TOareaFan
Superstar
It is a two day service interuption and the Milton line is not that far if they have to catch a train. Not ideal but...what is!
|
|
|
GO Transit: Service thread (including extensions)
- Thread starter drum118
- Start date
It is a two day service interuption and the Milton line is not that far if they have to catch a train. Not ideal but...what is!
ShonTron
Moderator
Member Bio
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 12,463
- Reaction score
- 9,255
- Location
- Ward 13 - Toronto Centre
LOL!
Yeah, tell that to Burlington! Or tell Oakville passengers to take local transit. Better yet, drive!
denfromoakvillemilton
Senior Member
Member Bio
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2008
- Messages
- 7,452
- Reaction score
- 1,514
- Location
- Downtown Toronto, Ontario
But TOAreafan does that almost everyday
Molybdenum
Active Member
Using local transit from Bronte, this will turn a 45 minute train ride into a 2 to 2.5 hour odyssey via Oakville Transit, MiWay and then GO from Square 1, assuming the transfers work out, that is. Here's an example from Google Maps.
Last edited:
TOareaFan
Superstar
Like I said, it is a weekend....a one off caused by a major construction issue...and, frankly, based on the average ridership of the off peak trains it is not really effecting too many people. Is it unfortunate, absolutely....is it a huge issue, probably not.
Driving time (according to Google) from Oakville GO to Cooksville GO is 18 minutes. Would you ask commuters to do that everyday.....no. As an emergency measure on one weekend....it is not really the end of the world.
TOareaFan
Superstar
But TOAreafan does that almost everyday
That is true....although I am not sure what the point is you are making.
denfromoakvillemilton
Senior Member
Member Bio
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2008
- Messages
- 7,452
- Reaction score
- 1,514
- Location
- Downtown Toronto, Ontario
That if Brampton and Georgetown and Milton have bus service 90 percent of the time, then Lakeshore West can deal with bus service for two days.
TOareaFan
Superstar
I think what Shontron is saying (sorry ST if I have this wrong) is that the replacement service that GO is offering for those days should be GO buses - "Train buses" like the lines you mention have. Instead of asking people from Oakville to either drive to Cooksville (for a frequency far less than they are used to) or take some sort of convoluted public bus option or drive...they should have put on every half hour (or even every hour) buses from the various train stations along the line to Union.
I bet that was considered but the number of buses needed would have been a lot and to do that, I am guessing, they would probably have had to borrow/rob buses/service from other lines.
Like I said, the solution that they came up with is hardly ideal but it is only two days and, I suspect, two relatively lightly travelled days.
It is funny, the first reaction I had was that if I were a Milton rider who has been told there is no way to have weekend rail service I would be thinking "wow, you found a way to do it that weekend"
nfitz
Superstar
Hmm, you've got the line to Niagara Falls all as peak-only 1-way. But won't there be 2-way off-peak services to James Street North by 2015? And possibly to Stoney Creek a few years later?
vegeta_skyline
Senior Member
I can't see it happening, Milton trains diverting onto the Lakeshore West that is. Not for at least a decade but more likely two (see bottom).
The move makes sense from an operational irregularity standpoint(line shutdowns) but not a complete diversion. Its also very wise to buy CPs Obico yard for use as a TTC subway yard and/or GO yard. But most importantly, there is really no need to divert Milton trains onto the Lakeshore West line. The area east of the jct. between the Canpa sub & the Galt sub(Kipling and points further east) is not where the Milton line has capacity constraints(with the exception of the Humber bridge), the main problem area is through Mississauga.
There are numerous problems such a proposal would face. For one the jct. to the Canpa sub is westward facing. There's an industrial facility in the way of making an Eastward connection but a more relevant physical obstacle is that Canpa is the western entrance to Willowbrook yard. A Eastern wye would interfere with the western yard lead and vice versa;
western yard lead in red/hypothetical eastern Canpa wye in yellow
As we can see the tracks would have to cross. This interface would normally require a diamond interlocking, the kind they've spent hundreds of millions eliminating over the last few years re: West Toronto/Hagerman/Snider. But one may not even be physically possible at that kind of narrow angle. Nor would it be preferably from a safety/maintenance/operation point of view to have a mainline track and a yard track cross each others path and so close to the yard itself to boot.
A controlled location with switches is a much more viable alternative. However the problem with that is that there may not be sufficient space for it. Yard movements frequently travel up to the Kipling overpass. A controlled location would extend eastward beyond that. I cant possibly see them allowing yard trains to occupy the maintrack in order to make their moves considering how busy the line is (plus it would require extensive qualification upgrading for the yard operators which would come with significant pay increases). I don't know if the yard could be reconfigured, however if so that would reduce its capacity and therefore isn't something that could be done at least until the East Maintenance facility is completed in 2017, if this kind of reduction has even been taken into consideration.
A fly-over option is another possibility but it would be extremely expensive compared to the other options and again may not even be physically possible, depending on the grade and other obstacles; Horner, Kipling Ave. It would also require extensive land acquisition from VIA if the ramp were to be built on the south side. Which would still be preferable to building it on the north side. In addition to reducing available yard space it would be operationally problematic since Milton trains would have to cross over to the south side of the corridor at a later point so as to not occupy the tracks used by westbound Lakeshore trains servicing stops at Mimico & Exhibition on the north side of the corridor.
Track space/time on the Oakville sub would be an even bigger problem going east to Union with local/express/equipment Lakeshore West trains and revenue/equipment VIA trains. The corridor already sees over 200 train movements per day (break down of train movements; http://urbantoronto.ca/forum/showth...n-Express-(Metrolinx-U-C)?p=766327#post766327).
An additional 16 trips may seem insignificant but the problem is the timing of those trips. Between 7:52 am at 8:20, 6 eastbound and 5 westbound GO trains pass by Mimico on the Lakeshore West line. You can tell there already is congestion on this segment as the 7:58 eastbound express out of Oakville takes 5 more minutes (27 mins) to reach Union than the 7:43 eastbound express (22 mins). Extended to 7:42-8:30 you add 2 westbound VIAs, 2 eastbound VIAs and one more westbound GO to the mix. Meanwhile in the same time period you have 3-4 Milton trains making their way to Union (the 7:40, 7:50, 8:00 & 8:15 out of Kipling). Holy congestion batman! I think we can all see why this might be a very bad idea...
The 5th track will be needed for any increases in service. But that's not going to happen until the city commits to rebuilding the Dunn, Jameson & Dowling Ave overpasses (not to mention the widening of 6 other bridges along the corridor). Maybe you can make it happen after that, but then the Milton trains would eat up most of the new found track time. Which brings me back to the question of WHY? Why use up that new found track space on a service for another line that already has enough capacity in its own corridor save for one pinch point.
Now once they implement cab signalling or some other advanced form of train control, such diversions may present an interesting option for differing routes. However GO continues to purchase Bombardier bi-level coaches and MPI locomotives, both of which are currently incompatible with such technology. I suppose a complete overall is possible, but would likely be prohibitively expensive. Most likely the next generation of equipment will be fully compliant with such technology i.e. after electrification, which as we know outside of the UPX is realistically 1-2 decades out from completion for the Lakeshore West, East & Kitchener corridors. Don't think so? Well, it will have only taken about 14 years from conception to implementation for the ARL/UPX to come to fruition. And the electrification of those corridors is a far larger project... only time will time I guess.
The move makes sense from an operational irregularity standpoint(line shutdowns) but not a complete diversion. Its also very wise to buy CPs Obico yard for use as a TTC subway yard and/or GO yard. But most importantly, there is really no need to divert Milton trains onto the Lakeshore West line. The area east of the jct. between the Canpa sub & the Galt sub(Kipling and points further east) is not where the Milton line has capacity constraints(with the exception of the Humber bridge), the main problem area is through Mississauga.
There are numerous problems such a proposal would face. For one the jct. to the Canpa sub is westward facing. There's an industrial facility in the way of making an Eastward connection but a more relevant physical obstacle is that Canpa is the western entrance to Willowbrook yard. A Eastern wye would interfere with the western yard lead and vice versa;
western yard lead in red/hypothetical eastern Canpa wye in yellow
As we can see the tracks would have to cross. This interface would normally require a diamond interlocking, the kind they've spent hundreds of millions eliminating over the last few years re: West Toronto/Hagerman/Snider. But one may not even be physically possible at that kind of narrow angle. Nor would it be preferably from a safety/maintenance/operation point of view to have a mainline track and a yard track cross each others path and so close to the yard itself to boot.
