GO Transit Electrification | Metrolinx

[steveintoronto]

Side note: operational issues on the Barrie line among other things come to mind.

Environmental Assessment
Notice to Proceed (October 5, 2017)
Statement of Completion (October 12, 2017)
Notice of Completion (August 8, 2017)

The Barrie Rail Corridor Expansion (BRCE) Project has formally issued the Notice of Completion for the Transit Project Assessment Process (TPAP) for the proposed addition of tracks and supporting infrastructure from Lansdowne Avenue in the City of Toronto to the Allandale Waterfront GO Station in Barrie.

We thank everyone for their feedback to date.
http://www.metrolinx.com/en/regionalplanning/rer/rer_barrie.aspx

And how's it coming along? {{...Sound of crickets chirping...}}

Metrolinx says plans underway to quadruple weekly GO train trips, build new stations
BY NEWS STAFF

POSTED MAR 26, 2018 2:31 PM EDT

Metrolinx says planning is underway to quadruple weekly GO train trips and begin servicing new parts of the Greater Toronto Hamilton Area.

Ontario Transportation Minister Kathryn McGarry was at Union Station on Monday to announce the next phase of work to expand the GO Regional Express Rail System (RER).

McGarry said riders can expect more all-day, two way GO train services, as Metrolinx begins the process of designing and ultimately building six new GO stations, and six new City of Toronto Smart-Track stations.

Over 20 existing GO stations will also undergo renovations, as well as new bus loops and digital signage.

“Work is well underway to build a better, integrated and seamless transit network across the GTHA,” McGarry said in a release.

“Today’s announcement is a major milestone in the delivery of all-day two-way electrified train service, more station stops and more service to get commuters where they need to be sooner.”

http://toronto.citynews.ca/2018/03/...ple-weekly-go-train-trips-build-new-stations/

Let me put that through my translation software here...to English:
"Blah blah blah blah blah" And here's the bit where it gets really interesting: "Blah blah, baah, baah...".

Notice that change in dialect and inflection? She's really serious...(Be sure to catch all of Metrolinx' exciting announcements!)

 

[raptor]

Environmental Assessment
Notice to Proceed (October 5, 2017)
Statement of Completion (October 12, 2017)
Notice of Completion (August 8, 2017)

The Barrie Rail Corridor Expansion (BRCE) Project has formally issued the Notice of Completion for the Transit Project Assessment Process (TPAP) for the proposed addition of tracks and supporting infrastructure from Lansdowne Avenue in the City of Toronto to the Allandale Waterfront GO Station in Barrie.

We thank everyone for their feedback to date.
http://www.metrolinx.com/en/regionalplanning/rer/rer_barrie.aspx

And how's it coming along? {{...Sound of crickets chirping...}}

http://toronto.citynews.ca/2018/03/...ple-weekly-go-train-trips-build-new-stations/

Let me put that through my translation software here...to English:
"Blah blah blah blah blah" And here's the bit where it gets really interesting: "Blah blah, baah, baah...".

Notice that change in dialect and inflection? She's really serious...(Be sure to catch all of Metrolinx' exciting announcements!)

Metrolinx initially put out an RFQ for the Barrie line double tracking through IO (AFP). Then they realized the contract won't meet the AFP $$ threshold, and decided to pull it from IO.
They will release the RFP in the spring/summer and award the contract by Fall (this year).

 

[steveintoronto]

Is the implication that all GO Lines that are being converted to RER will use a common vehicle type? And that the non-RER lines will continue to use the current equipment?

For RER, is GO dedicated to the bi-level coach concept, regardless of the vendor that is selected?

All open to question. I suspect greater chance single level EMU due to loading and unloading dwell time and ability to run in tunnel. Paris is about the only RER left now advocating DD. A lot of the decision on this will be down to how Metrolinx 'goes to the Market' on this. It could well be some lines are DD, others single, but all will be EMU. Hydrogen will remain a lonely atom.

 

[Streety McCarface]

All open to question. I suspect greater chance single level EMU due to loading and unloading dwell time and ability to run in tunnel. Paris is about the only RER left now advocating DD. A lot of the decision on this will be down to how Metrolinx 'goes to the Market' on this. It could well be some lines are DD, others single, but all will be EMU. Hydrogen will remain a lonely atom.

