Jump to content

smallspy

CPTDB Wiki Editor
  • Posts

    10,365
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by smallspy

  1. No arguements here from any of those points. And again....no arguments. You're confusing two different sets of rules. Queensway intersections are 7km/h. The rule for specialwork is that it must be traversed at no more than 10km/h. That's why they installed those blue indicators on the dashboards of the CLRVs and ALRVs. I seem to recall that there was also a rule that only one car can enter an intersection, but I also can't recall if they rescinded that one. Dan
  2. As I've written elsewhere, largely the TTC's own knee-jerk reactions to incidents. Like the one at Fleet Loop. Or the one at Queens Quay and Spadina. Or the other one at Queens Quay and Spadina. And the one at Queen and Spadina. The TTC has used each of these incidents - and likely others that I can't recall at this moment - to institute rules that have in the long run hampered streetcar operations. Like stopping before every single facing-point switch to ensure that it is pointed in the right direction. Or operating at only 10km/h over all specialwork. Or operating at only 7km/h over all intersections on the Queensway. Keep in mind too that flange-bearing streetcar trackwork on the TTC was used in some places in the 1960s and into the 1970s, and they didn't need any slow orders to operate over them then. Dan
  3. I need to circle back onto this point..... Riding on the flange of the wheel does absolutely nothing to the likelihood of a derailment. If it did, flange-bearing trackwork wouldn't exist. While it does is alter the point of contact between the rail and wheel interface, it still (in concert with the solid axles on the equipment) provides more than enough security against derailment. It's no less safe than a traditional diamond, where one of the two wheels completely loses contact with the rail for a brief moment. Dan
  4. It's not Metrolinx's facility to charge fees to. That said, DavidH's answer is the correct one. Dan
  5. Considering the level of service that the route is providing, it's pretty obvious why extending any of the 29 branches wasn't done. Dan
  6. Other than a couple of meters around Smiths Falls, it will be the first scheduled service, yes. CN and VIA passenger trains have used the Belleville Sub for detours, however. Dan
  7. If I remember the station layout correctly.... That's the east end emergency exit stairwell. It exits into the bus driveway, underneath the entrance hallway on the north side of Sheppard. Dan
  8. It looks like he's referring to the smooth, poured concrete wall on the left (track) side versus the concrete block wall on the right. The concrete block wall is used to block off the "excess" length of the station box that was built but is not being used. This was done at all of the stations along the Sheppard Line - and in general construction, concrete block is used when you need to build a wall or enclosure that isn't structural. If/when the line gets modified to use 6-car trains, the concrete block walls at all of the stations will be knocked out, and platform finishes extended into those areas. Dan
  9. Cool, so there's one. In the three years that there's been track on the surface alignment so far. This doesn't strike me as something that is worth fretting over that much, at least not as yet. Dan
  10. I haven't heard of a single incident of a driver ending up on the tracks on Eglinton yet - and certainly, there's been nothing in the papers, which seems peculiar considering how quick they generally are to report on these kinds of things. How many have there been? Dan
  11. I'm not so sure that Metrolinx is doing this out of the goodness of their hearts. As I understand the contract is written, the TTC needs to pay for the use of the vehicles and the line based on the service level. Reduced frequencies means more vehicles, which means higher costs. And considering that as new there should be virtually no major maintenance needed to be performed - which is what those payments are supposed to help cover - Metrolinx would pocket the difference. Yes, the TTC is currently undergoing a funding crunch, but they certainly aren't the only ones, either. Dan
  12. Oh, the fare issue is absolutely something that will need to be dealt with. But that's also a bit of putting the cart before the horse, no? The line to Highway 7 hasn't even been started yet, nevermind further north. Dan
  13. Since it doesn't seem to be clear to most people.... A very large proportion - possibily even a majority - of people getting on at Finch Station today are not taking the subway all the way downtown. And this would also extend to any extensions further north. While some may take the trip all the way to Queen or King, most of them will be getting off far upstream of those stations. Dan
  14. For a while there, the TTC was publishing monthly MTBF data in the CEO's reports. Other than that, historically, no, there's never been any data released - at least not that I have been able to dig up. Dan
  15. I'm sure that more CLRVs were thought about at the time, but I've never seen any hard reference to it. In fact thinking about it, there must have been additional options not taken for the Scarborough and Etobicoke LRT systems. By the time the ALRVs were in the picture - and remember, they started design work on the articulated version almost in parallel with the CLRV - they were only going to be buying ALRVs, but to replace the PCCs then still in service. The original plan was for 75, which eventually got whittled down to 52. Dan
