News   Apr 02, 2026
Early Work Commencing on St Clair-Old Weston Station
 1.3K     1 
News   Apr 02, 2026
Cranes Up, Foundations Underway at Peter Gilgan Mississauga Hospital
 793     0 
News   Apr 02, 2026
City Council March, 2026 Settlements: Negotiations Advance Projects Across Toronto
 2K     2 

GO Transit: Service thread (including extensions)

robmausser said:
Need this badboy on the Kitchener line stat!

6292044602_277cf04061_b.jpg


btw, I must say this is an incredibly inefficent use of space for bikes

Should be this way

SFD_SEO_content_April_-_Semi_Vertical_Cycle_Stands-image_1.png
Click to expand...
Doing the vertical route as your photo will see the rack on one side only as there isn't enough room on the coach to do it on both sides. If it was 100% vertical, then you can have racks on both sides.

To have a bike only car will require GO to convert a number of car for the KW line, but what impact will it have on GO existing fleet.

I assuming the extra NF trains have bike cars on top of the other trains. Between NF and KW lines, what other line will require bike cars and what impact will it have on the existing fleet??
 
drum118 said:
Doing the vertical route as your photo will see the rack on one side only as there isn't enough room on the coach to do it on both sides. If it was 100% vertical, then you can have racks on both sides.

To have a bike only car will require GO to convert a number of car for the KW line, but what impact will it have on GO existing fleet.

I assuming the extra NF trains have bike cars on top of the other trains. Between NF and KW lines, what other line will require bike cars and what impact will it have on the existing fleet??
Click to expand...

I mean I would like a bike car on every go train that's not 12 car, but I know that's a lot to ask for.

You could put a 13th bike car train on trains with the new MPI locomotives since they can pull 14 cars.

I really think bikes on GO would benefit ridership, it solves the last mile problem of a lot of stations and once you get downtown.
 
Last edited:
robmausser said:
I mean I would like a bike car on every go train that's not 12 car, but I know that's a lot to ask for.

You could put a 13th bike car train on trains with the new MPI locomotives since they can pull 14 cars.

I really think bikes on GO would benefit ridership, it solves the last mile problem of a lot of stations and once you get downtown.
Click to expand...
It doesn't scale that well. Mature bike cultures don't allow bikes on trains. Not to say we shouldn't allow it, just that high quality parking at stations and bike share options would likely have a bigger impact.
 
innsertnamehere said:
Can the platforms fit 14 cars though?
Click to expand...
No

It would be a tight fit for 13 using only one door for that car. Most likely move the markers where the locomotive is to stop to get full use of the platform for the 13th car. The door on the first car behind the locomotive today could be move about 10 feet beyond the platform with room for the first door or more that only the 2nd door will be use only to fit the 13th car to the existing platforms.

With the move to more service, the need for 12/13 car is not there for most service lines other than NF at this time.
 
The GO fleet has 979 coaches, GO could easily convert 10 regular coaches to bike cars and it wouldn’t make a dent in the fleet.
 
afransen said:
It doesn't scale that well. Mature bike cultures don't allow bikes on trains. Not to say we shouldn't allow it, just that high quality parking at stations and bike share options would likely have a bigger impact.
Click to expand...

The price of success with active transportation is that it's not feasible to transport bikes when a larger segment of riders become cyclists. There isn't enough space on the trains. I don't know of another jurisdiction where onboard bike racks are anything more than token and/or meant for the rare cyclist.

The bikeshare options are so good in the central city that I question why many would need to bring a bike downtown.

There is a subset of ridership that consists of bike couriers. One might pursue more secure options for them to store their bikes downtown, but I suspect that many will resist this and may need the bike at their outer end of their commute.

For now, running 12 car trains and inserting at least one bike coach in each trainset is probably sufficient to take the pressure off. But in the longer term, there is no easy solution. ML may have to accept an unpopular policy around bikes.

In the Netherlands, it costs 10 euros to bring a bike on a local or intercity train. That tells you something.

