News   Mar 28, 2024
 969     2 
News   Mar 28, 2024
 544     2 
News   Mar 28, 2024
 839     0 

GO Transit Electrification (Metrolinx, Proposed)

It could just be track improvements that would be needed for RER-level service regardless of if the Missing Link happens or not. Chances are a 3rd track would be needed to support some kind of express service to/from Kitchener, since 2 tracks would be needed just for local service.

Yep and also remember that VIA and occasional freight will still want to use that corridor.
 
Yep and also remember that VIA and occasional freight will still want to use that corridor.
Bear this in mind:
Paris’ RER line A, a through-running regional rail service, carries about as many people daily (more than one million riders) on just two tracks as all services operated by commuter rail services in New York City, including Long Island Rail Road, Metro-North, and New Jersey Transit, which require dozens of platforms at the two Manhattan terminals, Grand Central and Penn Station, and which require acres of train storage areas near downtown, either under Grand Central or at the huge yards on Manhattan’s West Side or Sunnyside. In Paris, trains stop at six central-city subway stops, distributing ridership, and train storage is on the suburban fringe.
http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/...wn-often-isnt-the-right-place-for-a-terminus/

More detail here:
What American Commuter Rail Can Learn From Paris
 
This presentation outlines electrification and other planned improvements for the Stouffvile line. I had thought it was only being electrified up to Unionville, but apparently it will be the entire line: http://www2.markham.ca/markham/ccbs/indexfile/Agendas/2017/Development Services/pl170424/Metrolinx Presentation.pdf

Interesting!

I guess electrification makes sense for the entire line because it is wholly owned by Metrolinx and because of the relatively large yard at Lincolnville, which isn't a huge distance from Unionville (ideally, RER should go as far as Mount Joy, but that's another matter). Given the much longer distance between Aurora and Barrie, I can't see electrification happening for the entire corridor there.
 
Interesting!

I guess electrification makes sense for the entire line because it is wholly owned by Metrolinx and because of the relatively large yard at Lincolnville, which isn't a huge distance from Unionville (ideally, RER should go as far as Mount Joy, but that's another matter). Given the much longer distance between Aurora and Barrie, I can't see electrification happening for the entire corridor there.

The entire Barrie Line is also planned to be electrified last I saw

https://swanboatsteve.files.wordpress.com/2015/10/gorer_electrificationplan.jpg

60 minute All Day 2 way service to Mount Joy is good enough IMO.

I guess the Barrie and Stouffville Lines will use fully electric locomotives with the bi-levels for the non-RER service areas, whereas the other lines will have to use fully diesel or diesel/electric.

I could see Barrie-Stouffville becoming a run-through line, just like Lakeshore East/West for this reason, that the fully electric locos will only run on these lines.
 
This presentation outlines electrification and other planned improvements for the Stouffvile line. I had thought it was only being electrified up to Unionville, but apparently it will be the entire line: http://www2.markham.ca/markham/ccbs/indexfile/Agendas/2017/Development Services/pl170424/Metrolinx Presentation.pdf
I can only get that file to scroll laterally with my reader, will try another way to read it later, it's PowerPoint and may remain problematic to view on this OS.

Here's what I read elsewhere: Updated May 2016
upload_2017-4-20_11-42-52.png

http://www.gotransit.com/electrification/en/docs/Electrification TPAP Consultation FAQs EN.pdf



Besides the present question raised on the Stoufville Line, I'm impressed at times as to how *Staff* at Metrolinx can see the big picture, as the lower pane illustrates. They're looking at 'how it's done' in other jurisdictions.
 

Attachments

  • upload_2017-4-20_11-42-52.png
    upload_2017-4-20_11-42-52.png
    113.2 KB · Views: 339
Besides the present question raised on the Stoufville Line, I'm impressed at times as to how *Staff* at Metrolinx can see the big picture, as the lower pane illustrates. They're looking at 'how it's done' in other jurisdictions.
If I were staff, I wouldn't invite people to look at MARC very hard. They are in the midst of dumping their electrics for Siemens SC-44 diesels! :)
 
The November PIC presentations also indicate that the Barrie line will be electrified all the way to Allandale, and the Uxbridge line will be electrified to Lincolnville. The plan for substation and feeders is designed in part to feed from the very end of both lines. I'm not an electrical engineer, but it's quite possible that the design has to cover the whole line in order to have the right balance and redundancy of feed points, and because the Hydro One connections have to be in certain places anyways.

- Paul
 
If I were staff, I wouldn't invite people to look at MARC very hard. They are in the midst of dumping their electrics for Siemens SC-44 diesels!
Quite the contrary. Lessons to be learned, albeit MARC's situation had a lot to do with access fees on the NEC for electrical provision. That and the need for bi-modal run-through on non-electrified MARC and freight lines. I think the experience should be studied closely so similar doesn't happen to GO any more than it already has running over others tracks.

I've noted Metrolinx technical staff being vastly more objective and non-political than the executive branch in a number of reports. They showed similar mettle in some of the earlier reports on rolling stock choices for the future, and often diplomatically mentioned the need for Transport Canada to change the regs to allow a greater choice of quality options for EMUs and others.

