News   Nov 22, 2024
 642     1 
News   Nov 22, 2024
 1.1K     5 
News   Nov 22, 2024
 3K     8 

GO Transit: Service thread (including extensions)

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

Well, it's in the order of multiple millions of dollars, but not multiple tens of millions of dollars. I think ML can handle that kind of thing, and successfully get funding, if they were able to get cooperation from CN.

However, if ML has bigger plans and if there is any real agreement with CN, there may be bigger things afoot that would argue for not doing this. In that case, the risk would be asking QP for money, and getting it, but not getting the bigger envelope for the bigger thing.

At the end of the day, we're just amateur coaching from the bleachers.

- Paul
 
^But the fact remains that the siding/side track with the 'side platform' is grossly underutilized at this time, (once a weekday in revenue service) and it offers *as is* a glaring example of how a regime fixated on "efficiencies" is not being very efficient.

Stub Track
A form of side track connected to a running track at one end only and usually protected at the end by some form of bumping post or other solid obstruction.
https://www.csx.com/index.cfm/about-us/company-overview/railroad-dictionary/?i=S

A side platform is a platform positioned to the side of a pair of tracks at a railway station, tram stop, or transitway.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Side_platform
Side Track
A track adjacent to the main track for purposes other than for meeting and passing trains.
https://www.csx.com/index.cfm/about-us/company-overview/railroad-dictionary/?i=S

The situation being discussed prior was for 'terminating service' at that siding and platform, not running through:
Do we know as fact that the Bramalea turnback train will use platform 4?
I was up there this week, and it is not usable. I am guessing that the local will turn back from Main 3 while the express goes by on Track 2.

This siding offers a classic 'last station single track access' with layover at alternate platforms on two tracks at the terminal. When one train arrives, the other leaves, so the single track access for the route is maximized time-wise until such time it's doubled.

Many services, both rail and LRT, are designed this way for economy of build. (length between last two stations on a line is single tracked) As for 'run through' being permitted/supported by added signalling, that would have to happen eventually anyway. But that's superfluous to @reaperexpress ' original proposal and subsequent discussion. If Metrolinx can do this once a weekday, they can do it for more instances. The claim that 'it's not yet possible to support frequent service to Bramalea' is weak, if not untrue.

And here's the switches already extant to do it:
1549597253780.png
https://www.google.ca/maps/place/Br...2d31667cc38677!8m2!3d43.7315479!4d-79.7624177
 
Last edited:
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.

Exactly! It's frustrating how we haven't yet completed the last 700 metres of double track into Bramalea station. It's a small amount of track which would provide big opportunities for bidirectional service:

Screen Shot 2019-02-08 at 19.33.00.png

Blue=CN; Green=Metrolinx; Colours represent the primary user of the track, not necessarily the track owner.

^But the fact remains that the siding/side track with the 'side platform' is grossly underutilized at this time, (once a weekday in revenue service) and it offers *as is* a glaring example of how a regime fixated on "efficiencies" is not being very efficient.

If Metrolinx can do this once a weekday, they can do it for more instances. The claim that 'it's not yet possible to support frequent service to Bramalea' is weak, if not untrue.

My guess is that Metrolinx is in no hurry to add service to the frantically-temporarily-reopened south platform until its elevator access is restored.
The next low-hanging fruit would be to extend the AM Peak Malton-Union trip to originate from Bramalea instead. But until there's elevator access to the south platform, GO can't convert the adjacent Kitchener-based trip to run express from Bramalea to Union because people requiring step-free access wouldn't be able to connect between express and local services. Non-stop Malton-Union would be an option though.

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.

I was just thinking about 'low hanging fruit' but yes I suppose that's the underlying theory. The PM counter-peak express trip which would be produced by the new Union-Bramalea trip would provide a massive benefit to people traveling in that direction.

