[chronicsurfer]

Headlights? Montréal streetcars didn't have headlights in their day, why start now?

From link.

Sigh. Wish Montréal had kept their tram lines.

 

[chronicsurfer]

Agree. One of my biggest issues with the new AZUR trains is the perpendicular forward/backward seating. It's nice and all during non peak hours but during peak hours, it's nearly impossible to move around the car or move between cars because of the various choke points caused by the perpendicular seating arrangements. AZURs were designed with open gangways, which are meant to spread out bodies during rush hour, but the seating arrangement essentially cancels out this ability to move around the train.

This isn't so much of an issue of the TTC rockets because the greater car width, but definitely create bottle necks on narrower cars like the AZURs and LRTs.

New to Montréal here and I wondered the same. Saving grace, we have two parallel seats - two fixed and two foldable - around the gangways/vestibules that make the car-to-car movement somewhat easier. As somebody pointed out, with all the extra layering of clothes in winter, chaotic to manoeuvre around in the middle of the cars with the perpendicular seating.

 

[henrydm]

I said the same about that ill-conceived seating system when TTC proposed it for the TR cars. Should I treat Montreal specially?

I don't get it - I criticize TTC and Metrolinx decisions harshly and I get little reaction. But someone always react negatively when I pick on LRT in other cities.

you criticize EVERYTHING. Give it a break

 

[nfitz]

This isn't so much of an issue of the TTC rockets because the greater car width, but definitely create bottle necks on narrower cars like the AZURs and LRTs.

Montreal Metro cars are only 2.5 metres wide - about the same as the 2.54-m-wide TTC streetcars. The Eglinton/Waterloo cars are slightly wider at about 2.68 m; though to be honest, I can barely perceive a difference when riding them.

The REM cars are 2.94-m wide - there's more than enough width to use even 4 seats in a row, let alone 3, without significant pinch points. They are about the same width as the Canada line in Vancouver, and I don't find they are too crowded - even with 4 seats across.



I fear we might see the same on the Ontario line - though hopefully the drive to go for relatively short 100-metre platforms will hopefully force them to go for wider vehicles.

 

[lawwt]

Financement de la station du REM à l’aéroport | Québec se désiste, l’avenir du projet en péril

L’avenir de la station du Réseau express métropolitain (REM) à l’aéroport international Pierre-Elliott-Trudeau se complique : le gouvernement Legault a inopinément décidé de se retirer du montage financier en voie d’être échafaudé par Ottawa et Québec pour assurer la construction de cette...

www.lapresse.ca

Not a good development, the Legault government is withdrawing from the financial package that was being developed with quebec

 

[SFO-YYZ]

Montreal Metro cars are only 2.5 metres wide - about the same as the 2.54-m-wide TTC streetcars. The Eglinton/Waterloo cars are slightly wider at about 2.68 m; though to be honest, I can barely perceive a difference when riding them.

The REM cars are 2.94-m wide - there's more than enough width to use even 4 seats in a row, let alone 3, without significant pinch points. They are about the same width as the Canada line in Vancouver, and I don't find they are too crowded - even with 4 seats across.

View attachment 283455

I fear we might see the same on the Ontario line - though hopefully the drive to go for relatively short 100-metre platforms will hopefully force them to go for wider vehicles.

You realize there's like 2 people in you pic right? 4 seats in a row is all fun and games till you try to move around a Canada Line train between 4 and 7 pm. I'm in Vancouver right now taking Canada Line almost daily. Rarely go for those forward/backward facing window seats because I always have to climb over someone on the aisle every time I need to get out.

And paaalleeease let Ontario Line have perimeter side seating. Hallelujah finally.

 

[nfitz]

You realize there's like 2 people in you pic right? 4 seats in a row is all fun and games till you try to move around a Canada Line train between 4 and 7 pm. I'm in Vancouver right now taking Canada Line almost daily. Rarely go for those forward/backward facing window seats because I always have to climb over someone on the aisle every time I need to get out.

I don't see the difference if you standing in the middle of a New-York style car, or a Canada Line train, and they are crush-loaded and want to get out.

The problem I've noticed in Vancouver, is that they don't seem to run the trains as frequently as you'd expect ... with surprisingly full cars off-peak, rather than running trains more frequently. And at peak, trying to board at the downtown terminus ... gosh. A problem with the BFDOM model without loading specs. If you start diverting from the current model of having full seating off-peak, things start going downhill quickly it would seem.

And paaalleeease let Ontario Line have perimeter side seating. Hallelujah finally.

You realize there are people who get nausea, sitting sideways or backwards? Less so mostly in tunnels - but Ontario Line is going to have long sections outdoors.

 

[Northern Light]

You realize there's like 2 people in you pic right? 4 seats in a row is all fun and games till you try to move around a Canada Line train between 4 and 7 pm. I'm in Vancouver right now taking Canada Line almost daily. Rarely go for those forward/backward facing window seats because I always have to climb over someone on the aisle every time I need to get out.

And paaalleeease let Ontario Line have perimeter side seating. Hallelujah finally.

I despise perimeter seating.

It affords a cattle-car vibe.

 

[Northern Light]

you criticize EVERYTHING. Give it a break

Now now.........that's @nfitz 's charm.

It grows on you............ mostly.

