Krypto98
Active Member
TorontoStar would likely make a scathing article how metrolinx is overreaching others by forcing them to use presto
|
|
|
GO Transit: Service thread (including extensions)
- Thread starter drum118
- Start date
Jonny5
Senior Member
There's high fixed costs for low marginal benefits to a very small number of transit users in a place like Milton.
You know, back when GO had punch cards, commuting was not some horrible nightmare simply because of that (there were other reasons it was bad back then). For all its benefits, PRESTO has added relatively little marginal benefit to the experience of pro-commuters in a place like Milton.
Last edited:
robmausser
Senior Member
Most of PRESTO's faults have been worked out at this point. It would have been easier to go with an off-the-shelf system like Oyster, but most of the PRESTO teething issues are done with and its at a pretty good place. Credit/Debit tap and other such features are almost finalized.
nfitz
Superstar
There's still issues. Not to mention the huge annual cost to maintain it, much which seems unnecessary with credit/debit. It would be interesting to see a good cost per ride comparison between systems.
Lots of issues still though. The transfers issued by drivers and the ticket machines on vehicles were supposed to be tappable. I still don't know how you are supposed to use a paper transfer to get into an often unstaffed subway station, unless you are travelling with someone with Presto.
The on-vehicle machines still don't accept debit/credit for payment - this was removed "temporarily" years ago. Which might have worked, but they don't take paper money either ... meaning you travel with lots of loonies and toonies. Yeah, you could get Presto, but with only a 5-cent fare difference between Presto and cash - what's the point? You have to take 120 rides just to get back your $6 for the card (yeah, my daughter lost her Presto card ... sigh).
And it's not even the cheapest way to travel - for example on UP, you can buy paper tickets for some trips that are cheaper than using your Presto Card - like a quick visit to the airport to meet someone.
wopchop
Building Toronto
Weekend pass too is cheaper than Presto fare, and only available online. $10 for a weekend day or $15 for whole weekend.
reaperexpress
Senior Member
As I've described before, I too have wondered about VIA temporarily leaving the north mainline until it is upgraded to the point that they can provide half-decent intercity service.
Here's an edit of the October 2021 GO timetable which replaces VIA west of Kitchener. I added a Stratford-Toronto commuter trip like VIA wanted to do in 2016, because the Stratford-Kitchener segment is slightly less dilapidated than the London-Stratford segment.
Table only shows trips continuing west of Georgetown.
This change depends on CN permitting VIA to reroute the Sarnia service via Brantford. If necessary, we could mitigate the impacts on CN by building an additional platform at Woodstock station. Although the CN Dundas Subdivision is fully double-tracked, the stations along it only have platforms on the south track. So in order to meet trains in the opposite direction, VIA trains need to weave back and forth across the two tracks between stations. A second platform at Woodstock would allow VIA to schedule meets there, enabling ordinary double-track operations from London to Brantford (or Ingersoll to Brantford if meeting trains both stop at Ingersoll).
Brantford would have been a more obvious location for upgrades, but it looks a platform there would be a lot more expensive due to space constraints. Woodstock actually has enough space to add dedicated VIA sidings, which would allow the platforms to be raised for level boarding.
By the time the new platform is built, there would already be hourly AD2W GO service to Kitchener, providing far more scheduling options for GO trips to London than the conceptual timetable I made. There's a good chance my timetable is impossible anyway due to freight movements which I don't know about.
Last edited:
Krypto98
Active Member
Only freight movements I'm aware of West of Georgetown are, cn533,cn540 cn568 and the gexr one.
crs1026
Superstar
^Both Woodstock and Brantford deserve the same kind of station investment that has been made further east at Cobourg and Belleville. I doubt that either CN or VIA would be comfortable with a second platform without a pedestrian overpass or underpass. I agree that putting the Sarnia service on the Brantford route and fixing the “weaving” would at least give better service.
The key to improving service on the north line - and at this point I don’t care who runs it, so your suggestion that VIA withdraw is quite palatable - is passing capacity. While ML may be using its funding wisely, by starting with tackling bridges and crossings and track east of Kitchener, those sidings are an urgent prerequisite to getting things right. I sure hope we see shovels go in the ground on these this spring.
What the Kitchener-Stratford-London line needs is 4-5 runs each way spaced out over the day. As you noted, a departure out of Toronto as early in the AM as possible is the start of that. (The fact that it can’t be run west of Georgetown earlier than 09:42 demonstrates the siding problem).
I doubt that VIA would withdraw, no matter how rational a solution that might be…. too much political ammunition if they folded their flag, even if it produced better interim service.
What this route needs is an integrated business case and service plan… you know, the kind where federal and provincial people get in a room together, take off their hats, and works together to find the best solution without regard to politics or level of government.. Only then will we know just how much investment is required, and where. I’m not sure we will ever see that train arrive.
- Paul
The key to improving service on the north line - and at this point I don’t care who runs it, so your suggestion that VIA withdraw is quite palatable - is passing capacity. While ML may be using its funding wisely, by starting with tackling bridges and crossings and track east of Kitchener, those sidings are an urgent prerequisite to getting things right. I sure hope we see shovels go in the ground on these this spring.
What the Kitchener-Stratford-London line needs is 4-5 runs each way spaced out over the day. As you noted, a departure out of Toronto as early in the AM as possible is the start of that. (The fact that it can’t be run west of Georgetown earlier than 09:42 demonstrates the siding problem).
I doubt that VIA would withdraw, no matter how rational a solution that might be…. too much political ammunition if they folded their flag, even if it produced better interim service.