As far as I can tell, there seems to be a convenient slot for the train to return eastbound, departing 7 minutes after the westbound trip to Kitchener passes through Bramalea and slotting between eastbound UP trains on track 2:
Screen Shot 2019-02-08 at 20.23.12.png


This trip would line up perfectly with the existing 15:50 Route 30 express trip from Kitchener.

Based on the previous train trip with this stopping pattern, the trip would take about 30 minutes from Bramalea to Union, which is a whopping 35 minutes faster than the current 17:15 bus trip which also has the same stopping pattern! That's a game-changing improvement for prospective passengers.

All trips are as per Feb 2019 schedule except proposed 17:25 train trip.
Screen Shot 2019-02-08 at 20.46.08.png
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2019-02-08 at 20.29.22.png
    Screen Shot 2019-02-08 at 20.29.22.png
    9.1 KB · Views: 269
^ Very well presented, I'm still studying possibilities further than what you've articulated, as one shortcoming I can see....albeit it's a trade-off already done on the later down trips from Mt Pleasant, is the mid-day last two runs down 'GO express from Malton to Union' (I presume that's being kept in the impending timetables?) Ostensibly this is for padding, albeit I've yet to be on one of those express runs (blowing past my stop at Bloor, and my having to backtrack) where they didn't arrive at Union with surplus time to spare.
...the trip would take about 30 minutes from Bramalea to Union, which is a whopping 35 minutes faster than the current 17:15 bus trip which also has the same stopping pattern!
This raises a number of possibilities, the obvious I hinted at, inserting Malton and/or Weston and/or Bloor into the run again. If pathing and time permit, there's an obvious benefit to those who wish to alight at those stations, plus it raises the viability of:

Combining the UPX as an 'evening service connector' with a single shuttle train, with as little as a single F59 with two or three coaches (the min required to satisfy accessibility, and a driving coach) to shuttle between Bramalea and Weston, to allow Bramalea to be connected with Union with all stops (perhaps minus Malton) with passengers changing at Weston. Even with the ostensible 7.5 min headway lag and intermediate stops to Union (or reverse) most of that "whopping 35 mins" would still remain. Plus rail delays, at least on Metrolinx owned tracks, are a fraction of the times for buses on highways downtown.

This 'shuttle' would not only do great service for Bramalea, and the bus routes looping there, it would also bolster UPX ridership outside of peak.

There may be some hitches I haven't considered, high v. low platfrom is an obvious one, but there again Weston and Bloor have both! A shuttle using present 'second line' stock biding time on the 'surplus until disposed of siding' could be pressed into service to do this. I'd suggest two or three shuttles, and going all the way down to Union, but that would start to get away from the simplest idea. At present, UPX every fifteen mins isn't ideal, but it works, and has empty seats outside of peak. There's no need to overlap a shuttle any more than effectively extending UPX up to Bramalea. At least at this time. "Every 15 mins to Bramalea" was the promise. It can be met this way.

This would be a *HUGE* coup for the present Overlords of Metrolinx writ Political Masters. They could (and most certainly would) claim "All Day Frequent Service to Bramalea-Union has begun!".

And they could do it with the present infrastructure with perhaps a signal/control/switch tweak. And it would cost dick to do it.

I wonder if Reaper or someone else could figure out if a single shuttle (and an F59 with just two or three coaches could be PDQ accelerating and decelerating) would be suffice to do Bramalea to Weston, including turn-around time? Or if 'sandwiching them' in between the UPX headways isn't even necessary by using the present third track pathing now used for DDs? And if such a service should in fact be more than one shuttle, and regular 15 or 30 min service to Union? Perhaps even further?

The bottom line is that Bramalea "RER" can be done in a bare-bones form now. The excuses for not doing what has been promised for years are running out. And it won't need 'tunnels and another track added' to do it, at least not in an interim form until electrification.

lol, I had a cider with dinner, so pardon my rough formatting. I'll try and tidy it up later. Had to post as Reaper crystallized the beginnings of 'what could be'. And done simply and cheaply.
 
