Toronto Spadina Subway Extension Emergency Exits | ?m | 1s | TTC | IBI Group

Swarley said:
They've been testing speed control, which is a component of ATC, on Sheppard for years now... I guess they still haven't finished it?
Click to expand...

SCS has nothing to do with ATC. It is simply an overlay of the existing wayside signal system that enforces speeds and signal indications, rather than just the permissiveness of the signal. And yes, it is active on the Sheppard Line.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.
 
CDL.TO said:
If it doesn't include in-cab signalling or speed control, can we even call it ATC?
Click to expand...

That's why I called it a failure. For whatever reason we are abandoning the kit that was installed on Sheppard and was expandable to full ATC and are starting again.

I thought the whole point of the Yonge upgrades is to install moving block? If they're sticking with fixed block then where are the capacity improvements coming from?
Click to expand...

It appears they intend to install both moving-block ATC and a tradational fixed block system. Somehow we are going to overlay one on top of the other so both work at the same time allowing work cars and disabled trains to be intermixed with ATC traffic.

I've never seen that before and have serious doubts it can be made to work system wide.

What I expect will actually happen in 2016 is we will have moving block in a few choke points like the approach to Bloor, King, and Union and the remainder will remain as it is today with a "call control" notice for trains not ATC equipped to pass those points. Pure speculation, but my confidence in the plan details as advertised is pretty low.
 
rbt said:
That's why I called it a failure. For whatever reason we are abandoning the kit that was installed on Sheppard and was expandable to full ATC and are starting again.
Click to expand...

Again, SCS has nothing to do with the future ATC/ATO system. It was designed and developed long before the City agreed to fund the ATC/ATO implementation.

rbt said:
It appears they intend to install both moving-block ATC and a tradational fixed block system. Somehow we are going to overlay one on top of the other so both work at the same time allowing work cars and disabled trains to be intermixed with ATC traffic.

I've never seen that before and have serious doubts it can be made to work system wide.

What I expect will actually happen in 2016 is we will have moving block in a few choke points like the approach to Bloor, King, and Union and the remainder will remain as it is today with a "call control" notice for trains not ATC equipped to pass those points. Pure speculation, but my confidence in the plan details as advertised is pretty low.
Click to expand...

I'm not certain as yet that the secondary signal system will be a full wayside system in the same design as the current one. I certainly haven't seen any hard details of the system, and would love to see what has already been planned out. For all we know it may be as simple as fixed signals at interlockings with moving block/cab signals in between - a system currently in use on a number of different systems (such as Chicago).

Dan
Toronto, Ont.
 
smallspy said:
Again, SCS has nothing to do with the future ATC/ATO system. It was designed and developed long before the City agreed to fund the ATC/ATO implementation.


I'm not certain as yet that the secondary signal system will be a full wayside system in the same design as the current one. I certainly haven't seen any hard details of the system, and would love to see what has already been planned out. For all we know it may be as simple as fixed signals at interlockings with moving block/cab signals in between - a system currently in use on a number of different systems (such as Chicago).
Click to expand...

Thanks for clearing that up, Dan.

However, I'm extremely surprised that the CTA utilizes moving block. I'd love to read about their implementation. I did a Google search and didn't find any articles about it. Do you have a source?
 
rbt said:
No, and it cost millions in engineering to move the roof supports away from the platform edges as a result of their elimination.
Click to expand...

Why would it cost millions when they haven't really built anything yet? And why couldn't the TTC just install half-height doors. Not that I like platform doors, but just wondering.
 
Transportfan said:
Why would it cost millions when they haven't really built anything yet?
Click to expand...

Moving roof supports changes everything from passenger flow to the lighting. There seem to be dozens of engineers and architects involved in creating a single station; kill 6 months of time for a large team and you get millions in manpower. Remember, double a persons salary to get what their employer charges (minimum, sometimes 3 or 4 times).

A large chunk of the cost for these things is during the design process that's worse for one-off luxury stations like the Spadina line is receiving.
 
Last edited:
a0th said:
......... why wouldnt you like them
Click to expand...

Because I'm a traditionalist who likes the look of the open platform and the view into the tunnels that are familiar from the existing stations. Building platform doors doors on the extension would destroy the sense of it being a continuation of the Spadina line.

Put them in on Sheppard if you must have doors...I never saw that as an "extension" anyways.
 
Transportfan said:
Because I'm a traditionalist who likes the look of the open platform and the view into the tunnels that are familiar from the existing stations. Building platform doors doors on the extension would destroy the sense of it being a continuation of the Spadina line.

Put them in on Sheppard if you must have doors...I never saw that as an "extension" anyways.
Click to expand...

hahaha, do you want us to switch back to steam powered trains as well? your preference for "traditionalism" and some other vague stuff is certainly much better than the safety that platform doors provide. thank you sir i've seen the light
 
Comparing a dislike for platform doors to a desire to bring back steam trains is crazy. Why are platform doors needed on the extension anyways? Doors are no good unless the whole subway system has them. Besides, suicides don't need redirects. And though it's true that suicides causes service delays, the cost of installing the doors doesn't outweigh the benfits in my opinion, especially with the TTC being so cash-strapped--probably permanently now.
 
Transportfan said:
Doors are no good unless the whole subway system has them.
Click to expand...

Not true. If you can assume a station has platform doors then you can put the ceiling supports immediately adjacent to the tracks as part of the door wall at the platform edge. This reduces the horizontal span and/or eliminates pillars in the platform.

Station heating/airconditioning is another benefit. It isn't practical when all the air goes down the tunnel but is done when platform doors are in place. You aren't going to retrofit heating into Dundas station (open stairwells) but it might be worth while in new stations.

Finally, not all stations cause the same headache when there is a track level incident or have the same potential to cause one. The backlog caused by an issue at Wellesley station is much higher than an issue at North York Station. It can make sense to be selective about which sections of the line are retrofitted with doors based on a cost analysis of outage cost/frequency.
 
Last edited:
rbt said:
Finally, not all stations cause the same headache when there is a track level incident or have the same potential to cause one. The backlog caused by an issue at Wellesley station is much higher than an issue at North York Station. It can make sense to be selective about which sections of the line are retrofitted with doors based on a cost analysis of outage cost/frequency.
Click to expand...

Well, using that criteria, the Spadina extension certainly doesn't need them.
 
Transportfan said:
Comparing a dislike for platform doors to a desire to bring back steam trains is crazy. Why are platform doors needed on the extension anyways? Doors are no good unless the whole subway system has them. Besides, suicides don't need redirects. And though it's true that suicides causes service delays, the cost of installing the doors doesn't outweigh the benfits in my opinion, especially with the TTC being so cash-strapped--probably permanently now.
Click to expand...

really? saving lives isn't worth a few million to you? not to mention what the people who witness such an event have to deal with. and doors work just fine even when they aren't installed system wide, I don't think there's a transit system that does have them in every station. also consider that this doesn't just save people considering suicide, it protects against accidents by slip or fall, debris falling onto the track (the cause of many delays) and the very rare homicide.
 
wouldn't adding PSD's to busy stations like Bloor-Yonge, or King, etc improve dwell times at these stations? I know that trains tend to move at a considerably slower speed when the platforms are absolutely packed at these stations (for safety reasons I assume)
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top