Toronto Crosstown LRT | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx | Arcadis

[Streety McCarface]

Agreed. My point is that it's not an insurmountable problem with a relatively easy fix if it's not delivering at least expected results.

Except it's not as easy of a fix as you propose, at least, in the case of the design @MisterF proposed. You'd likely have to shut down numerous intersections for weeks to months at a time to realign them and install barriers. Traffic signals would also have to be replaced. There's also the issue of installing a signaling system that triggers the barriers. You're looking at a few hundred million dollars for every single intersection.

 

[Streety McCarface]

Metrolinx Press Room

Find the latest Metrolinx news, project updates and more.

blog.metrolinx.com

So
Much
Wasted
Space

 

[daptive]

So
Much
Wasted
Space

How much larger are heavy rail subway tunnels versus LRT tunnels?

 

[crs1026]

^ Much as the clearances seem ample, I’m intrigued that the first vehicle didn’t have any of the clearance-checking styrofoam and cameras that we saw for first vehicles through the KW and TYSSE projects. They may be doing that with some other test rig, or this was truly a “symbollic” passage.

This may be more of an opening of test track for vehicle burnin than a real project milestone, but it’s certainly good to see.

- Paul

 

[Streety McCarface]

How much larger are heavy rail subway tunnels versus LRT tunnels?

They're smaller — the ID of the crosstown's tunnels is 5.75 m, while the ID of the TYSSE's was 5.4 m, and the ID of the Sheppard Subway tunnels was 5.2m because the tunnels were relatively straight.

 

[Steve X]

Except it's not as easy of a fix as you propose, at least, in the case of the design @MisterF proposed. You'd likely have to shut down numerous intersections for weeks to months at a time to realign them and install barriers. Traffic signals would also have to be replaced. There's also the issue of installing a signaling system that triggers the barriers. You're looking at a few hundred million dollars for every single intersection.

Barriers are never happening. It isn't part of the city vision at all. How well the LRT runs will depend if the city is willing to activate a transit phase (which can be easily reprogrammed even on Spadina) and the willingness of TTC allowing trains to cross intersection and switches at higher speeds.

 

[Voltz]

Barriers are never happening. It isn't part of the city vision at all. How well the LRT runs will depend if the city is willing to activate a transit phase (which can be easily reprogrammed even on Spadina) and the willingness of TTC allowing trains to cross intersection and switches at higher speeds.

I don't think there is any need for full crossing arms to get decent signal priority, traffic lights can do the same thing, the ATC system will know exact;y where the trains are, and if it can communicate with the traffic lights then its good enough. There can't really be full priority either way since the cross streets need a certain amount of green light time for pedestrian crossings, which again can be mitigated by decent communication between the traffic signals and the train signals.

If anything, I would consider short crossing arms for the left turn lanes on Eglinton, they could allow the city to be comfortable with the trains crossing intersections at full speed.

 

[robmausser]

How much larger are heavy rail subway tunnels versus LRT tunnels?

The LRT tunnels are larger as they need to accommodate the pantograph.

 

[rbt]

How much larger are heavy rail subway tunnels versus LRT tunnels?

6.5m diameter for Crosstown and about 5.5m diameter for Scarborough/Spadina extensions. Sheppard was a bit less at 5.2m; there have been building code changes since then.

Tunnels costs are low compared to deep-station costs. IIRC under 10% of Crosstown capital budget is tunnels, closer to 60% is stations and emergency exits.

I've sometimes wondered if a 6m wide train (super-fat 8 person across seating with double-aisles) at half the length would cut 20% of the construction price with the same capacity. Doors become a problem. Stations would also likely need to be wider to meet fire-code. Still, I'd like to see Metrolinx run a quick analysis on a few very out-of-the-box designs; the Barcelona Line 10 experiment seems to be going well on the short open section.

