I have now ridden the RAV (Canada) line twice – from Bridgeport to Broadway, and from Broadway to Waterfront. While it is nice to have a subway running through south Vancouver, I can’t say riding the “new” train felt like a revolution in Vancouver transport. To really understand how the RAV line sits in Vancouver’s transit system, it really must be compared to the “old” skytrain.
First off, the RAV line uses older technology than the Expo and Millenium line Skytrains. It is propelled by conventional AC motors rather than Linear Induction. To be technical, this makes the RAV line less technologically advanced than the ICTS demonstration line, currently the Science World expo line station and adjacent track, which was completed in 1983. However, this is a good thing – linear induction motor technology is overpriced for the benefit in reduced wear and maintenance costs. Still, it doesn’t exactly inspire awe that the new RAV line has more in common with the old BC Electric streetcar line that ran to Richmond on West Boulevard and to Marine Drive along Oak, Ontario and Fraser until 1958 (not 1910 as our current Premiere believes, despite having been Mayor of Vancouver in the 1980s when he protested freeway expansion projects in the city).
Second the RAV line is slow. While it has an top speed of 80km/h this is both formally lower than the mark 2 skytrain cars top speed of 90km/h, and also marks a bit of an embarrasement – since a major advantage of using conventional AC motors is that linear induction propulsion has theoretical limits which prevent speeds much over 90km/h from being achieved. But perhaps more important, it hardly even reached its operating speed since the track is so festooned with bends. Riding the Expo line after getting off the RAV line at Waterfront Station felt like getting onto a freeway after getting off a city street – on that line you feel like you are being wooshed along, but on the RAV line you feel like the train is constantly slowing down for bends.
Thirdly, the remote operation is inferior to the existing remote operation technology on the Expo and Millenium line. The breaks are deployed far more often (silly, since convention AC motors can perform regenerative breaking exactly as easy as a linear induction motor can), and they are deployed a seemingly silly times – like at the bottom of an incline, or in the middle of a bend.
Fourth, whereas the long fast bends on the Expo and Millenium line are curved such that the train leans into the corner to permit high speeds with lower sideways forces on the wheels – this does not seem to have been done on the RAV line. My only guess here is that the corners are so tight and sudden that such engineering was simply not feasible. However, trundling through curvy tunnels at low speed with passangers being pushed from side to side rather than down into their seats makes the RAV line feel more like a glorified undergound streetcar than a subway.
However, all of these criticisms are really not so important because the ride only takes 25 minutes end to end. Still, having ridden it, I can’t help but think they could have shaved 5 minutes off the trip if it had been an NDP led cost-overun project run by engineers rather than accountants.
Only a Northern Song 
“Still, having ridden it, I can’t help but think they could have shaved 5 minutes off the trip if it had been an NDP led cost-overun project run by engineers rather than accountants.”
As I read this entry, I was puzzled to see the focus on criticism on a project that was delivered ahead of schedule and under budget.
The last reference made me wonder if your entry was politically inspired and if your were aware of the NDP’s last experience with public transportation construction – the fast ferries disaster of the 1990’s.
The Wikipedia entry for the Fast Ferry fiasco in part reads
“Due to various oversights by the government, BC Ferries, design bureaus, and the shipyards, the cost of the program more than doubled from $210 million ($70 million/vessel) to almost $460 million ($150 million/vessel) and final delivery was almost 3 years behind schedule. As with all prototype construction this cost and build time was gradually being reduced with each successive completion. A large part of the delay was because the shipyards commissioned to construct the vessels had very little experience working with aluminum. Also design changes during construction caused delays and more costs. Previously, construction of aluminum vessels in British Columbia had been limited to fishing boats and special-purpose vessels. The construction of three dual-hulled 122.5 m catamarans represented a very large leap of faith by the Government in British Columbia shipyards.
The ferries also had the following problems during their brief tenure:
High fuel consumption. The four 8,375 brake horsepower (6.2 MW) engines driving their waterjets required an inordinate amount of diesel fuel and had to be used at 90% power for cruise speed, making them prone to breakdown. This was largely due to BC Ferries’ insistence on using diesel engines rather than the more efficient gas turbines that were originally planned.
Due to an unusually wet and windy winter, there was a higher than normal amount of flotsam in the waters along the route, some of which was sucked into impellers for the ferries’ engines, causing breakdowns and sailing cancellations.
When operated at full speed, the Pacificat fleet created a wake which was reported to have damaged waterfront wharves and property in coastal areas near the two terminals. This required that the ferries reduce speed in certain areas and alter course in others, reducing their speed advantage.
The air on vehicle decks became uncomfortably warm, either from the heat of the vessel engines or lack of air circulation. This made some people wary of bringing pets aboard the FastCats; however, the ferries had kennels with improved air circulation at the bow and stern of the vehicle decks.
