Honolulu’s Skyline Rail Expands to West Honolulu, and to a New Airport Station

 https://www.travelandtourworld.com/news/article/honolulus-skyline-rail-expands-to-west-honolulu-bringing-faster-more-sustainable-public-transit-to-oahu-with-a-new-airport-station 

Even if the widest parts of the H-1 could be 10 or 12 lanes, it would still get plugged up. Nevertheless, being from Vancouver, it's quite impressive to see such a wide H-1 by the airport. If you visit Vancouver from Hawaii, you might think that Vancouver is a big city like Sydney, SF or Seattle. Then you discover that the roads & bridges are much narrower than what's in those cities. The real big surprise is that Vancouver not only has shorter trains than Sydney, SF & Seattle, but even Edmonton. Fortunately, the Skyline to the airport isn't a 2 car joke of a train like Vancouver's airport line is.

https://honolulutransit.org/about/route-map , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyline_(Honolulu)#Route

https://www.honolulu.gov/dts/skyline

The Airport Segment.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyline_(Honolulu)#Segment_2:_Airport 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lelepaua_station If only Vancouver's line to the airport could have opened with 4 car trains, then with Selective_door_operation, eventually 6 car trains. Unfortunatly, backwards Vancouver has been stuck with a 2 car YVR train since 2009, but it has the potential to become a 2.5 car joke of a train, someday.  

Downtown Honolulu.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyline_(Honolulu)#Segment_3:_City_Center 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyline_(Honolulu)#Ala_Moana_extension 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyline_(Honolulu)#Rolling_stock "The line uses 256 ft (78 m) four-car train sets, each with the capacity to carry nearly 800 passengers..."  "Each car is 64 ft (20 m) long, weighs 72,000 lb (33,000 kg), and has 36 seats with a listed total capacity of 195 people, and sits on standard-gauge (1,435 mm) rails." 

While the Skyline cars are similar in length to the YVR-Canada-Line cars, they are of a heavier construction. Plus, the trains are twice as long as any on the embarrassingly short Canada+Line trains.

While it took a long time to get the Skyline to the airport, at least the stations were all initially built to accommodate 4 car trains. Unfortunatly, the joke that is the SkyTrain-Canada+Line is still only running 2 car trains and wasn't designed to eventually have 5 car trains. Its difficult to understand why the joke-line stations are only designed to accommodate a 2.5 car train, someday.

Honolulu like Brisbane, are very far away from the Vancouver Mind Virus (VMV) and much warmer. Thus, they are able to have longer trains to the airport, because they can build on a proper big city scale.  

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Brisbane+Airport+Railway+Line 

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=the+airport+train

The Canada (embarrassment) Line

Using the limited funds and low capacity argument is excrement! It's only because of inept urban planning that the Canada+Line is such a transportation embarrassment & sad joke since 2009. Several other cities around the world are able to think big, they plan & build in a long-term way. Thus, if there are only enough funds to build a 2.5 car train, the stations could have been designed to eventually accomodate 5 car trains as demand increases. Plus, all the stations should have been designed with enough clearance to gradually be long enough for 10 car trains.

https://www.translink.ca/-/media/translink/documents/plans-and-projects/regional-transportation-strategy/transport-2050/backgrounders/transport_2050_backgrounder_action_2_rapid_transit_network.pdf

An ultimate capacity of 10 car trains connecting both ferry terminals with the airport & downtown Vancouver, would really have been properly planning for the future. 10 car trains running every 2 minutes during the busiest times of the day would efficiently allow a lot people to get around. Unfortunatly, it will be challenging enough just to eventually have 5 car trains.

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

The absurdity to design the stations to only handle 2.5 car trains is a sad joke. The ultimate capacity of two 20m cars with a 10m filler car is so inadequate & pathetic, but this is the BC part of Canada. This backwards & backwater thinking must be challenged. 

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/skytrain-future-station-locations

With some modifications, three 20m cars could form a 60m train, despite the absurd platforms only having a clearance for 50m. A 60m walkthrough train makes this possible, its just that the doors at either end wouldn't reach the short station platform. Selective_door_operation could enable the Canada Line to go from a 2 car & 2.5 car joke, to a 3 car & ultimately, a 5 car train. That's still a far cry from cities with 10 car trains running every 2 minutes. However, a 5 car train running every minute could make all the difference for Greater Vancouver.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/what-you-need-to-know-north-shore-wastewater-treatment-plant-1.7235368# Aparently, there is enough money to overpay for a $HIT-PIPE and a $HIT-BOX, but not enough funds to build a proper high capacity train over a couple of decades.  

The Canada_Line opened in 2009 with its short 2 car trains & in 2025, there still aren't any 2.5 car trains. By now, it really should have been running 5 car trains, connecting the 2 ferry terminals & the airport. Fortunately, most real cities are able to do proper long range planning for their infrastructure, unlike backwards Vancouver.

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

Any serious airport+train should be envisioned as more than just a 2 car joke. While a 3 car train might be a little better, a 4 car train should be the minimum. Then, having the stations already long enough to accomodate 6 car trains, with enough clearance for eventually 8-10 car trains. A 2 car joke of a train is almost as bad as the 3 lane Lion Bridge. 

There should have been enough informed people to not only make sure that the C+Line was properly designed, but that the whole Greater Vancouver Region had proper planning measures for future transportation infrastructure capacity. Unfortunatly, backwards BC has been under a multi-generational backwater agenda. 

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

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=airport+line

LRT, Semi-metro and Heavy Rail Rapid Transit...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_rail , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_rail#Types , 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_rail#Comparison_to_other_rail_transit_modes

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semi-metro 

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

Of course when Vancouver & the greater urban region became obsessed with keeping the roads & bridges narrow, it was as if there wasn't a proper concept of having express bus lanes & dedicated rapid bus lanes.

