GO Transit: Service thread (including extensions)

[innsertnamehere]

no way the 50 minutes saved is correct, GO currently takes 57 minutes from Milton.. thats suggesting it would only take the train 18 minutes to travel over 40km..

 

[gweed123]

http://www.bramptonguardian.com/news-story/4201915-mayor-wants-to-fast-track-go-trains-to-cambridge/

Interesting. A fundamental question arrises though when discussing exurban services like this: who pays for it? This will become especially true when Metrolinx implements its new revenue tools, as these exurban areas will likely not fall under the purview of them. It will be a lot easier for people within the "revenue tools taxation area" to argue for increased service levels, because the money they will be spending in taxes will go to help pay for it. But for people outside? The question of "how are you ponying up for this extra cost?" becomes a lot less clear.

Personally, I think Waterloo Region should be subsidizing GO for the added cost of doing runs to Kitchener or Cambridge vs the cost of doing runs to Georgetown or Milton, especially because those added trips aren't anywhere close to breaking even (at least for Kitchener, Cambridge remains to be seen). If Waterloo Region does manage to get great local connections to the GO service and it ends up breaking even, Waterloo Region pays nothing and everybody is happy.

 

[innsertnamehere]

I think we will still see infrastructure improvements outside of the big move projects in the coming years, politicians are still going to need vote buying projects like Cambridge GO.

 

[gweed123]

no way the 50 minutes saved is correct, GO currently takes 57 minutes from Milton.. thats suggesting it would only take the train 18 minutes to travel over 40km..

I do agree that it's a bit exaggerated, but considering the fact that there would likely only be 3 stations added to the extension over that 40 km (Campbellville, Puslinch, and Cambridge), that's a very wide stop spacing, which would allow for higher speeds.

And it is likely correct that it would be faster than via Kitchener, because as I understand it the track that the Cambridge extension would use is built to higher standards than the track that the Kitchener extension uses, which again would allow for higher speeds (case and point, the fact that the Kitchener GO has to crawl through Guelph).

I think we will still see infrastructure improvements outside of the big move projects in the coming years, politicians are still going to need vote buying projects like Cambridge GO.

Hey, at least this vote buy is a low capital cost buy, haha. I'd take an ask like that over the Scarborough Subway any day. And I do agree that it was an omission from the 15 year plan.

 

[TOareaFan]

Interesting. A fundamental question arrises though when discussing exurban services like this: who pays for it? This will become especially true when Metrolinx implements its new revenue tools, as these exurban areas will likely not fall under the purview of them. It will be a lot easier for people within the "revenue tools taxation area" to argue for increased service levels, because the money they will be spending in taxes will go to help pay for it. But for people outside? The question of "how are you ponying up for this extra cost?" becomes a lot less clear.

Personally, I think Waterloo Region should be subsidizing GO for the added cost of doing runs to Kitchener or Cambridge vs the cost of doing runs to Georgetown or Milton, especially because those added trips aren't anywhere close to breaking even (at least for Kitchener, Cambridge remains to be seen). If Waterloo Region does manage to get great local connections to the GO service and it ends up breaking even, Waterloo Region pays nothing and everybody is happy.

How do you measure break even though? In neither case is the service established simply to get to those communities but, rather, an extension of much busier corridors.


So, to use the KW example, what is the cost of two of the trains (in each direction) being extended to KW? How close to the cost of operating the extension does 100 or so passengers a day come? What is the value of that extra EB train (8:19 a.m. in Brampton) that the extension made possible...a train that in about a year has grown from very sparsely used to being pretty much full.

Are all new services expected to break even?

As for who pays for it....it has yet to be seen but every discussion about revenue tools I have seen has them covering capital costs not operating costs....so in the case of a low capital cost extension like Milton-Cambridge I guess they will find a way for the province to cover the capital costs and have the GO operating budget cover the operating deficiency (if there is one).

 

[TFC]

I wonder how CP would react to GO extending rail service to Cambridge, as that's a busy section of track for them.

