RedRocket191
Senior Member
So lets find ways to improve the orange stripe. It'll probably all get amalgamated into one system anyway (at least visually, and I'm not putting any timelines on that statement).
|
|
|
GO Transit: Service thread (including extensions)
- Thread starter drum118
- Start date
So lets find ways to improve the orange stripe. It'll probably all get amalgamated into one system anyway (at least visually, and I'm not putting any timelines on that statement).
ahmedyusali
Member
GO service not growing fast enough to meet need
Longer trains, new bus routes being introduced
May 10, 2008 04:30 AM
Tess Kalinowski
Transportation Reporter
Run it and they will ride.
That's the situation at GO Transit, where the demand for service continues to tax the supply of trains and buses on many routes even as they're being expanded.
Ridership grew about 7.5 per cent in March over the same month last year, according to a report to the GO board yesterday. That's significantly more than the 4- to 5-per-cent ridership growth GO had been anticipating this year.
The equivalent of 14,080 more riders daily "is a good problem," said managing director Gary McNeil. "Most transit companies are out there screaming to get people on the system."
But it creates challenges in co-ordinating a new supply of vehicles, parking and schedules, he said.
While many riders are standing on overcapacity rush-hour trains, some ridership is migrating to the off-peak periods, when there are seats available. But at many stations there's no room left in the parking lots by the end of the morning rush, said GO customer service director Bill Jenkins.
On its most congested line from Milton, GO now runs 12-car trains pulled by its new locomotives.
The longer trains are also available on three Lakeshore runs daily, but GO needs to get more of the locomotives before the increased capacity can be added, probably by the middle of next year.
Meantime, new bus routes are being introduced June 28 between Milton and the Bronte station and from Stoney Creek to the Burlington station. The preliminary foray into the Niagara region at Stoney Creek is also designed to alleviate demand on parking at Burlington, where a new parking structure is supposed to open in September, adding capacity for 600 cars, for a total of 800 spots.
Georgetown's weekend bus service to Union Station also is being significantly expanded. A new hourly express service will take riders to downtown Brampton and a second hourly service will go to Bramalea and Malton.
That's expected to serve 1,500 to 1,600 riders on a weekend day.
The addition of a third track on the Lakeshore means the VIA station at Oakville must be moved. It will be demolished and rebuilt northwest of the current site, for about $3 million, by December.
Toronto Star
Longer trains, new bus routes being introduced
May 10, 2008 04:30 AM
Tess Kalinowski
Transportation Reporter
Run it and they will ride.
That's the situation at GO Transit, where the demand for service continues to tax the supply of trains and buses on many routes even as they're being expanded.
Ridership grew about 7.5 per cent in March over the same month last year, according to a report to the GO board yesterday. That's significantly more than the 4- to 5-per-cent ridership growth GO had been anticipating this year.
The equivalent of 14,080 more riders daily "is a good problem," said managing director Gary McNeil. "Most transit companies are out there screaming to get people on the system."
But it creates challenges in co-ordinating a new supply of vehicles, parking and schedules, he said.
While many riders are standing on overcapacity rush-hour trains, some ridership is migrating to the off-peak periods, when there are seats available. But at many stations there's no room left in the parking lots by the end of the morning rush, said GO customer service director Bill Jenkins.
On its most congested line from Milton, GO now runs 12-car trains pulled by its new locomotives.
The longer trains are also available on three Lakeshore runs daily, but GO needs to get more of the locomotives before the increased capacity can be added, probably by the middle of next year.
Meantime, new bus routes are being introduced June 28 between Milton and the Bronte station and from Stoney Creek to the Burlington station. The preliminary foray into the Niagara region at Stoney Creek is also designed to alleviate demand on parking at Burlington, where a new parking structure is supposed to open in September, adding capacity for 600 cars, for a total of 800 spots.
Georgetown's weekend bus service to Union Station also is being significantly expanded. A new hourly express service will take riders to downtown Brampton and a second hourly service will go to Bramalea and Malton.
That's expected to serve 1,500 to 1,600 riders on a weekend day.
The addition of a third track on the Lakeshore means the VIA station at Oakville must be moved. It will be demolished and rebuilt northwest of the current site, for about $3 million, by December.
