[felix123]

Why do you need two platforms though? It's a terminal station.

A few reasons, such as:
1) A single platform limits frequency, as only one train can be in the station as a time and has to clear the switch when departing the station before the next one can enter (this is exacerbated somewhat by diesel's slow acceleration).
2) Redundancy - if equipment fails on the platform or the train itself stalls in the station, it would have to be towed away before another train could access the station.

 

[Filip]

A few reasons, such as:
1) A single platform limits frequency, as only one train can be in the station as a time and has to clear the switch when departing the station before the next one can enter (this is exacerbated somewhat by diesel's slow acceleration).
2) Redundancy - if equipment fails on the platform or the train itself stalls in the station, it would have to be towed away before another train could access the station.

UPX has pretty good acceleration for a diesel train. It's fun watching them outrun the GO clunkers when it leaves Union.

I'm not an expert at this, but I don't see how the one platform precludes more frequent service. I'm sure it can go down to 5 mins frequencies, but the reason it won't is usage.

 

[aquateam]

As for the REM vs the UPX, travel time to Gare Centrale on the REM will be 25 minutes on all-stops services, and 20 minutes on express services. The UPX offers service to Union in 22 minutes, which will increase with the new stop at Mt. Dennis. I think the quality of the REM is quite a bit higher than that of the UPX, due to the REM being electric and not diesel, there being 2 platforms on both termini of the REM, and all stations having platform screen doors, as well as direct connectivity to 3 metro lines.

In a way, the UPX also has "direct" connections with three metro lines: Eglinton at Mt Dennis, Line 2 at Bloor, and Line 1 at Union. The connections are just a bit awkward at Bloor and Union.

But for the REM, the connection to the Orange line at Gare Centrale is also very awkward, I hope it is improved as part of the project. There were some proposals from Anton Dubrau about improving the transfer:

Did you Montrealers forget just how long you didn't build just about anything? One rapid transit line and you're acting like you've been ahead of Toronto for a generation.

One 67 km rapid transit line kind of does put them ahead of Toronto for a generation

 

[Filip]

In a way, the UPX also has "direct" connections with three metro lines: Eglinton at Mt Dennis, Line 2 at Bloor, and Line 1 at Union. The connections are just a bit awkward at Bloor and Union.

But for the REM, the connection to the Orange line at Gare Centrale is also very awkward, I hope it is improved as part of the project. There were some proposals from Anton Dubrau about improving the transfer:

View attachment 142248



One 67 km rapid transit line kind of does put them ahead of Toronto for a generation

If we count REM, then we have to count what GO RER is trying to achieve.

 

[nephersir7]

First of all YUL is quite a bit closer to the city than YYZ - the fact that the ride time/distance will be almost identical is kind of the point I tried to make above.

Closer as the crow flies, but a more direct southern route from YUL to Central Station along (or using) the CN's tracks would only have been 10% shorter in terms of distance to Central Station. (19.5 km instead of 22km). That only would have had the potential to shave off a minute or two at most, at the cost of decreasing the overall value of the line as a transit service.

Secondly, where do you get integration is poor on the Toronto side? UPX hits Line 2 at Dundas West (currently not integrated, but will be), and Line 1, TTC surface, GO, intercity trains at Union - where integration couldn't be better (it's in the station, +/- 3 mins walking time to get to all the points). There will also be a station built at Eglinton (and Weston will be shuttered) to interchange with Line 5.

I wasn't specifically talking about transit integration, but more in general terms. Having two downtown stations directly connected to the airport instead of one increases the coverage and decreases the walking distance (and travel time) for a great number of users.

I had thought that the plan was to have at most 15 minutes between services to/from YUL

The 99-year contract between the REM and the public authorities specifically states that the frequency interval will be no longer than 10 minutes during rush hours and no longer than 20 minutes otherwise.

 

[Hopkins123]

One 67 km rapid transit line kind of does put them ahead of Toronto for a generation

It literally would double their rapid transit system.

It would take fully grade-separating all of the Crosstown from UTS to the airport for Toronto to catch back up.

