GO Transit: Service thread (including extensions)

[johntauren]

Odd ... I'd thought I'd seen the odd level crossing on a very rural expressway before in the Prairies somewhere.

The Hanlon Parkway (Highway 6) has a level crossing between Woodlawn and Speedvale - though I suppose that piece of the Hanlon isn't a "freeway".

When was Autoroute 31 grade separated from the old CP Trois-Rivieres Subdivision? I've got a vague feeling that used to be a level crossing ... though perhaps A31 was a tollway not a freeway back then ...

The 406 had a level crossing at its south end that has only been replaced in the last few months.
There's a level crossing on Autoroute 20 near Saint-Hyacinthe.

They do exist, but are very rare, and probably predate such rules.

 

[vegeta_skyline]

Because generally they are the same, or an application to adopt them won't meet much resistance. And they are easily publicly accessible, unlike Transport Canada.

I'm scratching my head where in Canada there is currently ANY operating speed over 177 km/hr. Presumably the current Transport Canada rules predate the current FRA rules, and have not been modified, because no one has applied to run faster than 177 km/hr.

Generally the same, but not exact. Which was the point in referencing that particular regulation. It's just incorrect to state that FRA regulations prevent such and such from happening when the FRA has absolutely no authority in Canada. Also, our regulations are accessible and publicly available on Transport Canada's website.

 

[mdrejhon]

The 406 had a level crossing at its south end that has only been replaced in the last few months.
There's a level crossing on Autoroute 20 near Saint-Hyacinthe.

They do exist, but are very rare, and probably predate such rules.

I was driving on a 65mph freeway on a recent roadtrip that brought me through three states, and to my surprise, I drove over a level railroad crossing -- in a 65mph freeway zone! I had never seen such a thing before; I had seen level stop sign intersections of minor farmland streets intersecting a 65mph freeway, but not a railroad.

 

[innsertnamehere]

There are a couple in Moncton too.

 

[ShonTron]

I was driving on a 65mph freeway on a recent roadtrip that brought me through three states, and to my surprise, I drove over a level railroad crossing -- in a 65mph freeway zone! I had never seen such a thing before; I had seen level stop sign intersections of minor farmland streets intersecting a 65mph freeway, but not a railroad.

The Sûreté du Québec has to assist whenever the Autoroute 20 crossing is used, and it is very rare. Highway 400 used to cross the CN Beeton Subdivision at grade near Innisfil Beach Road, it was bridged in the 1960s, but today, the Beeton Sub is abandoned at about that point.

It's not an Interstate, but US 127 north of Lansing, a near-freeway with a 65 MPH speed limit, has a level crossing, protected by both lights and bells and traffic signals, and buses/trucks are exempt from stopping. They're rare, but they exist.

https://www.google.ca/maps/place/73...m2!3m1!1s0x88225cd8ad83f801:0x576aafa436de472

 

[vegeta_skyline]

The standards are for new crossings not old ones. Like I said the regulations can be found on Transport Canada's website. That specific regulation can be found here; http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-2014-275/page-7.html#h-13

Besides that this discourse about highway crossings is certainly not relevant to the point I was making;

Generally the same, but not exact. Which was the point in referencing that particular regulation. It's just incorrect to state that FRA regulations prevent such and such from happening when the FRA has absolutely no authority in Canada. Also, our regulations are accessible and publicly available on Transport Canada's website.

Also, if the right party comes into power changes towards a more European system could happen much sooner than they would in the US. But we're likely to lag behind the US in regulatory changes as long as the conservatives are in power as they are very much content to let the industry regulate themselves. Which means the "old guard" and the two big freight companies will continue to run the show/drive the agenda and Metrolinx is still only a bit player in the 'game'. Though for the record, before someone else jumps to any more conclusions, I'm not advocating for or against them in making that statement. Although I don't approve of their handling of the matter, there is more to consider than just rail issues when it comes to federal governance.

 

[nfitz]

Generally the same, but not exact. Which was the point in referencing that particular regulation. It's just incorrect to state that FRA regulations prevent such and such from happening when the FRA has absolutely no authority in Canada. Also, our regulations are accessible and publicly available on Transport Canada's website.

Are you saying I'm wrong that they can speed up service between Guelph and Kitchener without building grade separations everywhere? Because that was my point.

 

[vegeta_skyline]

Are you saying I'm wrong that they can speed up service between Guelph and Kitchener without building grade separations everywhere? Because that was my point.

Your wrong in using information referenced from the FRA to back up your point. And I wasn't solely directing my comment at you which is why I quoted your post after my initial statement about;

I'm not sure why everyone keeps bringing up and quoting FRA rules

Lets just say I'm tired of seeing people do that when we have our own governing body - not to mention its misleading to others.

