LNahid2000
Senior Member
From Niagara Falls, NY. The Maple Leaf isn't crossing the border during COVID.
|
|
|
Great Platform Height Debate: Subway-Style Level Boarding for GO Trains
- Thread starter mdrejhon
- Start date
Allandale25
Senior Member
ARG1
Senior Member
Honestly, the best we can hope for is whatever new EMUs we get have both High Level and Low Level platforms, so that when a good chunk of our bilevels retire, we can start upgrading certain lines to high floor standards.
reaperexpress
Senior Member
@Krypto98
Metrolinx has selected 610mm ATR as the future level boarding height. That's the lower level of the bilevel cars. I have always favoured 1220mm thanks to the greater rolling stock flexibility, and standardisation with VIA, Amtrak, UPX, Exo, MBTA, CT Rail, Metro North, LIRR, NJ Transit, SEPTA, MARC and RTD, but sadly that ship has already sailed.
All new stations since 2017 have been future-proofed to be raised to 610mm. You will notice features such as weirdly tall concrete bases on columns (so that the mounting points stick out above the future platform height), entrances which are too high for the current platform (to line up with the future 610mm platform), and larger than expected spaces between tracks (to make room for a bypass track or gauntlet track for freight trains to bypass the higher platforms).
Downsview Park Station (opened 2017): note the height of the entrance onto the platform
note the space for a centre 3rd track:
Bloomington Station (opened 2021), note the height of the entrance onto the platform. The station is also on a siding used exclusively by GO.
Rutherford Station (reconstructed 2022), note tall foundations for pillars and shelters, and space for a centre 3rd track
The reason that these stations are initially built with 127mm platforms is that GO still hasn't started retrofitting its coaches with an adjustable step to handle both platform heights. Until all coaches on a given line are retrofitted, not a single platform can be raised since there would be a massive gap for people to jump over.
It is incredibly frustrating that work has not yet begun on the rolling stock retrofits, because the longer we wait, the more new platforms get built at 127mm which need to be retrofitted later. It's not like the future consortium is going to propose selling all 750 Bombardier Bilevel coaches and buying an all-new fleet. At least part of the current fleet will stick around through GO Expansion to operate regional and commuter express services. There is also no chance that the consortium would overturn the decision to standardize at 610mm given the amount of work which has already been done to future-proof for 610mm.
Last edited:
Urban Sky
Senior Member
@Krypto98
Metrolinx has selected 610mm ATR as the future level boarding height. That's the lower level of the bilevel cars. I have always favoured 1220mm thanks to the greater rolling stock flexibility, and standardisation with VIA, Amtrak, UPX, Exo, MBTA, CT Rail, Metro North, LIRR, NJ Transit, SEPTA, MARC and RTD, but sadly that ship has already sailed.
View attachment 373333
View attachment 373331
View attachment 373332
All new stations since 2017 have been future-proofed to be raised to 610mm. You will notice features such as weirdly tall concrete bases on columns (so that the mounting points stick out above the future platform height), entrances which are too high for the current platform (to line up with the future 610mm platform), and larger than expected spaces between tracks (to make room for a bypass track or gauntlet track for freight trains to bypass the higher platforms).
Downsview Park Station (opened 2017): note the height of the entrance onto the platform
View attachment 373335
note the space for a centre 3rd track:
View attachment 373336
Bloomington Station (opened 2021), note the height of the entrance onto the platform. The station is also on a siding used exclusively by GO.
View attachment 373334
Rutherford Station (reconstructed 2022), note tall foundations for pillars and shelters, and space for a centre 3rd track
The reason that these stations are initially built with 127mm platforms is that GO still hasn't started retrofitting its coaches with an adjustable step to handle both platform heights. Until all coaches on a given line are retrofitted, not a single platform can be raised since there would be a massive gap for people to jump over.
View attachment 373337
It is incredibly frustrating that work has not yet begun on the rolling stock retrofits, because the longer we wait, the more new platforms get built at 127mm which need to be retrofitted later. It's not like the future consortium is going to propose selling all 750 Bombardier Bilevel coaches and buying an all-new fleet. At least part of the current fleet will stick around through GO Expansion to operate regional and commuter express services. There is also no chance that the consortium would overturn the decision to standardize at 610mm given the amount of work which has already been done to future-proof for 610mm.
I don't know how the situation is in the Netherlands, but this is the whole misery in Germany:
Distribution of platform heights across the 16 German States
Platform height by platform count (top), State (middle) and passenger count (bottom)
Source: Wikipedia (also for table above)
Note: 96 cm is mostly used for S-Bahn, which is why its share is much higher by passenger count than by platform count
Last edited:
Krypto98
Active Member
Ayyyy that's me asking that.
