How the City Rail Link Transforms Auckland's Train Network while Vancouver is trapped by the BCMV

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmtSI3N57kM Auckland, like Brisbane, Sydney, Melbourne, Perth, Seattle, Edmonton, Toronto & Montreal... are just some of the cities that get to have longer train than provincial Vancouver.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_Rail_Link  

"Although the trains are capable of having extra cars added in groups of three, the CRL station platforms, as originally specified, would not be long enough to accommodate nine-car trains. The proposed new capacity is 54,000 passengers per hour with the station platforms to be made longer so they can take the longer trains..." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_Rail_Link#Capacity_forecast_forces_platform_enlargements 

9 car trains are possible for Auckland, because there isn't anything like a Vancouver Mind Virus (VMV) to thwart it. 

https://www.cityraillink.co.nz/meet-your-stations 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waitemat%C4%81_railway_station#Capacity Proper big city infrastructure planning and development, unlike backwards Vancouver.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waitemat%C4%81_railway_station#Electrification 

In contrast is the joke that is the two car Canada_Line. There was a deliberate decision, (apparently to save money) to not have a future station level clearance of at lest 100 m, if not even 160 m. So instead of planning for at least 5 car trains, there is only enough space for a 2.5 car joke of a train, some day.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada_Line#Stations "The five busiest stations have platforms 50 metres (160 ft) long, while the rest of the stations have 40-metre (130 ft) platforms that can be easily extended to 50 metres." 

Being that this is a line which could eventually link YVR to the Tsawwassen Ferry Terminal & eventually Waterfront station with Park Royal and even the Horseshoe Bay Ferry Terminal, the BC Mind Virus (BCMV) got in the way.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada_Line#Technology "The capacity of the trains is estimated at 334 people per pair of cars (comfortably) or 400 people at crush load." 

Since each car is 20 m and the stations are designed to a maximum of 50 m, every effort should be made to try to eventually have 60 m platforms. Unfortunately, it might be difficult enough just to try to gradually have 55 m stations. Still, the initial goal should be to try to have a 3 car train of 60 m. 

Then with Selective+Door+Operation, a 3 car train could become a 5 car train. Its unfortunate that there is such bad transportation planning in Greater Vancouver. Compared to backwards Vancouver, its great that nothing like a VMV has prevented Auckland from eventually having 9 car trains. The Montreal Metro and the Stockholm Subway can also have 9 car trains. Unlike Vancouver, several cities have no problem thinking big.

Auckland is so far away from the backwards mentality of Vancouver. Thus, Auckland is allowed to have longer trains than provincial Vancouver and taller buildings and even a wider harbor bridge. Of course the same can be said about Sydney and several other cities. 

A Speculative Map of Montreal Metro-REM-EXO

 https://www.reddit.com/r/TransitDiagrams/comments/1w9apwg/oc_montreal_metroremexo_speculative_map/ 

What if Montreal could have a Paris scale of transportation infrastructure? Unfortunately, Greater Montreal hasn't reached the 5 million point yet, let alone 10 million people. Thus, the really big city stuff is still quite a ways off. 

At least Montreal isn't stuck with a 3 lane LGB. So far, Vancouver isn't interested in building an express bus tunnel and an LRT tunnel next to the inadequate LGB. A line from Burrard_station to Park+Royal and the Horseshoe+Bay+ferry+terminal would be getting into proper big city transportation infrastructure. Just like a tunnel between Waterfront station and Lonsdale_Quay would be.

At least Le REM wasn't designed to be a 2 car joke of a train like the YVR-Canada+Line is. 

The stations on the first 2 Skytrain lines are barely half the length of a 9 car Metro station. While a REM station can accommodate a 4 car train, the Canada+Line stations can only accommodate a 2.5 car train, but only 2 car joke trains, so far.