A controlled location with switches is a much more viable alternative. However the problem with that is that there may not be sufficient space for it. Yard movements frequently travel up to the Kipling overpass. A controlled location would extend eastward beyond that. I cant possibly see them allowing yard trains to occupy the maintrack in order to make their moves considering how busy the line is (plus it would require extensive qualification upgrading for the yard operators which would come with significant pay increases). I don't know if the yard could be reconfigured, however if so that would reduce its capacity and therefore isn't something that could be done at least until the East Maintenance facility is completed in 2017, if this kind of reduction has even been taken into consideration.
A fly-over option is another possibility but it would be extremely expensive compared to the other options and again may not even be physically possible, depending on the grade and other obstacles; Horner, Kipling Ave. It would also require extensive land acquisition from VIA if the ramp were to be built on the south side. Which would still be preferable to building it on the north side. In addition to reducing available yard space it would be operationally problematic since Milton trains would have to cross over to the south side of the corridor at a later point so as to not occupy the tracks used by westbound Lakeshore trains servicing stops at Mimico & Exhibition on the north side of the corridor.
Track space/time on the Oakville sub would be an even bigger problem going east to Union with local/express/equipment Lakeshore West trains and revenue/equipment VIA trains. The corridor already sees over 200 train movements per day (break down of train movements; http://urbantoronto.ca/forum/showth...n-Express-(Metrolinx-U-C)?p=766327#post766327).
An additional 16 trips may seem insignificant but the problem is the timing of those trips. Between 7:52 am at 8:20, 6 eastbound and 5 westbound GO trains pass by Mimico on the Lakeshore West line. You can tell there already is congestion on this segment as the 7:58 eastbound express out of Oakville takes 5 more minutes (27 mins) to reach Union than the 7:43 eastbound express (22 mins). Extended to 7:42-8:30 you add 2 westbound VIAs, 2 eastbound VIAs and one more westbound GO to the mix. Meanwhile in the same time period you have 3-4 Milton trains making their way to Union (the 7:40, 7:50, 8:00 & 8:15 out of Kipling). Holy congestion batman! I think we can all see why this might be a very bad idea...
The 5th track will be needed for any increases in service. But that's not going to happen until the city commits to rebuilding the Dunn, Jameson & Dowling Ave overpasses (not to mention the widening of 6 other bridges along the corridor). Maybe you can make it happen after that, but then the Milton trains would eat up most of the new found track time. Which brings me back to the question of WHY? Why use up that new found track space on a service for another line that already has enough capacity in its own corridor save for one pinch point.
Now once they implement cab signalling or some other advanced form of train control, such diversions may present an interesting option for differing routes. However GO continues to purchase Bombardier bi-level coaches and MPI locomotives, both of which are currently incompatible with such technology. I suppose a complete overall is possible, but would likely be prohibitively expensive. Most likely the next generation of equipment will be fully compliant with such technology i.e. after electrification, which as we know outside of the UPX is realistically 1-2 decades out from completion for the Lakeshore West, East & Kitchener corridors. Don't think so? Well, it will have only taken about 14 years from conception to implementation for the ARL/UPX to come to fruition. And the electrification of those corridors is a far larger project... only time will time I guess.
rbt
Senior Member
Right. This is a job for a bridge or tunnel to avoid the conflict points.
innsertnamehere
Superstar
^$$$$ for minimal gains.
M II A II R II K
Senior Member
GO makes Quiet Zones permanent
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/transportation/2013/11/17/go_makes_quiet_zones_permanent.html
.....
First piloted in Barrie last February, the Quiet Zones were introduced on the rest of the train lines in July where they have met with approval of 80 per cent of GO riders, according to company surveys.
- Passengers using the upper levels of the coaches are simply asked to keep talking to a minimum and to mute their electronics between 6 a.m. and 9:30 a.m. and between 3 p.m. and 7:30 p.m. That allows riders to catch up on their sleep or their work without the distraction of others’ noise. Riders who want to use their phones or chat to friends are asked to use the lower and mezzanine levels of the trains.
.....
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/transportation/2013/11/17/go_makes_quiet_zones_permanent.html
.....
