GO Transit: Construction Projects (Metrolinx, various)

[PShells]

LSE express doesn't need to wait. There's already enough triple track between Danforth and Guildwood for an express to overtake a local. And a two-track railway can support far more than the 8 trains per hour we're currently running during peak periods.

How does this square with my Stouffville train sometimes sitting for 2-5 minutes west of Danforth station in both the morning and afternoon rush hour waiting for LSE and VIA trains to pass?

I know this is technically a “Service GO” question but it’s related to my hope the third track would be activated by the end of 2025.

 

[reaperexpress]

How does this square with my Stouffville train sometimes sitting for 2-5 minutes west of Danforth station in both the morning and afternoon rush hour waiting for LSE and VIA trains to pass?

I know this is technically a “Service GO” question but it’s related to my hope the third track would be activated by the end of 2025.

It is also a construction question because part of the issue is a missing switch west of Danforth. Eastbound trains can't switch to the express track without blocking westbound trains.

Similar issue west of Belleville:

Missing as in it never existed since it was normally just an intermediate interlocking. They really should have added the switch as part if the construction project given that location would be a bottleneck for several years.

Adding in the additional switch west of Belleville:

 

[nfitz]

LSE express doesn't need to wait. There's already enough triple track between Danforth and Guildwood for an express to overtake a local. And a two-track railway can support far more than the 8 trains per hour we're currently running during peak periods.

There's multiple construction sites along there. There was a work train just west of Danforth yesterday in rush hour (or was it this morning's rush-hour - it's all a blur).

 

[innsertnamehere]

There's multiple construction sites along there. There was a work train just west of Danforth yesterday in rush hour (or was it this morning's rush-hour - it's all a blur).

plus can the existing signaling system handle significantly higher frequencies while still having enough flexibility for service recovery in the case of delays? @reaperexpress is a pro at this, but ultimately is just a layman without a detailed look at how the corridor is operating and what it's constraints are (At least from my understanding!).

 

[crs1026]

plus can the existing signaling system handle significantly higher frequencies while still having enough flexibility for service recovery in the case of delays? @reaperexpress is a pro at this, but ultimately is just a layman without a detailed look at how the corridor is operating and what it's constraints are (At least from my understanding!).

The existing signal system is not at the same capacity level as say the Weston Sub, but it is not maxxed out either. It's the conflicts in routing that limit the capacity. The short pauses that @nfitz observed are pretty much inevitable - our operations are variable within a couple of minutes.

There's no point in reconfiguring things given that the third track is certain to reappear.

- Paul

 

[reaperexpress]

The existing signal system is not at the same capacity level as say the Weston Sub, but it is not maxxed out either. It's the conflicts in routing that limit the capacity. The short pauses that @nfitz observed are pretty much inevitable - our operations are variable within a couple of minutes.

There's no point in reconfiguring things given that the third track is certain to reappear.

- Paul

Yes, to clarify I am not suggesting the switch should be installed now. I'm merely noting that it would have been nice if they had installed it prior to taking the third track out of service.

But it's also worth noting that the return of the third track is also only temporary. Once the project is complete there will be 4 tracks, and since the Scarborough Junction grade separation was cancelled, the northern two tracks will be effectively reserved for the Stouffville line due to the amount of conflicts that would be created by allowing Lakeshore/Via trains to switch at grade onto the northern pair at Scarborough.

Lakeshore will need to accommodate a much higher traffic volume than today on two tracks between Union and Scarborough Junction. In contrast, the current 2-track bottleneck is only from Union to Danforth.

Currently the peak period service levels are currently:
Peak direction (8tph)
4tph LSE local
2tph Stouffville
2tph Via

Counter-peak (2 tph)
2tph LSE local

With 2021 service restored and Stouffville moved to dedicated tracks, the service on the Lakeshore pair will be:

Peak direction (8tph)
4tph LSE local
2tph LSE express
2tph Via

Counter peak (4tph)
4tph LSE local

Any service increase above that will involve operating more trains on fewer tracks than they do today.

 

[crs1026]

But it's also worth noting that the return of the third track is also only temporary. Once the project is complete there will be 4 tracks, and since the Scarborough Junction grade separation was cancelled, the northern two tracks will be effectively reserved for the Stouffville line due to the amount of conflicts that would be created by allowing Lakeshore/Via trains to switch at grade onto the northern pair at Scarborough.

