mdrejhon
Senior Member
Malton, Milton, Halton, Hamiltonmany people mix up the Malton and Milton stops....Malton near the airport on the KW line....Milton, not so much
Sounds like a ton of -lton's.
And it ain't the Hilton Hotel.
|
|
|
SmartTrack (Proposed)
- Thread starter aquateam
- Start date
Sounds like a ton of -lton's.
And it ain't the Hilton Hotel.
crs1026
Senior Member
I still can't imagine RER and ST coexisting on the same tracks without some capability for RER to overtake the ST trains. So budget some money for four-track stations or short three or four track segments so the ST trains can get out of the way.
- Paul
- Paul
mdrejhon
Senior Member
RER and ST are the same thing.
(ST being an upgraded RER of course -- i.e. infills, new routing etc. -- and are not a separate train)
In my earlier context, I was talking about Kitchener diesels and the RER/ST(samething) electric all-stop trains. The Kitchener long-haul diesels could go completely express over the SmartTrack routing, making it theoretically unnecessary for the SmartTrack stations to be fully compatible with traditional 12-car GO trains.
For the Brampton ST/RER and Pearson ST/RER, Metrolinx already suggested they'd alternate sending each next train down the other route. 15 mins before the wye, 30 minutes each for each branch. The wye, being the point where the SmartTrack detours off the existing GO routing. So you'd have two routings -- the existing Brampton GO routing, plus the new Airport routing, either via Eglinton or Pearson. Alternating sending the exact same kind of trainset down each route -- That's exactly the way they do it with Paris RER, Calgary C-Train and Sydney Metro. Multiple routes sharing the same core segment, but branches at the end.
Example, Calgary C-Train:
Attachments
Last edited:
nfitz
Superstar
They are not. Ontario has already promised to fully fund RER on the Stouffville and Kitchener lines.
That would mean the only difference between RER and ST then is the Heavy Rail down E
On that 2.6/2.6/2.6 list there's no entry for the new platforms at Union for ST. Presumably that's also part of the $2.6.
By the time you build the quite complex station at Gerrard Square, along with stations at Queen E, Lever, Sherbourne, Spadina, King W, Queen W .... then you'd have burned through a lot of cash. Wouldn't be surprised if the new platform/tunnel at Union would eat through $2 billion right there ...
mdrejhon
Senior Member
Every smart reader will recognize we are disagreeing only on semantics.
There are multiple interpretations of the terms, since RER can be a general plan of the whole GO upgrades, including express diesel trains. So the confusion can arise.
So to fix this confusion:
More accurately, "SmartTrack same thing as RER"
may be phrased, if you prefer, as
"SmartTrack is a subset of the whole GTA RER plan. SmartTrack is the all-stop RER train that serves all stops in the core 416 segment of the Kitchener-Stoufville lines."
What this means is there won't be an separate all-stop RER electric train and all-stop SmartTrack electric train. That would make no sense. Essentially, they are the SAME train, when we're specifically talking about the allstop electric rail beast they're planning to run in the core segment of Kitchener-Stoufville GO routing that the SmartTrack route overlaps.
If you wish to use a different glossary, by all means go ahead and make sure you specify -- but read the post in this thread using this glossary, please.
___________
Now, back onto topic.
The original RER plan was not planning to have the large number of infill stations. And we may very well have been getting electric locomotives rather than, say EMUs. Regardless, it's still a merger of RER/ST into a unified service that combines the best elements of each. Obviously, it's worth debating the large differences in the cost. Were we going to just get simple Exhibition-style platforms and electric-locomotive GO trains, plus maybe 2 infill stations? That's not really worth SmartTrack. The $8bn (for it to really make sense) would need to buy subway-style cars, great stations, good interchanges, subway-convenience, level boarding, a brand new routing (whatever is chosen).
But that's besides the point, since I don't like the Eglinton portion. Removing that (as well as the cost of infill stations that the Eglinton would have needed) could probably save many billions of dollars, and make the estimates far closer (e.g. Ontario original $3bn versus Tory-enhanced-minus-Eglinton $5bn), which would be easily explained in other SmartTrack elements such as the large increase in infill stations, especially if they were better than simple GO stations, considering the Eglinton stations would probably have needed to be underground and the interchange stations are incredibly complex.
