GO Transit: Service thread (including extensions)

[crs1026]

^Once that fourth platform is finished at Bramalea, it should be used intensively. The schedule should have multiple turnback trains following on the blicks of multiple express trains. We have to wean more local commuters off UPE, by intensifying GO frequency.

- Paul

 

[crs1026]

It is right there in their announcement not sure how much more factual you can get at this point.

So it is! Thanks. I bet there will be some scurrying up there this week. The ‘temporary’ statement, plus the comment about not all doors opening, is interesting, to the point of implying desperation.

- Paul

 

[TOareaFan]

^Once that fourth platform is finished at Bramalea, it should be used intensively. The schedule should have multiple turnback trains following on the blicks of multiple express trains. We have to wean more local commuters off UPE, by intensifying GO frequency.

- Paul

Why do we have to wean people off of UP? It is well used but other than event times I don’t get the sense it is overcrowded.

 

[steveintoronto]

the comment about not all doors opening, is interesting, to the point of implying desperation.

Which implies shid happening.

Time to review Houlihan's Law: What's that? Houlihan thought Murphy was an optimist. One stifled hiccup, and this all goes south. I like the intent, but just know this is on a knife's edge. Just look outside right now to see what will tip it over.

 

[crs1026]

Why do we have to wean people off of UP? It is well used but other than event times I don’t get the sense it is overcrowded.

It is often overcrowded at rush hour. Sure, at other times, it runs with plenty of available capacity. But we need enough capacity especialy at rush hour to not be a deterrent to potential airport customers. We do want the airport business to be able to grow.

- Paul

 

[steveintoronto]

It is often overcrowded at rush hour. Sure, at other times, it runs with plenty of available capacity. But we need enough capacity especialy at rush hour to not be a deterrent to potential airport customers. We do want the airport business to be able to grow.

- Paul

Airport travellers are given priority boarding at Union, and needless to say, by default at Pearson. The taxpayer pays the bulk of airport travellers' fare. It's only 'fair' they reap equal benefit. If UPX is overcrowded at peak, then it's obvious the route needs more stock, and sharing of the tracks most used by it. And a planned extension of a service leg into Bramalea.

 

[steveintoronto]

Does a new platform at Bramalea potentially enable some all day service? Given all the crowding you'd think they would be trying to get SOMETHING going even if it's hourly.

In conjunction with the mid-day hourly service to Mt Pleasant. The pathings UPX use are grossly underutilized. The fifteen minute schedule leaves a lot of potential for local service between those extant paths.

Oddly, with all the talk of "efficiency" plus the continual ridiculous separate fare system for UPX, not a word from the Overlords or Metrolinx brass on fully assimilating UPX into GO. They've got one foot in, where's the other?

 

[smallspy]

Does a new platform at Bramalea potentially enable some all day service? Given all the crowding you'd think they would be trying to get SOMETHING going even if it's hourly.

Only if the service is short-turned there. The "new" platform is on a stub-ended track.

Although with a little bit of additional track and a couple of signal rearrangements, they could certainly make far more use of it.

Dan

 

[steveintoronto]

The "new" platform is on a stub-ended track.

Unless it's been changed since the Fall, that track was connected as a run-through at the west end. Perhaps I'm mistaken as to the "new platform" but if it's the one that has existed for some time unused, and now being extended and better connected. The track used to be a stub, but is now connected if it's the one I'm recollecting. I made a point to check for that last few times through there as it's struck me as being odd that that degree of under-utilization has existed for so long.

Perhaps there's now yet another track being added to the south side of the most southerly platform?
https://www.google.ca/maps/place/Ma...2e85d26b185829!8m2!3d43.7210303!4d-79.6419698

 

[crs1026]

^There is a connection at the west end, yes, but it’s a manual switch that is not controlled by the RTC and requires someone to get off the train, unlock it, and then re-lock it after the movement passes. Verbal permission is needed from the RTC to use it, and to proceed on the main line. That is not suitable for GO train operations. Also, iirc the platform segment of the track is unsignalled, which is fine for turnbacks but one would want to address this if the track were to be used for through movements.
The limiting factor for 2WAD at the moment is the time it takes for a train to travel from Bramalea to Mount Pleasant and then return, because there is no place for two GO trains to pass in that zone, without impacting on CN. As Dan alluded, some added switches at Brampton and Peel, and a bit of track east of Bramalea, might improve things. The Third tracik through downtown Brampton is needed for more frequent service.

- Paul

 

[steveintoronto]

^ Then the answer to this is "yes":

Does a new platform at Bramalea potentially enable some all day service? Given all the crowding you'd think they would be trying to get SOMETHING going even if it's hourly.