There was little outside deck space for passengers. The existing ferries had large decks, and it was common for passengers to spend the entire sailing circling the decks of the ship or sunbathing on the lifejacket containers.
The ships had a more modern, European-style[clarification needed] interior which was perceived by passengers as being cramped compared to the existing ferries.
Loading took longer than the older ferries due to balancing issues. This further negated the ships’ speed advantage.
After a change in leadership, the new Premier of BC, Ujjal Dosanjh, placed the ferries up for sale.[1] A subsequent election virtually eliminated the New Democratic Party from the legislature, and Gordon Campbell of the BC Liberals auctioned off the PacifiCat fleet on March 24, 2003 for $19.4 million ($6.5 million/vessel) to the Washington Marine Group. Further controversy erupted when it was revealed that the same company had offered $60 million for the vessels prior to the auction.”
If the Fast Ferry experience had been replicated on the Canada Line, we could expect that :
1. it would have more than a billiion dollar overrun
2. it would been ready in 2012
3. it would be mothballed soon introduction into operation
4. it would be sold for 4% of the costs of construction.
Maybe proven and established technology has certain value.
I don’t think the entry is politically motivated. By the part you cited I meant that the train would be superior if it had been built using Bombardier technology rather than the conventional rolling stock which they in fact chose, and that it would be faster if more money had been spent buying land so the rails could be straighter. But, that such increased quality would have come at a politically unacceptable price. I did after all bracket my entire set of complaints about the technology and speed with “However, all of these criticisms are really not so important because the ride only takes 25 minutes end to end.”
I’m quite aware of the problems associated with the production, operation, and sale of the fast-ferries. But the fast ferries bear little resemblance to the Millennium line, which is probably the more relevant comparison in NDP versus Liberal approaches to skytrain construction.
If I was writing a politically motivated entry about BC government and transit, I’d probably argue the most relevant difference between the two governments is their relation to Translink – the Liberal record here is amazingly anti-democratic, short sighted, and politically motivated.
I just rode the new Canada Line train today. I think what you call “old” technology is far superior to the one-off expensive Bombardier linear induction motors of the other two skytrain lines. I did not find the train slowing down for odd reasons as the writer states. I found the trip exceedingly fast. I am delighted and amazed at this new line as I live near Queen Elizabeth Park and I can now get downtown from 25th and Cambie in 7 minutes! Amazing! I think I spent more time going up and down elevators (with my bike) than I did on the actual train ride. Another thing: the suspension and propulsion system are much quieter and smoother than the Bombardier system. The reviewer says he “felt like getting off a city street onto a freeway”, well, he’s right. The smooth ride of the Canada Line train is really pleasant compared to the incredible noise and jostling of the old skytrain technology. In addition, I’ve been to Japan and Europe and this new train is more like what I’ve experienced there, than the old Bombardier skytrain. Frankly, I’m totally delighted that we finally did not go with Bombardier because I think we got hosed by Bombardier who provided those expensive noisy bumpy trains. This time we did a lot better. That should be in your review.
“Frankly, I’m totally delighted that we finally did not go with Bombardier because I think we got hosed by Bombardier who provided those expensive noisy bumpy trains. This time we did a lot better. That should be in your review.”
It is in my review.
“However, this is a good thing – linear induction motor technology is overpriced for the benefit in reduced wear and maintenance costs.”
Concerning speed, the fact the train is slow is unrelated from the technology used. And it is slow, this is just objective. The train rarely reaches its operating speed. But, like I said, it doesn’t matter since the trip it so short anyway: “However, all of these criticisms are really not so important because the ride only takes 25 minutes end to end.”
And concerning roughness – do you really think the motors make a difference? And do you really think the RAV line will still feel this smooth in 30 years, or that the ICTS was not smoother when the tracks were first laid?
Marine Drive to Waterfront is about 9km and takes 16 or 17 minutes depending on sources – that’s an average speed of 33km/h. Leaving from Waterfront, the Expo Line will get you to Patterson station in 17 minutes, which is 11km away – average speed 39km/h.
Over the whole track: Expo line takes 39 minutes to travel 29km, Canada line takes 26 minutes to travel the 15km to the airport. So that’s 44.5km/h for the Expo line and 34.5 for the Canada line.
So, you might have “found” the trip exceedingly fast, but by Vancouver standards, it wasn’t. But, like I said before, this doesn’t matter. All that matters is it is useful and gets people where they are going much more quickly than before.
The Millennium line (only counting Columbia to VCC Clark) travels 20.2km in 27 minutes – average of 45km/h.
The Canada line is great for me but I too am a bit disappointed that a brand new transit line misses the mark in terms of speed and smoothness. I have ridden the train so many times I anticipate exactly where it brakes and turns. There are many places where the brakes are jammed on in the middle of a straight section or right after leaving the station. It makes me wonder if the train was programmed manually by an inexperienced driver! In sections it moves so gingerly through the curves that it makes you wonder if any engineers were involved in the project!