like front back seats though, and the input received leaned mostly towards the hybrid option. It's still higher capacity than the current seating arrangement. Reminds me of an Embraer seating layout.Wow, that hybrid seat layout is really.. quaint. Haven't seen something like that on a metro in ages! Doesn't bench seating along the sides offer a much greater overall capacity without reducing the number of seats much?
Seems like it would be the wiser choice if the trains are getting crushed with users at commute times.
The last purchase of SkyTrain cars (the Mark IV) has 2x1 seating and they offer a tonne of standing room. The newer Mark V has an unusual combination of forward facing seats opposite a bench of sideways facing seats.Wow, that hybrid seat layout is really.. quaint. Haven't seen something like that on a metro in ages! Doesn't bench seating along the sides offer a much greater overall capacity without reducing the number of seats much?
Seems like it would be the wiser choice if the trains are getting crushed with users at commute times.
I think alot of the public likes the forward seats when the trains aren't super full, which with our LRT system is most of the day outside of rush hour.Yeah bench seating is the highest capacity. People like front back seats though, and the input received leaned mostly towards the hybrid option. It's still higher capacity than the current seating arrangement. Reminds me of an Embraer seating layout.
Siemens (S200), Alstom (Citadis & Flexity), Stadler (CITYLINK), CAF (They might hate Alberta now), Hyundai Rotem?...
I'd p
wow, a complete lack of hanging straps, lots of space for standees though, and in hindsight, yeah good for a cyclist to control their bike in tranist...The last purchase of SkyTrain cars (the Mark IV) has 2x1 seating and they offer a tonne of standing room. The newer Mark V has an unusual combination of forward facing seats opposite a bench of sideways facing seats.
Kinki Sharyo also comes to mind. Not sure is Hitachi is still doing LRV's, but they acquired AnsaldoBreda who had built cars for more recently Los Angeles, but also for San Francisco and the MBTA to replace their Boeing's. Well, I guess replacing Boeing LRV's isn't terribly recent now, that was 24 years ago for MBTA.Siemens (S200), Alstom (Citadis & Flexity), Stadler (CITYLINK), CAF (They might hate Alberta now), Hyundai Rotem?...
I'd prefer the S200 and AlstomU5 type Flexity.
If this is the plan (as has been noted elsewhere) closing coliseum, then why a refurb? Build the 2 new stations and not waste another cent on coliseum.iseums
New stations would be great for the area.
Stadium Station redesign sees calls for service drop by 50%
Edmonton's head of transit said a redesign that emphasizes visibility has turned one of the least safe LRT stations in the city into one of the safest.edmonton.taproot.news
Elaborating more on WEM: Originally planned as a rebuild in 2014 for the 2015-2018 Capital Budget cycle, but while approved, it was only on the condition that admin had to come back with other options in light of future LRT in 2015. Admin came back recommending saving $1.4 million by refurbishing the transit centre building rather than building a new building. The $1.4 million would be made available to other projects. Council approved April 2015... I haven't tracked down any council documents that explain how the hell we ended up building a whole new structure only to completely tear it down 4 years later. The only items that were saved were some of the furniture, although, the glass might have been reusable at other locations.If this is the plan (as has been noted elsewhere) closing coliseum, then why a refurb? Build the 2 new stations and not waste another cent on coliseum.
Anybody else remember the West Edmonton Mall station refurbishment, then demolition for the new lrt station. They already had the plans, should have built it and forgot the refurb? I'm, impressed with the waste in this city...
I think part of the problem is the uncertainty of transit funding cycles. They could hold off on refurbishing the station because they plan to demolish and build two new ones, but then we could end up with 20 years of frugal councils who decline to fund demolition and two new stations. Would you be happy if the station remained untouched for 20 more years? Conversely, recognizing that council has no money on the horizon, they could decide to refurbish it in two years and then a year after that the Feds release a funding program for remodeling old transit lines across Canada. Should they pass on building the two new stations because they had just refurbished the Coliseum station?If this is the plan (as has been noted elsewhere) closing coliseum, then why a refurb? Build the 2 new stations and not waste another cent on coliseum.
Anybody else remember the West Edmonton Mall station refurbishment, then demolition for the new lrt station. They already had the plans, should have built it and forgot the refurb? I'm, impressed with the waste in this city...