Last edited:
The next low-hanging fruit would be to extend the AM Peak Malton-Union trip to originate from Bramalea instead.

I haven't seen the train cycling from the January or this coming week's changes yet, but that may not be possible. It would be dependent on where that trainset come from, where it might cycle to, and whether it has enough time to get the hell out of everything else's way. Without knowing what train that set is cycling from, it's impossible to say whether an extension to Bramalea is possible.

Dan
 
After having visited Montreal and riding the EXO (formerly AMT) trains, I wonder why Metrolinx insists on quad seating for GO passenger cars.

I found it so nice to be able to stretch out under the seat in front of me, even if every seat was occupied. There also isn't the awkwardness of having to stare at someone the whole ride.

I don't think boarding/disembarking is really impacted since the window seaters usual excuse themselves a little bit before the train comes to a stop and there is usually a line up of people ready to exit once the doors open.
 
After having visited Montreal and riding the EXO (formerly AMT) trains, I wonder why Metrolinx insists on quad seating for GO passenger cars.

I found it so nice to be able to stretch out under the seat in front of me, even if every seat was occupied. There also isn't the awkwardness of having to stare at someone the whole ride.

I don't think boarding/disembarking is really impacted since the window seaters usual excuse themselves a little bit before the train comes to a stop and there is usually a line up of people ready to exit once the doors open.

Airline-style seating would be a better fit for the upper level 'quiet zone' since quad seating is an inherently social arrangement (hence the awkwardness with strangers). For this reason, for example, Dutch Railways (NS) uses a "zoning" system with row seating on the upper level (quiet zone) and quad seating on the lower level (social zone). At 7:00 in this video, they talk about the zoning system in new NS double-deckers (in Dutch with English subtitles).
 
As a tall person, I find the quad seating very awkward and uncomfortable.

But on the other hand, I get nauseous when traveling backwards, so having the option to sit on the direction of travel is a good thing, because the trains don't turn around.
 
It currently comes from the Bradford train that reaches Union at 6:33, leaving for Malton around 6:55 on the heels of the 6:28 Stouffville arrival leaving for Mount Pleasant to do the 9:00 from there.

In that case, it should have loads of time to find a time slot to run to Bramalea. If I recall, the schedule used to give deadheads to Bramalea about 55 minutes to allow for the train to hold for a revenue move or other traffic.

Dan
 
As a tall person, I find the quad seating very awkward and uncomfortable.

But on the other hand, I get nauseous when traveling backwards, so having the option to sit on the direction of travel is a good thing, because the trains don't turn around.
In most cases with paired seating, half the seats face in each direction. So you would still have the option of sitting in the direction of travel as long as those seats weren't full yet.
 
In most cases with paired seating, half the seats face in each direction. So you would still have the option of sitting in the direction of travel as long as those seats weren't full yet.
Certainly that is how it is done on the UP trains.
 
Airline-style seating would be a better fit for the upper level 'quiet zone' since quad seating is an inherently social arrangement (hence the awkwardness with strangers). For this reason, for example, Dutch Railways (NS) uses a "zoning" system with row seating on the upper level (quiet zone) and quad seating on the lower level (social zone). At 7:00 in this video, they talk about the zoning system in new NS double-deckers (in Dutch with English subtitles).
It's too late and perhaps inept to discuss re-arranging the seating arrangement in the GO DDs, but for the upcoming (ostensibly) RER stock, bench seating must once again be considered. I'm not a great fan of sitting sideways to travel, but bench seating has a lot of advantages for shorter haul travel, more standing room, and much easier ingress and exit, not to mention access to the seats themselves. Many if not most of the latest models in other cities for both single and double deck have a combination of both. Here's a unique way of doing it which shows a lot of promise: (BTW: Notice the *real plush seats*...what a concept)
NSW Railways Current Affairs and Archives

A here's a vid on it:
 

Back
Top