Toronto Ontario Line 3 | ?m | ?s

My problem will always be with peak frequencies, you will always have to have large bilevels to deal with extreme peak demand. You simply cannot deal with peak demand on lakeshore using 4-6 car Ottawa style EMUs, you are going to have to go big. 12 car bilevels at 3 minute frequencies seems to be what will be needed on lakeshore in a decade or so, it's just nuts. Running 6 car DMUs every 10 minutes off peak will be fine today , but will be overcrowded In a decade as well. I guess that you could run them every 5 minutes and then at one point switch them out for the larger Bilevels, but it just doesn't make much sense to me, I can't see anything other tha GO using its 12-14 car bilevel EMUs on peak as well and just offering 10 minute off peak service with the same trains. Smaller single level DMUs and EMUs on the other lines would probably be fine however, as running large bilevels every hour just isn't really acceptable.
 
Last edited:
MrsNesbitt said:
I would like to think the use of EMUs would give GO more flexibility to maintain a fairly consistent set of frequencies across their lines while matching train lengths to capacity along the route. Although I suppose we can't entirely hold our breath for such a thing.

Fare integration and electrification are definitely the keys to making REX effective. With fare integration, GO's fairly numerous in-Toronto stations would suddenly become far more useful than they currently are - even to the point of lessening the need for a DRL significantly.
Click to expand...

Very good points. And yes, I think it would have an effect on the DRL, but I don't think it would necessarily decrease the need for it substantially, at least as far as a Lakeshore line goes. If you incorporate similar lines to Brampton and Markham, then you have a real alternative relief option.

And welcome to UT!

innsertnamehere said:
My problem will always be with peak frequencies, you will always have to have large bilevels to deal with extreme peak demand. You simply cannot deal with peak demand on lakeshore using 4-6 car Ottawa style EMUs, you are going to have to go big. 12 car bilevels at 3 minute frequencies seems to be what will be needed on lakeshore in a decade or so, it's just nuts. Running 6 car DMUs every 10 minutes off peak will be fine today , but will be overcrowded In a decade as well. I guess that you could run them every 5 minutes and then at one point switch them out for the larger Bilevels, but it just doesn't make much sense to me, I can't see anything other tha GO using its 12-14 car bilevel EMUs on peak as well and just offering 10 minute off peak service with the same trains. Smaller single level DMUs and EMUs on the other lines would probably be fine however, as running large bilevels every hour just isn't really acceptable.
Click to expand...

Yeah, after I posted that I ran the numbers on capacity of O-Train DMUs and I realized they probably wouldn't be enough. However, I think 5 or 6 car GO trains would do. Remember, because it's a shortened line, units are able to make more runs during the peak period. Right now a train is limited to maybe 2 inbound trips in the AM peak. With a shorter line, that same unit has the potential to do 3 or 4. That means you can have a higher frequency with the same number of trains.
 
MrsNesbitt said:
I have to say that, taking the GO into Union from Durham each day, this sort of arrangement would be an excellent idea. Most of the Lakeshore East express trains are already packed by the time they reach Pickering, so offering a DMU service from Pickering - Clarkson (or Port Credit) would be very beneficial. Adding the extra stations along the western half of the line could take a great deal of pressure off of the Lake Shore / Park Lawn area, especially in the face of standard TTC foot dragging and a rather slim chance there'll be a WWLRT for quite some time.

I can, as they say, dig this plan.
Click to expand...
This is a good idea. Welcome.
 
gweed123 said:
How does that help people inside Toronto though?
Click to expand...
GO needs to run a new type of service to deal with Toronto, but until they have the crews to do it, can't happen.

Some of these new service would only run to the first station in the 905 only servicing the Toronto Station.

In fact there needs to be more station both in Toronto as well the rest of the system and again a new type of service.

The biggest change will happen when lines are electrify and using various lengths of EMU's trains with EU standards, not FRA.
 
WislaHD said:
It seems like it is a good idea because it is.

And cheap too, I don't recall the exact figure but I remember someone saying it would only cost in the ball park of 800-900million. (If someone does know, I'd like a more accurate number) Well short of the several billion-dollar lines that are usually talked about back and forth on here and at city council. Its probably the line that can benefit the most, for the cheapest, and be constructed the quickest.
Click to expand...

The WWLRT has many flaws and needs to follow the idea of having the line on the Lake Shore 100% west of Bathurst Street. A new bridge over the Humber will have to be built to keep the line on Lake Shore 100% and bypassing the Humber Loop.

The plan TTC had to take the line through CNE to Dufferin was so so, but fail to service the waterfront and Ontario Place.

Taking the line north over the rail corridor and running it along the side of it to the Queensway is pure dumb as well removing track capacity for GO to not to have the 6 tracks in this corridor.

When the EA was done a few years ago about rebuilding the Lake Shore, TTC plan was scrap for the north side and was put on the Lake Shore.

Taking the line east of the CNE along Fort York and Bremmer to connect to Union Loop had all kinds of issues that TTC refused to look at. Even Concord for the City Place Development saw no need a line here to the point they were force to build the new Fort York Rd with room for this line in the middle. This line had an impact on Old Fort York itself and with the new visitors building being built has kill that idea.

When ACC was built, a new tunnel and ramp was built under it to connect to the Bay Tunnel and surface at the west side of it in the circle turn around. This would cause an operation issues for the current 509 & 510 cars heading in/out of the loop with is new line crossing it. At the same time, TTC was looking at running a 514 off Bathurst route to Union.

When the EA got underway for the new east Queens Quay line, this flaw show up real nicely that the new expansion for the loop would have lack of capacity for it as well causing a nightmare for operation.

The new loop would only handle 10,000pph for all lines and the expectation was to be 15,000pph with 60 seconds between cars.

The cost of that expansion of the loop has kill the building of the east QQ line to the tune of $375m.

At the same time, the residents of Mimicoe don't want a ROW considering traffic doesn't play a real problem for operation today there today.

There is a way to fix the Union Loop mess, but the city and TTC refused to look at or think about it.
 
Yeah I kept reading about the WWLRT and reading about the problems. I guess the DRL to Queen & Roncesvalles with a nice transfer to the streetcar is the best plan.
 
The ones that force US rail lines to run trains like this:
GO-542-LD-LF-20090816-75.jpg


Instead of this:

1280px-O_Train_over_Rideau_by_Wilder.JPG


The only reason the O-train is allowed to run is because there is 0 Freight activity on the line.

Canada also generally just follows US regulation in terms of safety requirements for compatibility purposes, just like they do with cars. The FRA is dropping regulations to run EU style trains in 2015, but that is still a few years off yet. It does give the likes of GO a whole lot more flexibility now, as they can actually offer DMU or EMU urban rail style service.

Hopefully in a few years GO will actually be legally allowed to run trains like this:

cq5dam.web.570.570.jpeg


And I have a feeling that is what they want to do once Lakeshore is electrified.
 
Last edited:
The legal difference between the O-Train and GO isn't freight traffic, its level crossings.

The O-Train is allowed to run because its route is 100% grade separated from roadways (there are two level crossings with other mainline railways, though).

"Grade separation of the O-Train line from roads is required to conform to current Transport Canada operating rules that prohibit trains such as the Talent and the Coradia Lint from crossing public roads at level crossings. An extension to Bowesville Road would use the existing grade separation of the rail corridor over Hunt Club Road, and new grade separations would be required to carry the O-Train line under Lester Road, Leitrim Road, and Bowesville Road." - direct quote from City of Ottawa study. (http://ottawa.ca/calendar/ottawa/ci...2012-ICS-TRA-0003 O-Train Expansion Study.htm)
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top