daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Subways and Urban Transport

Subways and Urban Transport Metros, subways, light rail, trams, buses and other local transport systems



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old January 30th, 2014, 12:09 AM   #1301
trainrover
:-x
 
trainrover's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,787
Likes (Received): 738

Huh? Better there being bi-levels than no rail service. Besides, double-deckers are fun to ride. And as for weak acceleration or braking: Take a look at how feeble busses used to be, right. Retrofitting the stock in the shop some time in the future wouldn't be that much of a hassle either. Anyhow, cab-ride videos of modern double-deckers departing or arriving around, say, Germany or Switzerland seem quite satisfactory.
__________________
.
hee hee
.

Last edited by trainrover; January 30th, 2014 at 12:18 AM.
trainrover no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old January 30th, 2014, 08:31 PM   #1302
ssiguy2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: White Rock BC
Posts: 5,404
Likes (Received): 857

Bi-levels are much slower than regular EMU or even DMU due to taking MUCH longer to board and especially exit. This is why they are only used for commuter rail in the first place, they are dysfunctional for more frequent stop systems. That is fine if that is what they are being built as by that just reinforces the notion that GO is a 905 service.

They are also not disabled friendly.
ssiguy2 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 30th, 2014, 09:37 PM   #1303
Scizoid.Trans.Prog.
platfusy i koderaści sio
 
Scizoid.Trans.Prog.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,171
Likes (Received): 312

Toronto should invest in a normal EMU, like Ottawa did. Ottawa do not have too much of it, but it's a small city. Commuter lines should be serviced in standard EMU. Doubledeckers are good only for longer routes (regional).

Last edited by Scizoid.Trans.Prog.; January 31st, 2014 at 10:25 PM.
Scizoid.Trans.Prog. no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 30th, 2014, 11:29 PM   #1304
trainrover
:-x
 
trainrover's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,787
Likes (Received): 738

GO Transit signifies commuter rail and bus services whereas TTC looks after municipal transit.
__________________
.
hee hee
.
trainrover no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 31st, 2014, 04:42 PM   #1305
kythoon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1
Likes (Received): 0

Hey,
Does anyone know what the deepest station in the TTC network is? Better yet, is there a list of station depths out there?
kythoon no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 1st, 2014, 03:02 AM   #1306
Nouvellecosse
~ Mysterious Entity ~
 
Nouvellecosse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Halifax, N.S.
Posts: 4,446
Likes (Received): 313

There are some Bilevel and multilevel trains used for high performance suburban service on networks like the Paris RER and Sydney Trains that can load reasonably quickly - especially those that have 3 doors per side. It's still not as fast as can be provided by a single level EMU or as high capacity as a regular bilevel, but even once service has improved, GO will always be suburban service with larger distances between stops compared to a true metro system so it doesn't need ultra fast loading times.

GO should really be divided up into two separate services. Go "Metro" should be rapid transit level service similar to BART or S-Tog with entirely electrified routes within the urban and suburban areas using single level EMUs and GO Link should be used for the routes that extend longer distances, particularly the sections that extend out of the built up area to places like Barrie, Kitchener, or Milton. The Link services would be very commuter specific and use locomotive hauled carriages and have lower, mainly rush-hour focused service, whereas the Metro services would be moderate frequency of around 6-8 tph peak and 3-4tph off peak.

Or perhaps the TTC could administer the metro services and GO could stick to the commuter services. The TTC metro services would have a dedicated tunnel running through downtown (or even a city loop like in Melbourne) rather than having everything focused on Union.
__________________
.
.
I always think of a new type of cologne brand when I see your name

"Nouvellecosse, by Calvin Klein. Take on the world!"

- MysticMcGoo
Nouvellecosse no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 2nd, 2014, 04:56 PM   #1307
Innsertnamehere
insertoronto
 
Innsertnamehere's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,960
Likes (Received): 680

Quote:
Originally Posted by kythoon View Post
Hey,
Does anyone know what the deepest station in the TTC network is? Better yet, is there a list of station depths out there?
currently I think the deepest is York Mills, but its really not all that deep. Toronto's network is very shallow, with large portions of it on the surface. The Eglinton crosstown is much deeper, and I believe the deepest station there is Caledonia.
Innsertnamehere no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 2nd, 2014, 10:17 PM   #1308
JustinB
Registered User
 
JustinB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,633
Likes (Received): 30

