[nfitz]

They've been doing very frequent test runs for a year and a half already, covering two winters. These are the final tests.

Ah okay, so test runs beginning Wednesday is Postmedia fiction.

Have they done trial running yet? Four to six weeks still seems short to me, for a brand new line, with new signals, new rolling stock, and new platform doors. And presumably a new operator (I don't know who operates this, and the Exo lines).

 

[NoahB]

Ah okay, so test runs beginning Wednesday is Postmedia fiction.

Have they done trial running yet? Four to six weeks still seems short to me, for a brand new line, with new signals, new rolling stock, and new platform doors. And presumably a new operator (I don't know who operates this, and the Exo lines).

The 30 days are for trial running. The CDPQ is required to notify the transit agencies 30-45 days before it opens.

As begratto said, They have been testing the trains and stations for the last two winters. They started testing at the end of 2020.

In the article below it talks about the various tests they need to do before commissioning. It says that the trial run is a month long. Note this was written before the delayed full-line commissioning schedule was announced.

5 Critical Pre-Commissioning Milestones

Overview of ongoing and upcoming tests this year

rem.info

 

[nfitz]

The 30 days are for trial running. The CDPQ is required to notify the transit agencies 30-45 days before it opens.

As begratto said, They have been testing the trains and stations for the last two winters. They started testing at the end of 2020.

In the article below it talks about the various tests they need to do before commissioning. It says that the trial run is a month long. Note this was written before the delayed full-line commissioning schedule was announced.

5 Critical Pre-Commissioning Milestones

Overview of ongoing and upcoming tests this year

rem.info

That sounds more optimistic - and it seems they've taken an extra 9 months to get to this point from the schedule there, so a good indication they are doing this properly and carefully.

Hopefully they don't make Ottawa's mistake of having the trial running fail, except for just a few days, and then launch anyway.

 

[Mind_the_gap]

I just wanted to share two very relevant (brilliant) posts by @Ricky from AgoraMtl, regarding testing:

Its 10 days in a row in which the equipment must show 95% reliability. So for example, if you get 9 days of perfect reliability followed by 1 of 90%, you must restart all days.

As for what 95% means, I have my doubts that means 5% of trips will have a noticeable issue. It probably includes things like trains throwing up faults that don’t affect service necessarily. Ill see if I can get a better explanation from a friend.

Source

And:

So I got the explanation of the 95% from someone with knowledge of the testing of the system.

The 95% corresponds to an availability of a subsystem to respond to an order from the system itself. So for example, when a train pulls into the station, the PSDs receive an order from the train to open. If that door does not open or otherwise does not function correctly, there is a downtime that is calculated based on how long it takes for the the component to get repaired and brought back to full functionality.

Example:

• 4 Stations with 16 doors each, for 20 hours a day = 1280 door/hours * 0.05 = 64 door-hours of downtime per day on the whole system. If for example a door throws up a fault that it didn’t open properly but then continues to work, it still needs to be checked and would count and each fault has an associated number of hours of work.

In this case, I asked if there is a differentiation between say a display screen going down and a train dying mid route, and the answer is kind of. So non-essential things like screens don’t necessarily prevent the system from operating, so 1 screen not working won’t really count, but there is an internal decision matrix that will determine when it does (often as it affects accessibility). A train that dies mid-route will still work based on the downtime principle, but because when a train goes down it takes a long time to remove the train from the tracks and then repair it to bring it back to service, it would certainly mean that the availability of the rolling stock subsystem goes below 95%. As of right now, they are running 6 trains at a time, so if one goes down they will quickly drop below 95%.

There was one other neat thing I was told, apparently the REM is designed to automatically a mini dry run on its own. I forgot to ask if this is a pre-opening only or will it happen in regular service, but apparently before the system opens, a train is supposed to run the system checking for faults. This occurred this morning for example prior to todays testing.

Source

 

[NoahB]

Dont think this was posted here. CDPQ Infra has been fine for multiple safety incidents on the REM construction sites. Examples include catenary installation experiments sliding down the tracks at 50km/h and crashing into each other, inadequate safety around the Mount Royal tunnel explosives, and various tradespeople not having proper safety equipment.