Stockholm, SV

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm#Public_transportation 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_Metro Unfortunatly, provincial Vancouver isn't allowed to have proper long big city type trains like in Stockholm or the Montreal Metro.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_Metro#Rolling_stock

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SL_C30 , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SL_C20 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm#Roads

REM operator apologizes for lack of communication during morning disruptions

 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/rem-operator-apologizes-for-lack-of-communication-during-service-outages-wednesday-morning-9.7312084  

https://exo.quebec/en

At least the REM started out on a grander scale than the Skytrain. With SDO, a 4 car train could easily become 6. Then, as long as there is enough level station clearance, longer platforms should be possible. 

Someday, SDO could even allow a 9 car Montreal Metro train to have 11 car trains like in NYC on the 7. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_(New_York_City_Subway_service)#Fleet 11 car trains. 

The Oakridge–41st Avenue Station

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/oakridge-41st-avenue-station-early-closure-construction-august-2026

 https://www.richmond-news.com/highlights/vancouver-canada-line-station-close-early-august-2026-12675151 

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Oakridge-41st+Avenue 

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/canada-line-skytrain For a line of B$ to have opened in 2009 and is still only using 2 car joke trains is a pretty sad example of inept transportation infrastructure planning. 

Even using the argument that it was necessary to have a watered down or scaled back the YVR-Canada+Line to save money, this line of B$ still could have been designed to eventually become a proper big city like train. As long as the 50 m stations were designed with a future level clearance of 130 m to 153 m, the underground stations could have been as long as the Montreal Metro stations, or at least as long as the underground Edmonton LRT stations.

New South Wales H set trains

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_South_Wales_H_set 

Train length	81.55 m (267 ft 6+5⁄8 in)
Car length	20.34 m (66 ft 8+3⁄4 in) (OD) 20,435 mm (67 ft 1⁄2 in) (ON/ONL)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_South_Wales_H_set#Design 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Coast_Line 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydney_Trains 

Example of selective door operation. The doors in the first 2 carriages are not opened, because the platform is too short for an 8-carriage OSCAR train. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selective_door_operation (SDO)

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/95/Selective_Door_Operation.jpg/960px-Selective_Door_Operation.jpg 

This platform can accommodate 6 out of an 8 car heavy-rail train. 

This means that an extra car or 2 can be added to a shorter train, even if the station isn't long enough. 

Thus, before lengthening the stations on the first 2 Skytrain lines, a 5 car train could become a 7 car train. Perhaps even a 9 car train, like with the Montreal Metro trains. Eventually, the stations on the first 2 Skytrain lines could be lengthened for 7 car trains and whenever possible, 9 car trains.

Unfortunately, the 50 m level station clearance for the YVR-Canada Line trains wasn't designed for 5 car, 100 m trains, just a 2.5 car joke of a train. However, with some platform modifications and some very slight station lengthening, three 20 m cars might be possible, instead of a 2.5 car joke of a train.  

Then, once a 3 car, 60 m train is adapted to a 50-55 m platform, SDO can enable an extra car at each end to become a 5 car train. Perhaps ultimately, there could even be an extra 2 cars at each end of the middle 3 car train, to become a 7 car train.

Why Montreal’s shortest Metro line exists

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKI4DhIC2DY 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_Line_(Montreal_Metro)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDxX0HU3Srg REM 

Unlike the 2009 YVR-Canada Line, which is still only running 2 car joke trains, La REM has 4 car trains. Hardly as long as a 9 car Metro train, but it can run with shorter headways. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_Line_(Montreal_Metro)#Proposed_extensions 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_Line_(Montreal_Metro)#Rolling_stock 6 car trains

CN Tower celebrates 50 years of being a skyline icon

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ujWLEBhbdt8 

If it were possible today, the KEEP VANCOUVER SMALL AND BACKWARDS people would still not permit any building to be a 3rd of the height of the CN_Tower. (CNT) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CN_Tower#Height_comparisons

The Harbour_Centre opened just over a year after the CNT, and is just under a 3rd of its height. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harbour_Centre#Height

https://www.cntower.ca/

Unfortunately, The Vancouver Mind Virus (VMV) was able to ensure that the Canada_Line Stations aren't even quite a 3rd of the length of the 152.5 m Montreal Metro stations. 