I take his intent to mean to/from Bramalea, not through it. Although there's assurances from some that GO have more than enough rolling stock, the opposite appears to be the case when they have to rob Peter to pay Paul with the two coaches presently on tour and ostensibly back again from Lakeshore.

Even if the signalling and control *effectively* render that through connected track as "stub end" for GO (last time I checked it was still embargoed for any use, that must now have changed), the limitation appears to be availability of rolling stock rather than the physical limitations of track.

I believe that was the basis of @reaperexpress ' attempt at maximizing utilization of what stock there is rather than see it down-running empty.

Another interesting piece is that the truncated 16:32 trip will now use the long-disused south platform at Bramalea:

https://www.gotransit.com/en/trip-planning/go-service-updates/train-schedule-changes
It's the only train all day to use this platform, so it has all the time in the world to sit and wait for an appropriate gap in train traffic to head east. It seems like a missed opportunity to have it run as a deadhead rather than a counter-peak express - it would be super helpful for people making connections at Bramalea, such as people coming in on Route 30 from Kitchener.

What crossed my mind to be added to that is something I've asked GO supervisors on, and that's looping the 30 bus at Aberfoyle to connect with passengers out of Guelph. (either the 29 or 48 routes) I'm told by two who concur that the time penalty for doing so would be "around ten minutes". If as Reaper states, the leaving slot for this train isn't critical, that particular connecting 30 bus could make a huge difference to even more travelling eastward by bus from the K/W/Guelph region. The alternatives to getting into west end Toronto are brutal otherwise. This would echo the now discontinued 39? bus that used to do this express run to/from Guelph/Bramalea. It would maximize the use of the 30 run. Believe it or not, even with the slow Hwy 6 stretch, the 39 bus would arrive in Guelph a minute or so sooner than the train's scheduled running time on the evening run. Unfortunately, the bus was never advertised, and ran almost empty most times I used it. Times have changed though.

 

[Allandale25]

^ I'm pretty sure there are signals on the east side of the platform where this "stub" track reconnects to the Halton Sub?

 

[crs1026]

^ I'm pretty sure there are signals on the east side of the platform where this "stub" track reconnects to the Halton Sub?

There are, yes. The eastward signal authorises an eastward train to leave that stub track. The issue is when a westward train is routed to enter that stub track. Because the siding is not "bonded" (ie not wired to detect occupancy), the signal indication that the train is governed by is more restrictive, and the train has to enter under more restrictive rules, because once it enters that zone it "disappears" from the signalling. If a previous train had entered the siding, and a second train were routed towards it, the signalling would allow the second train to enter the first train's space. (The RTC's console "remembers" that the first train was there, but that doesn't provide fail-safe assurance to keep the two trains apart).

The same thing was true at West Harbour when it first openend, and the signalling there is now upgraded to protect trains in the depot, and to allow them to enter the station at a higher speed. Same with the stub track at Pickering.

If I were ML I would reconfigure the tracks east of the platform, signal the west end of the siding, and bond/signal the siding proper, so that two GO trains could meet and pass using only Track 3 and the "stub" track without encroaching on the two northward tracks that CN needs for freight. That would make a couple of things possible, one being turnback service to Bramalea interleaved with the existing through trains.

- Paul

 

[Fritter]

If I were ML I would reconfigure the tracks east of the platform, signal the west end of the siding, and bond/signal the siding proper, so that two GO trains could meet and pass using only Track 3 and the "stub" track without encroaching on the two northward tracks that CN needs for freight. That would make a couple of things possible, one being turnback service to Bramalea interleaved with the existing through trains.

Is this reconfiguration relatively quick easy process, or is it a complicated thing? I'm just thinking of the chances of being done.

 

[Allandale25]

There are, yes. The eastward signal authorises an eastward train to leave that stub track. The issue is when a westward train is routed to enter that stub track. Because the siding is not "bonded" (ie not wired to detect occupancy), the signal indication that the train is governed by is more restrictive, and the train has to enter under more restrictive rules, because once it enters that zone it "disappears" from the signalling. If a previous train had entered the siding, and a second train were routed towards it, the signalling would allow the second train to enter the first train's space. (The RTC's console "remembers" that the first train was there, but that doesn't provide fail-safe assurance to keep the two trains apart).

The same thing was true at West Harbour when it first openend, and the signalling there is now upgraded to protect trains in the depot, and to allow them to enter the station at a higher speed. Same with the stub track at Pickering.

If I were ML I would reconfigure the tracks east of the platform, signal the west end of the siding, and bond/signal the siding proper, so that two GO trains could meet and pass using only Track 3 and the "stub" track without encroaching on the two northward tracks that CN needs for freight. That would make a couple of things possible, one being turnback service to Bramalea interleaved with the existing through trains.

- Paul

Thanks for clarifying!