SmartTrack (Proposed)

[salsa]

Interesting article on

Paris' Experimental High-Speed Moving Walkway is Abandoned

Speedy pedestrian connection between metro lines was plagued by problems

A cautionary tale for the fools who prefer to replace the streetcar with a pedestrian walkway through the Bay street tunnel.

 

[rbt]

A cautionary tale for the fools who prefer to replace the streetcar with a pedestrian walkway through the Bay street tunnel.

More a cautionary tale to fools who put a section you cannot walk on at each end of a moving walkway.

 

[salsa]

More a cautionary tale to fools who put a section you cannot walk on at each end of a moving walkway.

"for all its promise, the experiment failed too often because of technical problems."

" it was more often out of service than in operation".


That's what I'm trying to get at. Remember we also had a walkway at Spadina station which suffered the same problems, and was eventually removed.

 

[steveintoronto]

Besides the many technical problems, there's a functional one too, and this is echoed in studies on deep tube (London) escalators, and the new missive to *all* stand, not walk, on escalators. I'll reference later:

By Richard Alleyne, Science Correspondent

7:00AM BST 16 Jul 2009


Researchers have found that using the travelator at airports, especially at busy times, can actually slow you down because people reduce their walking pace on the human conveyor belts and cause blockages.

Two studies have shown that the time gained even without any congestion is minimal and when you add extra people you would be better off walking unaided.

Manoj Srinivasan, a locomotion researcher at Princeton University, created two mathematical models which showed that people slow down on walkways to reduce energy consumption.

Even when no one is about the time gained is only 11 seconds from a 110 yard stretch of electric walkway, he discovered.

The findings, published in New Scientist, back up earlier work by Dr Seth Young, of Ohio State University who observed people at San Francisco and Cleveland airports, walking much more slowly on automated walkways.

Often this will cause blockages, the research found.

"Moving walkways are the only form of transportation that actually slow people down," said Dr Young.[...]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/sci...-moving-walkways-actually-slows-you-down.html

 

[BurlOak]

In Japan, I notice the walk right, stand left actually seemed to make things slower when it was busy. Too many people did not want to walk, and the line up at the standing side was so long that sometimes the next train would arrive before the queue had cleared.
There needs to be some way of allowing standing on both sides when this happens, or maybe encourage more people to walk, for the good of the transit efficiency.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

In Japan, I notice the walk right, stand left actually seemed to make things slower when it was busy. Too many people did not want to walk, and the line up at the standing side was so long that sometimes the next train would arrive before the queue had cleared.
There needs to be some way of allowing standing on both sides when this happens, or maybe encourage more people to walk, for the good of the transit efficiency.

On the London Underground, they found that walk left, stand right was only effective for escalators up to a certain length. On one of the underground stations they've banned walking on the escalator at certain times of the day, for the reasons you've mentioned.

 

[44 North]

A cautionary tale for the fools who prefer to replace the streetcar with a pedestrian walkway through the Bay street tunnel.

Definitely a bad idea, but IMO it was at least a mildly reasonable proposal (one of several) in response to a bad idea...that being the Loop expansion plan. The original waterfront "LRT" + loop was underbuilt, and I think we were primed to spend a king's ransom on repeating the mistake. Present and projected volumes are simply too high for a single tunnel + loop for all the central, east, and west waterfront to terminate.

In Japan, I notice the walk right, stand left actually seemed to make things slower when it was busy. Too many people did not want to walk, and the line up at the standing side was so long that sometimes the next train would arrive before the queue had cleared.
There needs to be some way of allowing standing on both sides when this happens, or maybe encourage more people to walk, for the good of the transit efficiency.

Can't speak for Japan but yes too many treat walkways and escalators as if they were a ride of sorts. People will stop abruptly as soon as they stop onto it, and while they may be getting reprieve they're creating a bottleneck behind them. Reminds me of this standup bit:

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Definitely a bad idea, but IMO it was at least a mildly reasonable proposal (one of several) in response to a bad idea...that being the Loop expansion plan. The original waterfront "LRT" + loop was underbuilt, and I think we were primed to spend a king's ransom on repeating the mistake. Present and projected volumes are simply too high for a single tunnel + loop for all the central, east, and west waterfront to terminate.