You could probably have both running in Toronto, especially since no line has a height restriction on any of the lines for existing double-decker trains. I see a SEPTA or Metro-North like system where express trains will use high-floor, double-decker rolling stock with electric locomotives (like the city Sprinter) on fully electrified lines (ie Barrie, LSW, LSE), Single level EMUs for all-electric local service, and express trains to unelectrified areas using dual-mode locomotives pulling existing rolling stock. Since electrified areas will all have high floor platforms, this works out well since trains using low floor rolling stock don't have to stop at any of these stations.

Yes, my paint skills are abysmal, but thick lines imply local services, (all stops), dashed lines imply no stops (express). Yellow lines represent push-pull electric trains during peak hours, blue for RER (high floor, single level EMUs, note, LSW from Oakville to union should be labelled as such), and grey for dual-mode locos.

 

[rbt]

Is the implication that all GO Lines that are being converted to RER will use a common vehicle type?

Metrolinx doesn't know the answer; Siemens or Bombardier or CRRC or whomever wins the bid will be making that decision.

And that the non-RER lines will continue to use the current equipment?

That will almost certainly be the case. I'm not sure if Metrolinx intends to bundle these lines in with RER operations or not; if not then it'll probably be Bombardier staff running the trains too.

 

[EastYorkTTCFan]

Paris is about the only RER left now advocating DD

Sydne Australia has a prety sizable fleet of double deck EMUs that they use for both long disatnce and in and and around Sysdney. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydney_Trains_A_set

 

[steveintoronto]

Sydne Australia has a prety sizable fleet of double deck EMUs that they use for both long disatnce and in and and around Sysdney. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydney_Trains_A_set

I think you'd best investigate Sydney's move away from DD.

Example from University of Sydney:

A solution to Sydney's peak-hour train crush
2 August 2017
Metro must move to maximise passenger capacity
[...]
Yet, the cost of Sydney Trains remains too high, because half the rolling stock is kept idle outside of rush hour. Our double-decker trains are a custom-built oddity. And each train has a driver and a guard.

Employing guards has increased the cost of rail services and has historically acted as a brake to investment in expanding the rail network. If the right technology is adopted, the need for guards will decline. Most of the world's heritage systems have moved to driver-only operation. Many newly built lines are driverless.

Our double-decker trains are very difficult to run at a higher frequency than they do now. They have more seats but carry fewer people than single-deck metro trains. We need more trains with more room and rail lines or else our city will have a stroke.

Game-changing rail infrastructure could be the backbone of an efficient, sustainable system that gets everyone home on time without breaking the bank.
The high-capacity driverless metro under construction offers a solution.

The new metro line is designed to carry 43,000 passengers per hour per direction (p/h/d). No Sydney Trains line can currently reach 20,000 p/h/d. Motorways only manage 2000 vehicles per hour per lane – mostly cars with one occupant.

The Sydney Metro – from Sydney's north-west to Bankstown – now under construction is an excellent idea and the Coalition governments should be praised for finally making it happen. Sydney Metro West from the CBD to Parramatta is also in the pipeline. But the Berejiklian government should keep moving in the right direction.

The City Circle tracks should be converted to metro and an all-stop metro line could run from Homebush through the City Circle to Revesby. This could be converted to carry a driverless metro like the Bankstown line or a metro with a driver, which wouldn't require the platform remakes of the Bankstown project but due to higher labour costs may be more expensive over time. Another pair of tracks, from Bondi Junction to Hurstville, is also ripe for metro conversion.

Together with the new line to Parramatta, these tracks would create a decent system for the most densely populated areas around the city. Metro conversions would facilitate the use of remaining tracks for longer distance, faster suburban trains with fewer stops.

The government should reconsider finishing the Maldon-Dombarton freight line and building a new tunnel under the Royal National Park escarpment for the fast train to Wollongong. Faster trains and limited express trains using improved or new infrastructure should also be considered to link Badgerys Creek and parts of western Sydney to Parramatta, Macquarie Park and the CBD.

A game-changing railway infrastructure could be the backbone of an efficient, sustainable system that will get everyone home for dinner on time without breaking the bank.

But this will only happen if the government makes the right moves to meet our growing use of trains and weans itself from an over-reliance on low-capacity, polluting motorways.

Associate Professor Pablo Guillen Alvarez is an economist at the University of Sydney. This article was first published in the Sydney Morning Herald.

https://sydney.edu.au/news-opinion/news/2017/08/02/a-solution-to-sydney-s-peak-hour-train-crush.html

I at first thought Sydney's highly controversial move from DD to the 'Melbourne Model' single deck, and Sydney's historical norm was a mistake, but changed my opinion when realizing the vast improvement it makes.

