News   Jul 15, 2024
 350     1 
News   Jul 15, 2024
 516     0 
News   Jul 15, 2024
 556     0 

GO Transit: Construction Projects (Metrolinx, various)

The switch configuration is bizarre. The switch at the west end has the north track as the through route while the switch at the east end has the south track as the through route. So trains always need to slow from 70 mph (112 km/h) to 45 mph (72 km/h) to switch tracks even if they're not meeting any train in the opposite direction.

The platform at Breslau station will be on the north side, so the west switch should have been installed the other way around to allow the train bypassing the station to pass through at full speed. The stopping train needs to slow regardless of the switches.
Did they have to set it up this way? Or was it poor planning/ execution? Designing the tracks so the trains have to go slow is extremely frustrating. That really puts a damper on this entire project for me. I hope it's temporary or can be rectified.
 
Did they have to set it up this way? Or was it poor planning/ execution? Designing the tracks so the trains have to go slow is extremely frustrating. That really puts a damper on this entire project for me. I hope it's temporary or can be rectified.
I have no idea. Considering that the grading seems to continue further west than the western switch, it's possible that the current one is temporary and they plan to add one that's actually the right way around.
 
Did they have to set it up this way? Or was it poor planning/ execution? Designing the tracks so the trains have to go slow is extremely frustrating. That really puts a damper on this entire project for me. I hope it's temporary or can be rectified.

It was not a field execution error. Why the design called for this I don't know, but the signal placement at the east end does hint at being only temporary.

I'm not sure that this siding is as critical to 2WAD as it is to freight. The Guelph siding and the one at Acton are far more important to a 2 way schedule.

- Paul
 
It was not a field execution error. Why the design called for this I don't know, but the signal placement at the east end does hint at being only temporary.
If the east end switch were backwards then I wouldn't be worried since it is indeed temporary. But the western switch setting the north (platform) track as the through route is what's concerning.

I'm not sure that this siding is as critical to 2WAD as it is to freight. The Guelph siding and the one at Acton are far more important to a 2 way schedule.
The siding is indeed not likely to be used for the basic hourly local service, since it would produce an exceedingly long terminal time in Kitchener. Most likely the Guelph & Georgetown (not Acton) passing tracks would be the meeting places for the local service. The meets that would occur in Breslau & Acton would be with:

- peak period GO express trains (8-10 meets/weekday)
- Via trains (2-4 meets/day)
- CN trains (2-4 meets/day)

The fact that the passing track is not used as part of the basic hourly service makes it additionally frustrating that trains need to slow down regardless of whether they're meeting a train there. And even if they do build the permanent east switch to match the west one, it would create unnecessary delays for the GO, Via or CN train that doesn't stop at the station. It's also not helpful for the GO local train if the oncoming express or freight train needs to slow down rather than getting to the passing track as quickly as possible.

Given that there will only be 4-5 GO trains per weekday in each direction meeting at Breslau & Acton, I think it's very unlikely that they would build a second platform at those stations as part of the initial AD2W rollout. Via and CN obviously don't need platforms there.
 
Last edited:
March 28
Finally getting caught up On Hamilton GO Station with more up on my site
53640978786_6db515481a_b.jpg

53641195843_1120afb6ff_b.jpg

53641318514_c2712b073c_b.jpg

53640101442_9bd143fe4f_b.jpg

53641437110_0bd31890b2_b.jpg

53641195578_6969ab2e58_b.jpg
 
Oakville grade separation projects....

I've been looking around a bit for any hints of planning for Fourth Line grade separation. Can't find a thing. I know Kerr Street has been a point of discussion for many years, the Chartwell Drive crossing will probably close like Maple Grove Drive did back around 2000 or whenever it was.... and of course Burloak is underway now.

Anyone got a scoop on this?
 
Oakville grade separation projects....

I've been looking around a bit for any hints of planning for Fourth Line grade separation. Can't find a thing. I know Kerr Street has been a point of discussion for many years, the Chartwell Drive crossing will probably close like Maple Grove Drive did back around 2000 or whenever it was.... and of course Burloak is underway now.

Anyone got a scoop on this?
Kerr was cancelled by Metrolinx because it was going to cost $230 million. Any other grade crossings aren’t on Metrolinx’s radar for separation, and it’s up to the Town to fund it. Chartwell was been proposed for a flyunder in Oakville’s Midtown Plan update.
 
Confederation’s station building looks to be coming along well! The platforms a bit slower though. I guess the target opening is 2025 so we have time.
Given the amount of work for both the station and 3rd track, either spring or fall of 2025 will see service on both of them.
 
Oakville grade separation projects....

I've been looking around a bit for any hints of planning for Fourth Line grade separation. Can't find a thing. I know Kerr Street has been a point of discussion for many years, the Chartwell Drive crossing will probably close like Maple Grove Drive did back around 2000 or whenever it was.... and of course Burloak is underway now.

Anyone got a scoop on this?

Kerr was cancelled by Metrolinx because it was going to cost $230 million. Any other grade crossings aren’t on Metrolinx’s radar for separation, and it’s up to the Town to fund it. Chartwell was been proposed for a flyunder in Oakville’s Midtown Plan update.

From the Oakville Capital Budget:

1712651558074.png



No other grade separations (other than Burloak) are in the Oakville 10-year Capital Plan.
 
March 28
More up on my site.

As noted, the new trackwork from West Harbour going east is nearly ready to see track and switches installed this year once all the ductwork for all the new signals is installed along with landscaping, signal mast and signal boxes. This applies to all three tracks as CN is upgrading the existing ones.
53641451127_4d444b4faf_b.jpg

53641451232_04de8a02ba_b.jpg

53642789600_c0c2ee5966_b.jpg

53642544128_e972297cf4_b.jpg

53642789745_c64d13ce0f_b.jpg

53642543813_a0382b4b51_b.jpg

53642543648_3b4307acfe_b.jpg
 
I'm hopeful for a spring 2025 opening of Confederation, given the construction progress. We'll have to see.
Having that third track sooner would improve the current NF train service and be ready when the station opens. The opening of the station is most likely tied to operation costs and service changes.
 
There will be some theoretical reduction in capacity attributable to a "flat" junction as opposed to one with flyover/unders, but ML seems to feel that it's manageable. It may mean that more trains face restrictive signals as there will inevitably be more routing conflicts. But it may be years before the line gets that busy, and changes to the signalling will likely help. Many trains will only be moving at turnout speed anyways eg if they have stops at Scarborough GO, or if they are coming around the curves to/from the Uxbridge Sub, so routing them through crossovers does not impose a speed penalty.

Wice on the Kitchener line is a comparable junction, and it functions reasonably well.

- Paul
The junction will not be a flat junction based on every plan I have seen - and based on the conversation I had with Phil that was referenced.

The current plan has the Stouffville Line using the two northern tracks on the shared section with the LSE (and through the USRC of course) which is logical, at Scarborough junction the Stouffville line tracks peel off to the north and do not interact with the LSE tracks (there may be turnouts but they would only be for odd moves). Of course we will likely still eventually want a grade separation of Danforth and at least a fence along Midland. There is no need for rail to rail or flat crossing moves because trains from the southern two tracks will head to and from the LSE. This design is logical for ensuring frequency and reliability of service but I think its the worse overall design than a Local Express Express Local design (but its cheaper because you don't need the rail to rail grade separation - not that we really needed it for the frequencies we have planned in the near term).

This is reflective of the approach on the Weston sub as well, Express tracks are not inside the local tracks but off to the side.
 

Back
Top