Is this the original loop extension plan you're referring to? https://stevemunro.ca/2007/01/26/a-bigger-loop-at-union-station/

If so, I wasn't aware that plan would be of insufficient capacity.

 

[44 North]

Is this the original loop extension plan you're referring to? https://stevemunro.ca/2007/01/26/a-bigger-loop-at-union-station/

If so, I wasn't aware that plan would be of insufficient capacity.

I thought you and I discussed it in the Loop/s threads. But yes, myself and I believe a few others (poss Drum) believe it to be insufficient. Original projections put 8k peak hour n/b and 10k s/b coming out of the loop. Keep in mind that's in 2021 (while seemingly every other Big Move projection uses 2031), and does not include the DOA Bremner LRT numbers passing through the narrow cattle car corridors of Union. These are serious numbers, and factoring in things like the fresh Lower Yonge Precinct numbers, LCBO lands, and the natural unplanned increases in density we're seeing elsewhere in TO that will occur in the EBF+LDL+Port Lands - not to mention the nominal capacity of a Flexity Outlook (with only a paltry 500m of grade-separation) - it's no wonder there's glaring issues with the original loop expansion plan. Every single attempt at LRT through downtown has proven less reliable than projected, less capacity, less speed...this one is no different. Frankly, looking at the issue, I'd say this one could be much worse.

 

[rbt]

"for all its promise, the experiment failed too often because of technical problems."

" it was more often out of service than in operation".

That's what I'm trying to get at. Remember we also had a walkway at Spadina station which suffered the same problems, and was eventually removed.

Yeah, I get that. However the Paris installation was a particularly horrible design; both overly complex and dangerous as when people fell it would inevitably eat something of their clothing. Much of the maintenance was removing bits of clothing.

Newer designs now used elsewhere would work as well as any escalator. 3 of them (1 each direction + spare) would be sufficient to cover for maintenance.

A Queens Quay walkway is a poor choice for many reasons. Paris is still an inappropriate example of why it couldn't work and should be ignored by staff. The walkway at Spadina was removed because it was EOLd and nobody wanted to spend a few million on a replacement given very low use of that corridor (transferring at St. George is better in all ways).

 

[ShonTron]

Yeah, I get that. However the Paris installation was a particularly horrible design; both overly complex and dangerous as when people fell it would inevitably eat something of their clothing. Much of the maintenance was removing bits of clothing.

Newer designs now used elsewhere would work as well as any escalator. 3 of them (1 each direction + spare) would be sufficient to cover for maintenance.

A Queens Quay walkway is a poor choice for many reasons. Paris is still an inappropriate example of why it couldn't work and should be ignored by staff. The walkway at Spadina was removed because it was EOLd and nobody wanted to spend a few million on a replacement given very low use of that corridor (transferring at St. George is better in all ways).

Interesting fact: when built, the TTC had plans to operate late evening and Sunday service only between Wilson and Spadina at one point as the Spadina Subway was being planned and designed. The University Line between St. George and Union was closed during those times. The moving walkways at Spadina were to accommodate the forced transfers at Spadina. Thankfully the TTC instead opted to run through service at all operating periods, making the walkways redundant, except for passengers on the Spadina Line looking to get to the Bloor Street exit or the 77 Spadina Bus.

 

[gweed123]

I thought you and I discussed it in the Loop/s threads. But yes, myself and I believe a few others (poss Drum) believe it to be insufficient. Original projections put 8k peak hour n/b and 10k s/b coming out of the loop. Keep in mind that's in 2021 (while seemingly every other Big Move projection uses 2031), and does not include the DOA Bremner LRT numbers passing through the narrow cattle car corridors of Union. These are serious numbers, and factoring in things like the fresh Lower Yonge Precinct numbers, LCBO lands, and the natural unplanned increases in density we're seeing elsewhere in TO that will occur in the EBF+LDL+Port Lands - not to mention the nominal capacity of a Flexity Outlook (with only a paltry 500m of grade-separation) - it's no wonder there's glaring issues with the original loop expansion plan. Every single attempt at LRT through downtown has proven less reliable than projected, less capacity, less speed...this one is no different. Frankly, looking at the issue, I'd say this one could be much worse.