LOL

 

[robmausser]

I despise perimeter seating.

It affords a cattle-car vibe.

Especially on what is a regional transit system.

On a downtown subway system where stops are frequent and close together? I can see the advantage of making room for standing.

Who is going to want to stand all the way from Gare Central to Deux Montanges station? Or, sit sideways on plastic seats for that matter.

In my opinion these should have been done with forward/backward facing style seats along one side, and cattle car along the other, so longer distance commuters have a more comfortable place to sit.

And padded/fabric seats.

 

[nfitz]

In my opinion these should have been done with forward/backward facing style seats along one side, and cattle car along the other, so longer distance commuters have a more comfortable place to sit.

Exactly. Cattle car might be fine in New York City if you are riding only a few stops ... but I've found doing a Bronx to Brooklyn long-haul tedious.

So great if riding from the Blue Line to Central Station ... but a lot of the current ridership is coming a lot further - it is currently commuter rail after all, running 30 km! I'm not sure I've ever regularly had such a long subway ride on one train. The longest I regularly do is Main to Kipling - and that entire line is 26 km, so ... less than 20 km?

I have done Heathrow 5 to Russell Square before cattle-car style ... which is probably a similar length - and there's really no other option there given the cars are about the same width as a streetcar here - mostly outdoors. And one of our party vomited from nausea. I doubt that would have happened in forward seating.

I'm not convinced those in favour of cattle car-style are doing long-haul commutes regularly.

 

[SFO-YYZ]

I'm not sure I've ever regularly had such a long subway ride on one train. The longest I regularly do is Main to Kipling - and that entire line is 26 km, so ... less than 20 km?

I have done Heathrow 5 to Russell Square before cattle-car style ... which is probably a similar length - and there's really no other option there given the cars are about the same width as a streetcar here - mostly outdoors. And one of our party vomited from nausea. I doubt that would have happened in forward seating.

I'm not convinced those in favour of cattle car-style are doing long-haul commutes regularly.

I'm guessing there must be lots of vomits on Beijing or Shanghai metros? Beijing Line 6 is 56 km. Beijing Line 15 is 41 km. Shanghai Line 11 is 86 km. The REM branches are miniscule by comparison. Most of these lines are elevated like the REM and serve the same purpose of ferrying outer suburban commuters to downtown CBD areas. All are perimeter side seating cars.

Also, the Alstom Metropolis renderings and interior designs were released nearly 2 years ago with extensive public design input. Not like we all didn't know about the perimeter seating arrangement.

Shanghai Line 11

 

[lawwt]

Exactly. Cattle car might be fine in New York City if you are riding only a few stops ... but I've found doing a Bronx to Brooklyn long-haul tedious.

So great if riding from the Blue Line to Central Station ... but a lot of the current ridership is coming a lot further - it is currently commuter rail after all, running 30 km! I'm not sure I've ever regularly had such a long subway ride on one train. The longest I regularly do is Main to Kipling - and that entire line is 26 km, so ... less than 20 km?

I have done Heathrow 5 to Russell Square before cattle-car style ... which is probably a similar length - and there's really no other option there given the cars are about the same width as a streetcar here - mostly outdoors. And one of our party vomited from nausea. I doubt that would have happened in forward seating.

I'm not convinced those in favour of cattle car-style are doing long-haul commutes regularly.

Was it a bumpy ride with lots of hard accelerations and decelerations? I suspect that there will be a reduction in the nausea factor with the whole line being automated. Should help with a much smoother ride.

 

[nfitz]

I'm guessing there must be lots of vomits on Beijing or Shanghai metros? Beijing Line 6 is 56 km. Beijing Line 15 is 41 km. Shanghai Line 11 is 86 km.

No idea - never been there. But I'm not sure a totalitarian state is where we should be looking for, for issues of passenger comfort.

Though now I think about it, I have ridden 40-km on the similar Seoul Line 1, as far as Suwon. Which did use perimeter seating. But looking at some more recent pictures, even they are providing other more civilized options now.

The REM branches are miniscule by comparison.

Miniscule would be 5 km. Not 30 km.

Was it a bumpy ride with lots of hard accelerations and decelerations? I suspect that there will be a reduction in the nausea factor with the whole line being automated. Should help with a much smoother ride.

Not particularly - there's been a lot of rebuilding in recent years ... in fact, previous times I've tried to take the tube, I've ended up on National Rail because of construction closures.

It's not so much a shake and rattle thing. It's more a visual thing - particularly outdoors. My daughter seems to have inherited it from my wife. My son has no issues. I've heard of others with issues as well.

I understand why it's necessary on things like the Scarborough Skytrain. But I'd think if it was a choice, and that was made, it would be a potential rights violation here.

Also here, a lot of riders are by choice rather than by necessity. Discouraging ridership by having to stand for 45 minutes isn't the best long-term approach to encourage modal shift in an advanced economy.

 

[officedweller]

The problem I've noticed in Vancouver, is that they don't seem to run the trains as frequently as you'd expect ... with surprisingly full cars off-peak, rather than running trains more frequently.

It's run to a mutually agreed schedule under the Concession contract.
The contractor may also get penalized for failing to meet the schedule.
Increasing frequency across the board would require an amendment to the contract and fees.
I expect there would be provisions for event-based operational changes and fees.