Toronto Star
Long Island Mike
Senior Member
GO Transit Rail service improvements for the Niagara Region-Good News!
Everyone: Good news about GO Transit's proposed rail service improvements for Hamilton and Niagara Peninsula service. I feel this is something that is finally going to be implemented-the ridership potential is definitely there!
Let me make these comments about what was mentioned:
The one problem for expanded rail service to Niagara Falls is the Welland Canal Bridge-hopefully something can be worked out to allow trains to operate freely and keep potential delays to a minimum.
The idea of operating trains to Welland-thru the 70s era rail tunnel under the WC-and then perhaps Fort Erie and Buffalo is a interesting one-Sean's idea to operate trains to Buffalo to connect with Amtrak's Empire Service is interesting but the problems facing that are the single track International Bridge and dealing with customs troubles-it seems to me that the US Department of Homeland Bureaucracy and its Canadian counterpart wants to make crossing the border even more of a hassle then it has ever been. I am sure NYS officials would welcome thru rail service-Buffalo and WNY can use economic stimilus this can bring.
Another problem would be the outcry from both sides of Niagara Falls on this service bypassing them as well as population centers like St. Catharines.
The VIA station in Niagara Falls could use more platform space to accomodate expanded rail service there as well as allow service to cross the border there-I remember reading that CN had mentioned abandoning the connecting track across the Whirlpool/Suspension Bridge-ending thru NYP-TOR Maple Leaf service in the process. That track must be kept-allowing thru service and providing an alternate to the single-track International Bridge-it is hard to believe that with this proposed abandonment all Niagara Frontier international rail service would be down to using a SINGLE track.
Another idea is to allow passengers to cross the border on foot between trains-a good idea if the hassle factor is not too great but I will also say not at the cost of losing thru rail service thru Niagara Falls. I have been across this bridge many times on my earlier travels on Amtrak's Maple Leaf as well as on foot-it seems to me now that if the two Customs agencies can get away with it they would like that bridge closed altogether-but I know from past experience the added traffic troubles that would cause among other things.
Let's all hope that the agencies involved make traveling in the Niagara Frontier better-with the increasing cost of gasoline more people will be looking for a good alternative like rail travel. The potential for it to be successful is definitely there!
Comments and opinions by Long Island Mike
Everyone: Good news about GO Transit's proposed rail service improvements for Hamilton and Niagara Peninsula service. I feel this is something that is finally going to be implemented-the ridership potential is definitely there!
Let me make these comments about what was mentioned:
The one problem for expanded rail service to Niagara Falls is the Welland Canal Bridge-hopefully something can be worked out to allow trains to operate freely and keep potential delays to a minimum.
The idea of operating trains to Welland-thru the 70s era rail tunnel under the WC-and then perhaps Fort Erie and Buffalo is a interesting one-Sean's idea to operate trains to Buffalo to connect with Amtrak's Empire Service is interesting but the problems facing that are the single track International Bridge and dealing with customs troubles-it seems to me that the US Department of Homeland Bureaucracy and its Canadian counterpart wants to make crossing the border even more of a hassle then it has ever been. I am sure NYS officials would welcome thru rail service-Buffalo and WNY can use economic stimilus this can bring.
Another problem would be the outcry from both sides of Niagara Falls on this service bypassing them as well as population centers like St. Catharines.
The VIA station in Niagara Falls could use more platform space to accomodate expanded rail service there as well as allow service to cross the border there-I remember reading that CN had mentioned abandoning the connecting track across the Whirlpool/Suspension Bridge-ending thru NYP-TOR Maple Leaf service in the process. That track must be kept-allowing thru service and providing an alternate to the single-track International Bridge-it is hard to believe that with this proposed abandonment all Niagara Frontier international rail service would be down to using a SINGLE track.
Another idea is to allow passengers to cross the border on foot between trains-a good idea if the hassle factor is not too great but I will also say not at the cost of losing thru rail service thru Niagara Falls. I have been across this bridge many times on my earlier travels on Amtrak's Maple Leaf as well as on foot-it seems to me now that if the two Customs agencies can get away with it they would like that bridge closed altogether-but I know from past experience the added traffic troubles that would cause among other things.
