[junctionist]

Actually, rubber tires perform a lot better than steel wheels do on grades. This is one of the reasons Montréal advantageously builds its stations such that there is an uphill slope when approaching a station / downhill slope when departing. It assists with deceleration into the station and acceleration out of it.

That's a good advantage of rubber-tired metro trains. I remember reading about it in John Martins-Manteiga's book on the Metro, Metro: Design in Motion.

 

[W. K. Lis]

That's a good advantage of rubber-tired metro trains. I remember reading about it in John Martins-Manteiga's book on the Metro, Metro: Design in Motion.

The bad "advantage" is the heat generated from the rubber tires helps in heating the stations in winter... ...and in the summer. The current trains don't have air conditioning because of heat exhausted by the air conditioning equipment.

 

[smallspy]

Actually, rubber tires perform a lot better than steel wheels do on grades.

While in theory they do (and most certainly did in the late 1950s and early 1960s when the system was being designed), the advent of modern, high-performance steel-wheeled rolling stock has made that difference pretty minimal.

This is one of the reasons Montréal advantageously builds its stations such that there is an uphill slope when approaching a station / downhill slope when departing. It assists with deceleration into the station and acceleration out of it.

The use of rubber tires has absolutely nothing to do with why they build their lines with humpbacked profiles at stations. It absolutely does assist with accelerating upon leaving the station and decelerating into stations, but its use does not require the use of rubber tires. In fact, the TTC contemplated using a humpbacked line profile for the TYSSE, and then decided against it on the reasoning that doing so may confuse operators.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[nfitz]

Montreal truly is making excellent progress and there unlike here doesn't treat the word "subway" like it's a dirty term. They embrace grade separated transit whole hog.

It's been over 35 years since the 5-station Blue Line 5 extension to Anjou was announced, with re-announcements in 1988, 1989, 1998 (but only one station to Pie-IX), 2013, and 2016. And that's probably missing a few, including the earlier announcement about it going to Montreal-Nord instead (which was replaced by the aborted White Line 7).

The core the the REM service is the 1950s proposed Line 3

Yes, they are making progress, but let's not start suffering from "grass is always greener" syndrome.

Montreal Metro isn't perfect, but it's way better ran than the TTC subway, by a mile

It has positives and negatives. I don't think building the trains so narrow is an advantage in the long-term - it's got the same issues you have in London.

fyi, born and raised in Montreal, I know that system inside out and despite it's issues, I've never been this frustrated like the TTC subway has made me so many time.

I was there for the best part of the 1980s. I used to be very frustrated by long waits and travel times, to go only a few stations, waiting endlessly for trains - 10 minutes here, and 15 minutes there, in the evening. Then - and still now, the entire system only goes about 5 km west of downtown, to Angrignon. It still fails to get west of Decarie, north of the escarpment. And the lack of wheelchair accessibility for almost all the stations in this day and age, is beyond pathetic - good grief not even at a major interchange station like Vendome, which is a rare station where you can simply drop elevators in without much complexity. The poor integration of STM metro and bus service at major hubs is embarrassing. And then, in my youth at least, was having to head to the Metro shortly after 12:30 AM to go home from the bars, which closed at 3 AM - presumably they've fixed that at least now - my days of such things are long past me!

Even now, the buses aren't air conditioned - and the subway certainly wasn't - I assume the new Azur cars are though - I've only ridden in the winter.

I really just wish Montreal would release ridership data per line. Toronto also needs to give out more recent statistics.

Who would've thought...they have their stubway, yet they don't bitch about it.

They do release data for each station. Which again have me scratching my head, as not as high as I'd think (even when remembering they only count entrances, not exits, so multiply by two to compare to TTC data). So pretty easy to figure out approximate ridership for a 3-station line, when no-one the middle station - particularly in rush-hour.

APTA ridership data for both systems is released quarterly. http://www.apta.com/resources/statistics/Pages/ridershipreport.aspx

 

[begratto]

...but all new buses have A/C.

About the waiting times in the metro, it's now every 5 minutes or better until 10pm now on weekdays. And the STM is planning to have the same frequency on weekends too, starting later in 2018.

 

[felix123]

While in theory they do (and most certainly did in the late 1950s and early 1960s when the system was being designed), the advent of modern, high-performance steel-wheeled rolling stock has made that difference pretty minimal

This is simply not true. In fact, no one here is claiming that rubber tires were the right way to go for Montréal, as they necessitate a completely underground network when used in a snowy climate. Mayor Drapeau simply wanted to emulate what he saw as a technological advancement in the Paris metro, hence the use of rubber tires. Despite their drawbacks, where is the advent of uphill-racing, rain-loving "modern, high performance steel-wheeled rolling stock"?Modern EMUs still require sandboxes for crying out loud. Rubber tires still have their clear benefits and drawbacks, as do steel wheels.

