raptor
Senior Member
but you are still not quite correct. 2021-2015 = 6
|
|
|
raptor
Senior Member
How is that relevant? Crosslinx was awarded the contract in 2015
sixrings
Senior Member
I'm all for this line but I feel this goes back to 2011 as well. I bought my place beside Eglinton west just for years of delays to occur. Happy its getting done but its been forever and for anyone in the area the longer number seems far more accurate.
hw621
Senior Member
^Not referring to Crosslinx alone but the construction of the project as a whole will be 10 years by 2021 (if I remember correctly the expected opening date has been deferred from 2020 to 2021). Metrolinx's project management ability is in question.
sixrings
Senior Member
its not the project management as much as the deferred spending. Also originally they were suppose to close the Allen for a couple years to store the construction equipment but that was a no go from my sr nimby neighbours who may financially be blessed from their house values rising (i dont think they need or care if their forest hill values go up much more) yet at the same time will likely be dead before the opening.
drum118
Superstar
TransitBart
Senior Member
This photo looked better when I took it. It's a crappy shot looking southeast from the southbound lanes of Black Creek Drive at the Eglinton intersection. The construction is the Black Creek flyover from Mount Dennis Station to the west to the western portal east of this intersection.
Attachments
nfitz
Superstar
They've banded around crush-loading values for a TTC Flexity of 200. But even if you use the peak design load of 130 (which seems quite reasonable to me, it's 108 for an ALRV and 74 on a CLRV) ... which is 390 for a 3-car train.
If you run every 2 minutes that's 11,700. 15,000 might be pushing it ... which would be about one every 1.5 minutes. But it should be more than 9,000.
Especially as the Eglinton Line 5 cars are a bit wider than the TTC Flexity.
Streety McCarface
Senior Member
In the underground section, sure, you might get every 2 minutes, but not on the surface section.
rbt
Senior Member
It's easier to run tighter frequencies (in the tunnel portion) with shorter trains as use of the cross-over tracks is that much shorter. 90 second frequencies should be quite a bit easier on Eglinton than it will be on line 1/2. Dwell time at interchange stations will be the main capacity constraint and the plans for those stations look pretty good for the Eglinton line portion (centred, plenty of space, etc.).
Of course, even just 10k from East + 10k from West unloading at Yonge to transfer will very rapidly overload Yonge with passenger lines reaching all the way to the arriving Eglinton trains.
Last edited:
innsertnamehere
Superstar
the smaller trains means that dwell times will be smaller too. Less people to get on and off.
Also, 10k will never be needed on the surface portion. demand will be too low forever more or less, and if it does exceed that, as rbt mentioned, there will be much larger issues elsewhere on the network.
Also, 10k will never be needed on the surface portion. demand will be too low forever more or less, and if it does exceed that, as rbt mentioned, there will be much larger issues elsewhere on the network.
Neutrino
Senior Member
To alleviate the crush at Eglinton, is the TTC able to add another car to the line 1 trains?
Allandale25
Senior Member
Contra
Senior Member
Nope. The current trains are a one-size solution. I suppose they could switch to the older model but I also don't know if all stations could support the extra car.