Ahhhh I see thanks for letting me know. I was a bit out of the loop for that one.@Krypto98
Metrolinx has selected 610mm ATR as the future level boarding height. That's the lower level of the bilevel cars. I have always favoured 1220mm thanks to the greater rolling stock flexibility, and standardisation with VIA, Amtrak, UPX, Exo, MBTA, CT Rail, Metro North, LIRR, NJ Transit, SEPTA, MARC and RTD, but sadly that ship has already sailed.
View attachment 373333
View attachment 373331
View attachment 373332
All new stations since 2017 have been future-proofed to be raised to 610mm. You will notice features such as weirdly tall concrete bases on columns (so that the mounting points stick out above the future platform height), entrances which are too high for the current platform (to line up with the future 610mm platform), and larger than expected spaces between tracks (to make room for a bypass track or gauntlet track for freight trains to bypass the higher platforms).
Downsview Park Station (opened 2017): note the height of the entrance onto the platform
View attachment 373335
note the space for a centre 3rd track:
View attachment 373336
Bloomington Station (opened 2021), note the height of the entrance onto the platform. The station is also on a siding used exclusively by GO.
View attachment 373334
Rutherford Station (reconstructed 2022), note tall foundations for pillars and shelters, and space for a centre 3rd track
The reason that these stations are initially built with 127mm platforms is that GO still hasn't started retrofitting its coaches with an adjustable step to handle both platform heights. Until all coaches on a given line are retrofitted, not a single platform can be raised since there would be a massive gap for people to jump over.
View attachment 373337
It is incredibly frustrating that work has not yet begun on the rolling stock retrofits, because the longer we wait, the more new platforms get built at 127mm which need to be retrofitted later. It's not like the future consortium is going to propose selling all 750 Bombardier Bilevel coaches and buying an all-new fleet. At least part of the current fleet will stick around through GO Expansion to operate regional and commuter express services. There is also no chance that the consortium would overturn the decision to standardize at 610mm given the amount of work which has already been done to future-proof for 610mm.
reaperexpress
Senior Member
The Netherlands has universally adopted the 760mm standard, and all new trains are equipped with automatic gap fillers at that height.
The platform at the end of the video which is too low has since been rebuilt at the correct height.
As with GO's 610mm standard, 760mm is too low for conventional high-floor trains because a bogie can't fit under a floor at that height. But to make matters worse, it's also too high for the lower level of double-decker trains. The current double deckers have doors on the middle level with steps up from the platform. To introduce level boarding, future double deckers will need to have a design similar to the Bombardier Regio2N where doors are located in a separate single-level coach. At least we can be glad that GO's 610mm standard doesn't create a mess like that.
Image: Bombardier Regio2N
610 mm (24") seems like it is becoming the standard for low-floor level boarding in the western and southern States. Although it's unfortunate that GO has rejected the standard height used by every system near Toronto, at least there will be some off-the-shelf 610mm DMUs and coaches available. The Stadler FLIRT trains used in Texas and California have level boarding at 610mm, and those states also run Bombardier Bilevel coaches. But the Bilevel coaches haven't been retrofitted with adjustable steps, so stations used by both types have multiple platform heights, even though the trains have the same interior floor height.
Fort Worth Central Station, raised platform segment for Stadler FLIRT trains (screenshot from this video).
San Bernardino Transit Center, raised platform segments for Stadler FLIRT trains (from Streetview)
Last edited:
cplchanb
Senior Member
It's a shame that we can't get our fix off of this low floor nonsense for rail. Honestly I don't get why there's such a hard on for it just because it's a bit cheaper to build the platforms. They've essentially traded short term gain for Long term pain in terms of fleet flexibility. Now they're hamstrung to only a few select options for rolling stock. Not to mention at Union Station it'll be incompatible with the via trains
crs1026
Senior Member
I see it as exactly the opposite. There are so many other details to get right in the entire RER expansion…. adding this transition into the mix adds complexity, passenger confusion, and risk. Some things have to wait until after. Let’s get tracks finished, wires erected, EMU fleet selected, 2WAD operations on shorter headways implemented and the bugs ironed out . Maybe all new fleet will be procured as easily convertible.
It’s apparent that ML is futureproofing new station construction, and that’s encouraging. Maybe opportunities will present themselves sooner to begin a gradual transition on one or two routes.
- Paul
cplchanb
Senior Member
I'm not arguing against futureproofing which is long overdue, it's just the height that they are future proofing for is hardly compatible with anything else in the market. That means that they will have much fewer choices to competitively pick from or it will come at added cost of customization. Other than the flirt or the kiss and the Alstom or Siemens counterparts, what else is in the market that can be equivalent. ML will not reopen this platform height issue for at least 2 generations.
