Search results

Yes, a miniscule stretch and well away from people. But at least something local to show. To the west there will be a much longer structure crossing the valley, again well away from people. When it is to approach homes it will dive underground at considerable cost - despite the roadway being...

To be fair I was posting that for @officedweller who I believe posts here from BC and may not have been aware.

Yes it contradicts a lot of things for Sheppard to bypass the Centre. Heck there's 5x as many jobs there.

Yes six days down seems extremely excessive even for an organization with teething issues. This summer I saw wires get snagged hard on King with insulators popping. Got fixed pretty quick with a truck there in minutes. I guess when on a rapid transit line 15ft above the tracks things are more...

I would've thought the same a few years ago. Until I saw the 20ft masts. It makes a difference. How could it not since it doubles the height of the structure. And keep in mind I'm one of the biggest advocated of elevated rail. If overhead is not needed - and they're most definitely not for the...

Keeping Line 4 on Sheppard is optimal since it's a major arterial. But bypassing SC raises questions. It's an Urban Growth Centre, and a Mobility Hub. It's "Scarborough Centre" after all. One would think having the line swoop towards it would be a goal. Also since that time Kennedy Commons area...

The last major ice storm was interesting. Intermittent movement, constant popping and zapping. With the replacement of poles with pantographs things are likely improved. And TTC is pretty good at preventative measures. But exposed wires are obviously a vulnerability.

Confederation Line was down for six days, with the catenary mangled and melted. Using the same voltage and current as OL is supposed to. Can't recall that happening with our subway. I guess a "technical benefit" of third rail is that it's more robust, easier to maintain, and more capable of...

I didn't write that. I said they'd be opposed to both. I've argued overhead is harder to maintain and more vulnerable. They do allow significantly higher speeds, but that's at speeds well above what a subway would do so it's a moot point. At-grade crossings is moot as well since we're talking...

Seems like the highest frequency subways in the world do so without pantos. And do we know if it was in fact engineers or cost-benefit analyses that made the decision to go with overhead? If I'd hazard a guess it was more bureaucratic - perhaps as a wow-factor to show that the line stands out...

How quaint. A single rail line. A mainline railway at that, so not even relevant. You guys don't need to show Prague, or Montreal. We have tracks and wires all over Toronto. And now we have an elevated guideway, with catenary, it's on Eglinton. Why not show that considering the relevance to the...

We've got trams all over Toronto, with parts under buildings too. And I don't believe there'd be plans to drop the overhead by any significant margin on a new line like OL since it's all to be new. Comparison. Internal tunnel diameter for Crosstown is 6.75m, whereas our last subway (TYSSE) is...

And ultimately catenary infrastructure is uglier. You'll get more pushback against elevated infrastructure with pantos than you would without them.

Longer term is a point in favour of third rail. Think about it. When planning future extensions/branches in an urban realm we want a line that can be nimble - i.e allow for planning of grade changes and tight turns with ease. Flyunders and flyovers, short tunnels, deviations from road ROW to...

Seems to me they're more vulnerable. Less rugged. More maintenance-intensive. And any kind of greenery along the guideway will have to be kept well back to nonesxistent. Then the aesthetics. For an urban subway system, open-air or underground, I think third rail is superior. Should cost less too.

Any new reports on Sheppard? Is it still in the vague promise of a 6-car underground line? Nothing will be built if that's the case. But I guess the promise of building it is what's important...

Time to repeat a gripe of mine, and it's a general one. No more pantos for OL. They'll make the line cost more, but more importantly they make the line uglier. Think about it. It's supposedly a sleek small train. Ok. But it will a have a large size due to the panto. Now that requires a much...

Stupid poll and post, why waste your own time like that? Some of you perma whiners going on about trees maybe can accept it's not so much chopping trees people have a problem with, rather people taking issue with a shadowy political agency doing shadowy stuff. And the double standards. Can we...

Interesting. The pavilion does seem larger than necessary. And why extract the TBM. Just turn it downwards and bury it in situ. Or keep it tunnelling to another extraction point - with the tunnel being put to use when the line is extended west. I've thought of this before, but with regards to...

It wouldn't be a Union East, rather a single interchange station with a longer than normal pedestrian connection. Less than Spadina, more than others. And that's just a vague placement of the connection. Optimally it could be more direct. And yea gain storage, gain another line, improve Union...