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/translink-funding-issues-impacts-traffic-congestion

The 1959 George_Massey_Tunnel should have opened with 3 lanes each way. Plus, 2 wide emergency lanes. Then over the course of its first 2 decades, it could have become a 6 lane crossing with 2 bus & HOV lanes. 

By the 1980s, the inept 4 lane George_Massey_Tunnel should have had a parallel higher & wider bus & HOV tunnel consisting of at least another 4 lanes & at least 2 emergency lanes. Thus making it more capable as an eventual replacement to the old tunnel. Then by around 2000, there should have been a bike, truck & train bridge or tunnel as well. 

A George_Massey_Tunnel#Replacement by 2030? The first phase of this really should have been started by the 1980s. Of course the new tunnel with 8 lanes & 2 bike lanes, won't have 2 truck lanes & there won't be 2 HOV lanes. Plus, in accordance with a perpetual congestive planning mentality, there is no provision for an extension of the Canada Line to Delta.

The new tunnel should not only have had 3 general lanes each way & 1 bus lane each way, there should be 1 truck lane each way as well. Plus, 2 wide emergency lanes which could eventually be repurpose for a north & southbound rapid bus transit corridor. That's because, even if there is ever a YVR-Canada-Line to the ferry terminal, it won't be open 24 hours.

Someday the YVR-Canada-Line should not only have 2.5 car trains, but an actual 5 car train consisting of five, 20m coaches. Selective_door_operation technology would make this possible. Of course it would have simply been much better to have designed all the stations to already be at least 100m, instead of the inept 50m. Unfortunately, backward BC thinking keeps getting in the way.

https://www.richmond-news.com/local-news/province-considering-filling-george-massey-tunnel-with-sand-8777369 Despite the old tunnels height restrictions, a slightly smaller version of the Road_Train could have been ideal for it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road_train#Trailer_arrangements

Keeping the old tunnel as a freight corridor between Delta & Richmond would be of tremendous benefit. Delta has the Roberts_Bank_Superport & the Tsawwassen_ferry_terminal.

Richmond has the Vancouver_International_Airport & the inept Canada_Line. 

Despite budget limits at the time, the Canada_Line should have been designed to eventually have 5 car trains & ultimately, 10 car trains. It should have been envisioned as a high capacity rail link between downtown Vancouver, YVR, Richmond & Delta. With an ultimate connection between the Tsawwassen_ferry_terminal and the Horseshoe_Bay_ferry_terminal. 

For some reason Vancouver & BC never seemed to really take off in the 1980s like Calgary, Seattle & Perth. Indeed, while Vancouver seemed to continue on its sleepwalking path after Expo_86, Brisbane really started to boom after its World_Expo_88. 

Unlike SW BC, the Brisbane Airport & seaport are much closer to each other. 

https://upload.wikimedia.org If you are from Brisbane & visiting Vancouver, you will be shocked to see such a short airport train. Being from Vancouver, its difficult to grasp how Brisbane was able to build such nice long trains. This is something to be very proud of, as it can move a lot of people in both directions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Airport_railway_station,_Brisbane This opened in 2001 & Vancouver's inept version had to be ready by 2010 with just 2 car trains. Yet, Brisbane designed their train to be high capacity capable as soon as it open for service. From a backwards BC perspective, it's amazing how Queensland is able to think & function on such a grand scale & to properly allocate the necessary funds. Who knows where so much of the funds went in BC? That's because not enough of it seems to have gone into the infrastructure. 

https:://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vancouver_International_Airport#Rapid_transit_(SkyTrain) 

Unfortunately, this is an embarrassment line because, that's not a 4 car train, its only two, 2 car trains on a single track. How can Vancouver ever rank as a proper city & metropolitan area, when the trains are so short & most of the bridges are so narrow?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YVR-Airport_station Why have a double track station allowing for at least 155m - 200m long trains? Do it the backwards BC way with only a single track & a 50m station. This isn't just an example of extreme cost-cutting. Its not properly designing crucial transportation infrastructure for eventual high capacity. Fortunately, most proper big urban areas are able to think & build big right from the start. Case in point is Queensland.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Sir+Leo+Hielscher+Bridges,+Queensland,+Australia

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/Gateway_Bridge This 6 lane & then a 12 lane crossing was possible, because Queensland isn't under anything like the backwater BC restrictions. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sir_Leo_Hielscher_Bridges This has the potential to still have 4 lanes each way. Plus, 1 bus lane & 1 HOV lane each way.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_of_Brisbane , https://www.portbris.com.au , 

https://www.portbris.com.au/portbris-2060

Unlike backwater BC, Queensland is able to properly think, plan, invest & build for the future. Queensland just isn't hindered by anything like the BC Mind Virus (BCMV).

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=YVR-Canada+Line This is almost the worlds shortest train, because it only has 2 cars.

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=old+and+new+narrow+bridges 

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Brisbane+Airport+Railway+Line

Who controls the 3 lane Lions Gate Bridge?

 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/who-controls-the-centre-lane-on-the-lions-gate-bridge-1.7589996

The LGB has to be the worst or at least one of the worst traffic bottlenecks & chokepoints on the planet. Over the course of the past several decades, there should have been a bus and HOV tunnel and then a train tunnel close to the alignment of the LGB. 

Seven lanes of Georgia+Street funneled into a 3 lane LGB is nuts! The LGB is already a nice bike bridge, with sidewalks, but it should also be a bus bridge. That would be possible if a proper big city tunnel was built. An eight-lane-tunnel would really help the LGB.