Then again honest question, what is the benefit of low floor commuter trains when we are building raised platforms on all stations anyways?
tsm1072
Active Member
Because GO already has hundreds of low-floor carriages in their fleet and 50+ low-floor stations. It is going to be cheaper and faster for them to slowly upgrade the coaches to level-boarding and much cheaper for them to get the stations to 610mm than to try and replace their entire fleet. Unfortunately, it doesn't match VIA's level boarding, but the compatibility of those to systems is hugely important to Metrolinx or the average GO user.
reaperexpress
Senior Member
This would make sense, but then why haven't GO, Metrolink (Los Angeles) and TRE (Fort Worth) retrofitted any of their BiLevel coaches for 610mm platforms, especially since the latter two already have some 610mm platforms?
Frontrunner (Salt Lake City) has level boarding with BiLevels, but they've always had that since day one, so they never needed to accommodate two different platform heights during a transition period.
cplchanb
Senior Member
Really I think it's all down to the metrics on whether they want to proceed. It's a big investment but a good and frankly necessary investment. They think that just because it's been the same for a century means it's good to go until it breaks. There is hardly any proactive thinking here.
But my original question remains, what is the benefit of low floor trains vs standard height when we are going for raised platforms to begin with?
Urban Sky
Senior Member
I'm still not sure what exactly your point is, but in case you propose to build high-level platforms even before the entire fleet using that station has been converted to that height: as easy as it is to use high-level trains at low-level platforms, there are clear limits to how much higher a platform can be compared to a train's boarding height.
To provide an example from my native home state of Hessen: the Odenwaldbahn uses a train type called Bombardier Itino, which is built for a boarding height of 55 cm (see this example from Sweden):
Source: uploaded by user CC0 via Wikipedia
The train can also stop at rail stations with 76 cm platforms like in my home town Darmstadt or Frankfurt Hbf (shown below):
Source: uploaded by user MdE via Wikipedia
However, these trains have to skip the stop in Langen, which is a major town of 40k people (located 10 km South of Frankfurt) and a stop for all other regional trains, because the Southbound platform is shared with S-Bahn trains and thus 96 cm high, resulting in a gap of 40 cm, which is too steep of a step to climb out of a train. And even if there was a step, passengers would frequently hit their head while boarding or detraining.
As much as I would have loved Metrolinx to adopt VIA's platform height of 48 inches (1219 mm), I fail to see how you could have even started to convert a single platform in Union Station without going through a massive fleet procurement first...
Last edited:
Bordercollie
Senior Member
Cant they build doors at the mid level which would allow level boarding and support wheel chairs?@Krypto98
Metrolinx has selected 610mm ATR as the future level boarding height. That's the lower level of the bilevel cars. I have always favoured 1220mm thanks to the greater rolling stock flexibility, and standardisation with VIA, Amtrak, UPX, Exo, MBTA, CT Rail, Metro North, LIRR, NJ Transit, SEPTA, MARC and RTD, but sadly that ship has already sailed.
View attachment 373333
View attachment 373331
View attachment 373332
All new stations since 2017 have been future-proofed to be raised to 610mm. You will notice features such as weirdly tall concrete bases on columns (so that the mounting points stick out above the future platform height), entrances which are too high for the current platform (to line up with the future 610mm platform), and larger than expected spaces between tracks (to make room for a bypass track or gauntlet track for freight trains to bypass the higher platforms).
Downsview Park Station (opened 2017): note the height of the entrance onto the platform
View attachment 373335
note the space for a centre 3rd track:
View attachment 373336
Bloomington Station (opened 2021), note the height of the entrance onto the platform. The station is also on a siding used exclusively by GO.
View attachment 373334
Rutherford Station (reconstructed 2022), note tall foundations for pillars and shelters, and space for a centre 3rd track
The reason that these stations are initially built with 127mm platforms is that GO still hasn't started retrofitting its coaches with an adjustable step to handle both platform heights. Until all coaches on a given line are retrofitted, not a single platform can be raised since there would be a massive gap for people to jump over.
View attachment 373337
It is incredibly frustrating that work has not yet begun on the rolling stock retrofits, because the longer we wait, the more new platforms get built at 127mm which need to be retrofitted later. It's not like the future consortium is going to propose selling all 750 Bombardier Bilevel coaches and buying an all-new fleet. At least part of the current fleet will stick around through GO Expansion to operate regional and commuter express services. There is also no chance that the consortium would overturn the decision to standardize at 610mm given the amount of work which has already been done to future-proof for 610mm.