 

[vegeta_skyline]

As for speeding up service between Guelph and Kitchener, yes you can cut travel time without grade separating everything, to a point. But above a certain point, you would need to grade separate. That point would largely be when track speeds are increased above 110mph, which is a moot point right now because the highest speed currently allowable is on class 5 track at 95mph with an exception for LRC equipment at 100mph and I highly doubt RER equipment would operate above 110mph. But certain crossings may require grade separations at a lower speed based on sight line requirements. And while its not a TC regulation, once the road exposure index of a crossing exceeds 200,000(number of trains x number of vehicles using the crossing) a grade seperation is warranted and if remedial action is not taken there's going to be increased local NIMBYism against service increases.

 

[mdrejhon]

Interesring way of calculating whether a grade crossing is warranted. Those few dozen of Burloak car commuters look mighty displeased at my Lakeshore West GO train earlier today at the large level crossing. The road exposure index of that one must already be getting into the red zone soon, if not already deep into it at rush hour. Fortunately, that one looks like trenching goes to the road rather than the railroad, so no grade change to the rail.

 

[smallspy]

Interesring way of calculating whether a grade crossing is warranted. Those few dozen of Burloak car commuters look mighty displeased at my Lakeshore West GO train earlier today at the large level crossing. The road exposure index of that one must already be getting into the red zone soon, if not already deep into it at rush hour. Fortunately, that one looks like trenching goes to the road rather than the railroad, so no grade change to the rail.

Transport Canada calculates the exposure index by multiplying the average number of cars daily by the average number of train movements over the level crossing. It's been a while since I last found numbers, but I suspect that almost every single level crossing on both of the Lakeshore lines that still exists is over the 1 million number that TC uses to label a crossing as "critical" (200,000 is the threshold for which they recommend the community should start looking at grade separating the crossing). As of 1995, with far less rail service (and likely less auto traffic) than today, there were a couple of grade crossings in Scarborough with an index of over 1 million.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[gweed123]

Interesring way of calculating whether a grade crossing is warranted. Those few dozen of Burloak car commuters look mighty displeased at my Lakeshore West GO train earlier today at the large level crossing. The road exposure index of that one must already be getting into the red zone soon, if not already deep into it at rush hour. Fortunately, that one looks like trenching goes to the road rather than the railroad, so no grade change to the rail.

Yup. Burloak is probably the biggest grade separation needed on the Lakeshore West line. There are a few others still to do be done, but that's one of the few, if not the only, concession road that is still an at-grade crossing.

 

[mdrejhon]

I would imagine that electricified 15-minute (and more frequent during peak) GO RER corridors would have be 100% grade separated. I don't see any way to feasibly keep grade crossings even at minor roads, when gates have to stay closed more than half the time during peak period in both directions. Fortunately, the 13.5 billon budget should have room to pretty much pay for the remaining few level grade separations that still exist in the planned RER corridors.

Being completely free of level road crossing rules, it will be massively easier (from "mission impossible" down to "mission barely possible") to lobby waivers from Transport Canada, to get away from heavy rail requirements and give GO more trainset flexibility. Hello, sleek European-style trains!

 

[johntauren]

There's a lot of level crossings to be addressed for service all the way to Kitchener, especially past Georgetown. The Acton station is literally at level crossings at both ends.
Even through Brampton and Mississauga, there's still a few to be addressed. Torbram Rd is currently working on grade separation on the line, and that is still a year away. That leaves 3 in downtown Brampton (John St, Mill St, and a railroad crossing), and one in old Malton, plus anything beyond Mount Pleasant.

 

[mdrejhon]

There's a lot of level crossings to be addressed for service all the way to Kitchener, especially past Georgetown. The Acton station is literally at level crossings at both ends.
Even through Brampton and Mississauga, there's still a few to be addressed. Torbram Rd is currently working on grade separation on the line, and that is still a year away. That leaves 3 in downtown Brampton (John St, Mill St, and a railroad crossing), and one in old Malton, plus anything beyond Mount Pleasant.

Agreed. But they're only initially electrifying to Bramalea in the announced 10-year plan. There will be no more grade crossings to Bramalea thanks to the Georgetown Corridor megaproject. For the rest of the RER corridors, there's not very many elsewhere either. From what it looks, very soon, there will be even fewer remaining level crossings electric-RER-network-wide than the number of level crossings that the ongoing Georgetown project single-handedly removed.

That's why I think there's no grade separations anymore wherever electric GO RER runs. This greatly simplifies the RER plan.