Of course in both cases, the Lion Bridge was never expanded, twinned or duplicated & the M Tunnel (H-99) wasn't replace with a 10 lane bridge. Unfortunatly, no serious consideration for rail rapid transit was considered for both crossings. It was as if the regional & BC governments just didn't think it was that important to have a train from the Horseshoe+Bay+ferry+terminal and the Park+Royal+Shopping+Centre to Vancouver-International-Airport. Just like not having a train from the Tsawwassen+ferry+terminal and Tsawwassen+Mills to the airport. 

Despite Richmond,_British_Columbia having YVR, its as if no one really considered that Richmond should be a major intermodal transportation hub. Proper Transportation Planning has always been lacking in backwards BC.

https://www.theprogress.com/news/province-receives-business-case-for-new-massey-crossing-1911335

https://www.highway99tunnel.ca While an 8 lane tunnel is a good start as the first phase, eventually there will have to be a train, bus & bike bridge (or tunnel) next to it.

https://www.highway99tunnel.ca/project-overview-frt Then the H-99 tunnel could be 3 lanes each way with the 4th as a HOV lane. A new parallel bridge (or tunnel) could then have 2 rapid bus lanes, as well as 2 wide sidewalks & 2 wide bike-lanes. Extra width could allow for eventually 2 tracks, 2 HOV lanes, in addition to the 2 bus lanes. That would enable the H-99 tunnel to ultimately have 4 general lanes each way in a later phase. Of course it would have been better to do things correct right from the start, but that goes against the backwards BC mentality.

Its so sad that there was never a proper big city vision to have an airport+train connect to both ferry terminals. 

YVR receives unique accolade among the world's best airports

 https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/yvr-worlds-best-airports-accessibility

Unfortunatly, the YVR-Airport_station has one of the shortest & narrowest stations of any major airport. 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/00/Vancouver_Airport_Skytrain_Station_2008-04-22.JPG All of the C-Line stations should have been designed to ultimately accomodate 10 car trains, at least 8 car trains. This picture shows what a 4 car train could be like. Unfortunatly, its only two, 2 car trains. Ridiculously short 50m stations can only accomodate a 2-2.5 car train, not 4 or 5, let alone 8-10 cars. Combine this with mostly very narrow bridges in the Greater Vancouver Region and you see congestion or bottleneck planning at its best in backwards BC.

In true lack of a big vision for BC, the YVR-Airport_station_Platform is so narrow & short that only 1 train at a time can stop on the very short single track station. While such small-scale train infrastructure would be impressive for Victoria, Kelowna, Prince George & Kamloops, it's hardly impressive to Seattle, WA and Perth, WA. 

https://www.yvr.ca/en/passengers/transportation/public-transportation

https://thecanadaline.com/station-guides/yvr-airport/

https://www.translink.ca/schedules-and-maps/station/yvr-airport/schedule 

Being from backwards BC, it's amazing to see how several major airports will have at least a double track airport train station. The Portland_Airport_MAX_station is another one of them. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portland_Airport_station , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAX_Red_Line

Ideally, the+airport+train should be more than a 2 car joke. Even 4 car trains should be able to stop at stations with enough future clearance to accomodate 6 car trains.  

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

SkyTrain-Canada Line rebuilding

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

The YVR Canada+Line should have been called, the Financial Drainage Line. However, the Catheter Line seems more appropriate. That's because it would cost a lot just to attempt to bring the C+Line up to a proper big city airport+line standard.

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

Nevermind designing it to ultimately have 8-10 car trains, starting out with at least 5 car trains. A 2 car train is such a sad joke, but it all fits in with the reluctance to think & build big in BC. 

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

Wow, someday the YVR-Canada-Line will be able to accomodate a 2.5 car train, but not a 5 car train. Apparently, a full length 3 car train & especially a 4 car train might actually look like an attempt to have a proper urban train. Even with all the construction budget cuts, the stations could have been built with at least a 152.5 m provision, instead of a 40-50 m, 2 car train of a joke.

This approach goes so well with the regions narrow bridges & its reluctance to build a network of bus & HOV bridges. 

Unfortunatly, it's not possible to take a train from the YVR-Airport_station to the Tsawwassen_ferry_terminal or the Horseshoe_Bay_ferry_terminal. There doesn't even seem to be any official long-range plan to link to the YVR-Canada-Line.

https://www.yvr.ca/en/passengers/transportation/public-transportation

https://thecanadaline.com/station-guides/yvr-airport

https://www.translink.ca/schedules-and-maps/station/yvr-airport/schedule

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

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

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=SkyTrain+bridges 

. 

Why is the Canada (embarrassment) Line built the way it is?

Despite its high cost, the C+Line or YVR-Line was designed to have shorter stations than the underground stations in Edmonton & Seattle. Even shorter than the ground level stations in Calgary & Portland. Considering that a Montreal Metro station is 152.5m or 500 feet in length, the absurd C Line stations are only 50m. 

A one third size train still could have been designed for proper future capacity expansion. Unfortunatly, this joke of a train was only designed to have 2 coaches & eventually 2.5 car trains, not 5 & certainly not 10. Because that's what a proper big city would do.

The light rail train bridge to Richmond wasn't designed to have any bus lanes, just 1 bike lane. No proper bus & HOV lane bridge has been built next to the narrow Knight+Street+Bridge , Oak+Street+Bridge , or Arthur+Laing+Bridge. By now, all 3 road bridges should have had 4 lane bus & HOV bridges next to them. Indeed, each bridge should have had 2 bus & 2 HOV lanes beside them by now. But why do that when everything can be crammed into just 2 lanes each way. Combine that with no breakdown lanes or wide shoulders & you have classic BC bottleneck planning. Since the C Line isn't running 24 hours, there should have been a 24 hour express bus to the airport on 2 dedicated lanes on the C Line bridge. That would have made it possible to always have an airport express bus, especially when the C Line is only running 2 car trains.

