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

[EastYorkTTCFan]

What does revenue demonstration service mean? Could it entail a soft one-day opening?

It basically means running simulated service without passengers. For example when the TTC was testing the Toronto Rocket subway trains they would run them and open the doors on the wrong side of the train a the stations or before the extension to Vaughn opened the ran trains empty from Sheppard West station to Vaughn before they returned to pick up passengers again at Sheppard West

 

[bono47]

If the report is based on today's Mx board meeting, then Verster said the signal flaw has already been fixed via software update.

The software issue has been fixed?

 

[ThenWhat]

Would be hilarious if TTC continued to operate buses along Eglinton once the LRT is fully in service and running, just like they run busses above subway routes.

What would be hilarious about it?

That is exactly what they are going to do, and this has been known for years.

Subways don't allow bicycles during rush hour. Presumably the same for LRT. But you can put your bicycle on a TTC bus.

Of course, using a TTC bus in a rush hour may not be the fastest way to get where you want to go if you already have a bicycle, but that is a separate discussion. There will be people who need to get from A to B with their bicycle and cannot or will not ride it.

 

[drum118]

Metrolinx provides update on long-delayed Eglinton LRT after finding software flaw​

 

[smallspy]

If the report is based on today's Mx board meeting, then Verster said the signal flaw has already been fixed via software update.

I don't know if it has been fully repaired, but the third pair of training classes have started going out and doing their runs on the line, so it seems to me that it has been fixed enough to be safe again.

Dan

 

[Richard White]

It basically means running simulated service without passengers. For example when the TTC was testing the Toronto Rocket subway trains they would run them and open the doors on the wrong side of the train a the stations or before the extension to Vaughn opened the ran trains empty from Sheppard West station to Vaughn before they returned to pick up passengers again at Sheppard West

Exactly.

They run as if they were in revenue service to give operators a feel for timings, the line etc. They need to know how to stop properly at the stops, how long it would take for Boarding and disembarking before running real revenue service.

Can you imagine the c*********k that would occur if they went right from training to full revenue service without getting a feel for the line?

 

[PL1]

There will be fewer busses on Eglinton. A number of bus routes that currently go to Eglinton station will be rerouted. E.g. the 56 Leaside and 51 Leslie will be combined into a new 51 Leslie that goes to Donlands station

Edit: this was meant to be in reply to the discussion on busses on Eglinton after the Crosstown finally opens

 

[crs1026]

I don't know if it has been fully repaired, but the third pair of training classes have started going out and doing their runs on the line, so it seems to me that it has been fixed enough to be safe again.

To give this a historical comparison, the UCRS Newsletter of February 1966 reported that the final H1 cars for the Line 2 Bloor Danforth Subway, 5496-5499, were delivered to Greenwood Yard on Jan 3, 1966. Operator training began Jan 10/66.

The system opened successfully on Feb 26, 1966.

- Paul

 

[Metroscapes]

To give this a historical comparison, the UCRS Newsletter of February 1966 reported that the final H1 cars for the Line 2 Bloor Danforth Subway, 5496-5499, were delivered to Greenwood Yard on Jan 3, 1966. Operator training began Jan 10/66.

The system opened successfully on Feb 26, 1966.

- Paul

I think the block signaling of Line 2 was a bit less complex than the hardware and software for Line 5's system, so it strikes me as apples to oranges.

 

[cplchanb]

I think the block signaling of Line 2 was a bit less complex than the hardware and software for Line 5's system, so it strikes me as apples to oranges.

yea but with the amount of advances in technology to test and not to mention already in version 8 of their software you'd expect them to be able to get it right far earlier... theyve had 5 additional years to test this!

 

[crs1026]

I think the block signaling of Line 2 was a bit less complex than the hardware and software for Line 5's system, so it strikes me as apples to oranges.

No doubt... and the similarity to the Yonge/University signalling meant they were working with a proven product.

I wonder how many lines of Crosstown signalling code were even written and tested and validated as of the date that Crosstown ground was broken, and how many were written specifically for this line and within the last two years of the original committed tcd date. (Which put the burden of testing and validating and perfecting on this project)

We may be more technically advanced than in 1966, but we pay a huge price for wanting to be at a technological leading edge.

- Paul

 

[stevedean]

Can someone explain this to me like I'm a 5 year old - why do we need to come up with new software for what should be a pretty basic LRT system? Are there not other LRT systems that we could leverage the software from?
Is there anything really special with how Line 1 or Line 2 that made the training time so much less?
It seems like we're trying to reinvent the wheel on something that didn't need it.

 

[dowlingm]

Can someone explain this to me like I'm a 5 year old - why do we need to come up with new software for what should be a pretty basic LRT system? Are there not other LRT systems that we could leverage the software from?
Is there anything really special with how Line 1 or Line 2 that made the training time so much less?
It seems like we're trying to reinvent the wheel on something that didn't need it.

It's not just signalling in the underground section, it's also automated operation. So that increases the degree of difficulty substantially.

 

[duffo]

Can someone explain this to me like I'm a 5 year old - why do we need to come up with new software for what should be a pretty basic LRT system? Are there not other LRT systems that we could leverage the software from?
Is there anything really special with how Line 1 or Line 2 that made the training time so much less?
It seems like we're trying to reinvent the wheel on something that didn't need it.

The line runs automated in its grade-separated right-of-way underground/elevated (Automatic Train Operation or ATO), and once it emerges at Laird, it switches to manual control since it runs on street (Automatic Train Protection or ATP). Transitioning between the two systems on one line mid-service I believe is somewhat unconventional and is probably behind some of the headaches.

 

[crs1026]

It's not just signalling in the underground section, it's also automated operation. So that increases the degree of difficulty substantially.

Agree, but the same question..... did ML buy a proven product or was this custom designed during the project execution?

- Paul