News   Jul 12, 2024
199 Church Showcases Heritage Facade and Artwork at Street Level
 1.2K     0 
News   Jul 12, 2024
Six Points Plaza Redevelopment Advances With 36-Storey First Phase
 1K     1 
News   Jul 12, 2024
Trading Spaces: Can Real Estate Conversion Help Boost Housing Supply?
 381     0 

GO Transit Electrification | Metrolinx

EastYorkTTCFan said:
You seem to be very confident that the TTC will do that don't forget it took them almost 40 years to convert from trolley poles to pantographs. If they get an Ontario government that is willing to pay for full funding of it I could see that happening but I think that ship sailed a long time ago.
Click to expand...
It took TTC that long to move to pans as councilors were not willing to pay for a new fleet starting late 90's once they knew AODA requirements were coming at them. If TTC could got the funding sooner, the new fleet would have shown up sooner than later. One TTC chairmen around 2003 or 2004 said at a TTC meeting that he was not going to allow dollars spent on a new fleet on his watch

You got to thank one councilor who became Vice-Chair of TTC and Chair for pushing for the new fleet early 2000's while at the same time blame him for the smaller fleet than what we should had order day one. Even though he pushed for the new fleet his budget hat as chair of TTC budget committee got in the way. He did bean counting of the old fleet for the new fleet without looking at what would happen to ridership once the low floor cars were on the road as well the pent up demand for service and growth. COVID-19 is saving TTC ass now and if it did not happen and growth increase like it was that there would not be enough cars to meet the demand without going to a very small spare ratio, not the 20% that was being used before the mess. Then, why was TTC using 20% when BBD said TTC would only need 10% for the first 10 year of life???

Only when the city comes to terms that the farebox recovery is not enough to put a transit system on the road without the city providing almost double that it gives to TTC now or the province goes back funding transit like it did before Mike came along.

TTC could had pans when the old fleet was being built as the 4000-4005 came with pans with a few other built here for testing, but TTC wasn't sure if the OS could handle them. Being cheap, and no real testing, they went with poles.
 
drum118 said:
You got to thank one councilor who became Vice-Chair of TTC and Chair for pushing for the new fleet early 2000's while at the same time blame him for the smaller fleet than what we should had order day one. Even though he pushed for the new fleet his budget hat as chair of TTC budget committee got in the way. He did bean counting of the old fleet for the new fleet without looking at what would happen to ridership once the low floor cars were on the road as well the pent up demand for service and growth
Click to expand...
I think you are oversimplifing it as there was also the issue with the conservite government in Ottawa at the time who refused to find a third of the budget like the city figured that they would. In the end the city ended up picking up 2/3 of the cost of a reduced fleet size and the province of Ontario picking up the remaining balance.
 
EastYorkTTCFan said:
I think you are oversimplifing it as there was also the issue with the conservite government in Ottawa at the time who refused to find a third of the budget like the city figured that they would. In the end the city ended up picking up 2/3 of the cost of a reduced fleet size and the province of Ontario picking up the remaining balance.
Click to expand...
I am talking about what took place before before funding from the feds was required. With the city picking up 2/3rd the cost of the new fleet did cost an impact on the number of cars to order, but the bean counting was the real problem. It was how many x seats on the old fleet and what number of new cars would be require to have the same number.

I said then and still do that all we did was move from cattle car fleet to another with no room for the accessibly community who would now be able to ride a streetcar as well travel east-west south of line 2 along with strollers and more riders.

Not the first time the feds refused to fund things for TTC or walkway from doing so at a later date. The Queen Line was stop being built in the late 40's as the Yonge line was being built after the Feds pull the $25 million for the project and why there is a shell for the Queen Line station there now.
 
drum118 said:
TTC could had pans when the old fleet was being built as the 4000-4005 came with pans with a few other built here for testing, but TTC wasn't sure if the OS could handle them. Being cheap, and no real testing, they went with poles.
Click to expand...

When we came to Toronto in mid-1979, the then new CLRV's were starting to be delivered and going into service. At the time, the trolley buses were still in use on a number of routes, and continued to be so for a number of years. The trolley bus routes also interconnected with street car lines - the Bay bus crossed the College, Dundas, Queen and King lines.

As the trolley busses could not complete the power circuit to ground through the steel wheels like the street cars (rubber tires not all that conductive...) the trolley bus overheads consisted of two wires, positive and ground.