Even the North-Shore mountains aren't allowed to be as tall as the mountains north of L.A. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Shore_(Greater_Vancouver) 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c0/LA_San_Gabriel_Mountains.jpg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Gabriel_Mountains#Gallery 

Whether you are from Toronto or Chicago, LA or SF, Melbourne or Sydney, you might be shocked as to seeing how scaled down or watered down Vancouver is. Yet, the City of Paris, despite having a slightly smaller land area than Vancouver, can fit so much more inside. Boston and SF are only slightly larger in area than the City of Vancouver, yet they can also fit in so much more. 

How the Seattle to Vancouver area could become a megaregion

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=POcg0oFvVf8 

The larger Portland, Seattle and the Vancouver, BC (V-BC) region has a lot of growth potential. However, Seattle size buildings haven't been allowed in Portland and in Vancouver, BC. Nothing like a 12 lane Ship Canal Bridge has been allowed in Portland and Vancouver. While Oregon and backwater BC haven't been able to thwart the largest city in Washington State, Seattle might eventually become more of a magnet in pulling more people into the area between Portland and V-BC. 

Right now, Vancouver, WA (V-WA) still has a wider bridge than V-BC. Most of the V-BC bridges are so damn narrow that its not possible to have an efficient regional express bus network. As long as there is a refusal to build proper BRT bridges as part of a regional system, it remains a sad joke. 

The Skytrain (LRT) was built with shorter stations than what the underground stations in Seattle and Edmonton are at. Whenever possible, the Skytrain stations are shorter than the C Train stations in Calgary, DART stations in Dallas and even the Max in Portland. 

The biggest mistake of the Skytrain was to not build all of the stations with a future level clearance to eventually have Montreal Metro size stations of 500 feet or 152.5 m. Instead, the first 2 lines only have 80 m stations and the line to YVR (The Canada embarrassment Line) is only 50 m. Backwater BC logic is that a 5 car Skytrain could run twice as frequent as a 9 car Montreal Metro train. Someday, a 2.5 car YVR-Canada Line train could also run much more frequently than a 9 car Montreal Metro train. 

There is just one key problem with that type of BC logic. While initially constructing short stations and having short trains can save money, its not proper BIG city size infrastructure. In the long run, it costs more to try to lengthen stations for longer BIG city type trains. 

Can the SkyTrain in BC, Canada ever become a very high capacity system?

 Why BC, Canada Got it Right With its New SkyTrain https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dqo_KAEF81k 

The argument is that a mostly elevated train can move more people than an 8-10 lane elevated freeway, at much less the cost. However, any major urban grade-separated LRT system should be designed to eventually become a very high capacity conduit.

The first 2 lines only have 80 m stations, which are just a little more than half the length of a 152.5 m Montreal Metro station. Unfortunately, the line to Richmond only has a designed level clearance for 50 m stations, not even quite a 3rd of the length of a Montreal Metro station platform. 

While it might seem economical to opt for short trains and stations, the Skytrain stations should have still been designed to eventually become more like a proper big city train station allowing for much higher capacity. 

The first 2 lines can run the newest 5 car trains, but the 3rd line can only run 2.5 car trains, some day.

The Unusual transportation approaches used in Vancouver

 https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/history/5-of-a-kind-unusual-modes-of-transportation-used-or-nearly-used-in-vancouver-12388220 

Vancouver is such an unusual and backwards city with its inefficient and congestive approach towards transportation infrastructure.

Getting rid of the streetcars and interurban trams was utterly foolish! Fortunately, such MADNE$$ wasn't adopted in Melbourne, SF, Toronto, Boston, Philadelphia and New Orleans. 

Just because a no freeways mandate was chosen for Vancouver, the streets should have been kept wide enough for busses as well as other vehicles. 

https://movementyvr.ca/the-case-of-vancouvers-nine-missing-bus-lanes

Despite most of the Vancouver bridges being too narrow, some bridge lanes were removed, because the city wasn't interested in building parallel bike bridges. 

Since most of the bridges are so narrow, there isn't enough room for proper express bus lanes. Of course the city isn't interested in building parallel bus bridges next to the narrow bridges. 

