Fortunately, Toronto & Montreal had enough vision to plan & build 152.45m or 500 foot long subway & metro stations. Even Edmonton & Seattle have much longer underground train stations than the Vancouver-Richmond train or the YVR
Canada+Line. The Vancouver C-Line is a fine example of congestive & inept planning and should be studied all around the world as a warning. It could be called the, FINANCIAL DRAINAGE LINE, or the, CATHETER LINE. That's because the ridiculous 50m stations aren't even quite a 3rd of the length of the 152.5m Montreal Metro trains & stations. Thus, it will be difficult to lengthen these very short stations.
It's one thing if the
C+Line was started off with absurdly, short 2.5 car trains, but at least the stations were already built to gradually accomodate 5 car trains, plus still have extra clearance for even 5 more coaches. That would have been a reasonable attempt of planning for future capacity, but that's something BC just isn't that good at. The stations should have been designed to be ultimately accomodate 10 car trains, not some quarter-length joke.
Eventually, three 20m coaches could be linked together. Then an extra 20m coach at both ends of each 3 car, 60m train. While a five car, 100m train would seem too long for 50m, inadequate BC stations, a walkthrough train makes it a possibility. That and
Selective_door_operation makes a 5 car train quite possible.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-train
"The operation of the Central Circle is similar to the S-Train systems in Germany and other countries."
Russians aren't afraid to use good German technology.
I wish that they would allow some of that German tech in BC but BC still strives to maintain and keep things at a smaller scale.
The Moscow Circle Line is a much more recent development than the one in London.
There is suppose to be secret deeper level subway around Moscow.
Of course when severe flooding occurs, the subways are among the first things to be affected.
How in the hell is the 3rd SkyTrain line constructed to have such small stations, in-spite of increasing future demand?
No city has spent billions of dollars just to have 2 car trains, except Vancouver & Richmond.
Sure, in the early years, Montreal could run a little 3 car train, but their Metro stations were designed to accommodate a 9 car train during the very busy times & 6 car trains for intermediate demand.
So the BC inept planning process never allowed for a future demand of at least 152.5 m or 500 foot long stations & platforms. Instead, they designed the max potential to be only 50m or 164 feet. That's pathetic & only adds to the deliberate bottleneck planning approach that backwards BC aspires to.
As long as a line above ground & especially underground, has level sections of 500, 600 or 700 feet, then full length stations can be constructed.
When BC planers only allowed for a 50m or 164 foot level section for each Catheter Line,
If a system starts out with little trains but has designed the ability to triple or quadruple the length of the station platforms, then its just a matter of building that future extension right from the start or at some point later on.
Chicago & BART can still run ridiculous 4 car trains but the capacity to run 10 car trains was built in right from the start.
SYDNEY and its metro
Not only does Sydney have much longer trains & platforms, they are double level trains! Its like BC has made sure that it must never match the capacity that NSW &
New_England has allowed for.
TOP 10 of the most beautiful trains in Japan
V-BC strives to perpetually be one of the most stunted or underbuilt major cities on the planet.