Those few Eglinton stations that are underground, plus the interchanges at the endpoints of Eglinton crosstown -- could have ended up eating up $1bn total, the rest of the stations ~$1bn, then we've got roughly a $2bn+$3bn+$3bn math). Now if we eliminate Eglinton, the math becomes so much cheaper.
Obviuosly, we don't have all the answers yet, so speculation about $3bn through $8bn and what it could have funded (or not) is really speculative. But it makes a lot of sense that high quality subway-style level-boarding infill stations with GO stations redone into SmartTrack specific stations, would be stupendously expensive. That may not necessarily be what citizens want, or need, but would explain a large part of the cost differences, too.
That is exactly what I posted above -- the $8bn is only if Eglinton was built (AND of course, full-monty on all infills, new stations, interchanges, redo existing stations to level boarding, etc).
Obviously, we can save quite a lot of money here; I'm not disagreeing. But that is not the point. I was simply merely pointing out that Eglinton was a huge part of the $8bn cost, by showing the 2.6+2.6+2.6 breakdown example.
Regarding specifically the allstop electric rail beast they're planning to run in the core segment of Kitchener-Stoufville GO routing that the SmartTrack route overlaps. Honestly, there isn't going to be two separate kinds of electric trains doing exactly the same stops in the overlapping section.
Last edited:
crs1026
Senior Member
Doesn't matter what you call them, semi-stopping trains and all-stops trains won't coexist unless the semi-stopping trains can overtake the all-stoppers.
- Paul
- Paul
nfitz
Superstar
Metrolinx has been very clear on what RER is (electrified 2-way all-day GO service). And what it isn't (SmartTrack). And what they are 100% funding (RER); and what they are 0% funding (SmartTrack).
There's no interpretation necessary. Though if one starts calling the new Bombardier Flexity "a bus", and then calls the new 60-foot long Nova LFS Artics "streetcars" it might get confusing.
mdrejhon
Senior Member
Not all parties (Federal, Provincial, Muncipal, UrbanToronto) and sometimes they came up with their own terminologies after UrbanToronto already came up with theirs. Regardless, just use the glossary I used, until there's consistency. Whatever brand name they plan to use (GO, SmartTrack, RER) publicly in 7 to 10 years from now is likely going to be different.
Various Ontario provincial agencies have added chapters about "SmartTrack congruence" (earlier PDFs linked) and "SmartTrack elements", however, both obviously involve elements of allstop electric trains, regardless of who's calling what. Ontario's "SmartTrack elements" of GO RER is a more accurate financial description of what SmartTrack really is -- it is essentially enhanced elements of the existing GO RER plan. And we know Ontario funds Metrolinx.
Certainly GO RER isn't SmartTrack. But SmartTrack is part GO RER. When I say they are the "same thing" -- if that is what your misunderstanding is -- then I meant they're the same allstop electric train serving the core (loosely, the 416) Kitchener-Stoufville route, with some modifications. They'd use the same train set and same stations, running over the same route (up to where it forks off to Eglinton or Airport, if built).
Anyway, that terminology/semantics debate cleared up, I hope. This thread is clearly currently using its own terminology at the moment, thanks to the inconsistencies between Ontario/Metrolinx/Tory, but they all agree it's a electric allstop train service with a higher frequency (15 minutes).
Last edited:
robmausser
Senior Member
All areas where RER and Smarttrack work (Kitchener Line/Stouffville Line) will be at minimum triple tracked. This is to allow the bi-levels to still operate at the same time to the outer portion of the network.
So, with three tracks you can always bypass all-stop trains and this is what will happen..
Rainforest
Senior Member
That would be great.
However, space will be an issue at numerous points along the Stouffville line:
a) South of Bloor, in the Gerrard area. Three tracks fit there, but they need to be shared between the Stouffville line, Lakeshore East GO, VIA trains, and freight trains. I am not sure if 4 or more tracks can fit.
b) The southern end of the Uxbridge sub. It runs fairly close to the existing houses.
c) North of 401, and especially north of Sheppard, space is tight as well.
robmausser
Senior Member
The Gerrard area has 4 tracking in the Big Move plans by Metrolinx for RER as was discussed in their meeting on December 5th, 2014. 4 tracks can fit as they are doing it. This area also has not seen freight for a while, except at very very random and minimal times at night.
