Transit Fantasy Maps

[gweed123]

I think putting all the LRTs on the map would be insane. They don't belong on the subway map. Of course they'll go on the system-wide map, but it would be frankly disingenuous and misleading to put them on a subway map.

I'd be fine with doing it the way Boston does it.

To be fair, it's a Rapid Transit Map, not a subway map. As long as there's clear lineweights differentiating grade-separated rapid transit from at-grade rapid transit, I'm fine with it.

 

[jamincan]

I don't even see the point of differentiation based on at-grade and grade-separated. The point of a map is to communicate to people how to get from point A to point B. That is it. Mixing in other details just gets in the way of its primary objective.

 

[Dan416]

I'd be fine with doing it the way Boston does it.

Maybe I need to be more specific. We're talking about the maps that the TTC will be using in our subway and LRT fleet. For example, the Subway/RT Route Map in cars today.

Of course the TTC shouldn't be putting the LRT lines on a subway map. The only three subway lines in Toronto are Sheppard, Yonge-University-Spadina and the Bloor-Danforth. However, the TTC hasn't publicly used subway exclusive maps for almost 30 years. The closest thing they have is their "Subway/RT Route Map" that are used on our subway fleet. It features our SRT, BD, YUS, and Sheppard lines. The SRT is not a subway. They switched over to that map when the SRT opened in the 80s. I see no reason why they won't do the same now with the LRT. Especially since TTC/Metrolinx have been pushing it as a cheaper, but fast alternative to expensive subways (which is exactly what it is).





Who would it be misleading and how? It's not like these things are bus/streetcar routes, where it can literally take 30 minutes to travel 1 km. These are LRTs which in practice should have a trivial speed difference when compared to heavy rail.

What's misleading is omitting the LRT lines and making people falsely believe that there's no transit in those areas.

Imagine the complains when thousands of customers spend twice or three times as long as they need to travelling because someone decided that LRTs, which are almost as fast and operate nearly identically to subways, weren't good enough for our Subway/(L)RT Route Map.

LRTs operate nearly identically to subways? When did the TTC ever decide this? The only parts of the LRT network that will match subway speeds are those parts that are grade-separated with similar stop spacing, i.e. the tunnelled portion of Eglinton. The remaining LRT lines are being operated like our existing streetcars: in the median of the road, stopping for traffic lights, etc. They belong on the subway map as much as the Spadina streetcar does.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

To be fair, it's a Rapid Transit Map, not a subway map. As long as there's clear lineweights differentiating grade-separated rapid transit from at-grade rapid transit, I'm fine with it.

Do you really think it matters? Are our riders heads going to explode if their in a ROW instead of underground? Even if that LRT gets them to where they're going just as about as fast as a subway would have? This is just a bunch of technical nitpicking that does absolutely nothing to serve the TTC's riders better. The lines will be on the map, because that's what's best for riders.

And when the TTC does put the LRT lines on the map, I'm sure they'll just call it a transit map. Or even better, keep calling it a rapid transit map. I doubt any of the TTC's customers care what some transit experts ambiguously decided is and is not rapid transit.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

I don't even see the point of differentiation based on at-grade and grade-separated. The point of a map is to communicate to people how to get from point A to point B. That is it. Mixing in other details just gets in the way of its primary objective.

Exactly. This discussion is just a transit geek circle jerk. Sometimes we focus on little technical details too much for our own good.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

LRTs operate nearly identically to subways? When did the TTC ever decide this? .

Metrolinx. Not TTC.

The only parts of the LRT network that will match subway speeds are those parts that are grade-separated with similar stop spacing, i.e. the tunnelled portion of Eglinton.

Your point? The at grade portions of ECLRT, SELRT and FWLRT will be at most two minutes slower than if they were an underground LRT. We're arguing about seconds here. Nobody (but some here on UT) will notice the difference.

The remaining LRT lines are being operated like our existing streetcars: in the median of the road. Yes, they do run in the median of the road. But they run in a separated ROW. Stopping for traffic lights, etc. They belong on the subway map as much as the Spadina streetcar does

No. Their operation has more in common with our subway lines than our streetcar lines. Unlike our streetcars, LRTs will run separated from traffic. They will also have signal priority, which should mean that there will be minimal (if any) interference from traffic. They also will have to follow signals similar to the ones we see on our subway lines. This means that LRV arrival will be timed near perfectly, unlike on Spadina and other streetcar lines where their arrival times vary widely. This also means that there will be no vehicle bunching, just like on our subway lines. They will also be stopping at every LRT station at a predetermined interval, just like our subways.