Let's all hope that the agencies involved make traveling in the Niagara Frontier better-with the increasing cost of gasoline more people will be looking for a good alternative like rail travel. The potential for it to be successful is definitely there!
Comments and opinions by Long Island Mike
Long Island Mike
Senior Member
Go Rail service expansion and electrification-Lakeshore Line
Everyone: I read that Toronto Star article posted and I now realize with the high demand for GO Rail service that the electrified Lakeshore route-and the improved service using electric locomotives and MU cars could provide-is needed and now justified. New MU cars alone would allow GO to expand service elsewhere using diesel equipment now in Lakeshore service.
The core would be for GO to take title to the Lakeshore line from CN along with VIA-and allow them to provide better service to meet the high demand. Alternate freight routes are needed here also-CN and CP should work together to create a good alternative to the busy Lakeshore line for the numerous freight trains operating thru the Golden Horseshoe region.
I feel that the rail agencies can work together to provide good service for both passengers and freight-with the increasing cost of fuel rail is becoming the better way to go-a necessity to me for an area like the Golden Horseshoe.
More thoughts by Long Island Mike
Everyone: I read that Toronto Star article posted and I now realize with the high demand for GO Rail service that the electrified Lakeshore route-and the improved service using electric locomotives and MU cars could provide-is needed and now justified. New MU cars alone would allow GO to expand service elsewhere using diesel equipment now in Lakeshore service.
The core would be for GO to take title to the Lakeshore line from CN along with VIA-and allow them to provide better service to meet the high demand. Alternate freight routes are needed here also-CN and CP should work together to create a good alternative to the busy Lakeshore line for the numerous freight trains operating thru the Golden Horseshoe region.
I feel that the rail agencies can work together to provide good service for both passengers and freight-with the increasing cost of fuel rail is becoming the better way to go-a necessity to me for an area like the Golden Horseshoe.
More thoughts by Long Island Mike
drum118
Superstar
Other than the section between Port Credit and Clarkson, you can put 5-6 tracks in this corridor. PT-Clarkson can be 4 with easy.
Putting in a 5th tracks will require buying up land and relocating the Clarkson Yard.
You could build the new yard where the parking lot is now and reduce it to 3 tracks stub end.
The Aldershot to the junction will have some issue with the parks, but can be over come.
drum118
Superstar
I have said at each GO EA meeting for all lines as well in written reports that GO should be building 2 tracks, not one as plan.
To date, I am 66% for seeing the 2nd track go in in place of one.
At GO meeting on Friday, I went up to 75% when the approval to proceed for the West Toronto grade separation was given. The plan calls for 4 tracks using to tunnels to go from St Clair to the south side of Dupont.
This means there will be 5 tracks north of St Clair as far as Rogers Rd or Weston.
More like Weston as there is enough room to do it. New bridges will have to be built.
This means there will be 5 tracks running to Union with room to put in a 6th track.
Glad to see 4 tracks for the diamond, not the plan 3. Will help operation nicely.
To date, I am 66% for seeing the 2nd track go in in place of one.
At GO meeting on Friday, I went up to 75% when the approval to proceed for the West Toronto grade separation was given. The plan calls for 4 tracks using to tunnels to go from St Clair to the south side of Dupont.
This means there will be 5 tracks north of St Clair as far as Rogers Rd or Weston.
More like Weston as there is enough room to do it. New bridges will have to be built.
This means there will be 5 tracks running to Union with room to put in a 6th track.
Glad to see 4 tracks for the diamond, not the plan 3. Will help operation nicely.
ShonTron
Moderator
Member Bio
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 12,425
- Reaction score
- 9,140
- Location
- Ward 13 - Toronto Centre
I noticed this excellent letter in today's Star:
Time to change direction
May 12, 2008 04:30 AM
Re:GO service not growing fast enough to meet need
May 10
While the surging demand for GO Transit's rail services is surely a good sign for the future of transit in the GTA, the agency's reaction to it belies a fundamentally mistaken understanding of what its role should be.