Since Vancouver is supposed to be a major, properly functioning city in Western Canada, the city should have pressed the designers of the first 2 Skytrain lines to make sure that all of the 80 m stations could gradually be extended to 152.5 m, the same as the 500 foot long Montreal Metro stations and trains.

Unlike the first 2 Skytrain lines, the Canada Line was only designed to ultimately have 50 m stations and trains. A 2 billion dollar line to YVR could have been designed in such a way that would have allowed it to look and function like a proper big-city passenger train. 

A commuter train to the North Shore keeps taking a long time to be finalized.

https://northshoreconnects.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/BIRT-Benefits-Assessment_Final.pdf

Think small and build backwards, or not at all. 

Canada Line station platforms being extended for interchange hub with Broadway Subway

 https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/canada-line-broadway-city-hall-station-platform-extension-millennium-line-interchange Fortunatly, the planning for the TTC Subway, Montreal Metro & Edmonton LRT, all have much longer stations than what backwards Vancouver settled for. 

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/skytrain-canada-line-rebuilding

Once all of the YVR-Canada Line stations have 50-metre-long platforms, it will become quite apparent that the long-range planning for 5 car trains wasn't seriously considered. The 50 m stations will only be long enough for a 2.5 car joke of a train. 

However, there is a potential to work around this particular manifestation of the Vancouver Mind Virus. Selective_door_operation can allow for longer trains, despite the ridiculous short Vancouver stations. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selective_door_operation#International_variations

There is such a problem with Vancouver and BC in general of not properly planning for future transportation infrastructure expansion. 

https://www.railforthevalley.com/latest-news/zweisystem/the-skytrain-lobby-get-over-it/

Montreal's metro is absolutely fantastic. For a system built after World War II, it's also shockingly inaccessible.

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GtJ7oXZVaMU

The Broadway Subway-Mount Pleasant to Broadway City Hall

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z64SisMwIuY 

Another illogical lane reduction project. Broadway was for the most part, always 6 lanes, 7, if you count the turning lane at major intersections. The train isn't a 24 hour service, so its important to always have 1 bus lane each way, especially if the train is shut down for an occasional emergency. Then there still should be 2 general lanes each way, because this isn't supposed to be a small town street or avenue. 

This, combined with so many 4 lane bridges, ensures that BC bottleneck-chokepoint planning remains firmly entrenched. 

A 5 car Vancouver train is expected to do the job of a 9 car Montreal Metro train. That's because a short Vancouver train can run a little more frequently than a 9 car Montreal Metro train, during even the most busy times of the day. Of course many proper cities have long big-city trains, because they aren't under anything like small thinking Vancouver, or a backwater BC mentality.

The standard short trains, narrow bridges & narrow streets and short buildings, are all part of holding the scale of Vancouver back. Apparently, if you can't build a wall around Vancouver, the next best thing is to continually plan and build symbolically for a provincial backwater of a city. 

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Selective+Door+Operation

Oakridge Park and Mall

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6Kwx7SctJ4 

Somehow the people around Broadway Station weren't able to stop this. Well, the Oakridge Station area is becoming its own town centre in that part of provincial Vancouver. Yet, the Broadway & Commercial area is already a big transportation intersection.

Despite the C-Line still only running 2 car joke trains, there is a potential to have 3 car trains. That's still pretty sad when the 50 m stations should have been built to eventually accommodate 5-6 car trains. Unfortunately, the planners never seriously considered to have a future level station clearance of 100-120 m. In contrast, the Montreal Metro has 152.5 m stations and can accommodate 9 car trains. The Vancouver Mind Virus (VMV) has always prevented the city from thinking on a big scale. 

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Oakridge+Park+Mall 

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Selective+Door+Operation

Is the SkyTrain (YVR) Canada Line under-built and nearing capacity, because of Short platforms and trains?

