News   May 24, 2024
 8.1K     2 
News   May 24, 2024
 1.2K     0 
News   May 24, 2024
 464     0 

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

For vehicle. The constraint is the line, not a given vehicle. The situation you describe is simply mitigated by adding additional vehicles.
You can add vehicles when the trains are going faster too. All else being equal, speed does increase capacity.
 
You can add vehicles when the trains are going faster too. All else being equal, speed does increase capacity.
True - but only a barrier if you are up against the ultimate capacity of the line. You are already in deep trouble if you need to rely on that to keep the line moving (which I suppose is where the Yonge subway was before Covid). It's certainly not going to be a Line 5 issue in the near future.
 
You can add vehicles when the trains are going faster too. All else being equal, speed does increase capacity.

Depends on what constraints you set. If you decide on the # of vehicles per hour, and can correctly predict the speed, you can calculate the total number of trains needed. Lower speed will results in a larger required number of trains and higher operating expenses. But if you are willing to pay that price, you still can provide the desired frequency and capacity.

If your total number of trains is fixed and you can't get more, then your statement is correct; higher speed results in a higher frequency and capacity, because each train makes more trips per day.
 
Depends on what constraints you set. If you decide on the # of vehicles per hour, and can correctly predict the speed, you can calculate the total number of trains needed. Lower speed will results in a larger required number of trains and higher operating expenses. But if you are willing to pay that price, you still can provide the desired frequency and capacity.

If your total number of trains is fixed and you can't get more, then your statement is correct; higher speed results in a higher frequency and capacity, because each train makes more trips per day.
Yeah that's pretty much it. If you have higher speeds then you can carry more people with fewer trains. Sure you could add more trains to a slower line, that will cost extra.
 
I'm not sure why we are revisiting the design basis for this line - great theory, but water under the bridge at this point.

If the Crosstown as opened proves inadequate, there are at least two things that can be done.

One is to deal head on with the traffic signalling issue - there is no reason that the line in its as built form can't have this retrofitted, probably mostly through the as built signalling. There may be more leverage for this after we have a few thousand people riding every hour....if the line proves too slow, and the right things were done to create political awareness and pressure, the penny may drop with Council.

The other is to replace the fleet (it will happen sooner than we think, the oldest cars in the fleet are already five years old) with higher capacity cars. A three car Flexity train has a lot of wasted space - long couplers, rounded ends, cabs at the end of every car including middle cars. I'm sure there could be a 15% capacity improvement just by addressing that. (I wonder what the longest single carbody segment that will fit in the curve geometry is.... three Flexities is an awful lot of axles)

The signalling changes can happen immediately, there is likely no rush for the fleet solution but it may be needed some day.

- PUl
 
The only scenario which is worth modelling significant change against is with a constructed Ontario Line, surely? Any modelling done with no DRL, or DRL only to Pape, is going to be superceded. Now, Ontario Line which removing some demand toward Line 1 will also create some net extra, so this isn’t a statement that it will drive down overall ridership, but my assumption is that it will shorten average Crosstown ride lengths because some travellers will converge on Science Centre rather than go all the way to Yonge-Eglinton. Hopefully the easternmost part of the line will also see at least some demand head west east to Kennedy and a frequent service on GO, once all the LSE track is fully back in service and a fit for purpose track arrangement/grade separation is constructed between Scarborough Junction and Kennedy.
 
Last edited:
I really can't see this happening, not unless the cars end up being lemons. In those 5 years they've sustained very little wear and tear. They'll just keep them to age 35 instead of 30.

It will be interesting to see if aging is lessened for this fleet versus the downtown trams.... one would think that salt intrusion etc would be less, but the whole fleet has been sitting out in the rain and snow....

And at the end of the day - rust never sleeps.

- Paul
 
Unless they're in for repairs/servicing, cleaning, or stored in the mainline underground, they are outside.
Oh.

That changes things. How utterly bizzare that the rolling stock was allowed to sit outside for 5 years (and counting!) without ever carrying a paying passenger.

What is it with this town and its refusal to store most of its rail rolling stock indoors? Surely the cars would fare a lot better long term not exposed to the elements.
 
Oh.

That changes things. How utterly bizzare that the rolling stock was allowed to sit outside for 5 years (and counting!) without ever carrying a paying passenger.

What is it with this town and its refusal to store most of its rail rolling stock indoors? Surely the cars would fare a lot better long term not exposed to the elements.
The service bays will only hold so many cars and where do you plan to store the rest of them that has cover for them??

Very few places in Europe have inside storage for their fleet with most out in the yard. Buffalo store their cars indoors with three others being outside in the US. All of TTC fleet is outdoors.
 
The service bays will only hold so many cars and where do you plan to store the rest of them that has cover for them??

Very few places in Europe have inside storage for their fleet with most out in the yard. Buffalo store their cars indoors with three others being outside in the US. All of TTC fleet is outdoors.
You store the rest of them in cover that is built.

What places in Europe are these? Certainly not in central Europe, where tram yards without covered storage are the exception, not the norm.
 
Could a case for subsidized housing be built above the yard such that the yard is covered? I know soundproofing would be a challenge, but it could make use of dead air space.
 
You store the rest of them in cover that is built.

What places in Europe are these? Certainly not in central Europe, where tram yards without covered storage are the exception, not the norm.
Belgium, Frankfurt, Nice come to mind and did not see every yard for them, other than Nice back in 2012.

Could a case for subsidized housing be built above the yard such that the yard is covered? I know soundproofing would be a challenge, but it could make use of dead air space.
Housing can be built over yards, and you only have to look at TTC Davisville yard that has been on the books for decades of having development over it. Look at what is taking place in NYC where yards are being covered up.
 

Back
Top