News   Nov 22, 2024
National Housing Day: City of Toronto and Riverdale Co-op Open Affordable Homes
 704     1 
News   Nov 22, 2024
Bauhaus Condos Rising in Toronto's Old Town
 1.2K     5 
News   Nov 22, 2024
49-Storey Waterfront Tower Proposed at Spadina and Queens Quay
 3.3K     8 

GO Transit: Construction Projects (Metrolinx, various)

That's intriguing that they'd be laying welded rail. It makes sense they have long-term plans, but must also have serious short-term ones too to be laying welded track now since the present joined rail looks in quite usable shape. Looks like ribbons on the other side of the east track too...

So one has to ask: If they're installing welded track at this time, does this indicate some imminent use beyond stock movement and building a bridge at Evans?
 
steveintoronto said:
That's intriguing that they'd be laying welded rail. It makes sense they have long-term plans, but must also have serious short-term ones too to be laying welded track now since the present joined rail looks in quite usable shape. Looks like ribbons on the other side of the east track too...

So one has to ask: If they're installing welded track at this time, does this indicate some imminent use beyond stock movement and building a bridge at Evans?
Click to expand...

So a few theories that have popped up on this thread are:

1) Canpa will be used to divert LSW GO trains during bridge replacements closer to Exhibition Station (probably most likely?)
2) With more construction required at both ends of Canpa, Milton GO trains could be diverted via the LSW line (however this theory seemed to be debunked a few pages back)
3) (my own idea, which I really don't believe in whatsoever at all, but I'll say it for the sake of saying it) Metrolinx could use this for a test track for their LRV order from Bombardier. A point in Bombardier's filing against Metrolinx was that they had no place to test their LRVs if they were delivered. However this theory is EXTREMELY flawed as:
  • The line is not electrified and would require an EA to do so
  • The line sees heavy rail traffic, thus it precludes light rail operating on it (unless temporal separation happened)
  • The line isn't connected to any future LRT lines
 
alexanderglista said:
3) (my own idea, which I really don't believe in whatsoever at all, but I'll say it for the sake of saying it) Metrolinx could use this for a test track for their LRV order from Bombardier. A point in Bombardier's filing against Metrolinx was that they had no place to test their LRVs if they were delivered. However this theory is EXTREMELY flawed as:
  • The line is not electrified and would require an EA to do so
  • The line sees heavy rail traffic, thus it precludes light rail operating on it (unless temporal separation happened)
  • The line isn't connected to any future LRT lines
Click to expand...
You're right, that does sound far-fetched, or would in normal circumstances...but the situation for Metrolinx right now is abject in terms of asking for more time before the court injunction case to test the vehicles to make good their legal argument. For test purposes, albeit far from ideal, the LRVs can run for a few minutes off their own batteries, and if they then use additional batteries as weight ballast to emulate a passenger load, they can extend that considerably.

So assumed they intended to lay down ribbon track anyway at some point before the 'detour' corridor, then why not do it now and stone two birds with one kill? I note the crossings are already fully barrier protected as well as lights. If the switches at either end of the corridor are locked off, I can't see why TC wouldn't grant a temporary waiver to test, especially if the track is being replaced anyway.

Your idea is abstract, but it may not be that far-fetched. The only other independent (from BBD) electric catenary facility near Toronto to test at would be Rockwood, (and the gauge is TTC, not standard) and getting to there on a flat-bed all in one piece would be beyond a challenge.

Interesting....
 
Last edited:
Don't suppose anyone noted the weight of the new/old rail?

It's hard to tell from the pictures, but it doesn't look like it's more than about 115 lb, same as the old rail. That would suggest it's intended for something less than heavy duty service. ie deadheads and some occasional detours - but not wholescale rerouting of anything.

- Paul
 
crs1026 said:
Don't suppose anyone noted the weight of the new/old rail?

It's hard to tell from the pictures, but it doesn't look like it's more than about 115 lb, same as the old rail. That would suggest it's intended for something less than heavy duty service. ie deadheads and some occasional detours - but not wholescale rerouting of anything.

- Paul
Click to expand...
I noted that too, although you can only zoom in so far on the pic and then lose the ability to discern detail. That ribbon has been sitting around for a while too, as evidenced by the rust on it, unless....hmmm...it is second hand from elsewhere. I know a lot of the Ottawa Valley CN (now abandoned) was welded rail and torn-up for reuse.