It's all such a sad joke that should be laughed at all over the world. It's also symbolic of the refusal to properly think & build big in backwards BC. Its like a whole lot of money was never efficiently or properly put into the regional infrastructure over the course of several generations. Any serious big city airport+line should be designed for significant future capacity. 

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

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

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Edmonton+LRT

Airport rail links

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

An airport+line should always be designed with future capacity in mind.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airport_rail_link#Connection_types

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airport_rail_link#High-speed_rail_and_inter-city_rail

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airport_rail_link#Regional_rail_and_commuter_rail

 The Canada+Line is such a sad and pathetic joke. Nevermind planning for a 10 car train linking YVR with the Horseshoe+Bay+ferry+terminal and the Tsawwassen+ferry+terminal to YVR, BC opted for a half-assed little train. Apparently, its logical in backwards BC to not allow for future clearance to at least have a 5 car train connecting YVR with West Vancouver & Delta. It was difficult enough just to have a small 2 car train & eventually a 2.5 car train between Vancouver & Richmond. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SeaTac/Airport_station While Seattle can have a 2 car short train, the SeaTac_Airport_Station was designed to accommodate a proper big city long train.

Unlike in backwards BC, the Seattle_Central_Link Airport Station has 2 tracks. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/26/SeaTac_light_rail_station_from_airport_parking_garage_%282010%29.jpg Most proper cities around the world plan & build big infrastructure or at least allow for future expansion clearence.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SeaTac/Airport_station#Station_layout

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RER_B#List_of_RER_B_stations

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jazz_(Italian_EMU)

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

https://www.bart.gov/stations/sfia  https://www.bart.gov/guide/airport/sfo    

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=airport+line

Canada's population and its lacking infrastructure

https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/71-607-x/71-607-x2018005-eng.htm

Despite being the 2nd largest nation in overall area, Canada is far off from housing just 1% of the world's population. 

https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/corporate/mandate/corporate-initiatives/levels/population-growth-2014-2027.html 

There aren't enough big cities in the vastness of Canada.

It's strange that Halifax hasn't become a big city like Boston or Montreal. Since the 2020s, a lot more people work from home and there isn't always an industrial base in major urban areas. More people are retiring and like people working from home, might like living in a town of 1000-10,000 people just as easily as a city with over a 1,000,000 people. The point being, that the top 30 towns in Canada could be built up to at least a million people each. Winnipeg has yet to have a million people. Then the top 10 cities could be built up to 5-10 population regions. Greater Montreal has yet to reach the 5 million point and the Greater Toronto Area has yet to reach 10 million people like Greater Chicago or, CHICAGOLAND. The San_Francisco_Bay_Area is getting close to having 10 million people.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_municipalities_in_Canada_by_population Vancouver is only the 8th most populated city.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_census_metropolitan_areas_and_agglomerations_in_Canada#List However, the Greater Vancouver Region is still the 3rd largest urban area in Canada. Yet, it's so far behind with the necessary infrastructure. Indeed, When Greater Toronto & Greater Montreal each exceeded the 3 million point, they had longer trains & wider roads. It seems that Vancouver & BC in general, have perpetually opted for a congestive planning approach.

Will Canada's Next Prime Minister be Pierre Poilievre? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dck8eZCpglc

Why is anti-immigration sentiment on the rise in Canada? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txyjmNXcWiU

https://www.norden.org/en/information/population-nordic-region

https://www.nordicstatistics.org/news/population-growth-in-the-nordics Whether its Canada or the Nordic_Countries, places with cold winters can accommodate a lot of people. However, without setting up the proper amount of infrastructure first, its utterly foolish.

Canada hasn't kept up with building enough school & hospital facilities, as well as the overall necessary  infrastructure. 

https://www.definitivehc.com/resources/healthcare-insights/top-largest-canadian-hospitals

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

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vancouver_Hospital_and_Health_Sciences_Centre#Facilities

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Paul's_Hospital_(Vancouver) , https://helpstpauls.com/why-give/new-st-pauls-hospital

https://www.infrastructurebc.com/projects/announced-in-procurement/richmond-hospital-redevelopment-project-phase-2-3

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fraser_Health#Regional_hospitals 

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

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

https://www.infrastructurebc.com/projects/projects-under-construction/burnaby-hospital-phase-2-and-bc-cancer-centre-project/

Unlike the Montreal Metro which can accommodate 9 car trains, the strained Skytrain is only running 4 new-car trains & the inept Canada Line only runs 2 car trains. The Skytrain stations should have been designed to gradually accomodate 8-10 car trains. The Montreal Metro was built with 500 foot long or 152.5m stations right from the start. Apparently, to save money, the first 2 Skytrain lines only have 80m stations & the line to Richmond only has 50m stations, not 152.5m like Montreal. 

The inadequate new Pattullo-Bridge was designed to be so narrow that there won't be any emergency lanes. There won't be any bus lanes, even though the Skytrain doesn't run 24 hours. There won't be any truck lanes, despite the region being a major port. Thus, everything is supposed to be funneled into just 2 lanes each way. https://www.pattullobridgereplacement.ca/about/projectoverview Apparently, the bridge can eventually be upgraded, but to only 3 lanes each way. Of course there is no provision for a lower train & truck deck. This is another fine example of backward BC planning. Even if small-thinking NW only wanted 2 lanes each way for cars, there still should have been an extra 2 lanes each way so that there is a dedicated bus lane & a truck lane each way. 

2 lanes were removed from the Burrard Bridge, 1 removed from the Cambie Bridge & 2 lanes removed from the Granville Bridge. Many other cities can actually build bike bridges so they don't have to take away any traffic lanes from their bridges. 