It's interesting to note that the Weston Sub - which has the most advanced signalling and the most recent multiple trackage installation in the ML system - mostly only has single "X" crossover designs. This limits the ability to route trains on parallel routings without a stop-and-wait requirement, as only one crossover route can be cleared at a time.

Some LSE and LSW interlockings do have the duplicate parallel crossovers that you proposed. Danforth isn't one of them.

I do think that ML should have more of these, especially if express and stopping services are being interleaved.

- Paul

 

[bearcat]

Yes, to clarify I am not suggesting the switch should be installed now. I'm merely noting that it would have been nice if they had installed it prior to taking the third track out of service.

But it's also worth noting that the return of the third track is also only temporary. Once the project is complete there will be 4 tracks, and since the Scarborough Junction grade separation was cancelled, the northern two tracks will be effectively reserved for the Stouffville line due to the amount of conflicts that would be created by allowing Lakeshore/Via trains to switch at grade onto the northern pair at Scarborough.

Lakeshore will need to accommodate a much higher traffic volume than today on two tracks between Union and Scarborough Junction. In contrast, the current 2-track bottleneck is only from Union to Danforth.

Currently the peak period service levels are currently:
Peak direction (8tph)
4tph LSE local
2tph Stouffville
2tph Via

Counter-peak (2 tph)
2tph LSE local

With 2021 service restored and Stouffville moved to dedicated tracks, the service on the Lakeshore pair will be:

Peak direction (8tph)
4tph LSE local
2tph LSE express
2tph Via

Counter peak (4tph)
4tph LSE local

Any service increase above that will involve operating more trains on fewer tracks than they do today.

Do we know for sure the Scarborough Junction grade separation is definitely not happening?

 

[reaperexpress]

It's interesting to note that the Weston Sub - which has the most advanced signalling and the most recent multiple trackage installation in the ML system - mostly only has single "X" crossover designs. This limits the ability to route trains on parallel routings without a stop-and-wait requirement, as only one crossover route can be cleared at a time.

Some LSE and LSW interlockings do have the duplicate parallel crossovers that you proposed. Danforth isn't one of them.

I do think that ML should have more of these, especially if express and stopping services are being interleaved.

- Paul

On Weston, my guess is that with full build-out, trains would seldom switch tracks between Strachan and Wice. So most of the interlockings would be just there for redundancy, which would explain why they just use basic X configurations. Wice does have some extra crossovers to enable parallel movements.

For others' reference, here is a map of the current Kingston sub, where you can see the duplicate parallel crossovers that Paul mentions, at Guildwood junction and Durham junction:

 

[Bordercollie]

Bringing back LSW and LSE express trips would be helpful. Also is it not possible to get faster speeds between Aldershot and West Harbour?

What work is going on this weekend preventing trains from running past Oakville?

 

[Sauga89]

Bringing back LSW and LSE express trips would be helpful. Also is it not possible to get faster speeds between Aldershot and West Harbour?

What work is going on this weekend preventing trains from running past Oakville?

This construction notice says they are doing some work on the Burloak Drive Grade Separation this weekend.

(EDIT: They are also scheduled to start replacing the Drury Lane pedestrian bridge this weekend.)

 

[ownthesky]

Bringing back LSW and LSE express trips would be helpful. Also is it not possible to get faster speeds between Aldershot and West Harbour?

What work is going on this weekend preventing trains from running past Oakville?

I really hope there’s a way to speed up that slow roll into West Harbour - the 403 by Aldershot is a major choke point for commuters and at the current rate of travel, it makes sense for most commuters to drive to Burlington or Aldershot vs West Harbour or Confederation! Plus Hamilton’s transit plans is to terminate all the mountain bus lines into West Harbour, so it would be ideal to incentivize people to actually use these buses with a fast train. My daily running route is along the Waterfront Trail and it’s pretty funny to watch the train slowly crawl ahead of you in running shoes.

 

[reinventingthewheel]

I get the idea maybe ML wants to build a wye between the Oakville and Canpa sub. Any validity to that?

 

[Bordercollie]

I get the idea maybe ML wants to build a wye between the Oakville and Canpa sub. Any validity to that?
View attachment 635745

Why would they need a ramp?

 

[reinventingthewheel]

Why would they need a ramp?

To minimize disruption of the pipe yard, I suppose. Presumably the investigation area has it’s own entry point for staff access and delivery of drilling equipment.