Here's the story on the MARC situation:
The Maryland Transit Administration (MTA) has decided to phase out its 10-unit fleet of AEM7 and HHP8 electric locomotives used for MARC regional/commuter rail service and replace them with eight new 125-mph “Charger” diesel-electric locomotives from Siemens Industry.

The MTA plans to ask Maryland’s Board of Public Works for permission to piggyback on an Illinois DOT contract with Siemens to acquire the locomotives, for an estimated $58 million. Amtrak, which has been maintaining MARC’s electric fleet since 1983, will no longer be able to provide the service as of June 2016 because it has retired its own HHP8 locomotives and is phasing out its AEM7s as new Siemens ACS-64 electrics enter service.

The Charger locomotives, which are based technically on the Siemens Eurosprinter, Eurorunner, and Vectron locomotive platforms, feature a primary traction drive consisting of a 4,400-hp-rated 16-cylinder Cummins QSK95 diesel engine with a cubic capacity of 95 liters. The QSK95 complies with EPA Tier IV emissions regulations. The 120-ton (approximate) Charger locomotive offers a starting tractive effort of 65,200 pounds (290 kN).

MARC’s four EMD/ASEA-produced AEM7s, like Amtrak’s, are approaching 30 years in age. Its six-unit HHP8 fleet, also like Amtrak’s, is only about 15 years old but has suffered from reliability and availability problems. (The HHP8 was part of Amtrak’s Acela Express trainset contract with a Bombardier/Alstom consortium in the late 1990s.)

According to a report in the Baltimore Sun, MTA spokesman Paul Shepard said that replacing the electric fleet with diesels will improve MARC’s service reliability and will “enhance the passenger experience.” The electric locomotives operate only on MARC’s Penn Line (Northeast Corridor) between Perryville, Md., and Washington D.C. Union Station. The agency’s existing 33 diesel locomotives are used on the Camden (Baltimore Camden Yards Station-Union Station) and Brunswick (Martinsburg, W.Va.-Union Station) lines as well as the Penn Line.

“Concerns about the reliability of MARC peaked in June 2010 when a Penn Line train with an [HHP8] electric locomotive stalled outside Washington in 100-degree heat and the passengers were stranded for two hours,” the Baltimore Sun reported. “The so-called ‘hell train’ incident became an issue in the 2010 gubernatorial election between then-Gov. Martin O'Malley and former Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr.”

Shepard said MARC’s electric fleet has a reliability rating of between 40% and 50%. Its diesel fleet, most of which was replaced about five years ago with 26 MP36PH-3C units from Wabtec subsidiary MotivePower Industries, has a reliability rating of 85%. MARC’s diesel fleet also contains six EMD GP39H-2s, which are scheduled for repowering, and one EMD GP40WH-2, used as standby power.

MARC’s Charger locomotives are expected to be delivered by late 2017. As of Aug. 12, 2015, a date had not been scheduled for the matter to go before Maryland’s Board of Public Works. It had been on the board’s Aug. 5 agenda but was withdrawn after a losing bidder filed a complaint with the federal government. Shepard said the MTA “believes the complaint has no merit but it would likely take several weeks to resolve.”
http://www.railwayage.com/index.php...locomotive-fleet-with-high-speed-diesels.html

The plan for substation and feeders is designed in part to feed from the very end of both lines. I'm not an electrical engineer, but it's quite possible that the design has to cover the whole line in order to have the right balance and redundancy of feed points, and because the Hydro One connections have to be in certain places anyways.

Needless to say, the runs would be fed from the south too, for the reason you state. (Proximity to 230 kV feeders)

I'd pored over their in-depth technical report on electrification some months back, http://www.gotransit.com/electrification/en/project_history/Appendix Files/Appendix 7.pdf mostly as that pertains to their questionable assertion on aspects of 2 X 25 kVAC (they way they depicted it didn't make engineering sense) (better analysis here: https://www.railelectrica.com/traction-distribution/2x25-kv-traction-system/ ) and if end-feed of the line was mentioned as desirable technically, I missed it other than available 230kV feeders being available, which there are http://www.hydroone.com/RegulatoryAffairs/Documents/EB-2006-0501/Exhibit A/Tab_6_Sched_1-Transmission_System_Map.pdf

As a side note, the ex O&Q corridor is conveniently adjacent to a number of trunks to feed VIA HFR if/when it becomes extant, with very little need to run distribution feeders along the rail RoW. (Perhaps permitting a single 25 kV feed and the simplicity that goes with it)
 
Last edited:
How is hourly service going to work with double tracking only up to unionville?
Probably twinning at stations. Several countries manage 15-min and 30-min on single-track corridors with just passing track at certain stations for meet. Trains meet at stations, ala Ottawa O-Train style.
 
Anybody have any idea where the PCs and NDP stand on electrification. I haven't seen much. And that's real question.
 
Travel times from Unionville to Mount Joy are short enough that a train can go up, turn around, and return within the hour gap needed before the next trip needs to make the trip north.
Probably twinning at stations. Several countries manage 15-min and 30-min on single-track corridors with just passing track at certain stations for meet. Trains meet at stations, ala Ottawa O-Train style.

Thanks guys.

Sounds pretty simple. Why isn't this project moving faster if they just have to go to Unionville. Should be done by now.
 

Back
Top