Even the new Highway-99-Tunnel is designed to become just another BC bottleneck. There will only be 3 lanes each way & a bus-lane each way. However, there won't be any truck lanes & no emergency lanes. https://www.highway99tunnel.ca/project-overview-frt Of course there won't be any provision for a train tunnel, because the government doesn't see a good reason to connect the Delta ferry terminal with Richmond & the airport. They never bothered to have a train from Horseshoe Bay to Park Royal & downtown Vancouver either.

So while the Federal Government charges a carbon tax, Greater Vancouver is left with short trains & mostly narrow bridges. It's utterly foolish to not properly upgrade the infrastructure & build a lot of affordable housing, yet encourage a bunch of people to move into a country that hasn't kept up with building more housing stock. I thought that some of the carbon tax would help to properly upgrade the BC infrastructure, because backward BC just can't seem to even catch up to what Calgary & Seattle have. The trains in Montreal, Toronto, Edmonton, Calgary & Seattle are all longer than the short Skytrains. Yet, there is more demand in Vancouver to have longer trains, due to the narrow roads & bridges. Frequent short trains arent enough, there has to be proper big city long trains. 

Majority polled in Calgary and Edmonton are unhappy with the pace of population growth

 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/too-much-too-fast-majority-polled-in-calgary-edmonton-unhappy-with-pace-of-population-growth-9.6935121 

If you are visiting Vancouver or Victoria from Calgary or Edmonton, you will be shocked as to how narrow most of the bridges are in Greater Vancouver and Victoria. Edmonton was wise in the 1970s to have 125 m long underground LRT stations. Foolish Vancouver opted to only have 80 m stations on its first 2 lines and an absurd 50 m for the 3rd line. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Line_(Calgary) , https://www.calgary.ca/green-line.html 

https://www.calgarytransit.com/plans---projects/lrt/green-line.html

https://engage.calgary.ca/greenline/UndergroundStations Fortunatly, any underground stations in Calgary will be closer in length to that of the Edmonton LRT and not backwards Vancouver.

https://www.railjournal.com/regions/north-america/tunnel-preferred-for-calgary-lrt-green-line/

https://www.tunnelsandtunnelling.com/news/calgary-city-council-approves-green-line-lrt-construction/?cf-view

https://www.calgary.ca/green-line/stations.html

https://www.tunnelsandtunnelling.com/news/calgary-city-council-approves-green-line-lrt-construction/?cf-view 

The main roads and bridges in urban parts of Alberta are allowed to be wider than their counterparts in backwards BC. So while people in the urban parts of Alberta are concerned or even angry about rapid growth, at least Alberta can easily build more urban infrastructure. That's because Albertal isn't affect by the (unofficial) BC Mind Virus (BCMV). 

A timely example is a new bridge between Surrey & NW. Despite Surrey being expected to become the largest city in BC, the new bridge will only open with 4 lanes. No 3rd or 4th lane each way for busses, HOVs and trucks. Thus, all the road traffic at either end is funneled into just 2 lanes each way. Plus, there are no breakdown or emergency lane, just like the old bridge.   

While this new bridge can eventually be widened to 6 lanes, there is no provision for a lower deck for LRT, busses and trucks. Despite SW BC being a seaport area, trucks are funneled onto mostly narrow bridges. There has been a lack of interest to build bus bridges next to almost all of the bridges in Greater Vancouver. Yet, there is a Half-A$$ED attempt to have a better regional express bus network. This regional Rapid Bus attempt will always be a joke, unless a series of bus bridges are built. The Half-A$$ED approach is to try to have bus lanes on 4 to 6 lane bridges. Designating 2 bus lanes would reduce the narrow bridges to only 1 or 2 lanes each way for general traffic in what is suppose to be a major seaport and urban area.   

Most of the worlds population is non-white and for a big part of the history of BC, there has been a refusal to build up bigtime infrastructure for everyone. While some Albertains might wish that there was a wall built around their province or a force-field like out of Star Trek, BC is almost pretending like there is. Thus, the keep things small and backwards mentality. 

Several decades ago, BC implemented a symbolic slow-growth approach. Despite BC not having any control over immigration, or trying to establish an internal passport & checkpoint system, to KEEP PEOPLE OUT, it opted for the next best thing. Stunt or scale back the urban infrastructure to project a strong symbolic reluctance to growth and thinking big. 

When you realize how much larger things are allowed to be in Alberta, Washington State and even Western Australia & compare them to watered down BC, you see quite a difference. Despite BC & Canada in general, being multicultural, BCs cities keep finding ways to water the scale of things down. Canada has yet to have even 1% of the world's population, despite its size.  

While there are good arguments to occasionally slowdown immigration, that can eventually become problematic, just like too much immigration. Even in the 2020s, some people in the former White colonial parts of the world still wish that Canada & Australia, etc., could be a White Man's paradise. However, that seems so impractical on a planet that mostly has a non white population. 

https://humanrights.ca/story/chinese-head-tax-and-chinese-exclusion-act

https://thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/chinese-head-tax-in-canada 

https://royalalbertamuseum.ca/blog/chinese-head-tax-george-yees-story 

https://www.musee-mccord-stewart.ca/en/blog/chinese-exclusion-act/

https://parks.canada.ca/culture/designation/evenement-event/exclusion-chinois-chinese

https://www.canada.ca/en/canadian-heritage/campaigns/asian-heritage-month/important-events.html

https://stanleyparkvan.com/stanley-park-van-monument-komagata-maru.html

https://vancouver.citynews.ca/2022/10/05/vancouver-komagata-maru-memorial

https://vancouver.citynews.ca/2023/01/30/vancouver-komagata-maru-memorial-vandalism/

Even if Alberta were to eventually become its own country, it would be extremely unlikely that it could ever impose a White Man's Paradise Agenda. The same could be stated for backwards BC. However, something very peculiar has been happening in BC for several generations. 