Note: It's going to be a long time for Toronto, Ontario, or Canada altogether to adopt world-leading practices. I can think of nothing more wasteful of opportunity than building the DRL as a subway, for six car trains max, and built with yesterday's expensive and inflexible technology. The term "Metro" in Toronto is alien, save for amalgamating boroughs. Toronto is planning to build yet another subway, while the RoW looks to convert theirs to metros, along with expansion and improvement. (Edit to clarify: Montreal is building a driverless fully automatic metro, and Van and Toronto have had automatic trains for decades, albeit with a 'driver' still in the cab in Toronto's case. For Sydney and other cities, these are mainline compatible trains)

Adddendum: Here's from Auckland NZ. studying Sydney's rail system and changes to adapt and learn for their own needs (what a concept...might even happen in Toronto one day)

[...]

Australian cities have made conscious efforts to try and decentralise their employment over the past few decades, but while places such as Parramatta, Macquarie Park and North Sydney certainly do have a lot of jobs – the CBD still stands out. For comparative purposes I think Auckland’s CBD has around 80,000 jobs, showing that as a proportion of population Sydney is a bit more concentrated than us.

Sydney’s rail system is a rather strange hybrid of inner-suburban, outer-suburban and inter-city trains all competing to use the same tracks and stations. A lot of different operating patterns are run, especially at the peak times, which makes the system incredibly complex and therefore fragile to failures. The diagram below shows an example of this on Sydney’s western line – detailing all the different conflict points:

Because of continued population and employment growth, Sydney’s rail system is struggling to meet growing demand. On certain parts of the network there are significant capacity constraints. Importantly, overloading of certain services leads to slow boarding times which actually ends up meaning fewer trains per hour can be operated than planned – further reducing capacity and further creating overcrowding. This is succinctly described below:



A useful diagram shows where crowding on the network is likely to occur and how severe it will be – without significant upgrades. Something like this would be interesting for Auckland’s public transport network (bus and rail) in 2030 or 2040 if the CRL isn’t built:

The main proposed solution to Sydney’s impeding rail crush is quite interesting and proposes to effectively split the network up into three parts – a metro-like “Rapid Transit” for single-level trains, a suburban network and an inter-city network. This is shown in the map below:

There has been a long debate over whether the double-decker trains in Sydney are well suited to the role they play and it seems that the latest rail strategy quite cleverly says that the system needs to stop trying to be so much of a “jack of all trades” and actually start specialising a bit: much like how Paris has its Metro, RER and Transilien networks.
[...continues at length...]

https://www.greaterauckland.org.nz/2012/09/23/sydneys-rail-strategy/

 

[EastYorkTTCFan]

I think you'd best investigate Sydney's move away from DD. No shortage of detailed articles on-line. I'll post examples later. Thoroughly checked it all before making the claim. You should do same.

If they are moving away from double-decker trains then why are they just satrting to recive a second series of the ones I linked to prviously. If your claim is true then post a link and don't make others have to serch for it.

 

[crs1026]

If they are moving away from double-decker trains then why are they just satrting to recive a second series of the ones I linked to prviously. If your claim is true then post a link and don't make others have to serch for it.

The reality is, we will be riding bilevels for a loooooong time. They are needed for the heavy peak trains, for the non-electric zone, and, well, we have a lot of them that haven't worn out. Clearly, they have a long life span.

The single-level/bilevel debate is right up there in the realm of cyclical UT debates that restart every few months. As @steve noted, we really don't know what ML's plan is, and they may not know either, because they are leaving the decision to whoever they choose as contract operator. We all have our preferences, but we aren't ML.

- Paul

 

[steveintoronto]

If they are moving away from double-decker trains then why are they just satrting to recive a second series of the ones I linked to prviously. If your claim is true then post a link and don't make others have to serch for it.

I've posted quite a number of links. As to why you're unable to follow them is beyond me.

GO is also still receiving DD coaches, there's one sitting over the Runnymede underpass just north of Dundas as I type. You've lost the string as being discussed, whether or not *RER is going to use double decker or single decker coaches*. Considering the need for closer stations, rapid loading and unloading, and rate of acceleration/deceleration, let alone available off-the-shelf stock being readily produced, and the likelihood of running in tunnels for some lines (and Canadians won't like the 'cramped' Sydney or European DDs that do so), the operator will almost inevitably choose single-decker, for the reason Sydney is, as I've linked and explained.

