p_xavier
Active Member
I don't think that was ever the intention of the CDPQ, besides what VIA and the feds were saying.
|
|
|
Montréal Transit Developments
- Thread starter Ansem
- Start date
asher__jo
Active Member
Perhaps not, although the infrastructure bank did give money to REM and is also giving money to VIA. I wouldn't be surprised if they come up with some convoluted compromise, perhaps even creating a long-term plan for a secondary tunnel for VIA and Exo to use (while using the Mount Royal tunnel for a period of 10 years until construction/funding, etc is complete).
felix123
Active Member
I'm not trying to poke fun at you, but if the REM ends up being a success, will you be sad about that?
At this point in your relentless fight against the REM, you're comparing E-M station to a theoretical setup at Lawrence East, which is not being implemented.
As Torontonians, we have every reason to cheer Montreal's rapid transit on, because things are glum here and we need a good example to be set within Canada.
felix123
Active Member
I believe that the idea to share with VIA HFR was brought up before and afaik it was never ruled out.
The timing of the VIA services would be pretty tight, given the high frequency of the REM through the trunk, but I certainly hope it will be shared, at least temporarily.
ARG1
Senior Member
The chance of sharing is 0, plain and simple.
At 3 minute headways, that is far below the minimum allowed headways for heavy rail (5 mins iirc), not to mention that the signalling system will be completely incompatible with VIA trains. To answer simply, If we want VIA Rail to use the Mont-Royal Tunnel, we build a new tunnel. There is no other way about it.
nfitz
Superstar
I'm not sure what kind of question that is. Why do you react to my criticism in this particularly thread, and not the other threads - such as when I ridicule the unnecessarily deep Lawrence East station in that thread. Or the unnecessary tunnel in the Eglinton West thread. Or the station spacing and above-ground section in the Ontario thread?
REM is a great idea - poorly implemented. Why do Torontonians need to treat out-of-town projects differently than we treat our own projects?
I've said time and time again that REM is a good thing. Though I don't see why to be glum here - there's far more projects and kilometres of rail transit under construction and planned here than in Montreal.
For example, I was attacked here when I suggested that an above-ground terminal at the west end of the proposed LRT towards Montreal-Nord seemed not a great idea - I was told here that was impossible. And yet, I believe the current plan is to do it underground. Why was I wrong to criticize that? Why did no one criticize the ones who claimed it was impossible?
smallspy
Senior Member
Once again....
There is no such thing as a "minimum headway" for heavy rail. Trains operate as they see fit, within the safety boundaries laid out by the signalling system.
Dan
drum118
Superstar
ARG1
Senior Member
Perhaps but the point ultimately is that the REM is designed in order to run 90s headways. Unless I'm overlooking something crucial, there is physically no way to integrate any external train to use the tunnel with such strict headways. Not to mention that any prospective VIA train must be able to use the REM's signalling system, and draw power from the 1500V DC power that the REM uses (so possibly 2 different electrification styles for GO and REM when it comes down to this).
asher__jo
Active Member
No, under those parameters it isn't likely. I wouldn't be surprised if the federal government leans hard on the CDPQ to allow VIA trains for a period of time though.
nfitz
Superstar
Is it even physically possible? I thought there some structural changes to the tunnel - especially through ... whatever they call Metro Vincent-d'Indy now.
Though given that HFR is probably years away ... probably moot. I'd assume that if they don't go around the mountain - one way or another - they'll simply terminate the trains at new new interchange station with the REM. And is that such a bad thing? Might be more convenient for some, who would change from VIA to the Blue and Green lines ... or the REM itself. (will this still be the Red Line - Line 3?)
ARG1
Senior Member
The electrification requirement is a big one. You can't run diesel trains through the Mont-Royal tunnel - they must be electrified. So, in order to run VIA trains through it, you must have a locomotive that is capable of drawing 1500V DC power. That's an investment that I highly doubt the federal government would be willing to make.
lrt's friend
Active Member
So much for the Ottawa-Montreal-Quebec route.
I don't care how frequent REM runs. If I want to make a trip to Quebec City from Ottawa, I don't want to transfer twice in Montreal, all my luggage in tow.
nfitz
Superstar
Then move all VIA service from Central to a new terminal at Cote-de-Liesse station (which would indeed require taking over some properties on the west side of the Deux-Montagnes line, and reinstating the curve through the new Stinson garage). I don't think travel times would be any worse than to Central - heck, might even be faster.
(BTW, does anyone really think of the Autoroute 40 slip roads along there being Cote-de-Liesse? In my mind they always end where the 520 ends, near Blvd Alexis-Nihon - but I've not walked around that neighbourhood much).
But that would make it difficult to serve the Drummondville service - not to mention the trains to New York.
The answer is clear really - the Trois-Rivieres HFR service will be coming around the mountain, one way or another. Would be really cool if they could go around the east side, through the Port. Would probably necessitate a new link/viaduct from near Wellington/Bourassa to the Ports ROW - though perhaps the ship has sailed on that with all the redevelopment. And reconnecting the two branches of the CP line just east of Parc Avenue - which looks pretty doable.
Yeah, probably absurdly infeasible - so Montreal to Quebec City via Lachine it is.
Would be cool though, to see VIA trains stopping at Parc station. and along by the Port. Hmm, I wonder if there's a way to get the VIA service onto the CP line at Montreal West, instead of the CN line through the yard. Topography there would be difficult where the CP and CN lines cross near Norman Street.
I do love that road tunnel though! It was a favourite decades ago, racing out to Dorval, slightly late, to catch a VIA train, in evening rush hour!
Xav
Active Member
The cool thing is that she is the daughter of the woman who is the voice of the Metro