The answer to more passengers is not running ever-longer trains hauled by a small number of massive locomotives into Union Station in the morning and out in the evening, but rather changing GO Transit's operating philosophy entirely.
A much larger number of smaller, self-propelled trains running frequently in all directions and all day long is the only real long-term solution to GO's demand problems, and would bring its practices in line with the world's most successful suburban railways.
More importantly, moving from the current model of commuter rail to true regional rail would help make transit an attractive option for all kinds of trips by suburbanites – not just those to and from downtown office towers.
Matthew Campbell, Oxford, England
Time to change direction
May 12, 2008 04:30 AM
Re:GO service not growing fast enough to meet need
May 10
While the surging demand for GO Transit's rail services is surely a good sign for the future of transit in the GTA, the agency's reaction to it belies a fundamentally mistaken understanding of what its role should be.
The answer to more passengers is not running ever-longer trains hauled by a small number of massive locomotives into Union Station in the morning and out in the evening, but rather changing GO Transit's operating philosophy entirely.
A much larger number of smaller, self-propelled trains running frequently in all directions and all day long is the only real long-term solution to GO's demand problems, and would bring its practices in line with the world's most successful suburban railways.
More importantly, moving from the current model of commuter rail to true regional rail would help make transit an attractive option for all kinds of trips by suburbanites – not just those to and from downtown office towers.
Matthew Campbell, Oxford, England
RedRocket191
Senior Member
Nice try Sean... stop pretending you're from Oxford 
DMU/EMU is what we should strive for, but regional rail shouldn't depend on getting those. Large trains can do 20 minute frequency. It's not the most efficient route to go, but we can't/shouldn't wait any longer.
Bring up the frequencies in the short term, order more suitable trains in the medium term, and electrify all lines in the long term.
DMU/EMU is what we should strive for, but regional rail shouldn't depend on getting those. Large trains can do 20 minute frequency. It's not the most efficient route to go, but we can't/shouldn't wait any longer.
Bring up the frequencies in the short term, order more suitable trains in the medium term, and electrify all lines in the long term.
Dan416
Senior Member
Nice try Sean... stop pretending you're from Oxford
DMU/EMU is what we should strive for, but regional rail shouldn't depend on getting those. Large trains can do 20 minute frequency. It's not the most efficient route to go, but we can't/shouldn't wait any longer.
Bring up the frequencies in the short term, order more suitable trains in the medium term, and electrify all lines in the long term.
I'll second that.
doady
Senior Member
GO only cares about park-and-ride lots. The lots are full now already, so they so need reason to improve service and upgrade to regional rail.
RedRocket191
Senior Member
Working with the people who design the system, i fundamentally disagree with that statement.
The trend in the past was to move people downtown in the morning and out-of-town in the afternoon. It's hard to shake trends, but saying that they only care about park-and-rides is downright wrong
drum118
Superstar
I said over the years we need 30 minute service yesterday and need to move to 10-15 minute service over the next 5 years.
You will use today equipment for your express service covering long haul and stations that can fill a train with no problem. It does not have to be 10-14 cars long. You run the express service every 15 minutes at peak time and hourly up to 10pm.
You run 3-5 car DMU/EMU every 10 minute as local service from 5:30 am to midnight. From midnight to 5:30 am, you run 30 minute service.
This is for the Lakeshore.
Rest of the lines will have 20-30 minute service until the ridership is there, then move to 10. Late night may have to be 60 minutes at first or not at all.
You will get the same thing that GO cannot have 2 types of fleet just like the argument between 40' vs 30' buses for TTC.
A 10 car train cost around $25 mil to buy while a 3 car DMU cost about $5 mil. That $20 mil saving in capital cost. 10 train sets will cost $250 mil vs $50 mil for DMU's and that one huge capital saving.
You only need 1 man crew for DMU vs 3-4 for the current fleet and more saving on the operation side.
Add in the wear and tear on extra coaches that are not really use on a 10 car train in the first adds up more capital cost for overhaul.
If you got the 10-20 minute service 7 days a week, it will draw more riders as well get them to leave their car at home provided there is the same quality of local bus service.
