The REM vs. Reality: Does Montreal's new train meet expectations? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eq1xpxOt7FM&t=596s
Montreal’s Biggest REM Expansion Yet! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4G1oeIAfxDU&t=12s
How Montreal’s miracle metro could change everything https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XlHqqA0onn0
Evolution of the Montreal Metro & REM 1966-2030 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zvOk2t1EpE
The REM vs. Reality: Does Montreal's new train meet expectations? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eq1xpxOt7FM
https://macleans.ca/society/montreals-new-rail-line-is-the-future/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Paris_Express , https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88nkbjsLbI8
| Formation |
|
|---|---|
| Capacity | 932 per train (8 cars set) |
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MP_14_(Paris_Metro)
| Train length |
|
|---|---|
| Car length | 15.04 m (49 ft 4 in) |
The Transit Every Airport Needs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YeVZVluQWI&t=247s
https://www.upexpress.com/en/about-up/things-are-looking-up Its only a two and three car train, when it should be between 4-6 cars, depending upon the time of day. https://www.torontopearson.com/en/transportation-and-parking/up-express
At least it's not a perpetual 2 car train joke that is the YVR-Canada Line. The eventual airport REM line should consist of 4 car trains, but the entire REM should eventually have 6 car trains.
Somehow, Melbourne, Sydney, Brisbane & Perth all are able to have longer trains to the airport. The 10 car SFO-BART trains are pretty cool.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwsOVZ-j7hg
Oakridge_Park is on a much smaller scale than Metrotown, Brentwood and Lougheed. It will especially be on a much smaller scale than Parramatta in NSW.
Unfortunatly, the Oakridge-41st_Avenue_station was only designed to have 50m platforms, when it should have been at least 100m. Thus, the utter foolishness has meant that instead of allowing for a future level station clearance to accomodate 5 car trains, the Canada (embassament) Line was only designed to just have 2.5 car trains. While its extremely short stations might have been disguised as a cost saving measurer, there didn't seem to be any key people onboard to make sure that it could eventually become a proper big city train line. Its sad that a line which opened in 2009 is still only running 2 car trains. While the 2.5 car configuration is still a joke of a train, at least half of an extra coach-length is better than nothing. Plus, there should have been extra cars ordered by now so at least during the very busy times the trains could be operating at 1 minute headways. Unfortunatly, this goes against the Vancouver & BC congestion planning mentality.
Despite being built several years after the Sydney_Harbour_Bridge, the joke that is the Pattullo_Bridge was designed to only have 4 narrow lanes & only 1 sidewalk. Of course the replacement_bridge will only open with 2 lanes each way. It was as if someone really wanted to make sure that there won't be 2 bus lanes and no HOV lanes when the bridge opens. While the new bridge is designed to be expanded from a 4 lane joke to eventually having 6 lanes, it still won't be wide enough to accomodate 2 HOV lanes as well as 2 bus lanes. Of course the new bridge won't have any emergency lanes, just like the old bridge. However, it will have 2 bike lanes and 2 sidewalks. https://www.globalhighways.com/news/pattullo-bridge-completion-end-year Its only fitting that in backwards BC this new bridge wouldn't be designed to eventually have a lower deck to accomodate 2 bus lanes and 2 LRT tracks.
If the planners were afraid to symbolically have a wide bridge between NW and Surrey, the old Pattullo_Bridge should have been designed to eventually have a lower deck for trams, trucks and busses. Even when the SkyBridge between NW and Surrey opened in 1990, it wasn't designed to have any bus lanes or emergency vehicle lanes and especially, no bike and footpaths.
Is Vancouver the best city in North America? (2019) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8dmVUrNt38
One of the biggest mistakes in Vancouver & SW BC is to have short trains combined with mostly narrow bridges. Thus, the region doesn't get to have long, high capacity trains and there isn't a proper regional network of bus-bridges. The refusal to twin most of the bridges means that it's almost impossible to have a proper and efficient regional network of rapid-bus and HOV lanes.
While Montreal built the REM to augment their long-train Metro system, Vancouver should have allowed for enough clearance to eventually have 500 foot long trains. 80m-50m Skytrain stations are going to become inadequate, when there should have been a 152.4m provision so that the trains could eventually become as long as the ones on the Montreal Metro.
Is Regional Rail in the Future of British Columbia? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1PeIOVy6fFc
https://dailyhive.com/montreal/montreal-trudeau-international-airport-yul-expansion-rem-train
https://www.admtl.com/en-CA/corporate/about-us/future-projects
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YUL%E2%80%93A%C3%A9roport-Montr%C3%A9al%E2%80%93Trudeau_station
https://www.admtl.com/en-CA/parking-and-transport/roadworks
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/yul-trudeau-airport-10-billion-transformation-1.7586489
Eventually, the Pierre+Elliott+Trudeau+International+Airport could have 3 long runways. Fortunately, there is enough clearance to lengthen the shortest runway.
https://www.admtl.com/en-CA/community/soundscape-management/construction-on-runways-and-taxiways
Orly_Airport has 3 runways.