I think Bayview Station is the deepest station in the network.
__________________
The more valuable you perceive your time as worth, the less valuable it actually is.
JustinB no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 3rd, 2014, 07:16 AM   #1309
Innsertnamehere
insertoronto
 
Innsertnamehere's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,960
Likes (Received): 680

That seems possible, I've never used bayview, but for me it was a toss up between York Mills and Don Mills.
Innsertnamehere no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 3rd, 2014, 07:20 PM   #1310
XAN_
Registered User
 
XAN_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,034
Likes (Received): 760

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse View Post
There are some Bilevel and multilevel trains used for high performance suburban service on networks like the Paris RER and Sydney Trains that can load reasonably quickly - especially those that have 3 doors per side. It's still not as fast as can be provided by a single level EMU or as high capacity as a regular bilevel, but even once service has improved, GO will always be suburban service with larger distances between stops compared to a true metro system so it doesn't need ultra fast loading times.
Criticism of so-called 'bi-levels' aren't about 2 levels, but rather of fact that 'bi-level' is a generic name for overweight FRA-compatible loco-hauled cars with poor acceleration and ridiculously high energy/fuel consumption.
__________________
"I'm lost but still I know//There is another world"
-H. Kürsch, 1995
"Well, we all know there's no other side"
-H. Kürsch, 2002

Maadeuurija liked this post

Last edited by XAN_; February 3rd, 2014 at 10:54 PM.
XAN_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 3rd, 2014, 08:51 PM   #1311
trainrover
:-x
 
trainrover's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,787
Likes (Received): 738

Like Kleenex to asswipe
__________________
.
hee hee
.
trainrover no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 4th, 2014, 02:59 AM   #1312
Innsertnamehere
insertoronto
 
Innsertnamehere's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,960
Likes (Received): 680

Quote:
Originally Posted by XAN_ View Post
Criticism of so-called 'bi-levels' aren't about 2 levels, but rather of fact that 'bi-level' is a generic name for overweight FRA-compatible loco-hauled cars with poor acceleration and ridiculously high energy/fuel consumption.
and insanely high seated capacity for what is an otherwise short train, something that is key to be able to deal with the passenger loads exerted on what is really extremely limited infrastructure. (5 out of 7 GO lines are a single track, and up to a few years ago most weren't signalled) The critisism is a bit more valid on the Lakeshore line, but even then not really, up until this summer they only ran hourly trains.
Innsertnamehere no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 4th, 2014, 11:30 AM   #1313
Sopomon
Hideous and malformed
 
Sopomon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 870
Likes (Received): 153

Sure, but all this can be achieved with an EMU of the same length - the seats that are where the locomotive once were should make up the difference. The point is; why does Canada use these slow and inefficient FRA-ok trains?
__________________
And he kicked so many rosebushes at her that eventually, Sasuke turned into a log.
Sopomon no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 4th, 2014, 03:44 PM   #1314
Nouvellecosse
~ Mysterious Entity ~
 
Nouvellecosse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Halifax, N.S.
Posts: 4,446
Likes (Received): 313

For commuter rail lines, it's very hard to justify a huge amount of capital investment required for such service when the same investment could reap much greater ridership benefits elsewhere. They were set up first and foremost because the initial investment was cheap as the tracks already existed and had some extra capacity and all that was needed was the rolling stock. So the goal was to cheaply cram as many passengers as possible onto the unused track time. Adding trips beyond that is a whole different thing.

In order to make electrification worth the investment, you'd need to substantially increase the number of trips, and that's often difficult when there's freight or intercity rail traffic using the same tracks which are mostly owned by the freight companies. You'd need to add a huge amount of extra tracks to improve the single track sections, and even on sections with double track, commuter headway may still be limited. So it would potentially require a huge amount of investment, and it's hard to justify for these suburban routes, especially when some of the routes travel through areas not desirable for passenger rail including industrial zones. This is common here since freight has long dominated railways, so railways and industry went together. The exception is the lakeshore routes where GO owned most of its track and it has more of a passenger oriented history and development pattern, so these are the routes that are slated for electrification, along with the airport connection.
__________________
.
.
I always think of a new type of cologne brand when I see your name

"Nouvellecosse, by Calvin Klein. Take on the world!"