What this route needs is an integrated business case and service plan… you know, the kind where federal and provincial people get in a room together, take off their hats, and works together to find the best solution without regard to politics or level of government.. Only then will we know just how much investment is required, and where. I’m not sure we will ever see that train arrive.
- Paul
Last edited:
allengeorge
Senior Member
Maybe the auditor general is also in employ of the Toronto Star when it comes to Presto’s faults: https://www.auditor.on.ca/en/content/annualreports/arreports/en20/20VFM_06metrolinxgov.pdf
This constant (mindless) slagging of the Toronto Star is as tiresome as articles in The Star that show no nuance.
reaperexpress
Senior Member
Yes it goes without saying that a new platform would be accompanied by a new pedestrian overpass or underpass. If it's an overpass it could even be extended over to Main Street which runs along the north side of the station, cutting the walking distance to the station from the city centre.
I disagree that the first order of business is to build passing sidings west of Kitchener. The location of passing sidings is dependent on the travel times and headways, and with the a 60-minute headway currently being locked in due to the sidings under construction east of Kitchener, any sidings west of Kitchener will lock in the travel times at the time of their construction.
My opinion is that the first order of business is to upgrade the track speeds. My suggestion is to continue westwards with the same work that GO is currently doing between Kitchener and Georgetown - including both sidings and track upgrades in one project so that the sidings end up in the right places. To expedite visible results, it could be done in phases starting with Kitchener-Stratford once GO acquires the line from CN.
Furthermore, the frequency possible on the line is also strongly affected by the line speed. In the absence of any passing sidings, the current 2h10 London-Kitchener travel time translates to a minimum two-way headway of 4h20. With the 1976 travel time of 1h13, that headway would drop to 2h26. Of course we wouldn't fix the tracks up to that extent without building any sidings, but the point is sidings alone are not the most helpful.
The good news is that once the new sidings in Guelph and Acton come online (Summer 2023), the massive gaps in counter-peak service could disappear, which already goes a long way to increase the possible London-KW-Toronto frequency. The first westbound train to London could depart Union as early as 07:15, arriving in Kitchener around 08:30 after the last eastbound AM London train, and arriving London around 10:30.
This is exactly what the line needs, especially given how current investments could lock in future conditions as I described above. At the moment the situation west of Kitchener seems to consist mostly of value signalling from politicians, but hopefully the federal and provincial governments' statements about VIA and GO working together to create a plan for Southwestern Ontario passenger rail actually translate to a serious initiative.
Last edited:
crs1026
Superstar
Yes - I chose my words poorly, I actually was thinking of the sidings east of Kitchener which is where there is the most acute need to be able to pass trains.
Getting track speeds up further west is absolutely necessary. The existing sidings (Stratford and Kellys) would be OK for now provided running times could be raised... although with the current sidings spaced so far apart, any delay to a meet might cascade down the schedule. Some sidings should be added just to provide flexibility in operations.
I wonder if some double tracking - not necessarily the whole line, but between say Rock Cut and Acton - might actually be required to meet the combined needs of a proper GO/VIA integrated service. That's one reason to see an integrated service plan. All things with time, one hopes.
- Paul
reaperexpress
Senior Member
My mistake, I misread your post. I was thinking as if those sidings are a given, but you're right that we still need to make sure work actually starts on them this year as planned.
Assuming CN permits a second train per hour (i.e. 1 VIA + 1 GO) through Silver junction after the grade separation is built, I think that extending the double-track around Acton could indeed help speed up VIA service since that's where they will need to meet the basic hourly GO service, and unlike the peak-period GO trains, they don't stop there.
Last edited:
ShonTron
Moderator
Member Bio
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 13,282
- Reaction score
- 12,051
- Location
- Ward 13 - Toronto Centre
Now we’re well into March, in-person classes are back, and more employers are recalling workers to the office, and GO is still functioning under January Omicron peak conditions.
I do know it takes some time to assign crews and schedules, but it’s quite ridiculous at the point that it’s radio silence at GO/Metrolinx.
I wonder now if it’s to allow for a happy goody provincial announcement with Ford, Mulroney, Surma, and a bunch of Mississauga and York Region MPPs.
I do know it takes some time to assign crews and schedules, but it’s quite ridiculous at the point that it’s radio silence at GO/Metrolinx.
I wonder now if it’s to allow for a happy goody provincial announcement with Ford, Mulroney, Surma, and a bunch of Mississauga and York Region MPPs.
ARG1
Senior Member
@smallspy said about a week ago that the rules in Metrolinx require upper management to notify the boys on the ground (I assume operators, dispatchers, and whatnot) of service expansions 2-3 weeks ahead of time. Now the following is pure speculation on my part based off many different accounts I have heard about Metrolinx over the years: In classic Metrolinx fashion, the reason why we haven't seen service expansion yet is likely due to mismanagement. They decided to increase service, however forgot to articulate that to the actual dispatchers, and now we have to wait for an extra few weeks to actually get service running again properly.
crs1026
Superstar
Metrolinx' process for implementing service changes is actually pretty well-understood and well followed. If ML were ready to implement a service change, they know how to do it. They have done lots to this point.
I'm not suggesting ML doesn't have its left-hand, right-hand issues, but I would not say that's why we are not seeing service improvements.
There has definitely been attrition in ML's work force over the course of COVID. A significant number have moved on to other work - either out of necessity, or (with the same thing happening elsewhere, so lots of job openings out there) the grass just looked greener.
Plus, running empty trains and hoping for an upturn in ridership is very expensive.
Staff shortages and a desire not to ramp up until there is less prospect of another wave, and another lockdown would be more credible explanations.
- Paul