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/short-platforms-and-trains-is-the-skytrain-canada-line-under-built-and-nearing-capacity

Its one thing to build a line with stations that are only a 3rd of the length of a Montreal Metro station, but to no not properly allow for enough future level clearance is so inept. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selective_door_operation#International_variations

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/skytrain-canada-line-rebuilding 

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/canada-line-skytrain This and the 3 lane Lion Bridge should get an award for the blatant symbolism of not wanting to build proper big-city infrastructure in backwards BC.

Eight more Mark V trains are now in service on SkyTrain's Expo Line

 https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/skytrain-mark-v-trains-incoming-arrivals-april-2026 

While the Montreal Metro can run 9 car trains and Auckland is planning to eventually have 9 car trains, the 1st Skytrain line can only run 5 car trains. The 2nd and 3rd Skytrain lines are still only running 2 car joke trains.

Combine that with mostly narrow regional bridges, and BC is clearly maintaining its congestive transportation agenda.

YVR-Canada Line and REM Train in Montreal

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1ouk0VifwM&t=42s Its as if the YVR-Canada Line had to be built as a symbolically small city train for provincial Vancouver. Urban transportation infrastructure can be designed in ways that can double or even triple capacity to meet future demand. Unfortunately, its very difficult to build anything in backwards BC with significant future capacity in mind.

Ultimately, the YVR-Canada Line should have had level station clearances to eventually be able to accommodate 5-10 car trains. Unfortunately, in typical backwards BC planning the stations weren't even designed with enough level clearance to accommodate 5 car trains. The joke that is the Canada Line only has a level station clearance of 50m to eventually accommodate just a 2.5 car train. 

Most other cities actually build long stations to accommodate long trains, right in the first place. Or, at least allow for enough level clearance so that the stations can eventually be doubled or tripled in length. 

The YVR-Canada Line should have started with the Vancouver & Richmond segment, then the Vancouver and Horseshoe+Bay+ferry+terminal segment. Then finally, the YVR to Delta and the Tsawwassen+ferry+terminal through a proper Richmond-Delta+Tunnel or bridge crossing. 

The short SkyTrain Stations in Greater Vancouver https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Qg78Bmf1fk

Unfortunately, proper big city transportation planning is very difficult to achieve in backwards BC. So many things are watered down in small-scale Vancouver.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Montreal’s Biggest REM Expansion Yet https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4G1oeIAfxDU&t=106s 

The Montreal REM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9O6RzsXIqQ 

While the REM was designed to help the Metro, it should have the capability to be gradually expanded. Eventually, REM trains should be lengthened from 4 car trains to 6 car trains, perhaps even 8. 

In contrast, every Skytrain line should have been designed with enough level future station clearance to eventually accommodate a train as long as a 152.5 m (500 ft.) long Montreal Metro train. The first 2 Skytrain lines have 80m stations and the joke that is the Canada Line only has 50m stations. 

While the first 2 lines can accommodate 5 car trains, the C Line wasn't designed to accommodate 5 car trains. Just 2.5 car trains, someday. 

Despite there being such a symbolic push for Vancouver to keep having short trains, narrow bridges and stumpy buildings, things are gradually changing in backwards BC. The Vancouver or BC Mind Virus should have been challenged decades ago, but too many loud people wanted to perpetuate the, KEEP THINGS SMALL AND INDEQUATE agenda.

Given how most of the bridges in Greater Vancouver are so narrow, there isn't enough room for proper bus and HOV lanes, or even wide emergency lanes. One would think that at least the trains & stations would have been designed to eventually be doubled or tripled in length. But that would go against the mutigenerational congestive planning agenda. That's why there still is only a 3 lane LGB when there should have been at least a parallel bus, HOV and train tunnel. The Pattullo+Bridge replacement didn't open with 2 bus and 2 HOV lanes, not even wide shoulders or emergency lanes. NW really likes the congestive planning approach. Of course the new tunnel between Richmond and Delta won't have an additional provision for a train tube. This will also help to perpetuate the congestive transportation mandate. 

Fortunately, Selective_door_operation technology can eventually allow more sensible transportation planners to enable longer trains. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selective_door_operation#International_variations , https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YdH5d1ZthmM 

This means that a 5 car Skytrain (85m) could eventually become a 7 car train, despite the 80m stations. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SkyTrain_(Vancouver)_rolling_stock#Alstom_Mark_V Thus, an 80m train can become a 117m train.