- MysticMcGoo
Nouvellecosse no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 4th, 2014, 05:48 PM   #1315
Innsertnamehere
insertoronto
 
Innsertnamehere's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,960
Likes (Received): 680

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sopomon View Post
Sure, but all this can be achieved with an EMU of the same length - the seats that are where the locomotive once were should make up the difference. The point is; why does Canada use these slow and inefficient FRA-ok trains?
I don't think you realize what I am explaining, as you are insinuating that an EMU is realistic. its not. you have to realize that up until 2 or 3 years ago, GO transit had essentially no capital budget, and ran a commuter service on what are nothing more than a basic freight corridor, with only a few daily trains. Infrastructure was almost non existent on this corridor, it was largely just a signal unsignalled track running through subdivisions, far from a modern rail line with electrical power supply etc. You literally cannot run an EMU on these routes, or really anything other than what is currently being run.
Innsertnamehere no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 9th, 2014, 02:04 AM   #1316
Innsertnamehere
insertoronto
 
Innsertnamehere's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,960
Likes (Received): 680

Tail tracks of the spadina subway extenion:



Framing of the highway 407 station going in:



http://www.ttc.ca/Spadina/About_the_...lery/index.jsp
__________________

geometarkv liked this post
Innsertnamehere no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 9th, 2014, 06:56 AM   #1317
ssiguy2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: White Rock BC
Posts: 5,404
Likes (Received): 857

Bi levels are not only slower and take considerably longer to load and unload passengers but also greatly reduce capacity at stations.

It is far easier to move, for example, 1000 passengers at a station using 2 trains running every 10 minutes than moving 1000 passengers at a station using 1 train every 20 minutes. It not only spreads out the pedestrian unloading but also greatly reduces the chance of pedestrian accidents due to the width of the platform. It also reduces stress on the connecting networks like the subway at Union. Of those 1000 passengers let's say 500 will step onto the subway.............it is far easier to have 250 from each of the 2 trains get on the subway than the one train try to get 500 on one subway car. Same goes for buses and streetcars.

It is always easier to unload/load fewer passengers than more and if the same number it is better done with more vehicles than less. Also running more frequent service offering the same capacity will be a further inducement for people to take the train. The more frequent a service the more likely people are to take it.
ssiguy2 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 9th, 2014, 07:35 AM   #1318
Nouvellecosse
~ Mysterious Entity ~
 
Nouvellecosse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Halifax, N.S.
Posts: 4,446
Likes (Received): 313

Let's not forget though that there are already limits imposed by the track and signalling system that determine how many trains per hour can come in and out of a station and use the rail corridors leading up to it. so increasing the number of trains isn't always an option without incurring huge expense. Most metro systems usually only have one or two branches per line that feed the stations in the centre of the network, but mainline rail stations may have many more services - both commuter rail lines and intercity passenger routes - all converging into the same station and central track corridor. So in that sense, being able to serve the same number of passengers with fewer train movements can actually reduce the strain on the tracks at the station and central rail corridor.

And since the outer parts of the network tend to have limitations on trip frequency imposed by other reasons like single track sections and sharing with freight services, high-capacity bi-levels really can be quite efficient. They're not as convenient for commuters of course, because people like to be able to have access to more departure times, but in terms of the number of people moved relative to the capital investment, they're very efficient.
__________________
.
.
I always think of a new type of cologne brand when I see your name

"Nouvellecosse, by Calvin Klein. Take on the world!"

- MysticMcGoo
Nouvellecosse no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 9th, 2014, 01:36 PM   #1319
XAN_
Registered User
 
XAN_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,034
Likes (Received): 760

Nouvellecosse, double-deckers are common practice, but the problem is the fact that classic NA bi-levels are relatively heavy and have low power to weight ratio - http://pedestrianobservations.wordpr...level-version/
__________________
"I'm lost but still I know//There is another world"
-H. Kürsch, 1995
"Well, we all know there's no other side"
-H. Kürsch, 2002
XAN_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 9th, 2014, 03:20 PM   #1320
Sopomon
Hideous and malformed
 
Sopomon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 870
Likes (Received): 153

Quote:
Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere View Post
I don't think you realize what I am explaining, as you are insinuating that an EMU is realistic. its not. you have to realize that up until 2 or 3 years ago, GO transit had essentially no capital budget, and ran a commuter service on what are nothing more than a basic freight corridor, with only a few daily trains. Infrastructure was almost non existent on this corridor, it was largely just a signal unsignalled track running through subdivisions, far from a modern rail line with electrical power supply etc. You literally cannot run an EMU on these routes, or really anything other than what is currently being run.
Sorry, I meant to write DMU - I was trying to argue for multiple units in general
__________________
And he kicked so many rosebushes at her that eventually, Sasuke turned into a log.
Sopomon no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
canada, ontario, toronto

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 05:45 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium