News   May 24, 2024
 4.4K     2 
News   May 24, 2024
 884     0 
News   May 24, 2024
 387     0 

GO Transit: Construction Projects (Metrolinx, various)

Does the length of a turnout indicate whether the geometry allows for high speeds? I'm curious about the turnouts on the new section of the Trillium line in Ottawa. They are about 100 meters in length and not near the stations, so one hopes they will allow for 80 kph turnouts. (Yes, Ottawa bought 120 kph trains and won't even run them at 100 on long straight sections of track in the tundra.)
 
It was mentioned earlier that GO wants to upgrade some of their turnouts to #20's. What are most of the turnouts on the GO network currently rated at? Any idea where they're adding #20 turnouts on the GO network?
To be honest, most of the locations that GO operates on with any regularity are already using #20 crossovers.

There are a couple of key locations however that have smaller, lower-speed crossovers installed. The plant at Fort York (located immediately west of Stratchan on the Oakville Sub) is a key one that is in dire need of being upgraded.

Does the length of a turnout indicate whether the geometry allows for high speeds? I'm curious about the turnouts on the new section of the Trillium line in Ottawa. They are about 100 meters in length and not near the stations, so one hopes they will allow for 80 kph turnouts. (Yes, Ottawa bought 120 kph trains and won't even run them at 100 on long straight sections of track in the tundra.)
The number generally indicates the ratio at which the rails depart from each other when measured at the frog - i.e. it will take 20 feet from the point of the frog for the rails to reach a divergent distance of 1 foot apart. This is a bit loose and fast however, as some turnout geometries specify the diverging track as a spiral rather than a tangent, and so in those cases the number is meant as a means to allow engineering folks to figure out the space or speed requirements for the turnout.

Dan
 
April 15

Logan

DJI_0008.jpeg


Dundas
DJI_0009.jpeg

DJI_0010.jpeg
 
A quick glance while crossing the Uxbridge sub at the 401 this weekend, it looked like a lot of men and equipment at the creek under the CPR bridge just south of Sheppard. Did this weekend's workblock tie in that last pice of infrastructure, the 2nd span bridge over the creek and that the Stouffville line is pretty much ready for 2WAD?
 
A quick glance while crossing the Uxbridge sub at the 401 this weekend, it looked like a lot of men and equipment at the creek under the CPR bridge just south of Sheppard. Did this weekend's workblock tie in that last pice of infrastructure, the 2nd span bridge over the creek and that the Stouffville line is pretty much ready for 2WAD?
I'll take a look from the train tomorrow! We've been waiting for this tiny span over Highland Creek to be completed for at least 5(?) years, so great news if this is finally finished!
 
^That doesn't look like anywhere near the degree of mobilization that would be needed to build the bridge over that creek.

Does it look like the door to the signal bungalow is open ? I'm going to take a wild guess and say that they may be preparing to install the southward signal masts so that they can commission the new crossovers there....that will let them cut in the second track from there south to Kennedy.

Or they may be doing some utility shifting prior to starting the bridge in earnest.

Just speculating.

- Paul
 
^That doesn't look like anywhere near the degree of mobilization that would be needed to build the bridge over that creek.
At the time of driving by on Satuday about lunchtime, there appeared to be much more men and equipment, however it was a quick glance as I sped by at 100 kph
 

^That doesn't look like anywhere near the degree of mobilization that would be needed to build the bridge over that creek.

Does it look like the door to the signal bungalow is open ? I'm going to take a wild guess and say that they may be preparing to install the southward signal masts so that they can commission the new crossovers there....that will let them cut in the second track from there south to Kennedy.

Or they may be doing some utility shifting prior to starting the bridge in earnest.

Just speculating.

- Paul
I thought Highland Creek being isolated / diverted to the west culvert cell only would be a reason. But reviewing my pictures / video from October, those cofferdams were in place then. We did have a rain event last week elevating flows, so it could have been restoring / re-de-watering any work area in the east cell.
 
Does it look like the door to the signal bungalow is open ? I'm going to take a wild guess and say that they may be preparing to install the southward signal masts so that they can commission the new crossovers there....that will let them cut in the second track from there south to Kennedy.
I really wish this is true. I'm pretty sure that alone unlocks 4 tph.

Or they may be doing some utility shifting prior to starting the bridge in earnest.
I think that's all been done. There is a bunch of new-ish nicely routed cabling all the way from Agincourt station down to the creek that was installed I think 2 years ago.
 
^That doesn't look like anywhere near the degree of mobilization that would be needed to build the bridge over that creek.

Does it look like the door to the signal bungalow is open ? I'm going to take a wild guess and say that they may be preparing to install the southward signal masts so that they can commission the new crossovers there....that will let them cut in the second track from there south to Kennedy.

Or they may be doing some utility shifting prior to starting the bridge in earnest.

Just speculating.

- Paul
So, I've heard two different things about these crossovers.

The office staff say that the current plan is to activate them, and thus allow the double-track from here south to Oakworth to be utilized.

But I've also been told by signal crews that there is not enough track beyond the end of the north crossover to complete all of the shunts and various connections needed - and so, they won't be able to complete the signalling in the plant until the culvert gets completed and the track installed across it.

So which is it?

Dan
 
If the bridge is not going to advance, the alternative is to only activate the one crossover needed to route towards Oakworth and install a new temporary turnout north of the bridge to route towards Agincourt, and just leave the bridge as single track.

Yeah, that's some fancy signalling, rework, but it would make some level of service possible. There is a lot of investment in double track and secind station platforms sitting unused.

- Paul
 
Begs the question of just what is the complication of constructing a second bridge and related track/signal work in this realitivly short section ?

Some speculation from me on that, and this is without delving into any of the design drawings for this project and only looking at the pictures. There's probably some concerns about the hydraulic capacity of those culverts, to add the second track the culverts will need to be extended, the extension of the culvert may not meet the 100 year storm and they're trying to figure out how to design it so that it doesn't cause any downstream flooding, I suspect the concrete lined channel up and downstream is causing issues.

Alternatively or potentially in combination with, they require a DFO permit and are required to provide compensation for habitat loss and are trying to figure out property issues to provide offsetting habitat.

The existing culvert is old and likely doesn't meet the new hydraulic standards but when upgrading they need to meet the new model.

Edit: To add to that there's potentially another myriad of reasons for this bridge not proceeding. Utility conflicts, conflicts with the design with the other rail line, property issues. All in all this one narrow section has a myriad of potential issues with conflicting interests from various agencies that are probably trying to be resolved.
 

Back
Top