The use of rubber tires has absolutely nothing to do with why they build their lines with humpbacked profiles at stations. It absolutely does assist with accelerating upon leaving the station and decelerating into stations, but its use does not require the use of rubber tires. In fact, the TTC contemplated using a humpbacked line profile for the TYSSE, and then decided against it on the reasoning that doing so may confuse operators.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

"Absolutely nothing" is a bit strong. Steel-wheeled trains need to operate slowly on these sections, so acceleration would be hampered. Also, the TTC thought that trained operators would be confused by a slight change in grade and that they couldn't simply be taught a new trick? I don't doubt that. The LRV streetcars still open all doors when it's - 30 degrees out because the TTC feels that no one could ever learn to press a flashing button with a door open symbol on it.

 

[nfitz]

...but all new buses have A/C.

Though I hear this is recent in Montreal, and that most of the buses in service don't have A/C. Which just seems mind-blowing - when did TTC stop buying non-AC buses? 1987? They are now replacing the buses that replaced the buses that replaced the non-A/C buses!

About the waiting times in the metro, it's now every 5 minutes or better until 10pm now on weekdays.

I waited longer than 5 minutes at Vendome at 8:25 AM the other morning - almost missed my VIA Rail connection. Heck, thing sat on the platform for almost 5 minutes. And a few days earlier, I waited (not much) more than 5 minutes at about 3:30 pm at Bonaventure - and I hadn't just missed a train. Not surprisingly, the train was crush-loaded at Lionel-Groulx, with schools letting out. And then I waited near 15 minutes for a 90-bus at Vendome. Very poor transit. Hmm, Google Schedule explorer does say it should be about every 3.33 minutes at 3:30 pm - but on the other hand, it certainly isn't every 5 minutes or better off-peak on weekdays until 10 pm! It clearly shows every 6 minutes on Line 1 from about 10:30 AM to about 2:30 pm , and even every 6 minutes before 6:45 AM ... though every 5 minutes to 11 pm. After 11 pm still stucks though - good grief, every 7.5 minutes ... and still no service after 1 AM? And that's scheduled service - as I observed a couple of weeks ago, there's a big difference between scheduled service, and what actually shows up.

Sunday nights used to be the worst ... ah yes, every 10 minutes late night; even daytime is every 6 minutes. And yes, there's the famous 12-minute waits late Sunday night on Line 2 ... when a short 3-station trip from Charlevoix to Vendome could take almost 30 minutes, instead of the usual 5 minutes; some progress though ... the 14-minute frequency seems to have improved to 12 ... so maybe would only take 27 minutes now.

 

[begratto]

I waited longer than 5 minutes at Vendome at 8:25 AM the other morning - almost missed my VIA Rail connection. Heck, thing sat on the platform for almost 5 minutes.

Well that was an exceptionnal situation. I take the orange line everyday, it's every 150-180 seconds at 8:30.

But anyway, my point is that they are increasing the frequency. The orange line will be at every 120 seconds at rush hours once all Azur trains are received.

 

[Streety McCarface]

^I'm fine with the mods moving these posts into another thread if they feel it's appropriate.


The surface part of Eglinton, Finch, and Hurontario LRT aren't rapid transit. Closer to it than the downtown streetcars, but if it stops are red lights then it's not rapid transit. I'd personally call RER rapid transit but a lot of purists wouldn't. Hamilton and Kitchener aren't even in the same metropolitan area. And 60 km of subway by 2041 is good but not mind blowing. Montreal's REM alone is 67 km all by itself.

The only reason we think of suburban demand driving the TTC subway's success is because that's the only place we've expanded it in most of our lifetimes. It was successful long before it expanded into the suburbs and the highest demand is downtown. Toronto is now more densely populated than Montreal thanks to the massive amounts of infill development in the last 15 years. There's nothing about Toronto's built form that makes it difficult to serve by subway. As I said before, the Yonge line overcrowding is proof of that.

Yes, most people can deal with the streetcars, but most people would also tell you that the subway needs to be expanded downtown.


The Line 1 platform at Yonge-Bloor station is actually busier than any equivalent in New York. The Sixth and Lexington subways in New York are busier than Line 1, but only if you combine all the branches. The fact we have such a small system and such comparisons can even be made shows that we're a very transit oriented city and we've done a terrible job capitalizing on that. The per capita transit ridership in Toronto and Montreal is basically equal, and if you include GO and RTM it's quite a bit higher in Toronto. If our subway were more extensive in central areas instead of expanding so much in the suburbs it would have higher ridership.