Parking lots are a waste in more ways than they are worth. Time to remove them by downsizing them as well charging $20-$30 a day to park. The funds generate will help transit at first, but as lots become smaller and less people using them, funds income will go down.
You will use today equipment for your express service covering long haul and stations that can fill a train with no problem. It does not have to be 10-14 cars long. You run the express service every 15 minutes at peak time and hourly up to 10pm.
You run 3-5 car DMU/EMU every 10 minute as local service from 5:30 am to midnight. From midnight to 5:30 am, you run 30 minute service.
This is for the Lakeshore.
Rest of the lines will have 20-30 minute service until the ridership is there, then move to 10. Late night may have to be 60 minutes at first or not at all.
You will get the same thing that GO cannot have 2 types of fleet just like the argument between 40' vs 30' buses for TTC.
A 10 car train cost around $25 mil to buy while a 3 car DMU cost about $5 mil. That $20 mil saving in capital cost. 10 train sets will cost $250 mil vs $50 mil for DMU's and that one huge capital saving.
You only need 1 man crew for DMU vs 3-4 for the current fleet and more saving on the operation side.
Add in the wear and tear on extra coaches that are not really use on a 10 car train in the first adds up more capital cost for overhaul.
If you got the 10-20 minute service 7 days a week, it will draw more riders as well get them to leave their car at home provided there is the same quality of local bus service.
Parking lots are a waste in more ways than they are worth. Time to remove them by downsizing them as well charging $20-$30 a day to park. The funds generate will help transit at first, but as lots become smaller and less people using them, funds income will go down.
bar1967
Active Member
From today's Star
GO studies resuming Guelph service
TheStar.com - GTA - GO studies resuming Guelph service
May 13, 2008
THE CANADIAN PRESS
GUELPH – GO Transit has launched a study to examine the pros and cons of resuming rail service to Guelph, but it would take years to get there.
For now, GO Transit has hired an engineering consultant to do an environmental assessment, which could take until early 2009.
A GO official says there could eventually be a train every 20 minutes during rush hour and every hour outside of rush hour times.
GO ran trains to Guelph from 1990 to 1993.
Mayor Karen Farbridge says there is a "huge pent-up demand for commuter rail service to Toronto.
Local MPP Ted Arnott adds that GO service is something the province should give serious thought to given the region's population growth.
http://www.thestar.com/printArticle/424847
GO studies resuming Guelph service
TheStar.com - GTA - GO studies resuming Guelph service
May 13, 2008
THE CANADIAN PRESS
GUELPH – GO Transit has launched a study to examine the pros and cons of resuming rail service to Guelph, but it would take years to get there.
For now, GO Transit has hired an engineering consultant to do an environmental assessment, which could take until early 2009.
A GO official says there could eventually be a train every 20 minutes during rush hour and every hour outside of rush hour times.
GO ran trains to Guelph from 1990 to 1993.
Mayor Karen Farbridge says there is a "huge pent-up demand for commuter rail service to Toronto.
Local MPP Ted Arnott adds that GO service is something the province should give serious thought to given the region's population growth.
http://www.thestar.com/printArticle/424847
unimaginative2
Senior Member
This is what's insane about our system of government. It will take years to decide whether to run trains on a route that was already operated, on tracks that are already there. There'll even be a multi-year EA study! As if the effect on the environment of a few extra trains a day will require five volumes.
Anyway, this is good news. Maybe they'll extend it to Kitchener before I reach retirement age.
Anyway, this is good news. Maybe they'll extend it to Kitchener before I reach retirement age.
Long Island Mike
Senior Member
GO service to Guelph and Kitchener/Waterloo...
UNI2: I have to agree with you-especially if everyone in that area knows that the service would be a success right from the start. With the population of the three cities as well as knowing about the University at Guelph-which alone would generate riders for GO it can be a successful operation. Not to mention escalating fuel prices and the higher cost to drive-enough said.
LI MIKE
UNI2: I have to agree with you-especially if everyone in that area knows that the service would be a success right from the start. With the population of the three cities as well as knowing about the University at Guelph-which alone would generate riders for GO it can be a successful operation. Not to mention escalating fuel prices and the higher cost to drive-enough said.
LI MIKE