Toronto Ontario Line 3 | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx

Kitsune said:
Canada Line currently runs at 3m 20s giving a 6100 pphpd capacity after the split. They are adding additional train sets starting this summer to decrease that to 2m 30s, providing 8100 pphpd. Max is roughly 15000 pphd / 1m 30s with a additional 10m C car (the platforms can be extended from 40m to 50m). The Broadway subway is being built with 80m platforms.
Click to expand...

While off topic, I hope the build provisions for longer platforms. For a while, Translink wanted to add a 5th car to the new Mark III trains, it would have required preventing some of the doors opening since they'd be off platform. As the Canada Line shows, it's prohibitively expensive to go back and add longer platforms later for underground stations.

As for the DRL, maybe Ford is going with Elon Musk's Boring Company thing. Cars in a subway would be the kind of thing that would wow him.
 
WislaHD said:
The tunnel size isn't the worry (except when it is due to the PATH and downtown utilities), it is the cost of construction the station. Larger underground station to accommodate RER-equivalents would increase costs substantially over what we are doing on Eglinton.
Click to expand...
Sort of makes me wonder if we'll be seeing fewer stations as a result- especially if this becomes some sort of RER-metro system that might presumably be able to utilize GO's main lines.
 
CBC has an odd, seemingly pro-Ford transit piece up.

www.cbc.ca

Why Doug Ford's subway plan might actually work | CBC News

Many Torontonians are quite understandably deeply skeptical about any transit plan touted by Premier Doug Ford, given that the premier’s late brother tore up what they saw as a perfectly fine transit plan on his first day as the city’s mayor.
www.cbc.ca www.cbc.ca

Within the article, this paragraph can be found:

The city's existing proposal envisions that trains would be able to come along Line 2 from Kennedy and switch to the DRL at Pape. The province says it makes no sense to build a new line that has to be compatible with the old technology on Line 2. That's why it's proposing a "free-standing" line, in which trains would run only between Pape and Osgoode, using the latest available technology.

This is clearly erroneous, implying the connection to Line 2 has to do with interlining rather than a connection to Greenwood Yard.

Very sloppy journalism.
 
Northern Light said:
The city's existing proposal envisions that trains would be able to come along Line 2 from Kennedy and switch to the DRL at Pape. The province says it makes no sense to build a new line that has to be compatible with the old technology on Line 2. That's why it's proposing a "free-standing" line, in which trains would run only between Pape and Osgoode, using the latest available technology.
Click to expand...
The government insists the free-standing line would be quicker and cheaper to build than the city's model. The province is not proposing any change to the proposed routing of the DRL (down Pape and across Eastern Avenue and Queen).
Click to expand...

I also find it puzzling that that argument is being made- where would train cars be stored? Are we going to see the world longest moving sidewalk?
 
jje1000 said:
I also find it puzzling that that argument is being made- where would train cars be stored? Are we going to see the world longest moving sidewalk?
Click to expand...

Ford’s comment that his option would not just be for relief but would carry people from further afield may answer that.

It all makes sense if you assume that he intends a longer line that is all built immediately - likely both the South and North segments (and perhaps more). There was a lot of talk about a maintenance yard somewhere up in the North phase.

If both phases happen together, the maintenance yard can be built by opening day. Greenwood is not needed.

I am hoping that he will eventually walk back his comment to say that his jawdropping new technology remark was only in reference to the new line being ATC. That is possibly all the line about different technology in the letter was ever referring to. But he has gotten such attention that now he may actually propose a different whole design, just to save face.

- Paul
 
crs1026 said:
Ford’s comment that his option would not just be for relief but would carry people from further afield may answer that.

It all makes sense if you assume that he intends a longer line that is all built immediately - likely both the South and North segments (and perhaps more). There was a lot of talk about a maintenance yard somewhere up in the North phase.

