Amare
Senior Member
From a functionality perspective I dont know which shelters will be more useless: the one's that Astral have installed for bus shelters or these ones right here.
|
|
|
crs1026
Superstar
^I have walked a lot further to make transfers in other cities. We have been fortunate in Toronto......mostly because our subway system isn’t very extensive. Cedarvale’s layout doesn’t strike me as egregious.
What needs to be rethought is the premise that deep bores are desirable. Between the construction impacts and the permanent long stairwell and escalator/elevator climbs, maybe these aren’t the optimal design.
- Paul
What needs to be rethought is the premise that deep bores are desirable. Between the construction impacts and the permanent long stairwell and escalator/elevator climbs, maybe these aren’t the optimal design.
- Paul
sixrings
Senior Member
In NYC some transfers are crazy. Some don't have escalators or elevators. You need to be fit to ride the subway there. Lots of line but a lot less conveniences than we have on the TTC.
syn
Senior Member
I noticed that on a trip to Boston last year. Realized there's a lot we take for granted on the TTC. As much as we love comparing subway maps, the TTC does a lot of things well given the funding.
Streety McCarface
Senior Member
That's only because their system is so extensive. Also, almost none of it is deep bore.
I honestly find NYCT as a system that is one of the easiest to use from a train transferring perspective. The only really long transfers are those between IRT and BMT/IND lines at a few notable stations. Even then, a lot of IRT-BMT/IND transfers are super convenient (Queensborough Plaza, Lexington-59th Street, Chambers Street, 161st street Yankee Stadium, Court Street).
Pretty much the entire system is at cut-cover/elevated so you're not climbing many stairs, transferring between lines is often on the same platform, and each mainline itself has many branches so you don't necessarily need to even transfer when getting somewhere.
W. K. Lis
Superstar
Billy Bishop has a 260 m (853-foot) pedestrian tunnel between Bathurst Quay and the airport terminal. It includes a couple of moving sidewalks. If walking, it takes about 6-minutes.
From link.
But because patricians may end up using that moving sidewalk, having them at airports is fine. But because the plebeians end up using public transit, making transfers better is not justified.
From link.
But because patricians may end up using that moving sidewalk, having them at airports is fine. But because the plebeians end up using public transit, making transfers better is not justified.
Allandale25
Senior Member
robmausser
Senior Member
Billy Bishop has a 260 m (853-foot) pedestrian tunnel between Bathurst Quay and the airport terminal. It includes a couple of moving sidewalks. If walking, it takes about 6-minutes.
From link.
But because patricians may end up using that moving sidewalk, having them at airports is fine. But because the plebeians end up using public transit, making transfers better is not justified.
Has anyone been on the high speed moving sidewalks at Pearson? They are awesome.
rbt
Senior Member
Agreed, and this is exactly the intended use too. The high-speed walkway was marketed to Metro operators for long-distance transfers; mainly arguing that the walkway is cheaper to build and maintain than trains.
However, after 12 years of operations at Pearson, ThyssenKrupp has never sold another ACCEL walkway. I've gotta assume there is a reason for that; probably extremely finicky with boot dirt and snow.
Last edited:
Richard White
Senior Member
Coolstar
Senior Member
Coronavirus: Another Eglinton Crosstown construction worker tests positive for COVID-19, 4 off the job - Toronto | Globalnews.ca
The affected workers are based out of the Eglinton Crosstown LRT project's west portal site, east of Black Creek Drive and Eglinton Avenue West.
globalnews.ca
EastYorkTTCFan
Senior Member
I've used them once or twice when I've been in that section of Terminal 1 but never really noticed them being any different than the regular ones except for the middle part they kind of spread out more than they do at the beginning and end.
crs1026
Superstar
^They work in the airport because floors can be kept clean and not much dirt gets tracked in. Can’t imagine them working well in a public transit setting where there is more water, slush, salt, and grit tracked in.
- Paul
- Paul
Richard White
Senior Member
They had one at Spadina but maintainece was a headache
W. K. Lis
Superstar
It all depends on which politicians uses it. The auto-addicted ones use the airport, therefore there is funds available to maintain the moving sidewalks at the airport. But because the auto-addicted politicians don't use public transit, the maintaining of a moving sidewalk on the rapid transit lines is low-priority and can be dropped to meet their budget cuts.