LikeLike

LikeLike

LikeLike

LikeLike

LikeLike

26th May 2016
Why continue the CSELR project?

• Does it increase public transport passenger capacity per hour vs. existing buses? NO
• Are total journey times faster? NO
• Is it higher frequency? NO
• Is it more comfortable? NO
• Is it safer? NO

• 180 buses per am peak hour eliminated between Kingsford/Randwick and Central Circular Quay
Vs. just 15 Light Rail vehicles per hour
RESULT: Light Rail maximum passenger capacity per hour at least 6000 below current buses

• Bus journey times are 28 minutes from Circular Quay to Randwick and 30 minutes from Circular Quay to Kingsford
Vs. Light Rail Average journey 35 minutes from Circular Quay to Randwick and 37 minutes from Circular Quay to Kingsford
RESULT: Costs you time

• Buses on average 3 per minute between Kingsford/Randwick and Central / Circular Quay in the am peak hour
Vs. light rail one every eight minutes from Kingsford and Randwick respectively in the am peak hour
RESULT: Longer waiting times

• A 60 passenger capacity bus seats 43 people or 72% seated
Vs. Light Rail 120 out of 450 passenger capacity = 27% seated
RESULT: Get used to standing

• Buses can swerve to avoid a collision and brake with rubber tyres
Vs. Light Rail ploughs straight ahead with sliding metal wheels on metal rails
RESULT: More serious accidents and fatalities IMAGINE: A 67-metre giant light rail vehicle at 70 kph

It doesn’t benefit the community. Why build it?

If interested or any questions, please contact john@johnbellamybiz
SYDNEY LIGHT RAIL ACTION GROUP
MEDIA CONTACT John Bellamy john@johnbellamy.biz 0414 755 621


LikeLike

LikeLike

Each day here in Ottawa we have a tremendous number of STO buses crossing the provincial border from Quebec to Ontario and back (90-100 buses per hour during peak periods). A much smaller number of buses from Ontario cross into Quebec and back. The direction of the main flow of busses changes direction depending if it is morning or afternoon. Transit agencies are generally controlled and primarily funded at the provincial level in Canada (like your state level of government in the US). Although recently, the federal government level seems to be much more interested in helping to fund rapid transit systems across the country. However, it is still on a project by project basis unlike your Federal Transit Administration’s many programs and funding formulas. Our transit mess at the border between Ontario and Quebec here in the National Capital Region (NCR) has been greatly studied but very little concrete has been done. The reasons are mainly jurisdictional disputes about who pays for what and who controls what.

The reason for this diatribe is about a decade and half ago the Canadian transit vehicle and aircraft manufacturer Bombardier offered the Guided Light Transit System as the potential interprovincial transit problem solver for us here in the NCR. Serious study was devoted to it but it was eventually refused for many of the reasons already stated here in the article. There was a big push back by a vocal minority of supporters of this technology due to the then new system in Caen and Nancy opening there and the positive system aspects everyone including Bombardier was promoting.

Ironically, in a country like Canada, known for its harsh winter weather, one of the biggest problems we have with any articulated bus of any design has been their absolutely poor performance in heavy snow and on slippery hilly roads. Ottawa’s Transitway BRT system must have its main right of way’s plowed during heavy snow storms immediately or else, the inevitable problem of most, if not all, of the Articulated bus fleet will be paralyzed by snow. This has happened enough times, trapping very serious percentages of the entire articulated fleet that, a system wide process is followed by O.C. Transpo during heavy winter snow storms to make sure the artics keep running.

One particularly bad winter storm that occurred during the time of the debate of whether the Guided Light Transit System should have been refused or not put the final nail in the Guided Light Transit System’s coffin. The storm produced some of the best pictures and operational reasons locally, why using very oddly designed , electrically powered, articulated busses for rapid transit service may not be a very good idea in a area that can get up to 50 cm (20 inches) of snow, in a single storm.

These are OC Transpo articulated buses caught in a later snow storm around 2006 in the Hull Sector of the City of Gatineau, outside the front of one of the large federal government office complexes in that city at Tache Blvd. and Eddy St. This illustrates OC Transpo’s snow issues with articulated buses.

https://www.cptdb.ca/index.php?showtopic=16620

LikeLike

LikeLike

This was an error conveniently introduced automatically by the original Excel spreadsheet. We’ve just corrected it!
— LRN blog editor

LikeLike