News   Jan 15, 2021
 4.4K     11 
News   Jan 15, 2021
 770     0 
News   Jan 15, 2021
 978     1 

Ontario Line (was Relief Line South, in Design)

smallspy

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Nov 27, 2009
Messages
4,256
Reaction score
3,910
3 hour periods = short bursts. got it.
View attachment 274823

Last I checked, they hadn't actually met those goals. They had attained 36tph for almost 2 hours in the mornings (about one round trip) and 1 hour in the afternoon as of the middle of last year. If they have surpassed that and are achieving 36tph for the full 3 hour peak period, then fantastic.

But that's still not a 90 second headway.

You people have never ridden a fully automated system, have you?
They make the Yonge Line feel clunky and slow. And the number of systems built and under construction with the ability to run at 90 seconds from day one are numerous.

As for automated systems, yeah, I've ridden hundreds, thanks. Extremely few of them operate at a 90 second headway over the whole of the line. It is very difficult to design a stub-ended terminal to allow for that kind of headway, even assuming GoA3 or 4.

Dan
 

W. K. Lis

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 24, 2007
Messages
18,343
Reaction score
7,149
Location
Toronto, ON, CAN, Terra, Sol, Milky Way
...

That's the one that's parallel to the Leaside Bridge, so no real need to.
Likewise the other crossing has the Overlea Bridge.

The Leaside Bridge has a bicycle lane and sidewalk that is almost useless in winter for both cyclists and pedestrians.


From link.

That's why when they build the Ontario Line bridge parallel to the Leaside Bridge, they should include bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure.
 

afransen

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
3,278
Reaction score
1,311
I would hazard to say a lot faster. Elevated can be built in parallel for the whole line. Tunneling would require additional TBMs to complete more quickly, and frequently those TBMs are only used for one project then abandoned (to save the cost of digging them out).
 

Ritachi

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 18, 2019
Messages
21
Reaction score
36
Location
North York
The "Flemingdon Park" station is around 500 metres south of "Science Centre" station, I don't see a need to put a station there, especially when it's so close to "Science Centre".
 

Rainforest

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 23, 2008
Messages
4,368
Reaction score
1,926
The "Flemingdon Park" station is around 500 metres south of "Science Centre" station, I don't see a need to put a station there, especially when it's so close to "Science Centre".

The station in front of the Science Centre entrance is a lot more convenient both for the residents of highrises on the east side of Don Mills and for the Science Centre visitors, than the station at Eglinton.

The proposed names are odd though. The station in front of Science Centre should be called Science Centre, while the one at Eglinton should get another name.
 

Amare

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 4, 2015
Messages
3,283
Reaction score
3,512
Location
Toronto
OMG how many times do we have to say this. ITS NOT ABOUT THE NAMES. The names will change. Names of stations don't matter when the line doesn't even have shovels in the ground.
Thats exactly what we all thought when the Crosstown Line was being built, only to find out that Metrolinx was sticking with 95% of the names and only changed/modified the other 5%. So yes, it's all about the names.
 

JSF-1

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 27, 2018
Messages
474
Reaction score
773
Location
Woburn
OMG how many times do we have to say this. ITS NOT ABOUT THE NAMES. The names will change. Names of stations don't matter when the line doesn't even have shovels in the ground.
Sure that may be true for the OL, but in case you have forgotten Metrolinx is currently building another line at the moment, with some "interesting" naming choices. I don't even know why you would need consultants to help name a station. Of all the things that go into these types of projects, from the first shovels in the ground, to opening day; naming stations should be the easiest part. Anyone of us on this site could pick names for free, yet those boneheads at Metrolinx are pissing away like 6 figures to hire a bunch of yahoos to put together some arbitrary rules and fancy graphs, for something that can be done as simply as opening Google Maps and picking a name from the area. If Metrolinx was going to pay me like 100K to choose names for the stations, I would do so by simply opening Google Maps and making a list of names; and if they don't want things like duplicate names or cardinal directions that's fine. I or anyone else here could get it done in no more then 10 minutes.
 
Last edited:

H4F33Z

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 11, 2019
Messages
302
Reaction score
561
Location
Thorncliffe Park
Thats exactly what we all thought when the Crosstown Line was being built, only to find out that Metrolinx was sticking with 95% of the names and only changed/modified the other 5%. So yes, it's all about the names.

Keele Keelesdale
Dufferin Fairbank
Eglinton West Cedervale
Bathurst Forest Hill
Bayview Leaside
Leslie Sunnybrook Park
Don Mills Science Centre
Ferrand Aga Khan Park and Museum
Bermondsey Sloane
Victoria Park O'Connor
Lebovic Hakimi-Lebovic
Warden Golden Mile

Actually 57 percent of the station names were changed.
 

micheal_can

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 24, 2016
Messages
2,322
Reaction score
1,439
Keele Keelesdale
Dufferin Fairbank
Eglinton West Cedervale
Bathurst Forest Hill
Bayview Leaside
Leslie Sunnybrook Park
Don Mills Science Centre
Ferrand Aga Khan Park and Museum
Bermondsey Sloane
Victoria Park O'Connor
Lebovic Hakimi-Lebovic
Warden Golden Mile

Actually 57 percent of the station names were changed.

For most people, a station name is just a name. It could just be numbered according to the date built. I am going from station 4 to Station 106. The routes I need to take are....
 

99Messier

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Oct 6, 2020
Messages
45
Reaction score
64
I would hazard to say a lot faster. Elevated can be built in parallel for the whole line. Tunneling would require additional TBMs to complete more quickly, and frequently those TBMs are only used for one project then abandoned (to save the cost of digging them out).
I'd add, Elevated, like cut-and-cover, can be built in parallel for the whole line.
Tunneling requires the TBM's to completely finish before you can start the first station - because the "waste" soil is extracted through the shaft and a station can't break into the tunnels.
Tunneling itself is not that slow, but constructing the launch shaft takes time, and the stations are extremely deep adding to the time (and cost) significantly. Even is you have no stations, emergency exit construction is costly and time consuming in its own right.
 

officedweller

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
2,310
Reaction score
690
On top of that, with a twin bore, sometimes (like Vancouver Canada Line) the same TBM is used for both bores.
It is disassembled, transported back to the launch pit , reassembled and sent off again.

For elevated, both tracks are usually on one guideway (side platforms) so it's just one straight shot with more or more launching girders.
Wider structures for switches and sidings may take a bit longer.
 

Top