France's 'Greater Paris Region' is also ordering new DDs for some existing lines where tunnel capacity allows, but here's the modern example they're moving to:

Which is a multiple coupled:



3-car electric multiple unit

Here's some links for anyone who cares to see who is using them, and why:

Similar Projects

• Bm71 (Gardermoen Airport Express) & Bm73 (Signatur/Agenda) - Norway
• CONTESSA Electric Multiple Unit - Denmark and Sweden
• CP 2000 Electric Multiple Unit – Porto, Portugal
• Class 481 Electric Multiple Unit - Berlin, Germany
• Diesel Multiple Unit TALENT Class 643.2 - Germany
• Diesel Multiple Unit TALENT Class 93 - Norway
• ELECTROSTAR & Intercity Systems – Gauteng Province, South Africa
• ELECTROSTAR - United Kingdom
• Electric Multiple AM96 - Belgium
• Electric Multiple Unit – Adelaide, Australia
• Electric Multiple Unit - Brisbane, Australia
• Electric Multiple Unit Class 423- Germany
• Electric Multiple Unit Class 425.2 - Germany
• Electric Multiple Unit Class 490 – Hamburg, Germany
• Electric Multiple Unit ICE T - Germany
• Electrical Multiple Unit - Perth, Australia
• Electrical Multiple Unit TALENT for Regional Service - Austria
• High speed Train CRH1 – China
• High speed Train ICE 3 - Germany & Netherlands
• ICN Tilting Train - Switzerland
• ITINO Diesel Multiple Unit
• Lötschberger RegioExpress - Switzerland
• M-7 Electric Multiple Unit - New York, USA
• Queensland New Generation Rollingstock (NGR), Australia
• REGINA Electric Multiple Unit - Sweden
• SPACIUM commuter train - Ile-de-France
• Sprinter Electric Multiple Unit - Netherlands
• TALENT 2 Electric Multiple Units - Germany
• TURBOSTAR- United Kingdom
• V300ZEFIRO - Italy
• VLocity 160 DMU – Victoria, Australia

And here's the Transilien map for Greater Paris:

 

[felix123]

If they are moving away from double-decker trains then why are they just satrting to recive a second series of the ones I linked to prviously. If your claim is true then post a link and don't make others have to serch for it.

To expand and partially contradict the explanation that steveintoronto was making, Sydney is "moving" to single-deck EMUs but only on their new, driverless metro system -- the first phase of which is slated to open next year (currently under-construction, phase 2 will open in 2024). Earlier plans to move more of their existing rail network to single deck EMUs pre-dated the introduction of Sydney Metro, on what was to be a new RER line instead, called the Northwest Rail Link. That line eventually ended up being upgraded to the point that it was branded "metro" and would no longer run on any sections of track shared with the existing network, even though Sydney Metro trains and electrification (overhead, 1500V dc) are compatible with the mainlines. In any case this meant that single decker EMUs would not be rolled out to the rest of Sydney's network.

Sydney Metro is in many ways quite similar to Montreal's REM in that both systems are driverless and will use Alstom's Metropolis sets, combine tunnelled/at-grade/elevated sections, all stations will have platform screen-doors and both systems make use of some existing tunnels and sections of suburban train lines in addition to new tunnels and trackage. Average station spacing in both systems is somewhat above the norm for an urban metro system, but is far less than spacing in commuter systems, such as GO.

Even after the 65 km Sydney Metro is completed, partial sections of only two of the suburban lines whose stations are being upgraded for metro (the Bankstown Line and the Northern Line) will use single-decker EMUs. The state government has a plan to eventually convert a large section of the Eastern Suburbs & Illawarra line to metro as well as to build a completely new metro line to Parramatta (the Mississauga of Sydney), but until then and for a long while thereafter, yes, double-decker EMUs will be alive and well in Sydney on the bulk of its massive RER-style network.

 

[hw621]

To expand and partially contradict the explanation that steveintoronto was making, Sydney is "moving" to single-deck EMUs but only on their new, driverless metro system -- the first phase of which is slated to open next year (currently under-construction, phase 2 will open in 2024). Earlier plans to move more of their existing rail network to single deck EMUs pre-dated the introduction of Sydney Metro, on what was to be a new RER line instead, called the Northwest Rail Link. That line eventually ended up being upgraded to the point that it was branded "metro" and would no longer run on any sections of track shared with the existing network, even though Sydney Metro trains and electrification (overhead, 1500V dc) are compatible with the mainlines. In any case this meant that single decker EMUs would not be rolled out to the rest of Sydney's network.

