News   Dec 20, 2024
UrbanToronto Year-End Poll: Vote on the Best Buildings of 2024, presented by Sapphire Balconies
 2.7K     8 
News   Dec 20, 2024
UrbanToronto's Social Media Presence Skyrocketed in 2024
 1K     2 
News   Dec 20, 2024
Mattamy Homes Records A Year of Accomplishments
 1.9K     0 

GO Transit: Construction Projects (Metrolinx, various)

Allandale25 said:
Always interesting to see where this kind of work is taking place (and new location) as part of the expansion/track capacity work. This is near the 409/401 new tunnels. cc @crs1026

View attachment 538828
Click to expand...
Not sure why they are going that far east as the 4-track interlock block is a short distance to the east of Islington with all four tracks in place with block working signals. There is enough room from the interlock to Islington to spread the tracks apart for two tracks to use the two tunnels and two of the three tracks currently under Islington Overpass. Since you already had three tracks under Islington, I found it odd that they need to build two extra tracks under the 401/409 unless they were looking at having five tracks at this point to the airport cut off with two being used for UPX only.
 
drum118 said:
Not sure why they are going that far east as the 4-track interlock block is a short distance to the east of Islington with all four tracks in place with block working signals. There is enough room from the interlock to Islington to spread the tracks apart for two tracks to use the two tunnels and two of the three tracks currently under Islington Overpass. Since you already had three tracks under Islington, I found it odd that they need to build two extra tracks under the 401/409 unless they were looking at having five tracks at this point to the airport cut off with two being used for UPX only.
Click to expand...
The existing tunnel has a speed restriction due to low clearance. Reducing it to 2 tracks will eliminate the speed restriction.

There is not enough space for 4 tracks under Islington with the existing grading. They need to build a retaining wall on the south side of the underpass to fit the south track under the existing structure.
 
Last edited:
The 401/409 tunnel is another example of a piecemeal approach to projects - a very expensive asset that is sitting unused because the plan isn't being pursued with an end goal in mind.

This hasn't stopped Ml from putting out self-congratulatory press release after press release declaring victory on 2WAD on the Kitchener line.

The slow progress on getting work done is regrettable, but the constant flow of misleading PR is really egregious. If construction is going to take another decade to achieve, admit it - and stop pretending otherwise.

- Paul
 
reaperexpress said:
The existing tunnel has a speed restriction due to low clearance. Reducing it to 2 tracks will eliminate the speed restriction.

There is not enough space for 4 tracks under Islington with the existing grading. They need to build a retaining wall on the south side of the underpass to fit the south track under the existing structure.
Click to expand...
Getting four tracks under Islington was an issue back in 2010 as the corridor was being expanded as well the 401 with Islington being the worst one. I thought the south wall was built a few years ago and I need to check my photos. As for height requirements, I wasn't aware this was an issue. When they were building the corridor, they could have lowered the tracks to get the clearance they needed

I agree with @CR1026 as I don't see anything happening in this area or Woodbine station until 2035 at the rate things are going these days.
 
drum118 said:
Getting four tracks under Islington was an issue back in 2010 as the corridor was being expanded as well the 401 with Islington being the worst one. I thought the south wall was built a few years ago and I need to check my photos. As for height requirements, I wasn't aware this was an issue. When they were building the corridor, they could have lowered the tracks to get the clearance they needed
Click to expand...

As I understood it, the issue wasn't height but width, in the sense that the changes in air pressure when two trains pass in the tunnel can cause the cars to sway beyond the clearance limits, potentially contacting each other. That is mitigated by a speed restriction for the GO bilevels especially, but the better solution is to shift one or more tracks into the new tunnels.

- Paul
 
^ Wonder why they would start with an RFI instead of an RFQ or RFP? Wouldn't it be a fairly simple and known stretch/infra required?
 
Allandale25 said:
^ Wonder why they would start with an RFI instead of an RFQ or RFP? Wouldn't it be a fairly simple and known stretch/infra required?
Click to expand...

That depends on the scope. I don't have a Merx account, but I am praying that this is not some previously announced tweak that they are only just getting to (eg siding at Acton, service track at Rock Cut.... which I think I remember already being awarded?)
The 2009 EA contemplated full doubletracking from Silver to Kitchener. Possibly (hopefully?) some of that is actually getting closer.

- Paul
 
crs1026 said:
That depends on the scope. I don't have a Merx account, but I am praying that this is not some previously announced tweak that they are only just getting to (eg siding at Acton, service track at Rock Cut.... which I think I remember already being awarded?)
The 2009 EA contemplated full doubletracking from Silver to Kitchener. Possibly (hopefully?) some of that is actually getting closer.

- Paul
Click to expand...

I was curious if the 2009 EA was still online. I did a Google search for "2009 EA Kitchener Line" and it's the first hit. Miracle! For the benefit of new members or anyone who hasn't seen it, here's the PDF link and folks should download it in case it disappears from the Metrolinx website.

PDF: https://assets.metrolinx.com/image/...etrolinx/Georgetown-to-Kitchener-ESR-2009.pdf

@crs1026 you mentioned it and linked to it in 2018 in the High Speed Rail thread here in post 1982.

Update: Steve Munro mentioned this in a post here in 2009. The post mentioned PIC No. 2 in February 2009, but the link is dead. It was captured here via here.
 
Last edited:
Speaking of Guelph Sub. I walked along the subdivision west of Guelph Central Station today. The 2nd track is in only over the bridges spanning Wilson & Norfolk. Would be nice to see the 2nd track go in soon.
You can also see the end of the new south platform.

Moving from East to West ending at the Glasglow Street crossing.

IMG_4395.jpg
IMG_4394.jpg

IMG_4397.jpg
IMG_4396.jpg
 
Garuda said:
. Would be nice to see the 2nd track go in soon.
Click to expand...

If ML had to lay even a single crosstie before each self-congratulatory press offering or tweet.....

Okay, I'm exaggerating slightly.... but seriously..... I know railway museum volunteers who could close those track gaps in a single weekend of track laying.

- Paul
 
Garuda said:
Speaking of Guelph Sub. I walked along the subdivision west of Guelph Central Station today. The 2nd track is in only over the bridges spanning Wilson & Norfolk. Would be nice to see the 2nd track go in soon.
You can also see the end of the new south platform.

Moving from East to West ending at the Glasglow Street crossing.

View attachment 539425View attachment 539426
View attachment 539427View attachment 539428
Click to expand...

Maybe this is what Packages 1 and 4 will do per @SaugeenJunction 's RFI post above? Connect this track/add more?
 
Allandale25 said:
Maybe this is what Packages 1 and 4 will do per @SaugeenJunction 's RFI post above? Connect this track/add more?
Click to expand...

Possibly, but it's very small potatoes to need an RFI to lay that much track. (Which is likely why it is waiting until the very end of the platform construction - pretty much a "finishing touch").

When I last heard, however, the end state track configuration at Hanlon was still under discussion in light of input from CN and G&W. That might cause further design work and rewiring of the CTC interlocking.

- Paul
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top