Umm...Rapid Transit (Would it be a Winnipeg forum without this thread?)

Don't need one now.

oh but we Studied Edmonton's use of them.. and we all know how there is nothing wrong with any of Edmonton's crime ideas.... especially no bribery going on

Imagine how Winnipeg drivers would respond to a bus driving over them...

We wouldn't need anymore diamond lanes for people to ignore! Think of the paint/signage savings...

Winnipeg drivers can't handle bus' driving beside them....and most probably wouldn't notice if one drove over top...

OK...on an unrelated search...I found the following information:

Bombardier

Canada's history includes a number of innovative and successful businesspeople. One inventor and industry founder who helped diversify Canada's economy was Joseph-Armand Bombardier. Bombardier developed the first snowmobile prototype when he was only 16 years old.

Consumer demand made it challenging for the snowmobile manufacturers of the 1960's to find enough engines to meet their production needs.



The first engines used by Bombardier were small air-cooled industrial four-strokes produced by Kohler. While the four-strokes were easy to obtain, their use in winter operation was marginal at best.

The low-weight, high-power output and excellent low-temperature starting ability of two stroke engines quickly made them the engine of choice for snowmobiles. In 1963, Armand Bombardier partnered with the Austrian engine manufacturer Rotax, which gave him the exclusive rights to the small two stroke engine used in pumps and generators.

Bombardier's innovative work grew to include fuel-efficient commuter jets and light small-scale trains used in rapid transit.





NOW>>>the important thing is the last picture.

If Bombadier is/was making these trains...why are they NOT all over Canada?
It's a Canadian company...with Canadian politicians in their pockets.

Trains like these should be in EVERY Canadian city and crossing the country from coast-to-coast!!!

AGEsAces wrote:OK...on an unrelated search...I found the following information:

Bombardier

Canada's history includes a number of innovative and successful businesspeople. One inventor and industry founder who helped diversify Canada's economy was Joseph-Armand Bombardier. Bombardier developed the first snowmobile prototype when he was only 16 years old.

Consumer demand made it challenging for the snowmobile manufacturers of the 1960's to find enough engines to meet their production needs.



The first engines used by Bombardier were small air-cooled industrial four-strokes produced by Kohler. While the four-strokes were easy to obtain, their use in winter operation was marginal at best.

The low-weight, high-power output and excellent low-temperature starting ability of two stroke engines quickly made them the engine of choice for snowmobiles. In 1963, Armand Bombardier partnered with the Austrian engine manufacturer Rotax, which gave him the exclusive rights to the small two stroke engine used in pumps and generators.

Bombardier's innovative work grew to include fuel-efficient commuter jets and light small-scale trains used in rapid transit.





NOW>>>the important thing is the last picture.

If Bombadier is/was making these trains...why are they NOT all over Canada?
It's a Canadian company...with Canadian politicians in their pockets.

Trains like these should be in EVERY Canadian city and crossing the country from coast-to-coast!!!

For now, they're getting sent to Istanbul and Ankara, Turkey.
I still insist on saving money and using the existing railway corridors.

ill insist on saving money and using the existing railway corridors.


Insist all you like but the reality in da peg is that no one seems to notice trains and rails. From the top Provincial and Municipal leaders to Planning department , none have had a serious discussion with rail companies and their future in the City. It also looks like CentrPort has forgotten about rails also

Other than building overpassess , the most creative we can come up with is to build a BRT on a seperate network, which isn't really seperate but lets not worry about that, which will cost oh say about 4 to 6 billion when all is said and done.

Livio Ciaralli wrote:Only a bufoon living in Edmonton pounding about Winnipeg issues is backwards thinking. Do some reading edwin before you start playing simcity.

LOL! Oh Livio. Have a look at other cities (Not only the bix six, but K-W, Saskatoon, Spokane, Quebec City, Hamilton, etc., all of who are planning or at least have strong consideration for light rail in terms of their mass transit planning. Some of these cities are still smaller than Winnipeg, however they are indeed planning for growth in their respective cities.
Now, you take Phoenix and Minneapolis. They waited until the metro population was in the millions for them to develope mass transit systems, and these are very spread out, sprawling cities. But in the end, intelligent planning prevailed and the lines were built. However, I would rather not see Winnipeg wait until it gets to these sizes before implementation. As much as I don't feel BRT is really any legitimate form of "mass transit", it at least is a step in the right direction for the city, which can be upgraded to LRT in the future. And in the end, I'll begrudgingly support it for that reason.
Oh, and I don't play SimCity. Never have and likely never will. It just doesn't interest me. So maybe the accusing backwards-thinking bufoon should get his facts straight before making statements.

Winnipeg planned RT a long, long, long time ago. I believe there were also plans for a Subway. Imagine. The city simply never did anything about it.

Having lived in Toronto recently (and not comparing TO - Winnipeg) I did note there were very significant high-density housing developments surrounding subway stations. The property values closer to subway stations were also higher than those more removed.

I imagine had Winnipeg built rapid transit corridors 25-50 years ago this city would have seen a similar dynamic.

If we are to attempt to change the car culture of this city we do need to provide an alternate. Add in current growth, and if we don't build roads to accommodate the higher traffic levels we are seeing, we'll begin to see real gridlock.