Sydney Metro is in many ways quite similar to Montreal's REM in that both systems are driverless and will use Alstom's Metropolis sets, combine tunnelled/at-grade/elevated sections, all stations will have platform screen-doors and both systems make use of some existing tunnels and sections of suburban train lines in addition to new tunnels and trackage. Average station spacing in both systems is somewhat above the norm for an urban metro system, but is far less than spacing in commuter systems, such as GO.

Even after the 65 km Sydney Metro is completed, partial sections of only two of the suburban lines whose stations are being upgraded for metro (the Bankstown Line and the Northern Line) will use single-decker EMUs. The state government has a plan to eventually convert a large section of the Eastern Suburbs & Illawarra line to metro as well as to build a completely new metro line to Parramatta (the Mississauga of Sydney), but until then and for a long while thereafter, yes, double-decker EMUs will be alive and well in Sydney on the bulk of its massive RER-style network.

Again we are behind.

 

[steveintoronto]

To expand and partially contradict the explanation that steveintoronto was making, Sydney is "moving" to single-deck EMUs but only on their new, driverless metro system --

The point was a fair bit larger than just that. I'll reiterate:

[...]


There has been a long debate over whether the double-decker trains in Sydney are well suited to the role they play and it seems that the latest rail strategy quite cleverly says that the system needs to stop trying to be so much of a “jack of all trades” and actually start specialising a bit: much like how Paris has its Metro, RER and Transilien networks.
[...continues at length...]

https://www.greaterauckland.org.nz/2012/09/23/sydneys-rail-strategy/

I made that point that even Toronto will keep DD, as Sydney appears to be on *existing lines*, in fact a new order is being filled "overseas" for exactly that. But for RER in Toronto, *electrified* as per Metrolinx' many claims, and *close spaced stations* (so close that the DD will be used to by-pass them and run 'express') and *high platform* for RER....then single decker will "most likely" (my quote) be the choice, but it's up to the bidder/supplier/operator. Metrolinx is wisely standing back on that. And also standing back on their initial surmise that they'd be DD EMUs. I repeat, for the same reason subways aren't supplied double decker, it slows loading and unloading. In fact, many "metro" cars have three sets of doors, and some four sets, just like subway cars.

Anyone care to guess why?

Here's an example:

Here's Calcutta's

And I've already posted examples of the two models running on Crossrail in London, and one on Thameslink.

The emphasis is on standing room...just like subways. And no toilets...just like subways. And high platform, just like UPX and subways.

Here's what the 25kV AC Crossrail models look like inside (Thameslink are very similar) Both are *mainline* trains running in tunnel for much of the way for Crossrail, part of the way for Thameslink.









http://www.cityam.com/275861/crossrail-latest-elizabeth-line-train-rollout-stalls

You can buy this and many competing models off-the-shelf with state of the art signalling systems (Crossrail can do headways of less than every two minutes).

These ones have only three sets of doors per carriage, but due to the open concept inside, they carry more passengers and can entrain and detrain them multiples time faster than DDs, even the Paris models with a third door centre section.

 

[EastYorkTTCFan]

I think both models of trains have their place, for example, a single level train is good for a local service with few stops and not everyone getting off of them or even the way Go transit is now, for example on the lakeshore line most people get on and take it to Union station it's rare that you see someone get off of a union bound train at a stop like Danforth. RER / smart track (whatever you want to call it) wants to be a more local version which may be a tough sell to people in Toronto as they currently see the heavy rail lines as for commuters outside of the city and don't think to use them unless there is a problem with the subway also unless the TTC runs buses or has better ciont9ns ti the stations I don't see them getting much ridership from people inside of Toronto.

 

[steveintoronto]

I don't see them getting much ridership from people inside of Toronto.

Once the fare is matched to the TTC, there will be a massive demand. Does UPX ring a bell?

But that's not the point of conjecture. This was:

Is the implication that all GO Lines that are being converted to RER will use a common vehicle type? And that the non-RER lines will continue to use the current equipment?

For RER, is GO dedicated to the bi-level coach concept, regardless of the vendor that is selected?