 

[Rainforest]

I've sometimes wondered if a 6m wide train (super-fat 8 person across seating with double-aisles) at half the length would cut 20% of the construction price with the same capacity. Doors become a problem. Stations would also likely need to be wider to meet fire-code. Still, I'd like to see Metrolinx run a quick analysis on a few very out-of-the-box designs; the Barcelona Line 10 experiment seems to be going well on the short open section.

That's an interesting thought; however, what kind of turning radius would such a train need? For the 3m wide train, the recommended radius is 300m (not strictly required but desired to avoid excesive rail and wheel wear). Would it be 600 m for a 6m wide train?

I hope that the radius doesn't need to be proportional to the square of the width

 

[rbt]

That's an interesting thought; however, what kind of turning radius would such a train need? For the 3m wide train, the recommended radius is 300m (not strictly required but desired to avoid excesive rail and wheel wear). Would it be 600 m for a 6m wide train?

No idea. Looking at this chart I don't see an obvious relationship to track gauge. Other factors seem to be more important.

Minimum railway curve radius - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Vehicle shipping would be hard too as railway and road options wouldn't be viable. Perhaps assembly in Kingston and delivery by boat?

 

[Steve X]

I don't think there is any need for full crossing arms to get decent signal priority, traffic lights can do the same thing, the ATC system will know exact;y where the trains are, and if it can communicate with the traffic lights then its good enough. There can't really be full priority either way since the cross streets need a certain amount of green light time for pedestrian crossings, which again can be mitigated by decent communication between the traffic signals and the train signals.

If anything, I would consider short crossing arms for the left turn lanes on Eglinton, they could allow the city to be comfortable with the trains crossing intersections at full speed.

If they implement a "smart" dynamically controlled traffic light coordination taking account the estimated amount of time till the next train(s) are coming and schedule the next few traffic schedules, we'll see better priority. This could possible mean extending the green time from 25 seconds to 45 seconds to accommodate trains in both directions then follow by a longer red phase to allow traffic on the cross street to clear up the traffic backlog. Maybe this is way too advanced for this lame city.

 

[jordanmkasla2009]

This is a really minor detail, but I really hate how none of the signage matches the rest of the system. Like, why are there arrows on all the stations in the strip maps? Why is the font different? Why are we using chevrons instead of arrows for the direction of the trains? Can ML seriously not make the line fit in with everything that already exists and have some design consistency? It doesn’t even match GO’s maps.

That station design may not match the other station designs of the TTC but it does fit in with the design language of another (partially) provincial funded LRT Line.

Google Maps

Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.

www.google.com

 

[Coolstar]

I decided to take the signal priority issue directly to the crosstown team and here's what they had to say.

"Thank you for your interest in the Eglinton Crosstown project. With regards to signal priority, please note that limited priority (request for extended green, or early green if a train is behind schedule) along the Eglinton Crosstown was the finalised agreement with the City of Toronto in the development of the project specific output specifications (PSOS). Unfortunately, at this stage, no further changes will be made."

No chance of real signal priority ever. So except for the track gauge, and the coupled trains, what's stopping us from calling the surface section a streetcar line?

 

[H4F33Z]

That station design may not match the other station designs of the TTC but it does fit in with the design language of another (partially) provincial funded LRT Line.

Google Maps

Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.

www.google.com

View attachment 244245

It's essentially the new design language being pushed by Metrolinx for Eglinton, Finch, and Hurontario. The boring white and black finishes, the font, the symbols, the diagrams and bilinguality. Personally, it's nice and minimalist, albeit a bit boring.

I decided to take the signal priority issue directly to the crosstown team and here's what they had to say.

"Thank you for your interest in the Eglinton Crosstown project. With regards to signal priority, please note that limited priority (request for extended green, or early green if a train is behind schedule) along the Eglinton Crosstown was the finalised agreement with the City of Toronto in the development of the project specific output specifications (PSOS). Unfortunately, at this stage, no further changes will be made."

No chance of real signal priority ever. So except for the track gauge, and the coupled trains, what's stopping us from calling the surface section a streetcar line?

This should be the actual rapid transit map. Emphasis on rapid, because you know...