The only major thing they have in common with our streetcars from an operation POV is that they run in ROW. That's it.

 

[Dan416]

If you seriously believe the LRTs will run anything like our subways, I have some land on the moon to sell you.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

If you seriously believe the LRTs will run anything like our subways, I have some land on the moon to sell you.

Sell the land to Metrolinx and TTC. They're the one running this operation. I'm just the messenger.

Anyways, we'll see in a few years.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

If you seriously believe the LRTs will run anything like our subways, I have some land on the moon to sell you.

There seems to be some confusion about what exactly these LRT lines are (some still call them streetcars) , so here are a few videos of the Central Link line in Seattle to demonstrate what we should be getting. Of course, local environmental conditions will affect performance, but as far as I can tell the Central Link line is operated exactly the same as ECLRT, FWRT and SELRT are planned to be. Notice that the LRV has signal priority, stops at every station and uses signalling similar to the ones found on our subways to make bunching impossible. This line apparently runs at 3 minute frequencies (like or subways). Hopefully this will dispel any beliefs that our LRT lines are anything like St. Clair, Spadina or any of the other streetcar lines for good (regardless of what Ford says).

Watch at the 8:15 minute mark to see performance in ROW, similar to our FWLRT and SELRT lines.

[video=youtube;wuDNBoCgOTk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wuDNBoCgOTk[/video]

Here are three other videos. Unfortunately UT members are only allowed to embed one video per post.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvBu7YDN_BE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7R_08LgZU8&list=WL210E9249906F7596

At 7:45 minutes, you can see ROW travel:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVarqrslOuE

I am eagerly anticipating the opening of our new LRT lines. I feel that once people actually use them, they'll clearly see that it's not second class transit. Then we can finally get to building more of these things across the city, where appropriate.

 

[diminutive]

There seems to be some confusion about what exactly these LRT lines are (some still call them streetcars) , so here are a few videos of the Central Link line in Seattle to demonstrate what we should be getting. Of course, local environmental conditions will affect performance, but as far as I can tell the Central Link line is operated exactly the same as ECLRT, FWRT and SELRT are planned to be. Notice that the LRV has signal priority, stops at every station and uses signalling similar to the ones found on our subways to make bunching impossible. This line apparently runs at 3 minute frequencies (like or subways). Hopefully this will dispel any beliefs that our LRT lines are anything like St. Clair, Spadina or any of the other streetcar lines for good (regardless of what Ford says).

Watch at the 8:15 minute mark to see performance in ROW, similar to our FWLRT and SELRT lines.

I am eagerly anticipating the opening of our new LRT lines. I feel that once people actually use them, they'll clearly see that it's not second class transit. Then we can finally get to building more of these things across the city, where appropriate.

Central link is a bit unique though. Stations are extremely spaced (2km), the majority of the line is segregated and headways are low enough (4-8 tph) to allow effective signal priority at the few surface intersections.

Using ~30km/h avg speed as the defining characteristic of what goes on the rapid transit map does open a can of works in that nearly all surface routes could operate at that speed. The Viva Rapidways are projected to have average speeds of 30-35km/h, yet there's no plan to include them on any map. I imagine most TTC routes could achieve those speeds given basic improvements like reduced spacing, dedicated lanes, all door boarding n POP.

Perhaps it's worth abandoning a specific 'rapid transit map' in favor of a broader network map which would include everything. BRTs, LRTs, subway and commuter rail could all be represented with unique markings.

 

[CDL.TO]

Unlike our streetcars, LRTs will run separated from traffic.

Just like the Spadina, St. Clair, and Queen's Quay streetcars.

They will also have signal priority, which should mean that there will be minimal (if any) interference from traffic.

Just like the St. Clair streetcar has signal priority.

They also will have to follow signals similar to the ones we see on our subway lines.

The LRT lines will not have signals on the surface sections.

This means that LRV arrival will be timed near perfectly, unlike on Spadina and other streetcar lines where their arrival times vary widely. This also means that there will be no vehicle bunching, just like on our subway lines. They will also be stopping at every LRT station at a predetermined interval, just like our subways.

Although we will have to wait and see if this is true, we've now established that the only difference between a streetcar and an LRT is that an LRT will run on schedule.

To quote Steve Munro:
"LRT is streetcar technology" "If someone wants to know where “LRT” came from, it was from streetcars seeking better PR. A rose by any other name …"

Look, I'm pro-LRT. But I don't think that breathlessly declaring that streetcars and LRT are completely different is helping the cause. You can declare that LRTs and streetcars aren't similar all you wish, but when the public sees the plans they can see the many similarities.