Sea-Tac also has 3 runways, but are all parallel.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seattle-Tacoma_International_Airport
Heathrow_Airport has 2 very long runways.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heathrow_Airport#Future_expansion_and_plans
Charles_de_Gaulle_Airport has 2 very long runways, plus 2 of moderate length.
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/r2-rapidbus-north-shore-metrotown-burnaby-route-extension
https://aquilinidevelopment.com/community/kwasen-village
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Royal_Tunnel
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Royal_Tunnel#REM
https://rem.info/en/news/first-passage-rem-through-mount-royal-tunnel-and-start-dynamic-testing-area
https://www.montrealgazette.com/news/article144286.html
Even the REM train stations should be expandable to eventually accomodate 6-8 car trains.
The Dunsmuir_Tunnel was rebuilt to become a double deck tunnel providing a split_platform station configuration. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Split_platform#North_America
Unfortunatly, the Burrard_station & Granville_station platforms were only built to be 80m, when they should have been 155m-160m. This would have helped to eventually have 9 car SkyTrains, just like 9 car Montreal Metro trains.
With proper long-range planning in mind, the SkyTrain should have been planned to eventually be a double length LRT system. Instead, its been challenging enough just to establish 5 car trains on the first 2 lines.
Unfortunatly, the 3rd line or Canada_Line was built to only have 50m, whereas the Montreal Metro has 152.5m long stations.
The Canada_Line_Stations have platforms that are only 50 metres (160 ft) long, when all the stations should have been built with a future clearance of 160m. That would have allowed for a future provision to eventually accommodate at least 8 car trains at each station.
https://montreal.citynews.ca/2025/02/18/winds-to-intensify-montreal/
https://montreal.citynews.ca/2025/02/18/rem-service-disruptions-continue Montreals version of the Skytrain should have a snow-plough at both ends of each train.
https://montreal.citynews.ca/2025/02/18/exo-trains-cancelled-snow-accumulation Even for the big trains, at a certain point a snow-plough might not be able to properly clear the tracks.
https://montreal.citynews.ca/2025/02/18/montreal-snow-disabled-mobility-challenges/
https://montreal.citynews.ca/2025/02/17/snow-piling-up-montreal-clearing-loading
https://www.montrealgazette.com/news/article760907.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reseau_express_metropolitain
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alstom_Metropolis_Saint-Laurent
| Train length | 38.1 m (125 ft) per unit |
|---|---|
| Car length | 19.05 m (62 ft 6 in) over coupler faces |
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alstom_Metropolis_Saint-Laurent#Design_and_construction Two 125 foot trains = 250 feet, or half the length of a 9 car Metro train.
An 8 car [19.05 m (62 ft 6 inch)] REM train version of this would be great for Vancouver, but an improved Skytrain could be just as good. Unfortunatly, BC has a tough time thinking big for the future.
https://montreal.citynews.ca/2025/02/18/rem-service-disruptions-continue/
However, any elevated line or exposed rapid transit train in Montreal, is always potentially disrupted during the winter.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/montreal-rem-out-of-service-1.7461000
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R%C3%A9seau_express_m%C3%A9tropolitain#Future_sections
The genius of the Montreal_Metro trains is that they are all underground.
https://montreal.citynews.ca/2025/02/17/stormy-weather-continues-in-montreal/
Vancouver & BC always have a difficult time in properly planning & building infrastructure for significant future capacity. Thus, just because the SkyTrain is considered to be a Light Rail Vehicle, it still should have been designed to eventually have (152.5m) long trains, like the Montreal Metro has. If you are visiting from Montreal or Toronto, you will be shocked as to how short the Vancouver SkyTrains & stations are.
It's not that BC is in some kind of a timewarp, it's just that there has been some kind of a strange multigenerational mentality or agenda. Since the BC part of Canada doesn't have the authority or the technology to generate a force_field around its perimeter, the next best thing was to have very restrictive laws. That's especially the case for Vancouver & Victoria. Plus, a general encouragement to symbolically think small & backwards.
Having short trains, narrow bridges & mostly short buildings, all fits in with the symbolism of a reluctance to accommodate significant urban growth. Canada it self is also part of this larger predicament. Despite its size, Canada is nowhere close to containing even just 1% of the worlds population. Given that most of the human population is non-white, this poses an interesting dilemma.
Of course during tougher economic times, immigration is generally frowned upon. However, even during various economic boom-times, Vancouver & Victoria continued to lag behind with the scale of its infrastructure development.
Unlike BC, at least Montreal has a good level of infrastructure, when its working.
https://montreal.citynews.ca/2024/11/01/service-green-line-montreal-metro/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LiTS6RYr_Vw , https://www.youtube.com/@ReseauexpressmetropolitainREM/videos
Le REM, un nouveau trait d’union https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sEu817iPBws
A Ride on the Montreal REM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q23mkh8rX88, https://www.youtube.com/@RMTransit/videos
https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/montreal-metro
It would have been total chaos if the Montreal_Metro (MM) only had 80m stations, just like on the first 2 SkyTrain lines. An absolute disaster if it only had 50m stations like on the very underbuilt Canada Line. Unfortunatly, Vancouver took the watered down approach, decades after what Montreal did right.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreal_Metro#Rolling_stock
When starting in the 1960s, the MM could have 3 & 6 car trains and a 9 car train during busy times, in recent decades, it's just 6 and 9 car trains.
