GO Transit: Service thread (including extensions)

[Allandale25]

There will be so much lock-in to electrification by 2018 that it will be difficult to cancel it completely. Scaleback and some delays, possible. Complete cancel, probably not.

Excellent points. Although this is the same party that filled in the Eglinton West subway when it was under construction, so I think there could still be some trepidation.

That being said, RER will have a positive impact in the 905 so it's hard to see why they would cancel it outright but I agree they could slow it down. I also wonder if they'll avoid saying they would touch RER so they don't fall into the trap of the Liberals saying the PCs hate transit entirely and will cancel everything. Maybe they'll stick to something small like rolling Metrolinx into the MTO and claiming it's an "efficiency". It's hard to say at this point and all of this is speculative and pre-judging what they'll run on in 2018. Brown has been careful up until now to stay pretty quiet on specific policies or on the transit file, other than his comments relating to LRT in Hamilton and of course tolls. As best I can tell, other than the AG's report on Metrolinx, the party hasn't specifically stated much about RER, LRTs on Finch/Sheppard, the Brampton LRT situation, etc.

Just as a reference point, here's a CBC article from 2014 that spoke about the PC platform in that election:

The PC plan takes a different path. It's spread over 25 years with up to $2 billion dedicated each year. All-day, two-way GO service is there. LRTs are out, subway expansion in Toronto is in, focusing on an east-west express line as well as expanding subways north in to York Region and Scarborough.

The PC plan is unique in it calls for an overhaul in how transit is managed, calling for a merger of GO Transit, LRTs, subways and major highways into one transportation entity.

It's a departure from what Metrolinx has in mind, and with some key elements missing or removed, some experts are warning it could be a disaster (more on that later).

 

[steveintoronto]

The PC plan is unique in it calls for an overhaul in how transit is managed, calling for a merger of GO Transit, LRTs, subways and major highways into one transportation entity.

There's a lot to be said for that *with massive provisos*! It has to be done right, and has been done in many World Cities. I doubt we have the cajones in any level of government in this nation right now to implement what is so obviously necessary.

In the event, the Brown Shirts will probably do well to not bring up transit at all, not because that's good policy, quite the opposite, but because this is Wynne's election to lose, not anyone else's to win.

I'm so cynical on how policy has been delivered by QP no matter which regime for generations, I have doubts any one party can be much worse than another.

As to combining *trans-muni-border-transit*, (including highway express buses) it is long past due to be part of a 'Super-Region Government', an upper tier that combines all of the regions in the GTHA and devolves the present amalgamations back to local civic government. Transportation and transit are two of the most pressing issues to doing that.

Local bus services would be back in the domain of local civic governments, they can tax and run them as they wish, (including contracting the present TTC to do it for them, the TTC would remain as the old City of Toronto's bus/streetcar provider) and Scarberians can play in their own sandbox, and leave down-towners in theirs. There would be much greater balance of municipal sizes than at present, Miss and Brampton being roughly the size of a de-amalged City of Toronto, and so on. As to how representation of the voters is done on the Super Region level is open to question. There's basically two different ways done at present (direct and secondary), that's another discussion, but the status quo is doomed to fail, and has for some time now.

It's well past time to integrate fares and management of the systems used to move passengers regionally.

 

[jje1000]

The main problem with the PC plan though I heard, is that the subways actually earn a profit and thus partially subsidize the bus routes.

As such, the Conservatives were plucking out the money-making portions of the TTC while leaving the money-losing portions to the city.

In my opinion, any sort of governmental uploading should be done as a whole- it should be all or nothing.

 

[TOareaFan]

In the event, the Brown Shirts will probably do well to not bring up transit at all, not because that's good policy, quite the opposite, but because this is Wynne's election to lose, not anyone else's to win.

Interesting and, likely, inappropriate Godwins Law event (IMO)

 

[reaperexpress]

Nitpick - the two sidings on the line are at Bradford and a short one at Finch. There are two sections of double track located along the line, one at York University Station (between Snider South (12.1) and Steeles (12.9)) and one north of Maple (between Teston (18.5) and Kirby(20.7)).

The new section of double track will extend the current one from Steeles to Concord (16.6).

True. I guess I ignored the siding at York University because as of today all trains make all stops, which would preclude its use by passenger trains given that the station only has a single side platform. Of course there's nothing physically preventing trains from operating express in the other direction, but I guess they'd rather just wait a few months until construction is complete.

 

[TOareaFan]

What one line do you expect would be electrified? And couldnt a PC Government cancel any contracts for things like substations since shovels wouldn't be in the ground until 2019?

This keeps coming up for some reason....the answer (whether there are shovels in the ground or not) is "yes".....we have a long history of governments changing plans and cancelling contracts when governments change (regardless of which party is leaving and which is arriving in office)...heck we have a (albeit shorter) list of contracts being cancelled to avoid change.

 

[rbt]

The main problem with the PC plan though I heard, is that the subways actually earn a profit and thus partially subsidize the bus routes.

Is that true if 90% of the riders won't show up without the bus? TTC could demand virtually any cut of the farebox revenue because the subway operations recovery would heavily depend on them running service. If TTC cuts bus service, the city saves money but Metrolinx (as subway owner) would be knee deep in expenses that don't change with a decrease in ridership. Subway costs (both operations and capital) are largely fixed. That's actually the main argument for running 5 minute frequencies at midnight as running 10 minute frequencies saves a small fraction of the cost of keeping the subway open.