My preferred solution, which I posted a few months ago in another thread, is basically to reduce the stress on the Union loop by partially bypassing it with a "downtown circulator" route. In order to accomplish this, three pieces of infrastructure would be required (2 of which will be built as part of the QQE streetcar project anyway):

• Convert the south end of the Union tunnel (at Bay & QQ) into a full wye, capable of movements into and out of Union, as well as straight through.
• Streetcar trackage on QQE to at least Cooper St.
• Either a streetcar-only tunnel or an extension of Church St, bridging the gap between Church and Cooper. Streetcar-only would be preferable from an operations standpoint, but from a full transportation connectivity perspective, a roadway + dedicated tracks underpass/tunnel would probably be chosen.

This setup would allow for 3 routes to operate south of King:

• Waterfront streetcar: Exhibition to Cherry (and future Sumach DRL station) via Lake Shore, QQW, Union Station, QQE, and Cherry.
  
• Spadina streetcar: Spadina Station to Union Station via Spadina and QQW.
• Downtown Circulator streetcar: Loop via QQW, QQE, Cooper/Church, King, and Spadina.

For most people within that loop, particularly people in CityPlace who work downtown, the Loop would be far more convenient than having to transfer at Union and either walk up to the CBD, or transfer to the subway. I think it would reduce the capacity crunch on the Union Loop enough to avoid having to make any major expansion to it.

 

[ssiguy2]

The idea of ST is a good one. By using current transportation corridors and improving upon them there is no huge land acquisitions, endless environmental reviews, community consultation, much cheaper and faster to build, and service can be introduced almost immediately after the trains arrive. Frequency and more stations can be phased in but it isn't an "all or nothing" completion that new rapid transit requires.

There are only two issues that will cause ST from being a complete failure or a stellar success............fares and frequency.
This is why it is essential that ST be separately operated separately from RER/GO. The TTC can set it's own frequency but more importantly the have TTC fares which essentially makes it another subway line.

The ridership on the UPX would multiply by 10 overnight if it was to become just part of the TTC with TTC fares {and an extra fare for Pearson station} and this will be the same with ST if run by RER/GO.

 

[Hopkins123]

The idea of ST is a good one. By using current transportation corridors and improving upon them there is no huge land acquisitions, endless environmental reviews, community consultation, much cheaper and faster to build, and service can be introduced almost immediately after the trains arrive. Frequency and more stations can be phased in but it isn't an "all or nothing" completion that new rapid transit requires.

There are only two issues that will cause ST from being a complete failure or a stellar success............fares and frequency.
This is why it is essential that ST be separately operated separately from RER/GO. The TTC can set it's own frequency but more importantly the have TTC fares which essentially makes it another subway line.

The ridership on the UPX would multiply by 10 overnight if it was to become just part of the TTC with TTC fares {and an extra fare for Pearson station} and this will be the same with ST if run by RER/GO.

"fares and frequency."

How can either of these be guaranteed though considering the RER/GO/ST is sharing track space with both freight (affecting frequency) and regular GO lines not subject to a subsidized fare rate?

ST is a failure because it doesn't have dedicated tracks of it's own by which speeds could be drastically improved. And without frequency there goes demand and hence the need to keep fares higher than standard TTC rates to remain in operation.

 

[amnesiajune]

The entire SmartTrack route (aside from the Eglinton spur) is owned by Metrolinx and freight traffic doesn't use any of it. The railway line to Unionville doesn't connect to any other rail lines and ends in Uxbridge. The railway line to Brampton is only for passenger trains within Toronto, and has two or more passenger train-only tracks almost all the way to Brampton.