Streetcars and trams, along with buses, can help any Metro train or Subway system. Unlike Montreal and Vancouver, cities like Melbourne, Toronto, Boston, Philadelphia, SF and New Orleans, retained some of their tram or streetcar lines.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPM-10
| 9 articulated cars per train |
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPM-10#Specifications
Of course a good urban transportation network keeps evolving and the REM trains are a nice addition. The REM trains should eventually be at least as long as those on the Sydney Subway.
https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Montreal+Metro
https://www.planetizen.com/news/2023/08/124945-new-rem-light-rail-launches-montreal
As long as the trains can eventually become double the length, then Montreal can avoid a Vancouver type delema.
https://rem.info/en/reseau-express-metropolitain
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel-De_Champlain_Bridge
https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=REM+Train
https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Samuel-De+Champlain+Bridge
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/montreal-rem-vancouver-skytrain-comparison
If the SkyTrain could ever have longer stations & longer trains, then it might be on the same level as even the Montreal Metro, let alone REM.
Most bridges in Greater Vancouver are so narrow, because there was no provision to have bus and HOV lanes. The+Lion+Bridge+and+The+Iron+Bridge are 2 classic examples of not constructing additional infrastructure to accommodate bus lanes, HOV lanes and especially, rail rapid transit. That's because such improvements would actually go against the congestive urban planning agenda.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lacey_V._Murrow_Memorial_Bridge , https://www.historylink.org/file/21298 A narrow 4 lane BC type bridge was upgraded to an 8 lane crossing, plus 2 LRT tracks for WA.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narrows_Bridge_(Perth) From a basic bridge to a nice 10 lane crossing with 2 train tracks for WA. https://structurae.net/en/structures/narrows-bridge Its great that the horrible backwards Vancouver mentality never made it to Perth. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-11-13/perth-narrows-bridge-60-years-since-construction/11697812 Unfortunately, Vancouver & BC have done their damndest to prevent a similar nice, wide crossing, which also includes 6_car_trains. While backwards Vancouver & BC didn't want to build wider infrastructure simply to accomodate more drivers, the funds didn't seem to go towards a regional rapid bus or at least an express bus & HOV network with its own set of bridges. The SkyTrain should have been designed with a provision to eventually have stations at least as long as those on the Montreal Metro, which can accomodate 9 car trains on a 500 ft platform or 152.5 m. https://heritage.engineersaustralia.org.au/wiki/Place:Constructing_Narrows_Bridges
The old Champlain_Bridge_in Montreal just had 3 lanes each way & no provision for a train. Where as the new Samuel-De_Champlain_Bridge provides 4 lanes each way & has 2 REM train tracks. https://www.samueldechamplainbridge.ca Fortunately, Montreal, like Seattle & Perth was able to have a nice wide bridge with 2 train tracks in the middle. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel-De_Champlain_Bridge#Construction_method
Montreal, Seattle & Perth are allowed to exist on a larger scale than backwards Vancouver, because they don't have the same imposed restrictions. Urban Quebec and urban WA are able to do so much more, because they aren't hindered by anything like the backwards BC mentality.
Risk assessment model of bottlenecks for urban expressways using survival analysis approach https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S235214651730474X
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ironworkers_Memorial_Second_Narrows_Crossing
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Champlain_Bridge_(Montreal,_1962-2019) Both became classic 6 lane bottlenecks or chokepoints. That's because more than 6 lanes of traffic connected to such bridges.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel-De_Champlain_Bridge An 8 lane bridge with 2 REM tracks. While I would like it to have been 10 or 12 lanes with 4 tracks, its still so much better than what backwards Vancouver would allow. 8 lanes plus 2 HOV lanes & 2 bus lanes, because the REM train isn't running 24 hours.
The+Lion+Bridge+and+The+Iron+Bridge are just too inadequate to be modern transportation crossings.
The inept Lion_Bridge should have had bus & train tunnels built next to it decades ago.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lions_Gate_Bridge An 8 lane road tunnel could allow the Lions-Gate-Bridge to become a foot & bike crossing, but that's what a proper big city would do.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FVfdglQUAAEiQZV?format=jpg&name=large Vancouver Stumps vs. Towers.
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vancouvers-shrinking-skyline Holding Vancouver back is what you do when you symbolically don't want to acomodate growth. Whit so much scaled back infrastructure, who knows where the money went?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-Or_vNc2Z4&list=RDCMUCf4iKXL_SJQ5d0qsKkboRRQ&index=3
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Usk9J-tpzTA&list=RDCMUCf4iKXL_SJQ5d0qsKkboRRQ&index=5
the Montreal Metro, North America's 3rd busiest subway system https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfYgsWxqiUg metro https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCJPr0UOR3I
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iEiPl-EdHYc REM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VnXj0_H71ig&list=RDCMUCf4iKXL_SJQ5d0qsKkboRRQ&index=13 REM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CFSm9QLHrLw rem https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQ5Hxor0vAM
