fanoftoronto
Active Member
Honestly I didn't know they staggered the launches like they do for twin tunnel boring machines.
Also, I really hope they put a map of progress in the website, it'll make for a good visual aid.
technically, never. The Bloor Danforth line did open in stages though, between 1966 and 1968. The original line which opened in 1966 was only from Keele to Woodbine, with subsequent extensions to Islington and Warden opening 2 years later. They were all part of a single project from the start however, so I'm not sure they count.
I thought they did both TBM At the same time as the pit area was empty in June when I last saw it. There was 2 TBM in various stages being built when I had my first look at the site.Honestly I didn't know they staggered the launches like they do for twin tunnel boring machines.
Also, I really hope they put a map of progress in the website, it'll make for a good visual aid.
Let's generate twice the vibration by having both run side by side. Probably not as safe and plus they can sort out any logistical problems with one launch first before another.Honestly I didn't know they staggered the launches like they do for twin tunnel boring machines.
Also, I really hope they put a map of progress in the website, it'll make for a good visual aid.
This technically isn't true. Work on the extensions to Islington and Warden started on March 1, 1965 a little under a year before the first phase of Line 2 opened in 1966. Now the timelines between Line 2 and Line 5 will be very different since the extension of Line 2 to Islington and Warden only took 3 years to build owing to the use of cut-and-cover as well as at-grade construction where possible.technically, never. The Bloor Danforth line did open in stages though, between 1966 and 1968. The original line which opened in 1966 was only from Keele to Woodbine, with subsequent extensions to Islington and Warden opening 2 years later. They were all part of a single project from the start however, so I'm not sure they count.
Have the station names been finalized yet?
Yeah right a "community survey". After they went through their consultants to name the existing Crosstown stations, dont buy that croc of S*** from them.Not yet. Looking through the answers provided by Metrolinx in the website, it seems like they want to do a community survey to decide the names.
They will survey a "community" of consultants.Yeah right a "community survey". After they went through their consultants to name the existing Crosstown stations, dont buy that croc of S*** from them.
The reference to automated trains seems strange, because I thought this is an extension of CrossTown, and I'm not sure its surface route could handle automated trains, is it, at least in the short term?Here are some snaps from the presentation on July 26. I've only included the newer renderings not previously shared.
View attachment 417795
View attachment 417796
View attachment 417797
View attachment 417798
View attachment 417802
View attachment 417803
Overall, I think nothing majorly new in this presentation than what was already provided. I feel like this presentation is more tuned towards the NIMBY's that are asking to bury the line through the Scarlett to Jane section.
remember crosstown has full ATC in the underground portion, if its grade separated i dont see why it cant be full atc here too.The reference to automated trains seems strange, because I thought this is an extension of CrossTown, and I'm not sure its surface route could handle automated trains, is it, at least in the short term?
They want the entire Eg West to be ATO which can't be done if they placed it side by side or in the middle on Eglinton with no fencing.The reference to automated trains seems strange, because I thought this is an extension of CrossTown, and I'm not sure its surface route could handle automated trains, is it, at least in the short term?
Eglinton West is entirely grade separated.They want the entire Eg West to be ATO which can't be done if they placed it side by side or in the middle on Eglinton with no fencing.