News   Jan 24, 2022
 1.5K     2 
News   Jan 24, 2022
 1.7K     0 
News   Jan 24, 2022
 1.8K     0 

Crosstown LRT | Metrolinx

allengeorge

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jun 27, 2019
Messages
1,131
Reaction score
2,653
Honestly, I’m just waiting for the line to be built and in operation to see which one of the posters here will be right about the line: whether it’s going to be constantly delayed, mired in accidents - or whether it’ll operate just fine, have decent TSP and have better-than-expected ridership :)

Let me be clear: I don’t know. At this point I want to see it operational (even if it’s a staggered start).
 

robmausser

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 16, 2013
Messages
3,570
Reaction score
5,215
This is faster than what you were expecting? I was expecting it to be even faster than this. Acceleration appeared sluggish for what I can only assume are testing-released reasons.

Yes this absolutely isnt the real service speed of the line. Just testing it out.
 

M II A II R II K

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
3,832
Reaction score
898
So long as it doesn’t stop at red lights at intersections that aren’t stops, including red lights at intersections that are stops where the platform is on the other side of the intersection.
 

robmausser

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 16, 2013
Messages
3,570
Reaction score
5,215
So long as it doesn’t stop at red lights at intersections that aren’t stops, including red lights at intersections that are stops where the platform is on the other side of the intersection.

It will though, Transit Priority was mostly denied by the Toronto transportation commission (aka the car lovers). They are giving the trains a couple more seconds of green as they approach lights, but thats it.
 

W. K. Lis

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 24, 2007
Messages
21,062
Reaction score
10,919
Location
Toronto, ON, CAN, Terra, Sol, Milky Way
Hard to believe they're going to run trains that long on the street!
That's only a three car train. If a train is disabled for some reason, it would need to be pushed by an other train all the way to the MSF at Mt. Dennis. Meaning, a possible six car train. They'll need to test out that possible scenario, just in case. They'll have to test out the limit of the number of cars, one car can push or pull over some distance.
 
Last edited:

vz64

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 4, 2009
Messages
465
Reaction score
35
Location
Y&E
So long as it doesn’t stop at red lights at intersections that aren’t stops, including red lights at intersections that are stops where the platform is on the other side of the intersection.
I think they will, unfortunately.. There are too many small intersections that allow left turn (such as Swift Dr., Sloane Ave, Eglinton Square, and Pharmacy Ave around Victoria Park intersection; some of them only 200m apart. from each other), so I think it is almost impossible to synchronize all traffic lights to allow a good throughput frequency. If they had eliminated all these secondary street crossing and left only the main intersections to cross the line, then traffic lights could probably manage a good frequency of trains. They might opt to use the Crosstown as a "two-tier" system: the fast right-of-way part, (Keel to Laird, turning back some trains at Laird), and the slow part (Laird to Kennedy).
 

M II A II R II K

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
3,832
Reaction score
898
It may be inevitable to split the line between the off the road sections and the road sections, unless they short turn more train sets in the underground section or something
 

Randomguy

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 10, 2018
Messages
24
Reaction score
33
It will though, Transit Priority was mostly denied by the Toronto transportation commission (aka the car lovers). They are giving the trains a couple more seconds of green as they approach lights, but thats it.
This is because "transit priority" is management/politician dream compromise but an engineering nightmare. Train signaling on its own is hard - see basically every new transit line anywhere at the start, adding in this type of constraint just makes it worse (i.e., money and testing on signaling is never budgeted for correctly and making that part of the problem harder is just asking for trouble). And it inherently requires compromise between trains, vehicles, and what you all seem to forget, PEDESTRIANS, which is totally unneeded. We need to stop trying to play a zero sum game between modes of transportation when we don't have too, and this line is a crazy example of this.
 

robmausser

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 16, 2013
Messages
3,570
Reaction score
5,215
This is because "transit priority" is management/politician dream compromise but an engineering nightmare. Train signaling on its own is hard - see basically every new transit line anywhere at the start, adding in this type of constraint just makes it worse (i.e., money and testing on signaling is never budgeted for correctly and making that part of the problem harder is just asking for trouble). And it inherently requires compromise between trains, vehicles, and what you all seem to forget, PEDESTRIANS, which is totally unneeded. We need to stop trying to play a zero sum game between modes of transportation when we don't have too, and this line is a crazy example of this.

Hmm. When I rode the LRTs in Denver, Baltimore and San Diego they had literal gates that came down and stopped cars like a railroad. The trains never stopped, the gates came down and all car traffic stopped.

Seems pretty easy to me from what ive experienced in the US of A
 

Randomguy

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 10, 2018
Messages
24
Reaction score
33
Hmm. When I rode the LRTs in Denver, Baltimore and San Diego they had literal gates that came down and stopped cars like a railroad. The trains never stopped, the gates came down and all car traffic stopped.

Seems pretty easy to me from what ive experienced in the US of A

If your headway is low enough, street crossings far enough apart, etc, I agree it can work just fine. A quick look at Denver LRT and the shortest headway I found was 10 minutes with most 15 or 30 minutes, and at that length of headway (and more spread out western city/int he burbs), signal priority will work just fine. Trying to make it work with 90s headways (which are awesome as a user, going from 10 minute to 90s headways saves everyone 4m15s per trip per direction!) not so much.

So why build 75% of a line to support 90s headways and all the expense related to that, to then ruin it with a section that can only reasonably support 5+ minute ones (or if your metrolinx, apparently they think they can get to 2 minute headways over that section based on the 15000 people per hour per direction). The only good news is that by pissing off both sides equally, it may actually be fixable with a better solution than a non-sense linear transfer and making this line what it truly should be. What is most annoying is that I doubt it would have cost that much more to do it right the first time....
 

vz64

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 4, 2009
Messages
465
Reaction score
35
Location
Y&E
It may be inevitable to split the line between the off the road sections and the road sections, unless they short turn more train sets in the underground section or something
Short-turning is probably a better solution during rush hours. And the "fast" part of the line can be extended to Science Centre station, if they manage traffic at the Leslie intersection (or build an overpass..). That way, the fast part will be connected to a future Ontario Line station.
 

Obsidian

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 15, 2016
Messages
80
Reaction score
152
Anyone hate the names of a lot of these stations, for example not using the major street at the stop in the name and making everything confusing to non frequent users? would it have kill anyone to have a Weston, Keele North, Dufferin North, Bathurst North or Don Mills South Station. Also i will add Pioneer village and Vaughan Metropolitan Centre station to the shitlist.
 

Top