GO Transit: Service thread (including extensions)

[WB62]

With the new second track between Kennedy and Agincourt finally being completed soon, I thought I'd take a look at what additional service it would enable. The passing track enables 30-minute bidirectional service, but during peak periods we probably want service more frequent than that.

This concept uses the new passing track and existing second/third platform at Unionville to increase the peak period service to 4 trains per hour, and introduce counter-peak service:
View attachment 618748
View attachment 618747
Notes on the service design:

• To make room for the counter-peak service, there needed to be a period of 30-minute service in the peak direction just outside of the peak hour. But since one of the trains turns back at Unionville, that creates a 45-minute gap north of Unionville. So I made the adjacent peak-hour train run express between Union and Unionville to prevent Milliken or Agincourt passengers from using that train. They can instead use the new local trips that will have plenty of spare capacity and still provide the same 30-min or better service as the current timetable. The improved travel times for riders north of Unionville also partially compensates for the less ideal departure times for those riders.
• I added a southbound trip at the end of service, since that trip presumably already exists as a deadhead since the 23:07 northbound arrival at Mt Joy needs to return downtown somehow. This new in-service trip runs express to minimize the operating cost increase compared to the current not-in-service run.
• Due to the constraints of running 15-minute peak service on a line with a minimum bidirectional headway of 30 minutes, I wasn't quite able to fit hourly-or-better counter-peak service, but I was at least able to get the counter-peak service gap down to under 2 hours, compared to 4 hours currently.
• All-day 30-min service to Unionville would be technically possible but would require a lot more crews, and it would still have some awkward gaps due to the need to fit in the 15-minute peak direction service.

Great work as always!

 

[reaperexpress]

I would think that there is more than one board period between now and next September, so service adjustments are possible.... but I agree there will be a reluctance to put anything major in place before then.... and the postponement calls into question how much hiring and qualifying of staff is going to happen before then.

It doesn't need to be a major change though. The changes can be implemented incrementally as additional crews finish training. It would be weird to leave newly-trained crews sitting idle just to save some paperwork.

I wonder also what level of service ML is willing to support on LSE while the Ontario Line shifts and construction is underway. Adding one extra train each hour to double service frequency doesn't seem unreasonable.... but I'm not the people doing all the flagging down there. ML may have other views.

These trains are mostly added during peak periods, when there are already 8 trains per hour in the peak direction. I doubt they're doing any flagging at that time. I left the off-peak frequency at 1 train per hour, and the OL construction was a big part of the reasoning.

 

[kvvoyage]

It doesn't need to be a major change though. The changes can be implemented incrementally as additional crews finish training. It would be weird to leave newly-trained crews sitting idle just to save some paperwork.
View attachment 618780
View attachment 618779


These trains are mostly added during peak periods, when there are already 8 trains per hour in the peak direction. I doubt they're doing any flagging at that time. I left the off-peak frequency at 1 train per hour, and the OL construction was a big part of the reasoning.

I understand this might be a much more complicated matter but have you done any conceptual timetables of the LSE when the expansion programme is fully complete?

 

[reaperexpress]

I understand this might be a much more complicated matter but have you done any conceptual timetables of the LSE when the expansion programme is fully complete?

Yes I did some concepts to see what the effects would be of cancelling the Scarborough Grade Separation and thus constraining LSE to 2 tracks from Scarborough Junction to Union

 

[crs1026]

It doesn't need to be a major change though. The changes can be implemented incrementally as additional crews finish training. It would be weird to leave newly-trained crews sitting idle just to save some paperwork.

From what I have heard, Alstom walked away from managing the crewing operation fairly quickly once Onxpress had feet on the ground. There have been questions about whether there are enough crews for current operations. There may be trainees in progress right now, but I wonder if hiring anf training has happened at the necessary pace over 2024 to ramp up as required to meet the expansion schedule. If Onxpress's ability to hire is now postponed until late 2025, is there now a gap in that training throughput ? As a spectator I'm just avoiding any assumptions that the crews are available for any service upgrade.

- Paul

 

[WB62]

From what I have heard, Alstom walked away from managing the crewing operation fairly quickly once Onxpress had feet on the ground. There have been questions about whether there are enough crews for current operations. There may be trainees in progress right now, but I wonder if hiring anf training has happened at the necessary pace over 2024 to ramp up as required to meet the expansion schedule. If Onxpress's ability to hire is now postponed until late 2025, is there now a gap in that training throughput ? As a spectator I'm just avoiding any assumptions that the crews are available for any service upgrade.

- Paul

There are currently 2 CTO’s training on the network today, I haven’t seen CSA trainees on the bulletin page for at least 2 months.

 

[Allandale25]

^ Is that...concerning in terms of having more crews available to run more service?

 

[crs1026]

^ Is that...concerning in terms of having more crews available to run more service?

Yes. Alstom had already been trying to restrict vacations (an earned benefit, and totally predictable) just to keep up. Reportedly Onxpress was not willing to assume the entire workforce, and looking to impose further restrictions.

New CTO's don't just appear off the street, it's a lengthy training regime - so any interruption of new hiring and training will shrink the workforce. The employer has to hire just to address attrition, let alone expansion.

- Paul

 

[Bojaxs]

Yes. Alstom had already been trying to restrict vacations (an earned benefit, and totally predictable) just to keep up. Reportedly Onxpress was not willing to assume the entire workforce, and looking to impose further restrictions.

New CTO's don't just appear off the street, it's a lengthy training regime - so any interruption of new hiring and training will shrink the workforce. The employer has to hire just to address attrition, let alone expansion.

- Paul

With all the issues Metrolinx is having surrounding staffing issues, you'd think they'd make upgrading signals across the entire network a bigger priority. That way they can shrink train crews from 3 to 2 and increase frequencies without having to hire more staff. Or at least be able to comfortably manage service upgrades from April 2024.

 

[crs1026]

With all the issues Metrolinx is having surrounding staffing issues, you'd think they'd make upgrading signals across the entire network a bigger priority. That way they can shrink train crews from 3 to 2 and increase frequencies without having to hire more staff. Or at least be able to comfortably manage service upgrades from April 2024.

Redesigning and replacing signals systems is a huge undertaking with a multi year timeframe. Doesn't change the need to staff up to meet the next few years' growth and the transition to the new operator..

It's also a big challenge from a labour relations perspective. There will be union opposition, look how long it took TTC to change its subway staffing.

Reportedly, Onxpress has been attempting a "collective agreement reset" where the incoming work rules are significantly different - a "clear the slate for day one" approach. They may have some good ideas, but that strategy strikes me as strategically foolish, and a bit naive considering Canadian labour law and the prevailing politics.

There are sufficient implementation and transition issues that the last thing one would want during the handover is labour unrest. If I were running the show I would simply accept the current labour regime, possibly simply propose an extension of the first collective agreement, and postpone any talk of changing the work rules until the next contract negotiation. And, in the meanwhile, test the political winds carefully - a GO Transit strike plays considerably different than, say, Canada Post.

- Paul

 

[Bojaxs]

Redesigning and replacing signals systems is a huge undertaking with a multi year timeframe. Doesn't change the need to staff up to meet the next few years' growth and the transition to the new operator..

It's also a big challenge from a labour relations perspective. There will be union opposition, look how long it took TTC to change its subway staffing.

Reportedly, Onxpress has been attempting a "collective agreement reset" where the incoming work rules are significantly different - a "clear the slate for day one" approach. They may have some good ideas, but that strategy strikes me as strategically foolish, and a bit naive considering Canadian labour law and the prevailing politics.

There are sufficient implementation and transition issues that the last thing one would want during the handover is labour unrest. If I were running the show I would simply accept the current labour regime, possibly simply propose an extension of the first collective agreement, and postpone any talk of changing the work rules until the next contract negotiation. And, in the meanwhile, test the political winds carefully - a GO Transit strike plays considerably different than, say, Canada Post.

- Paul

No doubt. The union will argue "safety" as the main reason for having 2 crew members at the front of every train. I think it's silly that we have 2 crew members at the front of every UP express train. Those trains are no bigger than the trains you see in the U.K.. A country that has had 1 crew member at the front of every train for over a century with no issues at all surrounding safety. If it wasn't for our outdated signal system, the UP express trains could easily be operated by a single crew member.

 

[crs1026]

No doubt. The union will argue "safety" as the main reason for having 2 crew members at the front of every train. I think it's silly that we have 2 crew members at the front of every UP express train. Those trains are no bigger than the trains you see in the U.K.. A country that has had 1 crew member at the front of every train for over a century with no issues at all surrounding safety. If it wasn't for our outdated signal system, the UP express trains could easily be operated by a single crew member.

I don't doubt that we are headed in that direction. The issue is, Onxpress will want it on day one whereas the union will have a number of reservations, and likely want a number of rules or regulatory changes to make it work.... plus protection of jobs and transition accommodations. Maybe signalling or procedures need to be modified, and validated carefully.

I'm a bit jaded but, it's not the first time a management team might think they were ready to proceed with a big change while people are pointing out the many ducks that need to be coaxed into a row first. My inclination is, we may not be ready to get there.... and the new management may need to experience a year or two of the current regime before they jump too fast or too far.

If the new operator thought they could make this magnitude of change by just waving a big wand and jumping in at the deep end..... and relied on immediate labour savings to price their bid.....they may have miscalculated imho.

- Paul

 

[Bojaxs]

The issue is, Onxpress will want it on day one whereas the union will have a number of reservations, and likely want a number of rules or regulatory changes to make it work.... plus protection of jobs and transition accommodations

Just so we're clear. I'm not suggesting that by upgrading the signal system will lead to crew members being fired/ laid off. My thinking is that by shrinking crew sizes down, MX can better manage the staff they currently have to run more trains. It would simply be a matter of moving staff around. No one's getting let go.

 

[Krypto98]

From what I have heard, Alstom walked away from managing the crewing operation fairly quickly once Onxpress had feet on the ground. There have been questions about whether there are enough crews for current operations. There may be trainees in progress right now, but I wonder if hiring anf training has happened at the necessary pace over 2024 to ramp up as required to meet the expansion schedule. If Onxpress's ability to hire is now postponed until late 2025, is there now a gap in that training throughput ? As a spectator I'm just avoiding any assumptions that the crews are available for any service upgrade.

- Paul

If I recall correctly they canceled 2 classes of 15 CSAs back in September. One of my coworkers from CN almost got hired for one of them... a few people apparently resigned from their old jobs too for that posting but then learned they were canceled a week before they were supposed to start...

 

[Bojaxs]

If I recall correctly they canceled 2 classes of 15 CSAs back in September. One of my coworkers from CN almost got hired for one of them... a few people apparently resigned from their old jobs too for that posting but then learned they were canceled a week before they were supposed to start...

Don't the class 1 freight companies pay more for engineer/ conductors than GO does?

Why would someone leave CN for GO? No night shift?