Plan now. But follow through. Now.

Something else to note. Both Edmonton and Calgary are VERY car-centric cities, no different than Winnipeg. They always have been, and always will be. However, both cities also have very high transit use. There appears to be a balance between the two. You can't expect transit to be the permanent end of car use, however it can provide people with options other than their cars, and it does work.

TO also had many out laying communities around it which it swallowed up and justified the cost of the subway that way . Meaning it was cheaper to build it, then more Freeways .

No, that subway is hellaciously expensive. The Shepard expansion was obscenely expensive.

The outlying communities you mention such as York and Etobicoke were already served by the TTC and subway service already existed for the most part. Other communities that were absorbed by the GTA may never get subway service due to that cost.

Then there are the "other" communities, Brampton, Vaughn, Mississauga for example, that cannot even agree on ride-sharing agreements (a TTC transfer to a Mississauga bus for example).

Toronto is actually not a good example to emulate. Besides, Winnipeg simply does not have those problems.

Can anyone put a total dollar cost on any system and them put up the benefit of that expenditure?

That's why we need to use the existing railway corridors...
Will someone wake up in that council dormitory???

Forget it electrician ....some locals and expats seem to be oblivious to the obvious. They tend to try and reinvent things that don't need to be. So ahead they go, decades late and stubbornly looking to the future ignoring the past as it rumbles through their living rooms. And they think they know what they are doing. I'm afraid JTF has a good point about carpetbaggers. This town is ripe to get raped with any and all new fangled acronyms which captures the imagination of dullards. To bad for the rest of the population they get stuck with the bill.

I think it has something to do with cabbage consumption.

There should be zero spent on any "rapid " system because it is absolutely not worth the expense. If you take the bus, then spend the time on the damn thing and shut up! Take a book with you or an alarm clock to wake you up in an hour. This expenditure is worse than the Museum, and 10 time more costly for no return.
The existing system is underwritten by the City as a loss to run. Why at a loss?
I think the $1.05 cost to seniors is way too high and should be reduced!

Livio Ciaralli wrote:They tend to try and reinvent things that don't need to be.

Tell us about your plan to relocate the U of M.

Toronto is actually not a good example to emulate. Besides, Winnipeg simply does not have those problems.

I do not advocate us to follow it infact I do not believe we need it just used TO as an example of subway to the suburbs and how they assorbed the suburbs into the city structure . Winnipeg will never get to that density . We do not need a subway , rapid transit maybe .

Perhaps we should privatize the transit system.

That could very well solve a number of problems imo.

If we allowed it to be open, without a limit as to the number of busses a person could put on and no restrictions to routes, many existing hassles would be eliminated and loads of money saved.

People would move to bus routes rather than the other way around, for example.

Worth a thought?

People would move to bus routes- yes! Those that are too old or too young to drive, and those that work downtown and don't want to spend $120 per month to park.
What is the big deal of taking a bus at Lansdowne and McGregor and spending 13/4 hour to get to University? I did that.
How would spending $3,000,000,000 for rapid transit change that?
The whole plan is a bureaucratic load of crap, and it only works because Shindleman, Katz and Asper are organizing it!

Have any city's successfully privatized transit? Interesting idea. I don't know if it could work. They tried "privatizing" bus transit and air travel somewhat no?

When the routes proved untenable (i.e. lost money) Air Canada and Greyhound tried to drop those routes. Then the government stepped back in.

Possibly that would happen on the less traveled routes in Winnipeg? Maybe we could just find someone to manage Winnipeg Transit better?

The U of M move is something that should have been done in the 90's. To late now, almost a billion is going to be spent in the boonies. If you want to read about thoughts on the issue i'm sure your google can find it GOM. But seeing that original thought and cement don't mix, don't bother yourself with it, its much easier to be led ( bled ).

Is there really a boonies in Winnipeg? This seems to contradict your rapid transit argument.

yep, I'd consider Fort Richmond/U of M da "boonies" if my concern was core redevelopment and maximizing / leveraging systems we've spent decades and millions developing and reducing our carbon footprint.

But if you like to discount that there does not exist this contradiction and it makes your life easier to simply accept then, no sweat. It's not like you have a say in it anyways.

I don't believe in core re-development! where does that leave me Livio?
What core ? For whom? Why?
Fort Richmond certainly isn't the boonies! Lockport is the boonies.
All of Winnipeg are the boonies.
What dollar amount is proposed to be spent on rapid transit? What is the cost/benefit??
Come on someone, answer me!
Could it be that there is no beneft, but lots of cost??
Now I know why the governments want it!
That is what they specialize in! lol

Livio Ciaralli wrote:yep, I'd consider Fort Richmond/U of M da "boonies" if my concern was core redevelopment and maximizing / leveraging systems we've spent decades and millions developing and reducing our carbon footprint.

But if you like to discount that there does not exist this contradiction and it makes your life easier to simply accept then, no sweat. It's not like you have a say in it anyways.

What is it you presume I'm accepting?

Why not TRY to discuss this like a mature adult? This is a discussion forum. Try discussing things civilly before reverting to form. Otherwise why do ya bother?