Several BC cities and municipalities play off each other with various slow-growth agendas. Vancouver being one of the most restrictive & backwards on the the planet. Somehow the legitimate anti freeway fears of the 1960s & 70s didn't get the city & region to still build a series of bus & HOV bridges. Plus, a long-term, high capacity urban rail system.

While Montreal planned for 152.4 m stations to accomodate 9 car trains, backwards Vancouver only built 80 m Skytrain stations for the first 2 lines. Then to top that, was a plan to build a line to Richmond with only enough level clearance for 50 m stations. The 1st line only started to run 5 car trains in 2025. Eventually, the 2nd line will also have 5 car trains. However, the line to the airport was deliberately designed not to have 5 car trains. Just a Half-A$$ED 2.5 car train, someday. WTH?

For Greater Vancouver to mostly have narrow bridges, one would think the all the stations could ultimately be at least as long as a Montreal Metro train station. Indeed, Greater Vancouver should have built for 10 car trains, but will only have 5 car trains on the 1st  two lines & a 2.5 car joke of a train on the 3rd line. As of 2025, the 2nd & 3rd lines are still only running 2 car trains. Such a great way to symbolically show the resistance to eventually link YVR to both of the main BC ferry terminals. 

The inadequate 3 lane Lion Bridge still has no bus & HOV tunnels near it. Urban parts of Australia never seemed to have a similar reluctance to build tunnels as does backwards Vancouver. Tunnels for Montreal & Seattle aren't a problem either. At least BC is slated to have a new and improved tunnel by 2030, that's only a couple of generations late.   

Oh, if only people would stop moving to BC, especially Vancouver & Victoria. Well, that's not the case, its just that various BC cities want to only build urban infrastructure that is inadequate. Despite the frustrations that some people have in Alberta, at lest wider bridges, longer trains & taller buildings are allowed there. This watering things down in BC approach is symbolically indicative to refuse to properly build for a growing population. 

Surrey should have already had at least 1 hospital the size of VGH. At least Surrey like Burnaby, can build up taller in what is still mostly a mountain wilderness province. 

BC is a long way from New England & Southern Quebec. The restrictive urban planning measures in Greater Vancouver keep preventing it from becoming a proper big metropolitan area like Greater Boston and Montreal. 

Calgary and Edmonton each should have hand an airport+line by now.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Line_(MBTA) Calgary will have its own version of a Green Line, eventually. https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Calgary+Green+Line

Getting to and from the Airport Doesn’t Have to be Difficult

Getting to the Airport Doesn’t Have to Suck https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5WDCfDHQrxQ 

The Missing Transit in This Fast-Growing Canadian Province https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LGigNBLuS0

The Transit Every Airport Needs | Airport Rail Links https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YeVZVluQWI  

Metro Vancouver's Future Transit Plans https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVVfYwn7vmI 

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=the+airport+train

Five of Ontario's top 10 worst roads are located in the Greater Toronto Area

 https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/five-of-ontario-s-top-10-worst-roads-are-located-in-the-toronto-area-1.6903196 Of course its a good idea to make sure that the roads & streets are as smooth as possible.

The Greater_Toronto_Area is gradually becoming a vast urban region like the Chicago_metropolitan_area. So many more modes of transit must be provided for the GTA. IE, trains, HOV, bus & bike lanes. 

https://www.insauga.com/one-of-ontarios-worst-roads-is-among-the-busiest-streets-in-mississauga

Being from the BC Lower_Mainland, it's hard to believe that Canada's GTA is on its way to becoming like another Chicagoland. But then I always remember that Ontario, like Quebec & Alberta aren't under anything like the BC mentality & all of its restrictions.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamilton/worst-roads-ontario-2024-1.7215979 

In effect, the Burlington_Bay_James_N._Allan_Skyway went from a BC like 4 lane bridge to an 8 lane Ontario crossing in the mid 1980s. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burlington_Bay_James_N._Allan_Skyway#1985_twin_bridge

https://511on.ca/map/Cctv/loc06--3 Both bridges are safer than cramming everything into one crossing structure. 

https://burlingtontraffic.ca/qew-burlington-bay-james-n-allan-skyway The 4th lane each way could eventually become a bus & HOV_lane.

The 4 lane Burlington_Canal_Lift_Bridge is more like a narrow Vancouver bridge. Just 2 lanes each way with no space for an emergency lane or bus & HOV lane. That's why the Burlington_Bay_James_N._Allan_Skyway crossing is still better than any bridge within the Vancouver city limits. The skyway crossing combined with the lift bridge, provides 12 lanes, because the emergency lanes usually aren't counted. Just imagine if all that was funneled into a 4 lane Vancouver bridge. Fortunately, the backward BC bottleneck mentality has never taken over Ontario. 

While Oak Street in Vancouver has 6 lanes, the Oak_Street_Bridge was only designed to have 4 lanes. Thus, it's a fine example of the BC mentality and the multigenerational Vancouverization agenda. Vancouverization is all about watering things down & creating bottlenecks or chokepoints.

https://wikimedia.org/Oak_Street_Bridge.jpg

The narrow 4 lane bridge should have been designed with a provision to eventually be at least 8 lanes wide. 3 lanes each way, plus a bus & HOV lane each way, but that would conflict with the narrow mindedness of Vancouver. It's sad that at least a bus & bike bridge wasn't built next to it, but that would conflict with the BC bottleneck planning approach to things.

https://wikimedia.org/Oak_Street_Bridge_and_Fraser_River.jpg

https://images.drivebc.ca/bchighwaycam/pub/html/www/70.html A 6 lane street funneled into a 4 lane bridge. WTH?

