Guest Join UsHey Guest,
Welcome, Join our awesome community where you can discuss on various topics :-
Some point about your community
Some point about your community
Some point about your community
Some point about your community
Some point about your community
Some point about your community
Some point about your community
Much More.. or Create an Account


Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Hamilton area transit
#16
Part of the design requirement for the QNC was to eliminate as much interference from outside the building as possible. IQC had experiments that would be thrown off by the vibrations from trains going by.
Reply
#17
That is why friends don't let friends go to Western.
Reply
#18
Lots of other cities had issues with this, like Edmonton and Charlotte. It's a thing.
For daily ion construction updates, photos and general urban rail news, follow me on twitter! @Canardiain
Reply
#19
It comes up (as in Hamilton), and UWO ought to know that. The comments the other week insinuated that LRT was not a viable technology for London because of it, which couldn't be further from the truth.

It's no longer an issue with CCEM or Hamilton's system.
Reply
#20
Maybe Shortreed took a trip to Western to advise them...
Reply
#21
It will be interesting to see if lrt can go up and down the mountain, as I understood for Phase 2 they were looking to not go down Shantz Hill because it is to steep
Reply
#22
(01-14-2017, 11:50 AM)darts Wrote: It will be interesting to see if lrt can go up and down the mountain, as I understood for Phase 2 they were looking to not go down Shantz Hill because it is to steep

There are ways to do it.  Mark suggested one:

(01-13-2017, 11:19 AM)Markster Wrote: BRT up the mountain will be different from LRT up the mountain.  I would not be surprised if LRT up the mountain did something like become elevated as it approaches the mountain, and then enter a portal into the side of the mountain, to become a subway for 1 stop before resurfacing.  LINK Light Rail in Seattle does something like this.
Reply
#23
Another method could be to take the mountain sideways; I understand they want to jog a bit west of James anyway to serve the hospital and Mohawk College, so that might work as well.

But I imagine tunneling will be involved to some degree in any case.
My Twitter: @KevinLMaps
Reply
#24
(01-14-2017, 11:50 AM)darts Wrote: It will be interesting to see if lrt can go up and down the mountain, as I understood for Phase 2 they were looking to not go down Shantz Hill because it is to steep

What is the %-grade of Shantz hill? The climb up King after the grade sep is 6%, which is the recommended design limit for our trains. Toronto's FLEXITY Outlooks can do steeper because they used a different gearbox (lower top speed, more torque) and added a third powered bogie to their units for the steep climbs in their portals.

(01-14-2017, 01:11 PM)KevinL Wrote: Another method could be to take the mountain sideways; I understand they want to jog a bit west of James anyway to serve the hospital and Mohawk College, so that might work as well.

But I imagine tunneling will be involved to some degree in any case.

Wouldn't have had this issue if they'd just gone with ICTS in the 80's, like they were going to - steep grades are no problem for contactless LIM propulsion, which doesn't rely on wheel-to-rail traction - it's direct thrust against the reaction rail.
For daily ion construction updates, photos and general urban rail news, follow me on twitter! @Canardiain
Reply
#25
(01-14-2017, 04:25 PM)Canard Wrote: Wouldn't have had this issue if they'd just gone with ICTS in the 80's, like they were going to - steep grades are no problem for contactless LIM propulsion, which doesn't rely on wheel-to-rail traction - it's direct thrust against the reaction rail.

But then total grade separation would be required everywhere without exception, which would dramatically increase the cost of the project and make most extensions either infeasible or require a different (specifically, LRT) technology.
Reply
#26
Shantz Hill is ~8% I think.
Reply
#27
wow the artwork on the Western website about RT.... seen here:
http://www.uwo.ca/ipb/publicaccountabili...ansit.html

Basically, the opposite of the system they want to build...
Reply
#28
(01-14-2017, 12:01 PM)tomh009 Wrote:
(01-14-2017, 11:50 AM)darts Wrote: It will be interesting to see if lrt can go up and down the mountain, as I understood for Phase 2 they were looking to not go down Shantz Hill because it is to steep

There are ways to do it.  Mark suggested one:

(01-13-2017, 11:19 AM)Markster Wrote: BRT up the mountain will be different from LRT up the mountain.  I would not be surprised if LRT up the mountain did something like become elevated as it approaches the mountain, and then enter a portal into the side of the mountain, to become a subway for 1 stop before resurfacing.  LINK Light Rail in Seattle does something like this.

That sounds quite involved
Reply
#29
It all depends on how hard it is to dig into the mountain -- is it sand, granite or something in between?
Reply
#30
Quote:It all depends on how hard it is to dig into the mountain -- is it sand, granite or something in between?

Dolomite cap, shale beneath.

But also a UNESCO World biosphere Reserve, so it may be difficult to obtain permission to bore.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

About Waterloo Region Connected

Launched in August 2014, Waterloo Region Connected is an online community that brings together all the things that make Waterloo Region great. Waterloo Region Connected provides user-driven content fueled by a lively discussion forum covering topics like urban development, transportation projects, heritage issues, businesses and other issues of interest to those in Kitchener, Waterloo, Cambridge and the four Townships - North Dumfries, Wellesley, Wilmot, and Woolwich.

              User Links

              Advertise