According to the GO RER implementation it will be 4 tracks on Lakeshore and 3 throughout Stouffville, as its needed, so while it may seem tight, they are confident it can be done.
The south end of the Uxbridge will have more room when Scarborough RT is gone due to subway extension: however it will be a bit later than Smarttrack will supposedly be done. They can always do 2 track in this area and 3 in majority of rest as long as they use modern signalling equipment.
Rainforest
Senior Member
That's nice, I did not know. 4 tracks should be enough for express + local service.
Let's hope so; but such information can be counted as reliable only after the engineering studies are complete. High-level policy documents, at times, contain assumptions that turn to be unfeasible or way too expensive once the detailed studies are complete.
The most problematic section is south of Kennedy Stn, not the one that runs along Scarborough RT.
Maybe they can operate with 2 tracks between the Lakeshore junction and Kennedy Stn, and 3 (or even 4) tracks from Kennedy Stn to 401.
crs1026
Senior Member
Absolutely. I'm not even sure at this point that 3 tracks is a "decision", so much as it is a pretty no-brainer assumption. The question would be - will three even be enough? LSE/LSW got away with 3 tracks because the service was always a unidirectional peak service with a less than substantial counter flow service. Full 2WAD service with ST also 2WAD added will choke with three.
The big point, being - the added costs of the 3rd and 4th track likely should be accrued to ST and not to RER....which is why the price tag goes up....lots of land acquisition, underpass widening, civil works, etc
Some 2- or 3- track sections may be feasible, for a couple decades anyways, but this will set an upper limit on train frequency. I'd hate to see a repeat of the Weston Sub where we are promised a Cadillac and end up with a Trabant, because the trackage just isn't there yet.
- Paul
robmausser
Senior Member
3 is more than enough on just the lines like Stouffville, Barrie, etc. Just the lines that are owned by Metrolinx and used by nothing else.
With the proper signalling, you can have all day 2 way bi levels running every 30 minutes and RER running every 15 minutes in all directions easily. Its not like driving a car, with the proper switches every couple of miles and the proper signalling you can navigate trains around each other with ease.
Its the area that VIA, RER, Smarttrack and Bi Levels share that will have to be 4 track.
If you are referring to the lack of new GO trains on the Kitchener Line, the issue with the Weston sub is not trackage, its the lack of actual trains and drivers. We have enough room on the tracks, and then some right now, we simply just do not have the vehicles and employees right now. The infrastructure is there. The 4th track will be needed for RER/Smarttrack but that is coming soon, as it stands there is enough trackage in the Weston Sub for hourly both direction Go trains all day and VIA, and the Pearson Express.
crs1026
Senior Member
During off-peak, true. But at peak - when the peak direction bilevels may be running on 10-15 minute headways, can you insert an all-stops run between the bilevels and not have the bilevels catching up? And what will the headway of these all-stops be at rush hour to match the predicted ridership? (If the all-stops ridership isn't there, there is no business case to build it at all.)
At rush hour, the third track will be tied up with runarounds for the "peak" direction trains, which greatly limits your ability to use it to run turnbacks or runarounds in the counter-peak direction.
Can I ask - when you say 'we', are you expressing a GO viewpoint, or are you using the term to include "us" sidewalk observers?
What objective evidence is there that GO is committed to adding the fourth track? Has the money been committed? Is there a project plan?
If GO believes it is short of equipment for off peak, let me look up the GPS coordinates of the Bathurst and Don yards for them. Saying there are no trains to run a proper off-peak service suggests GO simply doesn't know how to manage its fleet. Outside of rush hour, there are plenty of trains sitting idle.
Similarly, re not having crews - we should not accept this excuse. This service has been promised for five years. That's more than enough time to staff up. Go has promised a much larger increase in the number of trains per week going forward. If we accept this explanation - How many crews can actually be added annually? Does this jive with the promise? Either GO figures out how to ramp up to meet the promise, or they should admit the promise is a fantasy. The twain needs to meet.
- Paul