[Kyle Campbell]

Btw what happened to the capacity concerns with the REM? Will it be possible to expand the platforms in the future?

Not without major rebuild. I believe frequency is their only solution. Of course if you believe their claims then the REM can move a lot more people than TTC's Line 1. I'd take that with a grain (or maybe a whole spoonful) of salt.

Edit: After reading closer I see they mean over the entire rush hour for a single segment not 42k pphd. Seems an odd measurement for capacity. By that measurement, it's actually a good deal more then the confederation line (28k over 3 hours in a single direction) and much less than TTC Line 1 at around 98k

The REM, seating and capacity | REM

rem.info

 

[Streety McCarface]

Not without major rebuild. I believe frequency is their only solution. Of course if you believe their claims then the REM can move a lot more people than TTC's Line 1. I'd take that with a grain (or maybe a whole spoonful) of salt.

Edit: After reading closer I see they mean over the entire rush hour for a single segment not 42k pphd. Seems an odd measurement for capacity. By that measurement, it's actually a good deal more then the confederation line (28k over 3 hours in a single direction) and much less than TTC Line 1 at around 98k

The REM, seating and capacity | REM

rem.info

I'm not at all the person to go out and increase the Confederation Line's nameplate capacity, but 28K PP3HPD is low, it should be closer to 35K at least, especially if line one's is 98K or REM's is 42K.

 

[NoahB]

The Confederation Line has its underground stations built with 120m platforms and can run up to theoretical 80-second headway. It won't be too hard/expensive to extend the ground-level stations when the time comes.

I'm wondering if the REM is doing the same with its underground platforms.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Not without major rebuild. I believe frequency is their only solution. Of course if you believe their claims then the REM can move a lot more people than TTC's Line 1. I'd take that with a grain (or maybe a whole spoonful) of salt.

Edit: After reading closer I see they mean over the entire rush hour for a single segment not 42k pphd. Seems an odd measurement for capacity. By that measurement, it's actually a good deal more then the confederation line (28k over 3 hours in a single direction) and much less than TTC Line 1 at around 98k

The REM, seating and capacity | REM

rem.info

There are more people moving into the Census Metropolitan Area (CMA). Rather than have them move around in single-occupant automobiles. Something other than the automobile is needed to move them around.

 

[SFO-YYZ]

Edit: After reading closer I see they mean over the entire rush hour for a single segment not 42k pphd. Seems an odd measurement for capacity. By that measurement, it's actually a good deal more then the confederation line (28k over 3 hours in a single direction) and much less than TTC Line 1 at around 98k

The REM, seating and capacity | REM

rem.info

Not sure if we should be comparing REM to TTC subway in any sense, given that REM is intended to replace part of an existing commuter rail system instead of acting as a new "metro/subway" line. Hence the difference in PPHD between REM and TTC subway is understandable.

Personally, if I were a suburban commuter, I'd also prefer a higher frequency system albeit with much smaller trains - e.g. Vancouver Skytrain - than a GO style 12-car diesel bi-level that comes every 30 min or every hour. Makes morning commute much easier to plan when you know there is a train every couple of minutes even if there is limited seating space (I used to commute for school from suburban Burnaby to downtown Vancouver on Skytrain Expo line, and didn't mind not having a seat on most days especially with Skytrain's frequent headway... many Skytrains back then in early 2000's only had 2-car configurations. It was crowded in peak hours but not unbearable).

As for platform lengths, does anyone have information on platform lengths for REM stations? Are there any possibilities for extensions esp in the underground stations (to avoid the short-sighted fiasco like Canada Line)?

 

[NoahB]

Not sure if we should be comparing REM to TTC subway in any sense, given that REM is intended to replace part of an existing commuter rail system instead of acting as a new "metro/subway" line. Hence the difference in PPHD between REM and TTC subway is understandable.

