|
|
|
Metrolinx: Sheppard East LRT (In Design)
- Thread starter Le Gique
- Start date
W. K. Lis
Superstar
TJ O'Pootertoot
Senior Member
It's amazing we've actually progressed to the point where we will complete EA's on projects (e.g. Sheppard, Yonge North) and then abandon them. I guess that's slightly better than starting to build them before filling in the holes so, good job, GTA! You're growing up.
Electrify
Senior Member
On the contrary, in theory it would mean that Sheppard trains would work with every subway line* **, as well as the eastern surface portions of the avenue. Basically think of the T1 trains, and add a pantograph to them which they can switch to before leaving the portal. Obviously it would not be quite that simple (have to rebuild electrical systems, enhance body to withstand collision, etc), and would likely require a new tender for new trains. Still, compared to retrofitting the current subway line it would not only be significantly cheaper, it would be far quicker to do.
*Automatic train control may affect this from actually happening unless it is put into these new trains, but physically it would be possible in case of emergency or having to move trains to other subway yards.
**For this to happen, it would also mean that TTC gauge would have to be used for Sheppard East. Considering that the project is to be collecting dust for the next 6+ years, we can use this time to make said adjustments in the blueprints.
georgevicbell
Active Member
There are a few places I've been that have combo high/low floor vehicles (new york)...highfloor is at the ends of the car and has steps down to the seating/low floor section...problem is that accessibility only works for the section of the line that is the same...
I think these were more heavy rail type cars, but electrified, so probably could be easily converted...
Electrify
Senior Member
Examples of trains switching power. Sadly they won't let me embed more than one video per post.
Boston:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTFORkPW_SQ
Chicago:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghy-WjRqGzo
London:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TPg0sZPl28s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIrtcRzY-j4
New York (via Train Simulator 20xx)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Zb7BS5l2yI
Rotterdam
[video=youtube;4bsVlPy_n3s]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bsVlPy_n3s[/video]
This example would be very similar to what Sheppard would use. From urbanrail.net:
Leaving Capelsebrug, trains heading for 'Ommoord' or 'Nesselande' lift up their pantograph while the train is in motion to switch to Sneltram ("rapid tram," or light rail) mode, whereas those going to 'Capelle a/d IJssel' continue with third rail power supply. The 8.4 km Sneltram section is totally segregated from other traffic, mostly fenced with hedges, but with several level crossings. All three eastern branches of the Calandlijn operate every 10 minutes, which allows a 3-4 minute interval along the main section. The northeastern branch, which initially terminated at De Tochten (showing 'Zevenkamp' on the destination sign), was extended mainly on a viaduct to Nesselande (1.5 km) in August 2005,. This section has no level crossings and instead of using an overhead catenary the trains switch back to third rail power supply.
http://urbanrail.net/eu/nl/rot/rotterdam.htm
Boston:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTFORkPW_SQ
Chicago:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghy-WjRqGzo
London:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TPg0sZPl28s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIrtcRzY-j4
New York (via Train Simulator 20xx)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Zb7BS5l2yI
Rotterdam
[video=youtube;4bsVlPy_n3s]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bsVlPy_n3s[/video]
This example would be very similar to what Sheppard would use. From urbanrail.net:
Leaving Capelsebrug, trains heading for 'Ommoord' or 'Nesselande' lift up their pantograph while the train is in motion to switch to Sneltram ("rapid tram," or light rail) mode, whereas those going to 'Capelle a/d IJssel' continue with third rail power supply. The 8.4 km Sneltram section is totally segregated from other traffic, mostly fenced with hedges, but with several level crossings. All three eastern branches of the Calandlijn operate every 10 minutes, which allows a 3-4 minute interval along the main section. The northeastern branch, which initially terminated at De Tochten (showing 'Zevenkamp' on the destination sign), was extended mainly on a viaduct to Nesselande (1.5 km) in August 2005,. This section has no level crossings and instead of using an overhead catenary the trains switch back to third rail power supply.
http://urbanrail.net/eu/nl/rot/rotterdam.htm
Electrify
Senior Member
I'm thinking the entire platform would be raised, like in Calgary. I did see a similar design to what you are suggesting in Buffalo though. The downtown surface stations are generally low floor, and the trains have stairs which fold out IIRC (they may have been directly inside like our streetcars). However there is a ramp up to a raised platform which meets the train barrier free. The underground suburban stations are all level with the train though.
For accessibility though, going with all level boarding should be the goal. Calgary is a good place for such an example, though the ramps may have to be slightly steeper:
https://www.google.ca/maps/@51.0467...ata=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s0YxaIC-zMV1Wp1dwal1ijw!2e0
Hairball
Active Member
Given there are 5-6 years of stalling on this, I hope the powers will get to look at this solution to use in the Sheppard subway tunnel, then we can have a second crosstown LRT line and it'll make this LRT much more acceptable.
Electrify
Senior Member
That is exactly what I'm thinking.
Canadian Chocho
Active Member
This really seems like the best solution. Almost makes too much sense!
Adjei
Senior Member
This will also make it cheaper to extend it westwards to connect to to Downsview station in the future if warranted.
Midtown Urbanist
Superstar
I fear it makes too much sense...
Electrify
Senior Member
Would help, but not a sure thing. The current bridge doesn't seem like it can be widened, so a car lane would have to be given up (WAR ON THE CAR!!!11!). However overcoming that hurdle, or even constructing the other bridge while operating at street level between Bathurst and Downsview GO, would be more affordable than tunneling the entire way.
If you can't tell, I have thought of this for a long time now
Electrify
Senior Member
Goodie, found a live action version of the New York example:
[video=youtube;hMuxucdRPpk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMuxucdRPpk[/video]
[video=youtube;hMuxucdRPpk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMuxucdRPpk[/video]
BurlOak
Senior Member
Would help, but not a sure thing. The current bridge doesn't seem like it can be widened, so a car lane would have to be given up (WAR ON THE CAR!!!11!). However overcoming that hurdle, or even constructing the other bridge while operating at street level between Bathurst and Downsview GO, would be more affordable than tunneling the entire way.
If you can't tell, I have thought of this for a long time now
The current Sheppard bridge is a steel girder bridge. Those (girders) are the easiest structure types to widen. The bridge would be widened with the addition of 2 girders along either side of the bridge. The bridge is about 350m long, so the cost would be 2 sides x 4m wide x 350m long x $6000/m2 = $17M ----say $20M.
If the plan is to go with subway with a centre platform station at Bathurst, then the widening would be slightly separated from the existing bridge and the subway would run along the outside. If you are after median LRT, the LRT runs down the middle and the traffic lanes added along the exterior.
Last edited: