anb
Active Member
I don't find that surprising at all. The terminus for future 15 min service barely even touches the core of Brampton and the 2 stations that are more deep into the city are really under-utilized for what they are.
|
|
|
GO Transit: Service thread (including extensions)
- Thread starter drum118
- Start date
ARG1
Senior Member
Although if the issue is based off staff, I fail to see what cutting the London service would do.
Pros: You save money... that's about it. Since the morning trip is so early, you can't strategically cut down the London trip to reposition a staff member elsewhere, and as such there's no benefit to cutting the service in the midst of a staff shortage. The only thing I can think of is maybe you can use that staff member to potentially run a counterpeak service in the evening? That's about it though.
Cons: You completely kill any faith in the extension. You're basically admitting that the pilot failed, and you potentially kill any chance to bring GO to London anytime in the near future.
In other words, even if we ignore the politicking, there is quite a bit of logic to keep the London service.
Urban Sky
Senior Member
I'm heartened to see that there are also people in this forum who actually grasp that a major metric of efficiency is how many revenue-km you can extract from a single shift. This is why unit labor costs (e.g. per revenue-km or per seat-mile) are lowest for metro services (which operate at high frequencies throughout the day) and highest for how most Commuter Rail networks still operate in North America (which is several inbound trips in the morning and outbound trips in the afternoon, as exemplified by GO's Richmond Hill and Milton services).
Which is why in times of staff shortage (and especially in times where overall demand is low), you would be much more inclined to cancel a 28-km-run like Bramalea-Union (which primarily runs to relieve overcrowding on the Kitchener-Union trains) and make the Express trains all-stop (which is exactly what happened yesterday) than a 195-km-run like London-Union. But, like in all corners of society, arguing against the conspiracy theorists among passenger rail fans (which are deeply entrenched in their believes that any changes to the frequency of trains are determined by political, not commercial or operational priorities) is like fighting wind mills...
Last edited:
Krypto98
Active Member
Essentially what happened with the London train (trip 3760) and the local trip from Bramalea (3110) is that they were merged together (3710). This makes it so 3 less people are needed to operate an extra trip. Also I've taken 3110 from Bramalea several times and it's usually completely empty with maybe maximum 45 people on board. Why hasn't the TorontoStar complained that only 15 people are getting on at Bramalea for a train. While the London train being added might be seen as political I can't help but think that the TorontoStars article is also political. Pre-pandemic, Kitchener Go's ridership was 320ish with 8 round trips. This averages to 30-40 riders per train
There are also few crews qualified at the moment the London trains. I see the same Engineer on the afternoon run almost every time.
Also a reason off peak trips to Kitchener were shortened was that the next trip would require a deadhead which means an extra crew.
Last edited:
Deadpool X
Senior Member
They drove all the way to Finch! Not even Vaughan or Downsview? Someone needs to give that person a transit map.
reaperexpress
Senior Member
When I suggested that the London trip/extension would be a likely target for a cut, I was simply looking at the trips which carry the fewest passengers per staff-hour. Hardly a deeply-entranched belief or conspiracy theory...
To operate the AM London-Kitchener component of the London service, the crew needs to drive (a car) 1.5h from Kitchener to London, set up the train (0.5h?) and drive 2.2h back to Kitchener. That's 4 hours of crew time to carry 30 passengers one-way. In that same time, they could operate 5 trips (2.5 round trips) from Union to Bramalea, each of which carries more than 30 passengers each way. The peak-direction components of those trips are not a huge loss given that ridership is currently very low and the former express trains are now operating local, but the counter-peak components of those trips were a big time saver for passengers connecting to other services at Bramalea (e.g. the Kitchener bus, 407 buses).
Last edited:
smallspy
Senior Member
There are lots of crews who are qualified.
But the crew that runs the afternoon stretch is quite senior, and isn't getting unseated anytime soon.
Dan
TOareaFan
Superstar
I am a bit confused.....the future level of service at some undetermined date explains why someone who lives in Brampton and has for a long time is unaware of the current level of service? I am not buying that.
Also 1) your first point about Bramalea "barely" touches the core of Brampton...it does not touch the core (to the extent there is one) at all...but since the core is so miniscule i am not sure that matters at all.....2) the other two stations are underutilized? Aren't all 3 Brampton stations in the top 4 of boardings on the line? Maybe even the top 3? 3) Mt Pleasant is no more "deeper into the city" than Bramalea is...it is just on a different "edge" of the city and, like Bramalea will see tons of growth around it.
reaperexpress
Senior Member
Yes, according to the April-December 2019 ridership map the three busiest stations on the Kitchener line (excluding Union) were:
1. Mount Pleasant
2. Bramalea
3. Brampton
Bramalea was usually #1 but perhaps some ridership temporarily shifted to the other two Brampton station due to the construction there
innsertnamehere
Superstar
many of my extended family in Durham Region still thought that the lakeshore lines ran hourly and had only 1-2 express services at rush hour as of 2 years ago.
anb
Active Member
Yes pardon my mistake, I meant that it doesn't touch the core at all, despite it being fairly close (as in 5-10 min drive/bus ride), to BCC. As for the underutilization, its more apparent with the train service they get. I get that the local Brampton Transit has more control over downtown Brampton and Mount Pleasant terminals, but Bramalea also has a mix of GO buses and trains that are among the most frequent across the entire network. If there were more GO buses heading to these 2 stations it wouldn't be as empty as they usually are throughout the day in terms of the service that GO provides. During the off peak hours, there are usually more people getting on from Bramalea onwards in comparison to the other 2, although that has slightly changed within the past year, but the trains would still be nearly empty until getting closer to Toronto. Mount Pleasant is more surrounded with the city suburb aspect compared to Bramalea's industrial setting and would probably stay ahead of it no matter how much growth the latter gets.
TOareaFan
Superstar
TRONto
Active Member
We supposedly have a lack of industrial space in the GTA so I don't know if this is a wise move. It may be a stealing from Paul to give to Peter situation.View attachment 374474
The city has this in front of the province looking for an MZO....they are looking to, quite dramatically, change the landscape around the station
The proponent suggests they could, over time, house 12,500 directly across the street from the GO station.
I hope that if this happens, it is built with walkability in mind.
12 500 people sounds pretty low from what is pictured.
crs1026
Senior Member
I will leave my mind open about how pleasant a streetscape the development can become.... but the walk to the GO station, across Steeles with its width and heavy traffic, and then across that huge open parking space, is everything that's wrong about how GO stations (and arterial road crossings) are laid out.
- Paul
TOareaFan
Superstar
There is a general shortage of industrial space across the country....but the stuff that is on the northwest corner of that intersection (the land looking to be rezoned) is not the type that people are looking for (it is - or was - old, low ceiling height stuff with parking lots not very conducive to turning/moving the trucks of today)...sure you could replace some of it with newer stuff...but not sure how much space it would actually yield....and given the competing goal of getting people closer to and using public transit, this is probably a bit of industrial land that it is worth rezoning.
Yes, it will never a "nice" walk across Steeles and through the lot....but i get the sense that people are just trying to make the best of a situation that we inherited (region wide not just Brampton) of commuter train stations in industrial areas served by wide roads. It is what it is...and if we don't do this kind of rezoning because it is not perfect...we might as well just give up here and build a couple more parking garages and tell people to just drive to the station.