My understanding was that pantograph operation in a mixed streetcar and trolley bus environment would not work - the pantograph pickup could short out the trolley bus overhead when they intersected or crossed routes - that was the main reason why poles had to be used, and that given that requirement, the streetcar overhead structure was built to meet pole operation requirements.

Please let me know if this is not correct - if in fact streetcar pantograph operation could co-exist with the trolley bus overheads.
 
Allandale25 said:
.-.. .- - . ... - / .--. --- ... - / -... -.-- / -- . - .-. --- .-.. .. -. -..-

(Latest post by Metrolinx)

blog.metrolinx.com

Metrolinx Press Room

Find the latest Metrolinx news, project updates and more.
blog.metrolinx.com

Also, the EMU image used in the post sure looks like the new Caltrains version.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1388165627844730888
Click to expand...
Here's a rendering of the protective barrier.

1620135056184.png



Morse Code Translations

1620135165667.png


And I guess further confirmation that electrification will be done in stages.

1620135429803.png
 
^ Interesting...I think this has been mention before, maybe even in the pre-RER/OnCorr concepts? Didn't the 2008 Big Move talk about electrification on the LSE and LSW? And then UP Express was added? cc @crs1026
 
^Gack. GO Electrification has been talked about, and studied, almost as often as Ottawa has studied HSR.

There was a time in the 1990's when GO even brought an electric locomotive from the south to display as "the way of the future"

The Big Move document suggested that a Regional Rail system was needed, but simply noted that Regional Rail systems elsewhere were typically electric. There was no specific commitment or action plan. The document speaks a lot about carbon reduction but never ties this specifically to rail propulsion.

Electrification was later thrown on the table as a strategy at the time of GTS/UPE planning, to pacify residents objecting to the volume of trains. In the end all that was committed was use of Tier IV diesels, which has never really been achieved. Similarly, the Davenport Diamond was justified as requiring an electric solution, and again nothing concrete emerged.

It would be interesting to go back through ML's (and GO's, before ML was created) annual business plan documents to see when and to what degree electrification looked like it was creeping towards the front burner.

No government of any stripe has actually had the stomach to get on with it. Continued use of diesel, while arguably costly, was always cheaper and safer than risking taxpayer sticker shock. Hasn't helped that both electricity and petro fuel prices have bounced around like a yo-yo, with electricity becoming much more expensive in Ontario than ever predicted.

It may yet happen with the DBFOM project, but that seems to be the only way to hide the capital cost sufficiently for government to take on the taxpayer. One would think that the disruption of transportation with EV's would help the public appetite, but not much has happened since 2008. Or 1998. We shall see.

- Paul
 
Last edited:
^ Thanks. Also, small correction. OnCorr is now listed as a "DBOM" project: https://www.infrastructureontario.ca/uploadedFiles/_CONTENT/News/2_Market_Update/IO_April 2021 Pipeline Chart.pdf

Also, for a trip down memory lane, here are some of the documents you were referring to:

1) You're right that the 2008 Big Move didn't explicitly say electrification for certain lines. They just included it in a definition for what "Regional Rail (full-day, 2-way service)" and "Regional Rail (peak)" could be.
Neptis overview: neptis.org/geoweb/data-catalogue/15-year-and-25-year-plan-big-move-2008

2) December 2010 GO Electrification Study Final Report http://www.metrolinx.com/en/electrification/docs/ElectricificationStudy_FinalReport.pdf

3) APPROVED CHANGES TO THE BIG MOVE February 14, 2013:
2. In the description of the Air Rail Link in the list of Top 15 Transit Priorities, add the word “electrified.” http://www.metrolinx.com/en/regionalplanning/bigmove/The_Big_Move_Approved_Changes_EN.pdf
 
Last edited:
Coolstar said:
So from tonight's Davenport Diamond presentation, the OnCorr contract will be awarded in March 2022, and electrification of the Barrie Line will start in 2025 onwards.


Found at 1:01:47
Click to expand...
"Electrification will be after 2025", I assume that means they'll be done some time after 2025? Jesus this is taking way too long...
 
Coolstar said:
I interpreted it as starting in 2025 for the Barrie Corridor.
Click to expand...

Yep. The Design portion of a P3 doesn't (officially) start until after the contract is signed and must be completed before construction starts. I imagine the timeline for LakeShore is a effectively the same (construction start in 2024?).
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top