First piloted in Barrie last February, the Quiet Zones were introduced on the rest of the train lines in July where they have met with approval of 80 per cent of GO riders, according to company surveys.
- Passengers using the upper levels of the coaches are simply asked to keep talking to a minimum and to mute their electronics between 6 a.m. and 9:30 a.m. and between 3 p.m. and 7:30 p.m. That allows riders to catch up on their sleep or their work without the distraction of others’ noise. Riders who want to use their phones or chat to friends are asked to use the lower and mezzanine levels of the trains.
.....
royalrivers
Active Member
Any updates on the CTC install on the GEXR track section. I have seen nothing installed beyond Georgetown and it is suppose to be all done next summer/
royalrivers
Active Member
Guelph must pay $3.15M to Metrolinx by 2016 for GO service
City must pay $3.15M to Metrolinx by 2016 for GO service
via Guelph Mercury - http://www.guelphmercury.com/news-s...ay-3-15m-to-metrolinx-by-2016-for-go-service/
By Chris Herhalt
GUELPH — Metrolinx, the provincial agency in charge of GO Transit, says the City of Guelph's share of the costs to extend commuter rail service into the region is $3.15 million.
And according to a staff report released Thursday, the city must pay up — in cash, transfer of property to the province, provision of in-kind services, or a combination of all three — by March 31, 2016.
"This contribution is a non-negotiable requirement as set by the Province but the contribution agreement does allow for flexibility in the payment terms," the report states.
Metrolinx estimates it spent $18 million extending GO Rail service to Guelph and Kitchener. The estimate includes work performed on Guelph Central Station, Kitchener Station and the construction of a "layover" facility in Kitchener to house trains overnight.
Of the $18 million, the agency decided the City of Guelph is responsible for covering $2.5 million worth of work done to prepare Guelph Central Station for GO service, and $650,000 in costs associated with building a layover facility for trains in Kitchener.
The report recommends that council approve moving $150,000 each year for the next three years into a reserve fund from the city's capital budget "in order to build the funds required to satisfy this commitment."
It is not yet fully clear how the city intends to repay the entire $3.15 million, but the report indicates the city "has begun investigating the option of transferring surplus properties to Metrolinx as partial payment towards this commitment."
Other ways to repay Metrolinx entertained in the report include provision of in-kind ticketing agent services at the station, and winter maintenance.
Any transfer of property to the province must first be approved by council.
The report also states the city will "be responsible for future capital contributions to the GO Train corridor" beyond 2016 and "that these will be assessed consistently with the other participating municipalities."
City must pay $3.15M to Metrolinx by 2016 for GO service
via Guelph Mercury - http://www.guelphmercury.com/news-s...ay-3-15m-to-metrolinx-by-2016-for-go-service/
By Chris Herhalt
GUELPH — Metrolinx, the provincial agency in charge of GO Transit, says the City of Guelph's share of the costs to extend commuter rail service into the region is $3.15 million.
And according to a staff report released Thursday, the city must pay up — in cash, transfer of property to the province, provision of in-kind services, or a combination of all three — by March 31, 2016.
"This contribution is a non-negotiable requirement as set by the Province but the contribution agreement does allow for flexibility in the payment terms," the report states.
Metrolinx estimates it spent $18 million extending GO Rail service to Guelph and Kitchener. The estimate includes work performed on Guelph Central Station, Kitchener Station and the construction of a "layover" facility in Kitchener to house trains overnight.
Of the $18 million, the agency decided the City of Guelph is responsible for covering $2.5 million worth of work done to prepare Guelph Central Station for GO service, and $650,000 in costs associated with building a layover facility for trains in Kitchener.
The report recommends that council approve moving $150,000 each year for the next three years into a reserve fund from the city's capital budget "in order to build the funds required to satisfy this commitment."
It is not yet fully clear how the city intends to repay the entire $3.15 million, but the report indicates the city "has begun investigating the option of transferring surplus properties to Metrolinx as partial payment towards this commitment."
Other ways to repay Metrolinx entertained in the report include provision of in-kind ticketing agent services at the station, and winter maintenance.
Any transfer of property to the province must first be approved by council.
The report also states the city will "be responsible for future capital contributions to the GO Train corridor" beyond 2016 and "that these will be assessed consistently with the other participating municipalities."