GO Transit: Service thread (including extensions)

[smallspy]

An additional 20 minutes of time savings is very easily doable when you consider that it takes the GO train 55 minutes to get 50 km non-stop from St. Catharines to Hamilton. Meanwhile VIA only takes 30 minutes to get 50 km from Oshawa to Union, despite the slow operation through the USRC. That's already 25 minutes of potential savings, and we haven't even started talking about addressing the slow zones between Niagara Falls and St. Catharines or between Hamilton and Aldershot.

Remember that earlier discussion that we had about the line speeds? The Grimsby Sub is only 65mph, with a long stretch of 30mph (the Hamilton PSO). The Kingston Sub has a couple of PSOs of 75mph, but is largely 95/100mph track. That alone will account for a substantial amount of time savings.

Which then goes back to the question about improving the line speeds on the Grimsby Sub, and what it would take. (In theory, not much. In practice.....who knows. It's up to CN.)

The other thing to consider is that the timings on the Grimsby Sub also include an allowance for the drawbridge over the Welland Canal. There isn't much that can be done about this, save for figuring some way to realign the line to not require a drawbridge. (Yes, GO has said that they've negotiated an agreement with the Canal Commission to try and keep the bridge clear for the morning and afternoon rush hours, but the fact of the matter is that the bridge will still remain an impediment until it is bypassed.)

Dan

 

[reaperexpress]

Remember that earlier discussion that we had about the line speeds? The Grimsby Sub is only 65mph, with a long stretch of 30mph (the Hamilton PSO). The Kingston Sub has a couple of PSOs of 75mph, but is largely 95/100mph track. That alone will account for a substantial amount of time savings.

Which then goes back to the question about improving the line speeds on the Grimsby Sub, and what it would take. (In theory, not much. In practice.....who knows. It's up to CN.)

The other thing to consider is that the timings on the Grimsby Sub also include an allowance for the drawbridge over the Welland Canal. There isn't much that can be done about this, save for figuring some way to realign the line to not require a drawbridge. (Yes, GO has said that they've negotiated an agreement with the Canal Commission to try and keep the bridge clear for the morning and afternoon rush hours, but the fact of the matter is that the bridge will still remain an impediment until it is bypassed.)

I think we're saying the same thing. My understanding was that the question was about how much time would be saved if we had a 140 km/h speed limit without those slow zones. 95 mph is 13km/h more than 140 km/h, but I think the travel times should be ballpark-comparable.

 

[crs1026]

^ I bet the cost of the engineering for a solution to the Hamilton slow order is less than the cost of putting a “T” decal on every bus stop in the GTA.

Hardware will have to be replaced eventually anyways. No incremental cost other than moving whatever bonds have to be fiddled with. The GO extension will force that work anyways when the CTC isnupgraded.

It’s a pretty straightforward bit of engineering and installation. Not rocket science, just money.

- Paul

 

[TransitBart]

What on earth is a "T" decal? And why does a stop need one?

 

[MisterF]

I'm getting a bit concerned about the branding mess that could happen on Line 5 (and other future Metrolinx-owned, but TTC-run lines). I know we are getting a "T" on Line 5, but will the TTC be allowed to also display their awesome pylons? I wish they could have figured out an integrated branding system (largely based on the TTC's existing standards) for at-least properties in Toronto-proper.

I agree about the problem but not the solution. I think we need a single signage scheme for rapid transit across the GTA. The TTC logo had always been unclear because it doesn't distinguish between a subway station and a local bus. The T in Boston, the up and down arrows in Montreal, the O in Ottawa, the Underground and Overground in London, the Ubahn and Sbahn in German cities... All of these give rapid transit is own signage separate from local buses and their respective parent agencies. I hope that the Metrolinx stations don't add another layer of complexity to the wayfinding in Toronto. It should be seamless regardless of who owns what.

 

[Streety McCarface]

I agree about the problem but not the solution. I think we need a single signage scheme for rapid transit across the GTA. The TTC logo had always been unclear because it doesn't distinguish between a subway station and a local bus. The T in Boston, the up and down arrows in Montreal, the O in Ottawa, the Underground and Overground in London, the Ubahn and Sbahn in German cities... All of these give rapid transit is own signage separate from local buses and their respective parent agencies. I hope that the Metrolinx stations don't add another layer of complexity to the wayfinding in Toronto. It should be seamless regardless of who owns what.