They say Finch West and Eglinton will not be stopping at red lights so we'll have to wait and see what happens. RER itself is supposed to have at least 15 minute frequencies in Toronto, and considering the fact they're making the move to High Floor Platforms and single EMUs, it'll be a lot like the London Overground, which, I would argue, is pretty much the same as REM.

Actually, when you consider the fact that the Lexington avenue line runs 4 tracks, capacity constraints on that line is nowhere near as bad as the Yonge line or even the Danforth subway.

 

[Cobra]

They say Finch West and Eglinton will not be stopping at red lights so we'll have to wait and see what happens.

I'll believe that when I see it. I have no faith that it will be operated as such

 

[smallspy]

This is simply not true. In fact, no one here is claiming that rubber tires were the right way to go for Montréal, as they necessitate a completely underground network when used in a snowy climate. Mayor Drapeau simply wanted to emulate what he saw as a technological advancement in the Paris metro, hence the use of rubber tires. Despite their drawbacks, where is the advent of uphill-racing, rain-loving "modern, high performance steel-wheeled rolling stock"?Modern EMUs still require sandboxes for crying out loud. Rubber tires still have their clear benefits and drawbacks, as do steel wheels.

A modern steel-wheeled subway train can operate on grades as steep as 8%. The maximum for a rubber-tired one is only a bit more at 10%. Any more than that and you have to get into racks or cables, or any other type of additional traction systems.

So yeah, it's a pretty minimal difference.

"Absolutely nothing" is a bit strong. Steel-wheeled trains need to operate slowly on these sections, so acceleration would be hampered. Also, the TTC thought that trained operators would be confused by a slight change in grade and that they couldn't simply be taught a new trick? I don't doubt that. The LRV streetcars still open all doors when it's - 30 degrees out because the TTC feels that no one could ever learn to press a flashing button with a door open symbol on it.

I'm curious - why do you think that steel-wheeled trains need to operate slowly on the same sections that a rubber-tired one wouldn't? We're talking about sections of track quite literally hundreds of metres long. There are other systems elsewhere that have built their steel-wheeled subway systems with a humpbacked profile - are you going to be the one to tell them that they're wrong to do so?

So yeah, "Absolutely nothing...." is the absolute correct term to use to describe it. Another one that could be used is "bunk".

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[felix123]

A modern steel-wheeled subway train can operate on grades as steep as 8%. The maximum for a rubber-tired one is only a bit more at 10%. Any more than that and you have to get into racks or cables, or any other type of additional traction systems.

So yeah, it's a pretty minimal difference.

The Lausanne metro (rubber-tire), its engineers and its 12% grade all disagree with you.

I'm curious - why do you think that steel-wheeled trains need to operate slowly on the same sections that a rubber-tired one wouldn't? We're talking about sections of track quite literally hundreds of metres long. There are other systems elsewhere that have built their steel-wheeled subway systems with a humpbacked profile - are you going to be the one to tell them that they're wrong to do so?

So yeah, "Absolutely nothing...." is the absolute correct term to use to describe it. Another one that could be used is "bunk".

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

No one is disputing that steel wheels can do it; the point is the slower acceleration that's required. It would have been one less reason for the TTC to consider using humpbacks in stations, apart from your reasoning that its operators would never learn to deal with change.

 

[smallspy]

The Lausanne metro (rubber-tire), its engineers and its 12% grade all disagree with you.

12% is still not a massive improvement over 8%. But still, improvement is improvement.

No one is disputing that steel wheels can do it; the point is the slower acceleration that's required. It would have been one less reason for the TTC to consider using humpbacks in stations, apart from your reasoning that its operators would never learn to deal with change.

And again, how do you figure that the acceleration would be slower? The reason why anyone would build a humpbacked profile is to use gravity - it's not going to affect a steel-wheeled train any differently than a rubber-tired one.

As for the TTC's reasons, you'd have to ask them. I think that it's kind of silly, myself.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[Streety McCarface]

It seems like the noise and much higher installation/operation costs make the rubbered tired bus (it's not a train, it's a very long bus) extremely infeasible. If you can gain an advantage of 4% grade, great. However, you'll use significantly more electricity doing so and for a system like Montreal's (where it's all deep underground), it seems extremely unnecessary.

 

[felix123]

If you can gain an advantage of 4% grade, great. However, you'll use significantly more electricity doing so...

I guess that would be an issue until one day when the train decides to go back down the hill.