 

[vegeta_skyline]

I wonder how CP would react to GO extending rail service to Cambridge, as that's a busy section of track for them.

Simple, it's not going to happen unless CP lets it. You'd think they would be able to squeeze in 4 extra trips a day but the problem is, having those scheduled trips operate on their line would interfere with their operational flexibility, that's a big no-no for CP. The line is single track(Galt sub.)west of Guelph Jct.(Campbellville). I wouldn't be surpirsed if CP demanded GO build them a second track to Cambridge if the want the service. As is, even in the unlikely senario that CP doesn't require that, GO is not really going to want to run an operation where the trains are going to be stuck in a siding for 15 mins or more. All of which leads me to believe this mayor is guilty of failing to do the research and just talking from his ass or just trying to look good to his constituents.

 

[TOareaFan]

Simple, it's not going to happen unless CP lets it. You'd think they would be able to squeeze in 4 extra trips a day but the problem is, having those scheduled trips operate on their line would interfere with their operational flexibility, that's a big no-no for CP. The line is single track(Galt sub.)west of Guelph Jct.(Campbellville). I wouldn't be surpirsed if CP demanded GO build them a second track to Cambridge if the want the service. As is, even in the unlikely senario that CP doesn't require that, GO is not really going to want to run an operation where the trains are going to be stuck in a siding for 15 mins or more. All of which leads me to believe this mayor is guilty of failing to do the research and just talking from his ass or just trying to look good to his constituents.

I think urban dictionary defines that as "Fording" (that was too easy!)

 

[TFC]

Simple, it's not going to happen unless CP lets it. You'd think they would be able to squeeze in 4 extra trips a day but the problem is, having those scheduled trips operate on their line would interfere with their operational flexibility, that's a big no-no for CP. The line is single track(Galt sub.)west of Guelph Jct.(Campbellville). I wouldn't be surpirsed if CP demanded GO build them a second track to Cambridge if the want the service. As is, even in the unlikely senario that CP doesn't require that, GO is not really going to want to run an operation where the trains are going to be stuck in a siding for 15 mins or more. All of which leads me to believe this mayor is guilty of failing to do the research and just talking from his ass or just trying to look good to his constituents.

This mayor is notorious for not doing his research. He's spewed Rob Fordian facts about the LRT project in Waterloo Region, and believes that because there are railway tracks in Cambridge, it means GO can operate their trains here. He fails to acknowledge simple things, like CP owns the tracks through Cambridge, and GO has much larger priorities to deal with.

 

[gweed123]

How do you measure break even though? In neither case is the service established simply to get to those communities but, rather, an extension of much busier corridors.

Break even may have been the wrong phrase. What I meant to say was reach the same fare recovery ratio as other routes. I agree that in some cases it's hard to split the cost of part of a route vs the entire route, but it should be possible to tell whether or not the new service is "worth it", or if it's decreased the overall cost recovery ratio of the route.

As for who pays for it....it has yet to be seen but every discussion about revenue tools I have seen has them covering capital costs not operating costs....so in the case of a low capital cost extension like Milton-Cambridge I guess they will find a way for the province to cover the capital costs and have the GO operating budget cover the operating deficiency (if there is one).

I believe that revenue tools are meant to go 75% towards capital, 25% towards operating.

 

[reaperexpress]

Question: Could half hour service work?

Not with the current track layout, and not in the near future either. It is inefficient to operate more than one train on the line at regular intervals running the full route to Barrie, because the siding is not in the middle of the line. Minimum headway would therefore be limited by the longer time north of the siding, as well as resulting in long layovers at Union. The minimum theoretical headway would be roughly 2h, assuming no schedule padding and super-quick turnarounds. This can only practically be attained if when a train arrives at the terminus, the return trip is a separate trainset already ready to go (like trips F2 and B2 in my schedule), which requires at least two tracks at the terminal stations.

