pstogios
Senior Member
Rob, is that you?
|
|
|
Rob, is that you?
ksun
Senior Member
That's probably true. However, I was taking the 510 this Sunday - the old one, and it was quite full, though not "crowded".
despite much clarification, I still think the new 510 is very similar to LRTs. What exactly is the difference? (it is not a rhetorical question, I genuinely want to know.)
That's quite true. However, Spadina is one of the busiest streets in the city I believe, busier than Bay or University (except rush hour) or College I think. Is a subway really an overkill, specially considering that the very frequent 510s are always quite full.
I think there is nothing wrong with aspiring to be world class. It is not a bad thing worth laughing at. Although I agree world class doesn't mean many subway lines. It depends on density and ridership.
In reality, Toronto does want to be world class. (this "Toronto only wants to be Toronto" thing is meaningless - there are definitely a lot of common qualities among world class cities.)
Cheap shots, really lame. He was talking about whether the LRTs will be sufficient to handle the demand on Eglinton and Spadina, while Rob is most concerned with not letting LRTs take lanes from drivers. It is really different. It is not a sin to want subways on this forum from now on, is it? Is it just me or the word "subway" carries an automatic derogatory meaning here?
Last edited:
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
It is automatically derogatory to argue for it without consideration of ridership, density and development patterns - especially when coupled with unrelated postings in multiple unrelated threads claiming that the sky will fall - contrary to projections developed with far more vigor.
AoD
ehlow
Senior Member
I've already tried to explain this several times to you, but I'll try again as simply as possible. Just to clarify, we're comparing 510 Spadina with new streetcars to at-grade LRT like Sheppard and Finch LRTs.
1. Vehicle capacity: Sheppard and Finch can run multi-unit trains which consist of 2 vehicles the size of the new streetcars. That's two 30 meter cars attached together and operated as one vehicle. Other LRTs like Eglinton can have up to 3 vehicles, if ridership warrants it. So the length of the train can be double what the Spadina line runs.
2. Speed: More than double the speed. Sheppard and Finch will go 22-23 km/h. Spadina goes 10.5 km/h. This is due to stop spacing and signal spacing.
Source:
http://stevemunro.ca/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/RouteSpeeds201010.pdf
http://thecrosstown.ca/sites/default/files/pdf/reports/Sheppard-EA/ea_report_master_part1.pdf
W. K. Lis
Superstar
The 510 Spadina and the rest of the legacy streetcar network uses single-point switches. The Eglinton Crosstown LRT and the other Transit City lines will use double-point switches, just like in the subway.
Streetcars have to go slower over the switches because of the single-points. Subways (heavy rail ) and light rail go faster over the switches because of the double-ponts.
Streetcars have to go slower over the switches because of the single-points. Subways (heavy rail ) and light rail go faster over the switches because of the double-ponts.
Last edited:
MisterF
Senior Member
Really, the lines are blurred. Some lines have characteristics of LRT and traditional streetcars at the same time. Some lines operate as streetcars in some areas and LRT in others. We have names for different types of services but they don't always neatly fit into a category. No need to get snippy if people call Spadina an LRT (albeit a very slow one) or Eglinton a subway, streetcar, or tram.
ksun
Senior Member
true, however, I wonder if ridership/density on Spadina ave is really lower than say outer part of the Bloor-Danforth line? or even the Spadina line north of Eglinton West?
ehlow
Senior Member
I agree, but when people say that what will be on Eglinton or Sheppard is the exact same thing as St Clair or Spadina, it's inaccurate. Double the average speed is a huge difference. I'm just trying to make it simple what the differences are between the two transit lines.
I don't really care what they're called. I don't mind calling Sheppard or St Clair an LRT, they are just very slow/local LRTs. I also don't mind calling Eglinton a subway. It's a spectrum and debating the specific terms becomes pointless at a given point. It's when people say "all LRTs are slow because Spadina is slow" that bothers me due to the inaccuracy of it.
Johnny Au
Senior Member
Olivia Chow prefers the terms "above-ground rail" and "below-ground rail." Why? It is to get away from the subway vs. LRT debate (especially given that the Eglinton Crosstown LRT is underground for much of its length and that Lines 1 and 2 are above ground for quite some length).
ksun
Senior Member
why can't we simply make 510 and 512 faster (by removing some stops) so that they can realize their full potential and function like LRTs? People have such negative impression of them precisely because they operate in the slowest and less efficient way. For example, Nassau stop is 220 meters from College st. NB Richmond stop is 80 m from Queen stop. Seriously, a stop at King, Richmond and Queen, when King and Queen are hardly 400 meters apart?
Can't blame people.
ksun
Senior Member
it matters because underground rail doesn't need to stop for traffic lights or left turning cars.
HUGE difference in terms of speed reliability.
Whether it is technically LRT or subway hardly matters to 99% of riders.
salsa
Senior Member
Because she is too chicken shit to call it what it is. The term LRT has been deeply stigmatized by the Ford propaganda, so Chow (among others) try to avoid using that word in an attempt to avoid pissing off low information suburban voters. The Liberal budget said something like "transit solutions on Finch and Sheppard" without mentioning LRT, for similar reasons.
When did she say "below-ground rail"? I haven't heard that one before.
ehlow
Senior Member
Because in order to make it faster you both have to remove stops AND reduce and eliminate with the traffic light delays. If you remove the stops alone, it may not be faster. If you remove traffic lights alone (made it elevated or underground), but the stops are still 200m apart, then it won't be that much faster.
Also, as I keep mentioning, the other difference is that multi-unit coupling of trains mean Sheppard would still carry 2x the amount of people per train/driver than St Clair. If your max frequency is say every 3-5 min, the larger train increases the capacity of the line.
I don't disagree with that, but to claim that Sheppard or especially Eglinton will be like that is inaccurate. They are much faster.
I'm not blaming, I'm trying to explain what you asked, the difference between Sheppard/Finch LRTs and Spadina/St Clair.
There are other factors to consider as well. What is the average delay due to traffic light? How far apart are the traffic lights (how many?). What percentage of time does it give the red light to the street the transit vehicle is on?
For example, on Sheppard between Pharmacy and Warden, there is 800m of street without any traffic signal. Other parts average about 400m per intersection.
On St Clair, the traffic lights are every 200m, sometimes even down to 100m. Which do you think would be faster for any surface vehicle?
When you say left turning cars, there are different scenarios. A King streetcar could wait the entire green cycle waiting for the left turning vehicle in front of it. A Spadina streetcar will wait maximum the left turn signal phase, it isn't directly behind the left-turning vehicle.
Last edited:
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
Other than platform length, what exactly is stoppunng FWLRT & SELRT from having trains of more than 2 LRVs in length? The 2 LRV limit sounds very arbitrary to me.
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
AoD: why did you even bother asking for evidence? You know he doesn't have any