The Oak_Street_Bridge really should have been opened as a 10 lane bridge. Yet, Oak_Street has only 6 lanes. A 10 lane OSB could have not only allowed for 3 lanes each way, but a bus & HOV_lane each way. Then the 5th lane each way could have been an emergency lane. 

https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/transportation/driving-and-cycling/traveller-information/routes-and-driving-conditions/hov-lanes

At the very least, a HOV, bus & bike bridge should be built next to the OSB. However, the multi generational backward BC mentality just doesn't care.

The 4 lane joke that is the George_Massey_Tunnel, should have had a HOV, bus & bike bridge built next to it several decades ago. But that would have actually created better mobility & less congestion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Massey_Tunnel#Replacement Of course just like with the old tunnel, the new tunnel won't have a provision for LRT & emergency lanes. Thus, a LRT bridge would eventually have to be built next to it. Apparently, having a train from the Tsawwassen_ferry_terminal to the airport still doesn't make sense. That's just the backward BC way.

If you are from Ontario, Quebec, Alberta, the Pacific NW, Australia or just about anywhere, the watered down BC infrastructure will surprise you.

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=old+and+new+narrow+bridges 

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=bus+and+bike+bridges

Skytrain-Canada Line maximum frequency and capacity issues

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/canada-line-maximum-frequency-skytrain

A limited construction budget doesn't have to prevent an airport+line from eventually becoming a regional high capacity corridor. That is as long as it's designed with significant future capacity in mind. Unfortunately, that wasn't the case with the little YVR-Canada-Line.

Transportation infrastructure such as the Canada+Line, could have easily been designed to be expandable over the decades. However, its as if someone with a strong antigrowth & anti big city infrastructure agenda was able to make sure that this line was poorly designed.

There really should have been a long term plan to not only connect the Vancouver_International_Airport's, YVR_station to the Horseshoe_Bay_ferry_terminal and the Tsawwassen_ferry_terminal. Again, it was as if someone never wanted such a line to ever become a high volume transportation corridor linking West_Vancouver and Delta to the airport.

Such absurd 50 m stations, especially the underground ones, should have been designed with at least an extra 50 m of level clearance at each end. Instead, the joke that is the Canada Line was only designed to have two 20 m coaches with just enough space for an additional half-length coach. Wow, so this 2 car train can eventually become a 2.5 car train, but not a 5.

This joke of a 2 car train should have immediately opened with 3-5 car trains. Then ultimately, 8-10 car trains as needed. 

Its difficult to understand why so much infrastructure in BC has to always be so underbuilt. 
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/canada-line-peak-hour-service-new-trains

There has been a multi-generational agenda to stunt or thwart the scale of infrastructure in BC. Long trains & wide bridges go against the congestive BC agenda. Allowing big & high capacity infrastructure in BC would be symbolic as well as indicative of properly planning for & efficiently managing growth. Why do that when you can just keep on implementing chokepoints & bottleneck planning overall?

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/canada-line-yvr-airport-station-wayfinding

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

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

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=C+Line

Sydney Metro

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydney_Metro Perhaps its because of the warmer climate, but this Sydney Metro train will be longer than any metro or subway rain in Canada. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydney_Metro#Capacity "...6-car trains running on 4-minute headways. After the addition of the Stage 2 extension to Bankstown, the stations' platforms will be configured to allow for future use of 8-car trains and the signalling system designed to allow for 2-minute headways..."

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

Train length	121.5 m (398 ft 7+15⁄32 in)
Car length	20.25 m (66 ft 5+1⁄4 in)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydney_Metro_Metropolis_Stock#Design_and_construction Eventually, an 8 car train could be 532 feet long. That's longer than a 500 foot or 152.5m 9 car Montreal Metro train. So far, the max on the Toronto subway are 6 car trains.

If you are from NSW & visit the BC part of Canada, you won't believe how short the train between the airport & Downtown_Vancouver is. Its a 2 car joke of a train & is a fine example of inept transportation infrastructure planning in backwards BC.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydney_Airport#Rail

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Sydney_International_Airport#Rail

Short Trains

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/55/Canada_Line_Train_201807.jpg/960px-Canada_Line_Train_201807.jpg , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada_Line#Route An airport+line connecting Vancouver & Richmond to YVR should have started out with at least 5-6 car trains, then eventually, 8-10 car trains after eventually connecting to the 2 main BC Ferry terminals. However that's a problem, because backwards BC can't seem to allow for proper long-range, bigcity infrastructure planning & development.

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_777 Train length 64.98 m (213 ft 2 in)  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merseyrail#Fleet 

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SL_C30 Train length 70 m (229 ft 7+29⁄32 in)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SL_C20  46.5 m (152 ft 6+45⁄64 in) Unlike Vancouver, Stockholm can run double-length trains. This is possible whenever longer stations are built, or at least have enough level clearance for future expansion.

The Montreal Metro in the 1960s could run ridiculous 3 car trains, but eventually realized that 6 car trains & especially 9 car trains can efficiently more more people. Thus, its a good thing that they planned to have 152.4 m stations right from the start.

While short trains and stations can initially be a cost saving measure, allowing for future level clearance can be more economically efficient, in the long run. Thus, even a tram premetro can eventually be turned into a tram-train.

Unfortunatly, in typical Vancouver fashion, the Canada+Line wasn't designed to have 10 car trains, not even 5 car trains. The 2 billion dollar joke of a train was only designed with a level clearance for 50 m stations that only can accommodate a 2.5 car train. For a line that had to be open by 2009, it's still only running 2 car trains, with no 2.5 car trains in sight as 2025 is winding down.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/35/NorthArmBridge.jpg/960px-NorthArmBridge.jpg A pathetic 2 car train on a bridge that should have 2 bike lanes & 2 sidewalks. 