Central link is a bit unique though. Stations are extremely spaced (2km), the majority of the line is segregated and headways are low enough (4-8 tph) to allow effective signal priority at the few surface intersections.

True. I think the other key part of Seattle is the majority of it does not run in the median of the street, but is instead fully grade separated. This seems to be the model that most successful LRT systems have used: in the street median only when a suitable non-street ROW alternative is not available. You see a lot of expressway and railway corridors being used. Transit City instead declared that LRT must always run in the median of the street (unless the street was too narrow).

 

[Rainforest]

"at most two minutes slower than if they were an underground LRT" is way too optimistic. My estimate for the surface section of Eglinton East LRT (9 km) is 4 - 6 min slower than underground. For Finch and Sheppard LRTs with much longer surface sections, we can expect 8 - 12 min slower.

Speaking of the map, I would put both subways and LRTs on it, but use thicker lines for subways. Locals will know the difference and plan their trips accordingly, while for tourists, a 8 - 12 min difference in travel time is usually not an issue and getting clear directions is more important.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

"at most two minutes slower than if they were an underground LRT" is way too optimistic. My estimate for the surface section of Eglinton East LRT (9 km) is 4 - 6 min slower than underground. For Finch and Sheppard LRTs with much longer surface sections, we can expect 8 - 12 min slower.

I'm using Metrolinx's estimates here.

Speaking of the map, I would put both subways and LRTs on it, but use thicker lines for subways. Locals will know the difference and plan their trips accordingly, while for tourists, a 8 - 12 min difference in travel time is usually not an issue and getting clear directions is more important.

There is no way that the LRT lines, especially the Crosstown would be a 12 minute travel difference. That would be even slower than the Spadina Streetcar.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

The LRT lines will not have signals on the surface sections.

Although we will have to wait and see if this is true, we've now established that the only difference between a streetcar and an LRT is that an LRT will run on schedule.

When did this change? I've been told by Metrolinx quite awhile ago at one of their events and others that the LRVs will be controlled by signalling throughout the line to eliminate bunching. I'll ask around again since their plans could have changed, or there was a misunderstanding. If this is true, that is rather disappointing. Bunching will now be a realistic possibility. I suppose their justification (if it is true) is that since the lines are short enough and the vehicles have signal priority, bunching wont be an issue.

To quote Steve Munro:
"LRT is streetcar technology" "If someone wants to know where “LRT” came from, it was from streetcars seeking better PR. A rose by any other name …"

Of course they're streetcars (LRV). It should be fairly obvious to anyone that the Freedom and Outlook are more or less exactly the same. I should also be noted that Munro has also said that all of Toronto's Subways, Streetcars and LRTs are exactly the same thing in different packaging.

True. I think the other key part of Seattle is the majority of it does not run in the median of the street, but is instead fully grade separated. This seems to be the model that most successful LRT systems have used: in the street median only when a suitable non-street ROW alternative is not available. You see a lot of expressway and railway corridors being used. Transit City instead declared that LRT must always run in the median of the street (unless the street was too narrow).

Their extensive ROW operation is rather successful. An example of what can be done here in Toronto, assuming we don't do something stupid (like forgetting to switch on signal priority).

 

[innsertnamehere]

End to end of the Sheppard LRT is supposed to take 34 minutes, assumng 22km/h.

End to end on the Sheppard LRT at Subway speeds is 21 minutes, assuming 35km/h.

Therefor there is a 13 minute difference for the Sheppard LRT. Mind you, very few people will be making that trip, and most will probably be transferring at the Scarborough LRT or subway, depending on what one happens.



Finch LRT will take 34 minutes end to end, and would be 21 minutes with a subway. 13 minutes difference.




For the Above ground LRT portion of Eglinton, it will take 21 minutes assuming 22km/h. Admittingly it will likely travel faster than that due to there being only 4 lights in the first 4 km.

at Subway speeds, it would take 13 minutes, meaning an 8 minute difference at maximum, though likely closer to 5 or 6 minutes.

One of the reasons I liked the extension of the LRT Tunnel to Don Mills so much is that it would have shaved off 2 minutes of travel time, for no additional cost.



The difference between the scarborough subway and the scarborough LRT going from STC to Kennedy would be 10 minutes on the LRT Vs. 9 minutes for the subway. The subway would save 1 minute.