 

[Streety McCarface]

UPX has pretty good acceleration for a diesel train. It's fun watching them outrun the GO clunkers when it leaves Union.

I'm not an expert at this, but I don't see how the one platform precludes more frequent service. I'm sure it can go down to 5 mins frequencies, but the reason it won't is usage.

Once prices are potentially slashed next year, I 100% guarantee that the UPX will be unrideable. Imagine if the extended that discount to the Airport...

But seriously, they really need a second platform at Union and a platform twice as long for both, and the line really needs to be electrified. The KS DMUs are great, but electrification will do wonders. (Though I will admit, it's always fun being scared by a passing UPX train when riding the upper-level Kitchener train)

Also, DMUs are going to have faster acceleration than Diesel push trains. It doesn't make regular go trains Clunkers by comparison.

One 67 km rapid transit line kind of does put them ahead of Toronto for a generation

~75 km of GO Transit RER immediately puts us ahead again, we have the advantage with the TYSSE bringing us 8.6 KM above, the 20 km Crosstown, the 10 km FWLRT, the Relief Line (8km - 18 km), the 6km Yonge extension, Eventual crosstown and Finch West extensions, Sheppard LRT/Subway...

 

[FollowTheLeader]

Montreal's population is 2 million + less and they still match up well with Toronto's transit, that's pretty sad considering how much of a boom Toronto has experienced in the last decade.

 

[rbt]

If we count REM, then we have to count what GO RER is trying to achieve.

I agree after a GO RER construction contract is signed.

 

[felix123]

Secondly, where do you get integration is poor on the Toronto side? UPX hits Line 2 at Dundas West (currently not integrated, but will be), and Line 1, TTC surface, GO, intercity trains at Union - where integration couldn't be better (it's in the station, +/- 3 mins walking time to get to all the points). There will also be a station built at Eglinton (and Weston will be shuttered) to interchange with Line 5.

Will GO be running 15 minute bidirectional service from Weston in time for Mt. Dennis's opening? If not, I imagine the residents there will be pissed off that Metrolinx would be going back on their promise to provide a UPX stop in exchange for railway expansion through the neighbourhood. I actually had no idea that they are going to close Weston UPX.

 

[Filip]

I agree after a GO RER construction contract is signed.

But what is that? Shouldn’t we count the incremental improvements as part of the work? It was never meant to be a traditional project in the strictest sense.

 

[felix123]

A couple weeks following the confirmation of prov/fed funding for the blue line extension, Québec's premiere spoke about a proposed REM extension north into Laval (youtube link below). There is another proposal to instead extend the orange line north into Laval, with a station at Bois Franc, acting as a 4th metro connection with the REM (2 orange, 1 blue, 1 green).
While some are apparently calling for both the REM and the orange line extensions, it seems in any case as though QC is intending to expand REM sooner rather than later.

The main surprise here was that the rumour was they were going to announce a transformation of the Mascouche line into REM - instead it's a much shorter branch north. With trains already running through the Mont-Royal tunnel every 2.5 minutes, I'm wondering how much more capacity it has.

 

[Kyle Campbell]

With CBTC headways of 90 seconds are doable, so it should be possible to double the number of trains in the tunnel to serve both branches.

 

[rbt]

But what is that? Shouldn’t we count the incremental improvements as part of the work? It was never meant to be a traditional project in the strictest sense.

And yet, the vast majority of it is being tendered as a massive single DBOFM contract; Operate being the key part of the agreement as that's what defines the service levels.

The preparatory works tendered or under construction thus far have little impact on service levels that will be offered without additional work. The prep-work does reduce the critical path of the main agreement but is no guarantee of follow through of the main agreement.

Put another way, REM is recession proof (it's being paid for even if cancelled) where RER is still a $10B contract on the table. Hopefully during 2019 RER becomes just as locked in as REM is today.

Planning is a great step toward making something a reality but with relatively short political terms very few plans make it to completion anywhere close to their original time-frame.

 

[Neutrino]

I am visiting Montreal in a few weeks - any tips for getting around on their subway and bus network?