Second to that, the calculation you are referring to is operations only. The subway is very capital intense and eats ~$300M per year in heavy maintenance work (known as SOGR). On a total cost basis the city would probably save money if Metrolinx completely took over the subway.

 

[smallspy]

Would 55 trainsets be enough for 30 minutes each way on all lines?

If the track was in place? Yes.

The trouble with that however is that several of the lines run better than half-hourly service in the rush hours - that's where the need for more trains comes from. So even if the track was in place, you would have to worsen service on several lines at rush hours in order to run half-hourly service.

Latest 'Info to GO' says 505 buses, 139 of them double deckers. Realize that's maybe different than what's in service but just providing the stat.

It also dates back to September, when they only had a dozen of the new SuperLo double-deck buses on hand. They now have over 35 in service, with a couple of others going through the commissioning process.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[mdrejhon]

The trouble with that however is that several of the lines run better than half-hourly service in the rush hours - that's where the need for more trains comes from. So even if the track was in place, you would have to worsen service on several lines at rush hours in order to run half-hourly service.

In one of the earlier GO schedules, one opposite-direction Lakeshore train was omitted (or started at a more innermost station), so you had a 1 hour wait between Lakeshore trains if you were trying to commute against peak.

It does not seem to be the case anymore, but back sometime in 2014, I had noticed a 1 hour gap at one point. I can't remember if it was Union-Aldershot or Aldershot-Union, but it was opposite direction relative to peak. I guess that's fixed due to some extra train sets coming online since 2014?

 

[ssiguy2]

All these increases in GO/RER till 2025 and going no where but up from there is all the more reason to make the DRL as part of RER. A standard third rail subway line will not do a damn thing about reducing the passenger and train congestion and eventual overcapacity at Union. GO/RER is going to have to have an alternative route thru the downtown core which means tunneling. The city will never be able to afford a standard subway and RER subway in the core so it should be part of RER.

RER is a long term project and Metrolinx should not plan for 6,000 trains a day but rather 16,000.

 

[mdrejhon]

RER is a long term project and Metrolinx should not plan for 6,000 trains a week but rather 16,000.

Fixed it for ya. The Metrolinx plan is to scale to 6,000 a week.

 

[micheal_can]

All these increases in GO/RER till 2025 and going no where but up from there is all the more reason to make the DRL as part of RER. A standard third rail subway line will not do a damn thing about reducing the passenger and train congestion and eventual overcapacity at Union. GO/RER is going to have to have an alternative route thru the downtown core which means tunneling. The city will never be able to afford a standard subway and RER subway in the core so it should be part of RER.

RER is a long term project and Metrolinx should not plan for 6,000 trains a day but rather 16,000.

In order to do that, you would need a crosstown GO line that intersects with the Yonge line. If RER is done right, and is priced right, it should ease the crunch.

 

[jje1000]

What about running GO service on the old CP line through Midtown Toronto? Unfortunately it won't intersect the Relief Line downtown, but in conjunction with the Relief Line Long, there should be some capacity for people to feed onto Yonge and Spadina.

Really, a London Crosstown-style project (with its associated complexity and cost) should be the last resort after you exhaust all other existing infrastructure options.

 

[steveintoronto]

Crossrail was to achieve what Toronto already has (and London used to have, via the Metropolitan Railway) and that's 'run-through'. Toronto never had the limitations placed on many European capitals: (And some eastern US ones): Steam trains had to terminate at the city limits.

To use Crossrail as a comparison misses the point. London lost her 'run-throughs' (at least East to West) (Snow Hill Tunnel does it north south as well as Wapping Tunnel to the east) when the Metropolitan was mostly absorbed as The Underground.

What Toronto needs is a by-pass, not a new run-through, and there is an alternative to tunneling, albeit I've not read of it: Double stacking at least a pair of rails above a pair of existing ones and around the south of the shed at Union to rejoin the main alignment west of the Don so RER can travel up the Don or to the east across it. A pair of extant tracks to the west of Union would have to be lowered incrementally to allow a double track stack to clear the bridges until the upper tracks reattain grade at Bathurst, with the elevated section wye-ing at both ends to allow RER to cross over other tracks before ramping back to normal track grade. Ostensibly the tracks could split into three or four south of the shed above the freight by-pass tracks to serve three elevated platforms. It may be unsightly, but the chances of cash-strapped backwards Toronto and Ontario doing a 'Big Dig' are virtually zero. Meantime Union is saturated.

Something I can't find anyone to answer is why Union still has three freight by-pass tracks? Why is there any freight running through there at all? If the lines are embargoed as passenger only, a height restrictive gauge can be applied that would allow only shorter stock (e.g: EMUs) to run on double stacked sections, and greatly alleviate the congestion through Union. Sound implausible to block some traffic? It's done at the Airport Spur. Pantographs on electric stock can compress quite low to get through tunnels, same can be done on stacked track.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

In one of the earlier GO schedules, one opposite-direction Lakeshore train was omitted (or started at a more innermost station), so you had a 1 hour wait between Lakeshore trains if you were trying to commute against peak.

It does not seem to be the case anymore, but back sometime in 2014, I had noticed a 1 hour gap at one point. I can't remember if it was Union-Aldershot or Aldershot-Union, but it was opposite direction relative to peak. I guess that's fixed due to some extra train sets coming online since 2014?

There's still the one hour gap in the late afternoon on Lakeshore East from oshawa to pickering.