A two car and 2.5 car (50m) train on the multibillion dollar Canada Line is so absurd and inept! With some slight station modifications, there could be a potential to eventually accommodate three, 20m cars at the very short platforms. Then, once 3 car trains could become possible, its just a matter of having an extra 20m car at both ends of each train. Thus, a 5 car train of 100m is so much better than a 50m joke of a train. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SkyTrain_(Vancouver)#Alstom_Mark_V_fleet 

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=SkyTrain-Canada+Line

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=REM+Train

Vancouver 1960s vs Today: The Shocking Difference

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnMLMp_gf1w 

Unlike Toronto, SF and Melbourne, Vancouver was one of the first cities to get rid of streetcars and tram-trains or interurbans. Backwards Vancouver will likely be one of the last cities to ever bring them back. 

No office tower in Vancouver was allowed to have a 30th floor before the 1970s. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TD_Tower_(Vancouver) The first 30 story office tower in backwater BC opened in 1972. As of 2026, no office tower in Vancouver, or anywhere in BC has been permitted to have a 40th floor. 

As of 2026, no Skytrain stations are even close to the length of the Montreal Metro, TTC subway and underground Edmonton LRT stations. 

Unfortunately, almost every city around the world is expensive. Its just that you get less of things in Vancouver. Short trains, short buildings, narrow bridges and mostly narrow streets. 

Thus, its no surprise that there isn't a regional network of bus-bridges. Congestive transportation planning is what Vancouver does best. 

Vancouver seems to be reluctant in constructing a network of bike-bridges. The city would rather remove a total of 5 lanes from 3 bridges for bike lanes. 

Broadway will eventually be reduced from 6 lanes to 4 lanes so that even some small towns will have wider major streets.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vancouver

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_municipalities_in_Canada_by_population 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lower_Mainland

K Line (Los Angeles Metro)

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K_Line_(Los_Angeles_Metro) 

https://la.urbanize.city/post/metro-seeks-state-funds-extend-green-line-platforms 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K_Line_(Los_Angeles_Metro)#Rolling_stock 

Car length	89 ft (27.13 m)
Width	8 ft 8+3⁄4 in (2.66 m)
Height	12 ft 6 in (3.81 m)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinki_Sharyo_P3010 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/07/LA_Metro_Rail_Expo_Line_Kinki_Sharyo_P3010_17th_St_Santa_Monica_College_Station_%2848943282587%29.jpg/960px-LA_Metro_Rail_Expo_Line_Kinki_Sharyo_P3010_17th_St_Santa_Monica_College_Station_%2848943282587%29.jpg  

https://www.metro.net/projects/kline-northern-extension Just like in SD, Seattle, Calgary and Edmonton, their LRT trains are longer than the ones on the first 2 Skytrain lines. Especially, the embarrassing Canada Line. 

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2026-03-24/this-rail-line-would-get-you-to-grove-beverly-center-cedars-sinai-is-it-l-a-s-missing-link In backwards BC its like it takes 2 or 3 people to turn a lightbulb than someone in Quebec. An 80m Skytrain on the first 2 lines would have to be about twice as frequent as a 152.5m Montreal Metro train to match capacity. The ridicules 50m maximum allowance for Canada Line trains would have to run 3 times as frequently as a Montreal Metro train. 

https://la.streetsblog.org/2026/03/18/metro-committee-again-sides-with-nimbys-postpones-key-north-k-line-rail-decision Unfortunatly, the Vancouver Mind Virus is all about holding back the scale of the city. Thus, anytime that a bridge or street can be narrower, a building kept shorter and especially a train kept short, is all part of the imposed symbolism of refusing to build on a BIG city scale. 

Sunny L.A. has been thinking, planning and building like a BIG city for over a century. In contrast, rainy Vancouver has been refusing to think on a big city scale throughout its history. For several decades, all White city counsels kept imposing various restrictions to keep Vancouver on a small scale.