WislaHD
Superstar
Interesting how the Metrolinx report showcasing the benefits of the DRL-Long option improve the case for the RH-RER-DRL further.
|
|
|
Translude15
Frank the Tank
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/43869799/Richmond Hill Line.jpg
Love the idea but looking at the map a bit further, would it not be an incredibly tall order to connect the East York tunnel from Donlands onto the Lakeshore East tracks? Same thing with connecting the central tunnel along Queen. Also, considering more tracks would be required on the Lakeshore East tracks prior to Gerard Square, are there not ROW limitations along this stretch too?
Love the idea but looking at the map a bit further, would it not be an incredibly tall order to connect the East York tunnel from Donlands onto the Lakeshore East tracks? Same thing with connecting the central tunnel along Queen. Also, considering more tracks would be required on the Lakeshore East tracks prior to Gerard Square, are there not ROW limitations along this stretch too?
44 North
Senior Member
And considering the LRT option has the attributes of a tram-train, it's possible we might see an RH-RER-RL-LRT. How's that for an acronym!
Rainforest
Senior Member
Should this plan be implemented, I expect that all trains using the East York tunnel will continue underground all the way into the Central / Downtown tunnel. There will be no surface section between the two tunnels, in order to achieve high frequency / capacity needed to justify the tunneling.
If any diesel GO trains remain in operation on the RH line, they will have to use the existing surface track into Union, and avoid the East York tunnel and Central tunnel. Same goes for the Canadian VIA train, and for any diesel freight trains, if they continue to use the RH line.