News   Nov 01, 2024
Toronto’s Bike Lane Feud at an All-Time High
 1.9K     11 
News   Nov 01, 2024
Bayview Village Resubmission More Than Doubles Height Near Bessarion Station
 2.1K     2 
News   Nov 01, 2024
Drone Flight Captures Cladding Progress at Menkes' Maison 77 Clarendon
 688     0 

Airport LINK to shutter for three months

No, that isn't normal.

And the thing always seemed a big shakey - it would be interesting to hear the full story.
 
That train always had an incredibly-rough ride for something that ran on such allegedly-smooth guideways. I never understood why. Maybe that has something to do with it?
 
W. K. Lis said:
A good reason for the Eglinton LRT to terminate at one or all the GTAA's airport terminals, instead of having the LINK come down to Eglinton.
Click to expand...
Link could never come down to Eglinton with the existing technology. It was never designed for that, or intended to ever have that purpose. The maximum extension possible for the system is in the order of 100's of metres, not 1000's of metres (for a future second T1 station, if they expand T1).
 
The rough ride has a lot to do with it, and apparently the thing brakes down a fair bit, although they seem to keep that out of the news: as long as one of the two sides is working, nobody says anything I suppose.

42
 
interchange42 said:
The rough ride has a lot to do with it, and apparently the thing brakes down a fair bit, although they seem to keep that out of the news: as long as one of the two sides is working, nobody says anything I suppose.
Click to expand...

I'm surprised they can't do just that: repair the two halves separately so that the trains can keep running at half frequency. I hope they built the stations to accommodate a potential technology upgrade, because they're lovely and it'd be a shame if they had to be rebuilt.
 
unimaginative2 said:
I hope they built the stations to accommodate a potential technology upgrade
Click to expand...
Looking at the infrastructure, I'm not sure that this is possible. Perhaps the stations could be re-used in their current form with maybe some slight modifications to the platforms, but I think any technology change would require new guideways and vehicles. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, please!
 
jks said:
Wasn't the guideway built so that it can accomodate a change to LRT. :confused:
Click to expand...

They claim the line was built to allow for conversion to a self propelled technology, my guess is that means adding an electrical third rail and using self powered cars of the same size as the existing ones, and adding crossover tracks at the terminals.
 
now this makes sense , cause when i was driving today , I had to take a de tour as they closed down airport road near american drive , just under where the train passes above
 
LINK is a major head-scratcher for me. GTAA are, to my mind, one of the most impressively forward-looking QUANGOs we have in Canada. The new terminal was built in an entirely logical, modular way that can be added onto to accommodate whatever capacity will be needed through 2050, at least. Pearson now has as many runways as it could possibly ever need. It is also, slowly, doing the right thing on landing fees. And all of this without a cent of public money!

But then there's LINK--an unexpandable, rinky-dink roller-coaster technology rightly shunned by big airports. I don't think there was any doubt, from day one, that it couldn't be permanent. Weird....
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top