APTA-2048
Senior Member
Possible. Metrolinx is taking a look at conventional coaches again. Apparently they are no longer interested in double deckers. They also wanted something low floor, but didn’t like the layout of the D45 CRT LE.
|
|
|
GO Transit: Service thread (including extensions)
- Thread starter drum118
- Start date
Allandale25
Senior Member
Why wouldn't they be interested in double deckers?
Bordercollie
Senior Member
Unfortunately a 45 foot low floor bus doesn't exist. LFS suburban?
T3G
Senior Member
Not exactly a 45 footer, but Solaris manufactured a 47 footer until 2018, and according to the Polish page for this bus again since 2020 as an e-bus.
Solaris Urbino 15 - Wikipedia
That being said, I would not want to ride a transit designed bus on GO. The comfort level of the double deckers is appalling enough.
APTA-2048
Senior Member
They were even looking at a custom product at one point as well as conventional transit buses. But from what I’ve heard, they’re back on to looking for a conventional high floor coach.
This is just what I’ve heard from various drivers, but the double deckers aren’t well liked. The second generation ones were just awful and it might be why they’re all retired. The SuperLos are better, but they have their fair share of complaints from drivers and maybe some passengers. If you take a close look at them you can see the build quality is lacking. Some of them leak like crazy in the rain.
Bordercollie
Senior Member
Probably worse after New Flyer took over lol
WB62
Senior Member
Let’s hope there’s no major TTC disruptions on this day:
Sunnyside
Senior Member
I still think this connection needs massive improvement, and preferably a grade separation-
Last edited:
reaperexpress
Senior Member
"No matter the difficulty" is a poor way to allocate public expenditure. The public benefits that a project brings should be weighed against the costs - namely the financial burden on citizens to pay for the construction and maintenance.
reaperexpress
Senior Member
Truly a fantastic piece of graphic design. Conveys all the necessary information in a simple and intuitive way.
One note though - if you make diagrams using Metrolinx's style, you should clearly credit yourself as the creator, to avoid the graphic being misconstrued as an official Metrolinx document.
Northern Light
Superstar
I agree.
But I think its important to illustrate for newcomers to the discussion why there is no easy solution here; or for that matter a moderately over-priced and less than effective one.
****
There is no underground connection available today, or easily buildable, even as a straight walking connection, never mind with movator (flat escalator/moving sidewalk)
There is no other practical way (sky bridge?) to make the connection any easier/quicker at really any cost, but certainly any vaguely reasonable one.
The best available option is really one of making sure there is adequate sidewalk width, some streetscaping, and maybe, at a push, some weather protection (canopy)
****
To truly make this connection more efficient; you need the two lines closer together; this is only achievable by either moving the GO Line(s) north, almost certainly underground, quite deeply.......or by pushing the subway tunnel south (with the small matter of the bus terminals current location).
To be clear, the above is absurdly costly...........and is unlikely to be worthwhile achieving, if not ever, then certainly in the near or medium terms.
***
PS @reaperexpress I know you know all of the above, I'm just putting it out there for those who do not.
Sunnyside
Senior Member
Ok, I’ll reword this. I meant it as hyperbole but I see it won’t read that way. Better to say it’s’ “worth more serious financial consideration” than it receives today.
Sunnyside
Senior Member
I like the idea of an elevated walkway actually. The walk as it is isn’t exactly flat, although I’m not wholly familiar with the grading on a consistent-user basis. Most of what you’ve stated here is a given, my point is moreso that we seem to have accepted these kinds of costs for Dundas West-Bloor GO when this can serve the same functionality elsewhere. Shifting the tracks is a non-starter of course and so is an underground passageway unless a developer paid for it(?). And while It’s obviously a further transfer than Bloor GO, I don’t see why we should settle for the way Main-Danforth is today. The difference in cost between the two tracks the disparity in experience imo.
Nonetheless, there are evidently times when people are going to be encouraged to make this kind of transfer anyhow. There are likewise many subway-GO transfers we are deliberately improving. I think compared to what was needed at say Leslie-Oriole, an elevated walkway (no movator required in my books) is not a technical challenge as much as it is one of willpower. The key element is that you are telling people on a visual and experiential level, “this is a transfer you can make, and we’ve made it easy to navigate!” . So, I can easily forego grade desperation if we see anything on this front.
rbt
Senior Member
We can get 60% of the benefit by adding a ramp/staircase and bus/tram stop on the west side for those heading to GO, and moving the existing 506/64/135 stops to a sheltered stop at the top of the existing ramp for those heading to the subway. The cost of doing this would be fairly low.
Last edited:
Northern Light
Superstar
You mean the ramp? The stairs to Danforth GO are locked/abandoned.
Placing a stop there for NB passengers (to Main Stn) would mean eliminating any stop at Main/Danforth, they're far too close to have 2 in such close proximity. Getting traffic to stop it an interesting question
***
There are no stairs or ramp on the the west side of the bridge.