Personally, if I were a suburban commuter, I'd also prefer a higher frequency system albeit with much smaller trains - e.g. Vancouver Skytrain - than a GO style 12-car diesel bi-level that comes every 30 min or every hour. Makes morning commute much easier to plan when you know there is a train every couple of minutes even if there is limited seating space (I used to commute for school from suburban Burnaby to downtown Vancouver on Skytrain Expo line, and didn't mind not having a seat on most days especially with Skytrain's frequent headway... many Skytrains back then in early 2000's only had 2-car configurations. It was crowded in peak hours but not unbearable).

As for platform lengths, does anyone have information on platform lengths for REM stations? Are there any possibilities for extensions esp in the underground stations (to avoid the short-sighted fiasco like Canada Line)?

They will be 80 meters. From Daily Hive:
"REM platform lengths of 80 metres will be identical to SkyTrain's Expo Line and Millennium Lines. All stations will feature platform screen doors, which is a first for a public transit rail line service in North America."

There are no mention of any capacity expansion other than increasing headways. So I'm worried we are ending up in a Canada Line situation.

 

[p_xavier]

They will be 80 meters. From Daily Hive:
"REM platform lengths of 80 metres will be identical to SkyTrain's Expo Line and Millennium Lines. All stations will feature platform screen doors, which is a first for a public transit rail line service in North America."

There are no mention of any capacity expansion other than increasing headways. So I'm worried we are ending up in a Canada Line situation.

The platforms for the A REM line will be 80m with trains being about 76m. There is a provision for extension to 95m but some demolition would be required. It's not expected until 35+years, if ever. The Airport branch should be rerouted in the B REM line with an announcement this year, adding capacity.

 

[asher__jo]

The platforms for the A REM line will be 80m with trains being about 76m. There is a provision for extension to 95m but some demolition would be required. It's not expected until 35+years, if ever. The Airport branch should be rerouted in the B REM line with an announcement this year, adding capacity.

Can you clarify what you mean by A line and B line?

 

[p_xavier]

Can you clarify what you mean by A line and B line?

A line is the current line under construction. B line should be the Pointe-aux-Trembles to Lachine, Island of Montréal line currently under study by the CDPQi.

 

[badawik]

A line is the current line under construction. B line should be the Pointe-aux-Trembles to Lachine, Island of Montréal line currently under study by the CDPQi.

Interesting. Does that mean the airport would no longer be connected through Bois Franc? Or would it be more like a circle line between Bois Franc, Downtown, Lachine and Airport?

Edit: I came across this forum through google and I’m honestly surprised at the amount of detail available here, and there were a lot of things I never knew. Very exciting times for the city!

 

[p_xavier]

Interesting. Does that mean the airport would no longer be connected through Bois Franc? Or would it be more like a circle line between Bois Franc, Downtown, Lachine and Airport?

Edit: I came across this forum through google and I’m honestly surprised at the amount of detail available here, and there were a lot of things I never knew. Very exciting times for the city!

The routing is not yet defined (it's still under study) but my guess that the airport branch would terminate at Bois-Franc. It's still pure speculation on my part.

 

[NoahB]

The platforms for the A REM line will be 80m with trains being about 76m. There is a provision for extension to 95m but some demolition would be required. It's not expected until 35+years, if ever. The Airport branch should be rerouted in the B REM line with an announcement this year, adding capacity.

I would love to see the sources! Where/when did they ever mention rerouting the airport branch and the route through Lachine?
As far as I can tell the city is trying to get a tram through there.

 

[p_xavier]

I would love to see the sources! Where/when did they ever mention rerouting the airport branch and the route through Lachine?
As far as I can tell the city is trying to get a tram through there.

I have transportation engineering acquaintances. Yes the city is still pushing for a streetcar but not the CDPQi. The QC government is waiting for the final cost numbers for a decision. Things can obviously change, because politics, but we should expect a public annoucement before the Summer.

 

[NoahB]

I hope it gets converted to REM. That would make the most sense as a Pink Line.

 

[badawik]

It indeed makes a lot of sense to go through Lachine. I think the difference today compared to a few years ago when the project was first announced is the link between the airport and the Dorval Via station. With that problematic stretch resolved, it is now possible to consider this route.

This may really spell the end of the VH line though.