If both phases happen together, the maintenance yard can be built by opening day. Greenwood is not needed.
Click to expand...
That's my hope as well, the article unfortunately doesn't do much to explain that.
 
Two elephants in the room that might be worth discussing:
  • the media seem certain that the overall envelope Ford will offer for transit will be around $30B. How much is left for other things after the four signature projects are funded? The BCS for GO expansion gave a price tag of $15-17B.....how much of that has been sacrificed to fund subways?
  • we seem to assume that if the purse strings open, all of these projects can be absorbed by the construction industry, on top of all the development they will trigger. A decade back, my job involved watching labour forecasts - the 2008 recession saved Ontario from running out of construction trades, at least relative to projects that were being proposed at that time. Similarly, project management skills have always been in short supply. We used to joke that the biggest city in Newfoundland was Fort McMurray, a reference to itinerant trades in the oilpatch. Does Ontario have the depth in people and contractor organizations to manage all this work simultaneously? Our inability to get shovels in the ground may be saving us from an embarrassing undersupply of shovels.

- Paul
 
Kyle Campbell said:
As for the DRL, maybe Ford is going with Elon Musk's Boring Company thing. Cars in a subway would be the kind of thing that would wow him.
Click to expand...
lol...did you see this?
transpod-gardiner-toronto-1200x675.jpg
A concept illustration of a hyperloop tube in downtown Toronto. (TransPod photograph)

Transport Canada wants to study the potential of hyperloop technology, a futuristic mode of high speed transportation envisioned by eccentric billionaire Elon Musk.
Click to expand...
Transport Canada to study Hyperloop technology
By Jolson Lim | Mar 28, 2019 | 2 minutes
 
jje1000 said:
I also find it puzzling that that argument is being made- where would train cars be stored? Are we going to see the world longest moving sidewalk?
Click to expand...
That would certainly be novel, using the high speed sidewalks like in Pearson when landing from on international flight.
 
jje1000 said:
Sort of makes me wonder if we'll be seeing fewer stations as a result- especially if this becomes some sort of RER-metro system that might presumably be able to utilize GO's main lines.
Click to expand...
It could be both if the stations have a passing loop built in. With modern signalling and control, that could be just a single track passing between two outer platform stopping tracks and shared for both directions. This is an already extant system for many subways and railways albeit the practice has more often been to use a passing track for each direction. That may be more than needed if modelling can show one is sufficient, especially during peak.
 
What if this new DRL ends up simply becoming improvements to the existing Yonge Line? (ie. an additional track to run express trains) Would make sense that it would be built along the same timeline as a Yonge extension too.
 
All this teasing and secrecy from the government is ridiculous. It's like they think they're Amazon or something.

Tuscani01 said:
What if this new DRL ends up simply becoming improvements to the existing Yonge Line? (ie. an additional track to run express trains) Would make sense that it would be built along the same timeline as a Yonge extension too.
Click to expand...
It wouldn't make any sense at all. It would have all the disadvantages of the relief line (just as complicated and expensive) with none of the advantages (expand the subway to new areas, network redundancy, relieve streetcars and buses, etc.). And it wouldn't even relieve Yonge-Bloor station since everyone would still be transferring there.
 
Kyle Campbell said:
For a while, Translink wanted to add a 5th car to the new Mark III trains, it would have required preventing some of the doors opening since they'd be off platform.
Click to expand...
What happened to this idea?
It makes perfect sense to me. Maybe expand the length of the busiest 1 or 2 stations on the network, and the longer train open all doors only at these few stations.
 
There are 2 lofty goals for the DRL. (1) is to relieve the Yonge line from long commutes into downtown and (2) rapid transit downtown. I would suspect that these can be looked at separately. Can we increase GO Train capacity on RH, add underground connections at Main & Dundas West and have a fare system that encourages these transfers? And at the same time have a lower capacity ROW (Queen Streetcar tunnel?) using cut and cover most of the way to add downtown capacity.

Is this cheaper and meets the 2 needs?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top