I was Googling and noted the Merx request
https://www.merx.com/English/Suppli...nm&searchtype=&hcode=3kn8UYXZz039dDKwywEyWw== from six or so months back.

It's curious as to what is to be achieved by this. The present rail *seems* to be fine for present use. Maybe signaling issues with jointed rail?
 
steveintoronto said:
The present rail *seems* to be fine for present use. Maybe signaling issues with jointed rail?
Click to expand...

Transport Canada reportedly has an aversion to jointed rail for passenger service.

That's one reason why VIA installed CTC on the Stratford line - signalling works fine with jointed rail, in fact it's a benefit to have signalling as it provides protection (well, warning really) against rail breaks.

- Paul
 
Further to Alex' wondering on the section being used for testing the Metrolinx LRV proto:
[...]
Actions — Program measures
The 8-km line. Prior to the O-Train project, the CPR freight line and its rail yard were seldom used and in poor condition. CPR upgraded the line to accommodate the O-Train, and no other trains use the track except when the O-Train is not operating.

The CPR track crosses two other active rail lines, making the signalling and braking systems (discussed below) important safety elements.

The line also runs through a 600-metre tunnel beneath Dow’s Lake. The tunnel was upgraded to meet engineering standards and to install a water system to provide a source of water for fire fighting in the tunnel. Lighting in the tunnel was improved and a walkway system installed in case of emergencies.

The original jointed track was upgraded but caused problems such as damage to the trains and excessive noise. It also made the ride uncomfortable for passengers. Instead, OC Transpo installed continuous welded rail in the summer of 2003 at a cost of $2.2 million, adding to the original capital budget for the project.[...]
Click to expand...
http://data.tc.gc.ca/archive/eng/programs/environment-utsp-otrainlightrailproject-973.htm

It remains abstract that ML would use this stretch to test the LRV proto....but where else could they do it? I wonder too if TC will grant an increased speed limit to this stretch having CWR along with signalling to make it a more effective bypass?
 
crs1026 said:
Transport Canada reportedly has an aversion to jointed rail for passenger service.

That's one reason why VIA installed CTC on the Stratford line - signalling works fine with jointed rail, in fact it's a benefit to have signalling as it provides protection (well, warning really) against rail breaks.

- Paul
Click to expand...

It's not TC. They don't care what kind of rail is used, so long as it works and is signalled for passenger trains.

The aversion is with Metrolinx. They seem to think that their precious GO trains can't run on jointed rail.

In fairness, the ribbon rail will come in handy in a couple of years once the line is signallized and speeds increase.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.
 
smallspy said:
It's not TC. They don't care what kind of rail is used, so long as it works and is signalled for passenger trains.
Click to expand...
That confirms why I searched and couldn't find any mention of it being needed in the regs. The search did show the O-Train example, one that still seems to be an anomaly in Canada in terms of TC waivers for temporal operation, and more. Being the Capital Region, I suspect they had pull from the inside, as TC, CN, CP, Capital Commission, etc, etc, were all in on the project. It still boggles me that Metrolinx don't point to it as a template that should be allowed for the Weston Corridor and more, not the least in allowing what the FRA already allow with waivers in the US for temporally separated lines, like SMART for a start. (Many in Sonoma are now wishing they had pressed for further exemptions to run off-the-shelf European type DMUs instead of the Nippon-Sharyo DMUs)(SMART has waiver(s) for the nature of the line operation, not the FRA compliant Sharyos)
 
Last edited:
GO Transit Control Centre continues to progress in Oakville. I assume that concrete floors are now being poured.

0EQFfev.jpg


EYixrCX.jpg
 
Last edited:
Based on the photos above, steel deck still has to be place at the west end for the floors and steel work that wasn't there when I last saw it in early Feb.

They installed the missing steel work on the east end to allow the enclose area so the floor slab can be pour in a heated area.

The steel work not enclose on the east end will be for the elevator.

We should see the siding go up in April/May, as it supposed to be brick. The north side is setup for the brick work already.
 
Northern Light said:
Honestly, has the management and/or ownership of the contractor have no sense of shame?
Click to expand...
Its starts with Metrolinx and they are clueless.

They are great for replacing people, but incapable of replacing companies who caused those people to be replace in the first place, as well delay projects. Then there is the quality of material and workmanship.

Its time this company goes bye bye.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top