Réseau express métropolitain | Le constructeur mis à l’amende à répétition

Le constructeur du Réseau express métropolitain (REM) a été reconnu coupable, le printemps dernier, d’au moins dix infractions aux lois sur la santé et la sécurité du travail, en plus de recevoir trois nouvelles contraventions, a appris La Presse.

www.lapresse.ca

 

[CharmAlarm]

REM trains are moving on Montreal's South Shore, and residents say they're louder than expected​

REM trains are moving on Montreal's South Shore, and residents say they're louder than expected

The REM, Montreal's light rail system, is now in operation between between Brossard and Downtown. The trains are still empty as technicians approach the final phases of testing. However, with cars on the rails, some residents say it's louder than they expected.

montreal.ctvnews.ca

 

[CharmAlarm]

Et en francais:

Le bruit du REM provoque le mécontentement de citoyens

Le député Guillaume Cliche-Rivard demande des mesures d’atténuation rapides de la part de CDPQ Infra.

ici.radio-canada.ca

 

[ARG1]

https://www.lapresse.ca/actualites/...de-l-est/100-souterrain-pour-36-milliards.php

The government is seriously looking at making REM de l'Est fully underground, which will have a total cost of $36B

Here's the Map:

1 note:

WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU MONTREAL????????

 

[Pacer]

https://www.lapresse.ca/actualites/...de-l-est/100-souterrain-pour-36-milliards.php

The government is seriously looking at making REM de l'Est fully underground, which will have a total cost of $36B

Here's the Map:

1 note:

WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU MONTREAL????????

What a sure fire way to kill a project. Let's file this report with the rest.

 

[p_xavier]

https://www.lapresse.ca/actualites/...de-l-est/100-souterrain-pour-36-milliards.php

The government is seriously looking at making REM de l'Est fully underground, which will have a total cost of $36B

Here's the Map:

1 note:

WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU MONTREAL????????

Not the government but a team that was meant to optimize the project and failed spectacularly. This project will never happen, this is what "experts" come out with other people's money. Best bet is that it's dead or a glimmer of hope is the premier will scold them and get back to the CDPQi's original plan.

 

[nfitz]

https://www.lapresse.ca/actualites/...de-l-est/100-souterrain-pour-36-milliards.php

The government is seriously looking at making REM de l'Est fully underground, which will have a total cost of $36B

The recommended project (the lighter yellow-green) looks identical to the old Line 7 (white line) proposal - other than an extra station south of the Orange Line (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Line_(Montreal_Metro))

They've been looking at that on and off for 70 years! They were pretty serious about this 40 years ago when they put it on the map in all the trains.

 

[robmausser]

Its amazing that a city that got it so right with REM Phase 1 could fail so spectacularly at phase 2

 

[nfitz]

Its amazing that a city that got it so right with REM Phase 1 could fail so spectacularly at phase 2

This is supposed to be a completely different technology. And not on mostly existing right of way, industrial areas, or along expressways.

 

[DirectionNorth]

This is supposed to be a completely different technology. And not on mostly existing right of way, industrial areas, or along expressways.

REM de l'Est was going to be the same technology, partially along urban stroads (Rene Levesque) and rail corridors (Montreal Est).

The cancellation (well, technically the city took over) of the project and replacing it with a 3.5x more expensive project that's smaller and less useful (that happens to use a different technology), is certainly a failure.

 

[Northern Light]

REM de l'Est was going to be the same technology, partially along urban stroads (Rene Levesque) and rail corridors (Montreal Est).

The cancellation (well, technically the city took over) of the project and replacing it with a 3.5x more expensive project that's smaller and less useful (that happens to use a different technology), is certainly a failure.

Here's the thing.............

Just like every time someone says a bus would be more cost-efficient than an LRT.......

And maybe they're right, we all recognize that people prefer transit on rails.

Perhaps we should be equally cognizant that people are not happy w/elevated rail lines.

That doesn't mean they should never be done, but its something to be intuitively aware of......

Ultimately, not everything is about the most technically correct decision, its about what the community will accept.

I think people can be sold on elevated in many cases, but we also need to recognize when that isn't going to work.

I'm not going to defend a 36B solution (which, for the record, I think is going nowhere fast); I'm simply saying, people reflexively applaud some things w/o asking....but does anyone actually like it (statistically speaking)

****

Here's a thought, if the incredibly awful elevated downtown Montreal section hadn't been proposed, thing thing would have gone ahead as elevated elsewhere, and presumably underground in downtown.

The choice to propose something that was near riot-inducingly stupid led to the nonsense we're seeing now.

First by highlighting the drawbacks of elevated and second by showing the public could push back and kill elevated.

Self-inflicted wound.

Take note Toronto.