Indeed, just because the Canada Line was designed as if it was only to start out with short premetro train stations, there should have been a long-term plan to eventually have proper big city trains. One of the biggest mistakes for what should be a proper big city metro train, is to design short stations that are almost impossible to double, let alone tripple in length. 

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Canada+Line+is+so+under-built

Toronto Pearson International Airport Train

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toronto_Pearson_International_Airport#Train 

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

Car length	85 ft (25.91 m)

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9f/UP_at_Bloor.jpg While a 2 car joke of a train is only about 170 ft or 52 m, a 3 car train is about 255 ft or 78 m. Unfortunatly, the embarrassingly short train to YVR was only designed to have 164 ft or 50 m stations. The YVR-Canada-Line was deliberately constructed to not allow for enough clearance to eventually double the length of each station. Thus, any underground station can't be extended from the absurd 50 m to 100 m. 

Depending upon the busy and general demand times there are three-car and two-car train sets.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toronto_Pearson_Terminal_1_station

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

"Seven trains comprise the fleet of Union Pearson Express (UP Express), grouped into 4 three-car and 3 two-car train sets (for a total of 18 cars)." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nippon_Sharyo_DMU#Union_Pearson_Express

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_rail_transit_in_Canada#Existing_systems

Selective Door Operation (SDO)

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

SDO is a great way to add an extra car at both ends of a train. Thus, a 3 car train can become 5 & a 6 car train could become 8. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Underground_S7_and_S8_Stock#Features

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Underground_S7_and_S8_Stock#/media/File:Articulate_section_S_stock.JPG

https://www.witpress.com/elibrary/wit-transactions-on-the-built-environment/74/12046

https://www.rssb.co.uk/research-catalogue/CatalogueItem/T686

The Chicago L can run up to an 8 car train, because that's the maximum station platform length. If the L can ever have walkthrough trains, then an 8 car train could become a 10 car train with SDO.

Stubborn Vancouver & BC just can't seem to allow for proper comprehensive transportation planning. 

Unfortunately, the multibillion dollar Canada+Line wasn't designed for significant future capacity. No five car trains, just a 2.5 car joke. There was a lack of vision to connect the Horseshoe+Bay ferry+terminal with downtown Vancouver and the airport.

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

How Bike Lanes have affected Vancouver's urban infrastructure

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LvkifuIjq9I The BSB was a 6 lane crossing that even had a provision for a lower deck intended for streetcars. Eventually, 2 lanes were removed & the lower deck was never completed. However, Vancouver was unable to prevent Seattle & Portland from reviving some of their streetcar routes.

The problem isn't bike lanes, it's the lack of interest to build a proper regional network of bus & bike bridges. Thus, if a proper bike bridge was built next to the Burrard+Street+Bridge, then 2 of its 6 lanes could have been for buses or at least HOV lanes. The lower deck could have still been for streetcars or tram-trains going between Vancouver & Richmond. The irony of backwards Vancouver is that it was one of the first cities to get rid of its streetcars & will likely be one of the last to bring them back.

The Fraser River Tunnel Project https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NWhHJWKa6CQ Unfortunatly, this will still be a chokepoint or congested crossing.

Of course the new Richmond-Delta+Tunnel wasn't designed to be part of a rail link between the airport and the ferry terminal. There should have been 2 HOV lanes, as well as 2 bus lanes, but that would be a big-city 10 lane crossing. Instead, just an 8 lane tunnel with no train component. Eventually, a train and HOV bridge or tunnel will have to be built next to it. 

At least the first SkyTrain line can now have 5 car trains. However, the 2 car joke of a train still exists between Vancouver & Coquitlam, as well as between Vancouver & Richmond. The Montreal Metro can have 9 car trains and BART in SF can have 10 car trains. Such things are possible because they don't have a congestive BC panning mentality.

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Bike+Lanes

Greater Vancouver behind the scenes

Vancouver has always been a small city with a backwater mentality, when compared to many other cities. Vancouver is smaller in area & population than 7 other cities in Canada. 

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

However, the Greater Vancouver Region is still the 3 largest metropolitan_area_in_Canada. Yet, it remains a mystery as to where all the big city scale infrastructure went, because what's mostly built in Greater Vancouver is half-sized or half-assed stuff. Indeed, a watered-down approach to things has been the name of the game for generations. Thus, after several decades of not properly building for the future, SW BC is still very congested and backwards.

There is nothing wrong with being small or thinking small. However, Vancouver and Victoria have perpetuated a small-scale mentality for several decades. Of course Vancouver would opt to have shorter underground train stations than Montreal, Toronto, Edmonton & Seattle. A short BC train just can't transport as many people as an 8-10 car train can. Just because the Skytrain is an automated system, the 50m to 80m trains just can't match a 152.5m Montreal Metro trains capacity. 

The bridges are narrow, but not just to prevent induced demand. It's almost impossible for backwards Greater Vancouver to have an efficient rapid-bus or proper truck-lanes, when many of the bridges are only 2 lanes each way. Whether its a multigenerational, backwards power-structure, or its just part of the backwater BC mentality, there should be a point of realization.

Why pretend to have an efficient rapid-bus network, when there is a refusal to build a series of proper regional bus & truck bridges? In order for busses to be fast & efficient, there has to be dedicated bus-lanes on new bridges. An efficient regional port using a lot of trucks to the airport & seaports, also requires dedicated truck-lanes in order to efficiently move things around.

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/global-bc-anchor-behind-the-scenes

https://x.com/YvonneSchalle/status/1875616820088176984

Airport Rail Links

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.