You're right, I probably need to do a bit more research, however, there is also a reason why people post fantasy maps on forums. Try not to burst my bubble too much k?
You forget who in charge of the RTP and that is Metrolinx. They have no use for non standard gauge and therefor the Lakeshore extension would be standard, since Hurontario will be standard. Metrolinx is building the Lakeshore, Dundas and Hurontario 100% at this time. If the PC get in this fall, the RTP maybe water down or scrap.
Just because Metrolinx is in charge of the RTP does not mean that they are tied into one gauge of rail infrastucture. The Waterfront West LRT (which is also part of the RTP) is being designed to run the exact same gauge as the rest of the TTC Streetcar network to take advantage of existing trackage, so I see no reason why the existing gauge of trackage cannot be extended from Long Branch to Port Credit.
In the end, I guess it makes little difference whether or not the section of LRT between Port Credit and Long branch is run as an extension of the Hurontario LRT or as an extension of the 501 Streetcar.
I just have a preference to not force a transfer along the same corridor if it is not necessary, but since this will be a point where people will be changing transit agencies regardless, I could see the case as arguable for either, even with fare integration through Presto.
There is no need for a 3 man crew considering CP uses 2 man crew now. If you go to shorter DMU/EMU trains, you only need one man crew.
CP is a freight operator and subject to different regulations than passenger operators. I was under the impression that passenger operators needed a minimum of 3 crew members per train, but it is a fact i'll have to frind the source for later since it is almost 1 AM.
In any case, there is no reason why there should need to be 2 crewmen on a 2-car DMU/EMU as long as there are station attendants.
The Milton Line cost is not caused by outdated Transport Canada regulations, but CP wanting 4 track in place of 3, as well requiring land to add the 4th track including building new bridges and grade separation.
If the cost is this high, would it be worthwhile for GO to buy CP's mainline and pay to maintain the track and monitor 3-track operation while charging CP for use of this line.
If CP still won't budge (and who would expect them to, this is their mainline) and expanding track is too expensive within the city, then how about the possibility of building a freight rail bypass paralleling the 407 to meet up with a joint-owned York subdivision?
Something like this? It may take CP trains a few extra kilometres to get to their yard in Agincourt, however, by moving almost all freight around the city, they would not have to compete for time with passenger trains and GO, CN, and CP could have complete control over their schedules.
At the same time, how do you expect GO to run more trains on all lines when they are short crews today, let alone in 5 years? you never commented on my factor of 70 that would see GO having 350-400 engineers only by 2025 compare to the 66 they have today.
We hire and train more engineers, that's how. I have no idea where the money is going to come from, but I can sure see that there will be no lack of people willing to be trained for a stable, government-run job in an age of economic uncertainty, and with our projected population growth targets met by immigration.
This problem with no engineers is part of the larger problem that we have in Canada concerning our infrastructure deficit. Something needs to be done, regardless of what political climate we may have in Ottawa or Queens Park. Just look at conservatives in Europe to see how the argument can be made for better rail transport.
As for the Brown BRT, I see your point for speed, connecting nodes, but what good is it when you have next to no riders using it or the headway is so poor that its not worth to used it?? The value maybe great for a few riders, but at what cost to the system riders?
I am not in TDM, however, with the number of GO and potentially Greyhound buses interfacing with the Renforth Gateway, there are sure to be plenty of riders who would use this route over what exists today, especially if they are coming from the West. Currently, to get to Etobicoke by transit from KW, passengers either need to take a Greyhound into Downtown Toronto just to backtrack an hour on the Subway/Streetcar, or take a GO bus to Square One and pay an additional fare to take their chances connecting from Mississauga Transit to the TTC. I have no doubt in my mind that this bus route will be well used, in particular if it is joint-funded by both the TTC and MT.
The Airport Rocket currently runs on 8 minute headways. Even if we just kept those headway in place, I would consider that an acceptable level of service. I would even consider 15 minute headways an acceptable level of service initially.
The argument that you are making here against a rapid bus service on the 427 can be the exact same argument made for not running buses out to suburbs. Buses need to be run out to areas with low ridership in order to bring people to concentrate ridership on high-capacity lines.
If you are looking at a transit map that includes other surrounding areas, you need to look at it and think of it as total network how everything going to work. Drawing lines on maps is one thing, but how they work as a network is another thing. You also need to do some research on those areas as they do have an impact on any plan you come up with.
I'm glad it's not up to me then.
All I need to do as a semi-informed citizen is make suggestions to my transit agencies and see if they bite. They are the ones who will be making the decisions.
Using a people mover in place of the roller-coaster is a waste of money and would be better service by LRT with some interlining. The airport is a missing link/hub for the GTA transit system including TTC, let alone Mississauga Transit.
Sorry if I didn't catch on earlier, but if by the roller-coaster you mean the Union-Pearson Air Rail Link? If so, then what I propose would not replace the ARL, but supplement it. I just forgot to show the ARL on the map.
And I thought we went over this before, but I am proposing REPLACING the people mover with some variety of self-propelled, medium capacity rapid transit, whether it be Skytrain, Elevated LRT, Regular LRT, Monorail ect. The exact technology doesn't matter as much as long as they have quick acceleration and frequent headways.
I really don't like the idea of interlining the Airport with the Eglinton line if the Eglinton is going to be run as an LRT to MCC. By splitting the line, you decrease frequencies on both branches of that line, making it less useful for the people who will be using it on a daily basis to get between Mississauga and Toronto. You also force people east of Renforth to wait for the correct route before boarding, adding one more layer of inconvenience for people who could have just as easily drove to work.
Other than the Brown Line, you are on the right path, but need to do more research and look at a long term vision needs.
Is class over now? Can you show me your alternative so we can compare notes?