Minimum headway in a continuous service condition is (round trip time)/(#of trains on line), so express service makes a massive difference. Each minute saved in travel time cuts the minimum headway by two minutes, and with only one siding on the line, bidirectional service is limited to 2 trainsets at at time. That's the main reason I went with express service.

The siding was designed for service between East Gwillimbury and Union, for which it would allow a minimum theoretical headway of roughly 1h05min with no schedule padding and super-quick turnarounds. But East Gwillimbury only has one track, so such a low headway is not possible in real life.

In order to operate at 30 minute frequencies, there need to be sidings every 15 minutes along the line. At that point, you might as well go with full double track, which is the plan.

I could make a new schedule which uses the proposed track layout for the near future, with double track from Union to Davenport Diamond (GTS), Downsview Park to Rutherford (TYSSE and separate project), and Maple to King City (existing). It would still be limited by the distance between the Maple siding and Barrie, but it might permit higher frequencies on the southern section.

I can see a couple of reverse runs and a few off-peak runs added on the Barrie line but I would think that GO will stay away from any significant schedule on the route until the Davenport Diamond Grade Separation Project is restarted and funded.

Right, I totally forgot about that. CP wouldn't be too pleased with this proposed schedule.

Let's move on that project already!

 

[nfitz]

Simple, it's not going to happen unless CP lets it. You'd think they would be able to squeeze in 4 extra trips a day but the problem is, having those scheduled trips operate on their line would interfere with their operational flexibility, that's a big no-no for CP.

It doesn't have to be 4 trips per day. I'd think day 1 it would be one or two trips per day. I'm sure for the right price, CP would make it happen, and give it priority. The question is, would GO and/or Cambridge meet their price. Perhaps the Mayor of Cambridge would like to put his money where his mouth is.

 

[TOareaFan]

Break even may have been the wrong phrase. What I meant to say was reach the same fare recovery ratio as other routes. I agree that in some cases it's hard to split the cost of part of a route vs the entire route, but it should be possible to tell whether or not the new service is "worth it", or if it's decreased the overall cost recovery ratio of the route.

But we do that with every new service we introduce. That new train on the KW line that gets in just after 9 at union in the morning. First time I rode it I had a car pretty much to myself....so it decreased the cost recovery ratio for a while.....a year or so later it is running nearly full.

Maybe the best example is the move to half hourly service on Lakeshore......we know that the off peak trains were running with an average load of 350 passengers before the increase.....3 months later we were told that the 100% increase in off peak service has produced a 30% increase in riders....so now they are running at an average of about 230 passengers....and at launch they told us they expected the cost to the taxpayer of the increase was $7 million per year....so we know that this major increase in service has reduced cost recovery and average ridership....but not many people would say it is not a valued service addition.

I believe that revenue tools are meant to go 75% towards capital, 25% towards operating.

Thanks...had not seen that.

 

[TOareaFan]

It doesn't have to be 4 trips per day. I'd think day 1 it would be one or two trips per day. I'm sure for the right price, CP would make it happen, and give it priority. The question is, would GO and/or Cambridge meet their price. Perhaps the Mayor of Cambridge would like to put his money where his mouth is.

Why should they? What contribution to increased/extended GO service have other cities made?

Ending the Milton line in Milton was always a head shaker to me. Milton is (and will be for quite a while) a smaller community than Cambridge and (warning: anecdotal evidence coming) long before I ever new anyone that commuted in from Milton I knew a lot of people that commuted in from Cambridge.

Cambridge is (to me) like Barrie and it must make people in Cambridge look at Barrie and say why not us?

Google tells me that Cambridge is 98.3km from Toronto while Barrie is 96.5km......the 2011 Census tells us that Cambridge had a population of 126,748 while Barrie has 135,711.

If I lived in Cambridge I would be wondering why my provincial tax dollars produce no rail service while Barrie's produce, what, 4 trains a day?

 

[innsertnamehere]

^milton was the second fastest growing town in the country in the last census, with only Stouffville beating it.

and as always, you should never build transit because they "deserve it", make an honest case for it first.