Except it was never much of a problem since only subway stations ever receive the lighted sign that denotes them, while stops have a pylon.

However, there's another important thing to take note of: pretty much all subway stations in the system are not just stops on the subway, but huge transit centers with bus terminals, streetcar loops, and of course, rapid transit platforms. This type of transportation center doesn't just occur at the subway but at numerous streetcar and bus loops (ie Dufferin Gate, Exhibition, Humber, Long Branch, Bingham, Renforth, etc) throughout the system. You don't have this level of transit integration anywhere else, so having some specific logo that denotes only the subway is utterly pointless.

 

[MisterF]

Except it was never much of a problem since only subway stations ever receive the lighted sign that denotes them, while stops have a pylon.
View attachment 229314

However, there's another important thing to take note of: pretty much all subway stations in the system are not just stops on the subway, but huge transit centers with bus terminals, streetcar loops, and of course, rapid transit platforms. This type of transportation center doesn't just occur at the subway but at numerous streetcar and bus loops (ie Dufferin Gate, Exhibition, Humber, Long Branch, Bingham, Renforth, etc) throughout the system. You don't have this level of transit integration anywhere else, so having some specific logo that denotes only the subway is utterly pointless.

It's not just the signs at the stations themselves. It's directional wayfinding. Signs pointing towards the subway (within a larger station or shopping centre or office building for example) that simply show the commission logo are unclear. To someone who doesn't ride the system frequently or even someone who's not familiar with that specific location the TTC logo could refer to anything. When you see an M sign in most cities it's immediately obvious what it is. That's not the case in Toronto.

Another issue is that not all rapid transit stations have the massive complexes you describe. The new stations on Eglinton are often simply part of the urban fabric or simple stops in the middle of the road.

The third issue is that if Line 5 uses a T logo it creates more confusion because it's different from everything else in the city. It should be one standard across the system.

 

[Allandale25]

There was some discussion during the Q and A of more Milton Line GO train service and the Lakeshore West Line service at this week's town hall in Burlington. I don't have time at the moment to provide a time marked link so I can update this post later. If anyone else wants to please go ahead.

 

[Jonny5]

When you see an M sign in most cities it's immediately obvious what it is.

McDonalds?

 

[Northern Light]

The above referenced discussion of Milton Line service improvements occurs at roughly 28:50 of the video.

 

[dowlingm]

I think we're saying the same thing. My understanding was that the question was about how much time would be saved if we had a 140 km/h speed limit without those slow zones. 95 mph is 13km/h more than 140 km/h, but I think the travel times should be ballpark-comparable.

I think the number of incidents Brightline has had is a cautionary note on running higher speed trains through even closely spaced grade crossings, even full 4 barrier protected ones.

 

[tmlittle]

There was some discussion during the Q and A of more Milton Line GO train service and the Lakeshore West Line service at this week's town hall in Burlington. I don't have time at the moment to provide a time marked link so I can update this post later. If anyone else wants to please go ahead.

Encouraging, but there's a lot of room for weaseling in the "Milton corridor" phraseology. I guess we'll have to see.

 

[Allandale25]

Upcoming meeting for the Bowmanville Extension:

Metrolinx holds GO Train open house for Oshawa-Bowmanville link in Whitby Feb. 29

Meeting at the Abilities Centre.

www.durhamregion.com

Meeting details repeated on Metrolinx Engage:

Open Houses - New Track & Facilities | Metrolinx Engage

[Summary]

www.metrolinxengage.com

 

[reaperexpress]

I think the number of incidents Brightline has had is a cautionary note on running higher speed trains through even closely spaced grade crossings, even full 4 barrier protected ones.

Brightline's operating environment is vastly different from the Niagara line, or southern Ontario railways in general. The level of separation is shockingly poor, with lines running at-grade through dense urban areas including many awkward crossings.

A much better comparison would be any of the other mainlines in southern Ontario, which operate at up to 160 km/h (commonly 153 km/h), without anywhere near the carnage of the 127 km/h Brightline trains.

 

[crs1026]

An important milestone for GO happened yesterday - CN transferred dispatching duties for much of the ML owned system from its dispatching office at MacMillan Yard in Maple to the new GO Operations Center in Oakville. The CN dispatching centre is closing, with the remaining CN owned territory mostly now controlled from Edmonton. CN also plans to close its Montreal dispatching office and centralise all dispatching in Edmonton.

- Paul