- Paul
 
crs1026 said:
In the Netherlands, it costs 10 euros to bring a bike on a local or intercity train. That tells you something.
Click to expand...
I think this is a smart compromise. For the people bringing their nice bikes for a long cruise around Niagara this is worthwhile. For the people who just want a bike for the last mile in Niagara Falls, a bikeshare system would be a much better option (provided there are decent cycling facilities). I can see an argument for Metrolinx getting into the bikeshare business (perhaps uploading it from TPA) so that much of the regional transit system can have bike share/bike rental at stations like OVFiets. The Dutch build some crazy big bike garages, but don't seem to have an equivalent of very short term bike rentals like bike share. OVFiets is good, but it meant for daily, return trip use, not one way. It could cut down on the bike parking clutter if there were just ubiquitous bike rentals, and instead of garages have repositioning infrastructure.
 
afransen said:
It doesn't scale that well. Mature bike cultures don't allow bikes on trains. Not to say we shouldn't allow it, just that high quality parking at stations and bike share options would likely have a bigger impact.
Click to expand...
From what I understand this line’s issue is not bike culture so much as bike business. Delivery riders. If delivery companies provided their riders with guaranteed bikes in their areas of operation, no problem, but that isn’t their business model. Neither is paying riders enough to live in the downtown Toronto delivery areas
 
C_Johnson_1995 said:
I've thought about this in a previous post, but I wonder if this might present an opportunity to look into completely decoupling freight and passenger operations in the GTA.

For example, with this conflict, it could be worth looking into eliminating freight traffic on the Guelph Sub entirely by buying out CN and the GEXR. Most of the lines CN sold to Metrolinx are secondary and it is likely not interested in long term continued operations. I don't believe G&W is interested in long term operation of the GEXR either given the loss of the Guelph Sub.

Doing so could simplify design requirements and speed up the implementation of electrification and high frequency service.

While there would be the negative impacts of a mode shift to trucks, it would likely be more than made up for by the decrease in car traffic and other resulting benefits.
Click to expand...
“likely”. Why not show your work, bearing in mind that while CN might sell the Guelph sub, selling the Halton would be another matter entirely, and thus a cap would exist on movements onto and off the Guelph anyway.
 
Willybru21 said:
The GO fleet has 979 coaches, GO could easily convert 10 regular coaches to bike cars and it wouldn’t make a dent in the fleet.
Click to expand...
The issue is not the size of the fleet vis-a-vis the number of bike coaches. The issue is the size of each of the trains and the loads they are expected to carry.

Pre-COVID, Metrolinx had designed their train cycling model quite particularly, and had sized each train accordingly. If a particular trainset was 12 cars long, it's because it needed to be during the morning and afternoon rush hours.

There's no reason to believe that they've gone away from this. There are a lot of 10-car trains in service, but there are also a lot of 12-car trains. 10-car trains could in theory be extended to 12-car trains with 2 bike coaches, but the 12-car trains can't be extended any more than they already have been.

Dan
 
smallspy said:
Pre-COVID, Metrolinx had designed their train cycling model quite particularly, and had sized each train accordingly. If a particular trainset was 12 cars long, it's because it needed to be during the morning and afternoon rush hours.

There's no reason to believe that they've gone away from this. There are a lot of 10-car trains in service, but there are also a lot of 12-car trains. 10-car trains could in theory be extended to 12-car trains with 2 bike coaches, but the 12-car trains can't be extended any more than they already have been.
Click to expand...

A peak-hours bike curfew is more than justified.

The tweets above that triggered the discussion were about service on a Sunday, however. Plenty of room to allow bikes if the train size is adjusted.

- Paul
 
crs1026 said:
The tweets above that triggered the discussion were about service on a Sunday, however. Plenty of room to allow bikes if the train size is adjusted.

- Paul
Click to expand...
Well......yes and no.

Since well before Metrolinx was ever a gleam in any politician's eye, GO has been quite allergic to changing train sizes. They would only do it if they absolutely needed to - and under no circumstances would they do so just to satisfy a one- or two-day need.

(I will add the caveat that they did for a while with the bike trains to Niagara Falls, but even then they would do some funny tricks like putting together a 6-car sub-set of equipment that they would then remove from a train and leave aside for the entirety of the work week. But towards the end of pre-COVID they were going way from this model too, and had just set aside full 10- and 12-car trainsets of equipment in the yard for the week.)

So if a 10-car train is to be used on a weekend, it will have to be from a set that is 10-cars during the week. And that might mean bring trains in from Georgetown, instead of from Willowbrook.

Dan
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top