  16. This is not a surprise, as it is precisely the reason why a lot of agencies run articulated vehicles. It's not to froth up the foamers - they can be used for cost avoidance by reducing the number of buses on a route, and thus the headcount. And when the operator accounts for about 90% of the operating costs of a vehicle, reducing the number of vehicles used - while still keeping the overall capacity the same - can be a game-changer for a lot of agencies. (Of course, all this also goes against the whole concept of more-frequent service inducing ridership, but when has YRT ever been one to make a decision by looking at the whole picture?) Dan
  17. And yet the MTBF for the Flexities is something like 8 or 12 times higher now than it was for the Cs at the end. Not that it means anything. A more accurate measure would be compare the two fleets at the same points of their lives. I don't have numbers for the CLRVs at that time, but I've been led to believe that the Flexities are doing much better. Dan
  18. In the tail track's current configuration - no. The tail tracks beyond Finch are simply too short, and the trains would have to operate too slowly entering them. But one of the ideas that the TTC had many years ago to shorten headways on the YUS was to lengthen the tailtracks beyond Finch almost to Cummer. This would allow for two things - one is lengthing the existing pocket track to allow trains to enter at higher speed. The other was to build a second pocket track beyond the first - this way trains would alternate between the pockets, and increase the flow of trains turning back - and thus decreasing headways. Dan
  19. The memory is fuzzy that long ago.....but that may have been a different cycle after the sets were used on 66/67. But I do recall the sets being used on 40 and I think 47 going back. Dan
  20. Sooooo...... While the switches can't physically throw any faster - or the trains travel any faster over them - one of the advantages of the new signal system is a reduction in the amount of time that the interlocking can be deemed "safe" after a train travels over it, as well as a reduction in the lockout time that the signal system enforces that prevents the switches from being thrown. That said, yes, it may actually cause more of a log jam entering the station because of the reasons you noted. It does seem like the delays heading into VMC are not nearly as bad as they were heading into Downsview when it was a terminal though, so there does seem to be some improvement in throughput. Dan
  21. They did run a pair of the trainsets on 66/67, which at that time were the premiere set of Corridor trains between Montréal and Toronto (the 5pm expresses). At the time, it was felt that the addition of the service car - used as a bar car for the run - would be a way to help build up ridership. On those same cycles, those trainsets also operated trains 51/52 (IIRC), which left Montréal and Toronto at about 8.20 and 9am, respectively, if memory serves. The trainset that laid over in Toronto also for a little while did a mid-day flip to Niagara Falls and back, it was was possible to see Rens down that way for a brief period, too. I don't know if ridership increased at all through the experiment, but the fact that they only ran the equipment on those runs for 18 months or so - plus the fact that those two trains no longer exist in that form or schedule - should say a lot. One other thing to keep in mind is that at their height, VIA operated 5 sets of Ren equipment in Corridor service each day. They now only run two. Dan
  22. There are two rules at play here. The first is that every single car must stop in advance of and observe the direction that the switch is directed. This has to do with the N/A system. The second is that all cars must not exceed 10km/h through specialwork. This has nothing to do with the single-point switches because at that point they will be trailing through them, not facing through them. It is just a silly rule that the TTC has decided to institute and enforce. No, there isn't. The one thing about the N/A system is that it includes a lockout. Once a car has been detected on the switch, the system prevents any further movement. It doesn't matter how close the trailing car will get, until it receives a signal from the end of a car the switch can't change. In fairness, the use of the this N/A system is not widespread - I honestly don't know any other systems that use this particular system. Yes, there are other systems out there, and frankly the TTC would have done well to have replaced it with one of those modern systems years ago. Dan
  23. Don't engage him. The switches aren't the problem. The problem is with the antiquated N/A control system, along with the TTC's own reactionary measures. Dan
  24. I don't know why you are so worried. If you look at the construction of the surface level section of The Crosstown - or even parts of Finch West, for that matter - the whole of the construction took less than 3 years. Individual sections take even less. It is way, way less intensive and disruptive than building it underground. So yeah, the construction will suck while it happens. But it will be well worth it in the end. Dan
  25. Centre platforms have long been the standard at terminal stations on the TTC's system(s) where possible, as it allows for the best combination of passenger flows to and from the trains, allows for a single location from which passengers can board without having to cross tracks, and still allow for a short crossover near the platforms to minimize the interference trains will have to deal with and thus reducing the minimum possible headways (although other station designs and track layouts can reduce this minimum what a bit more). The set-ups at the terminals of the Ontario Line will change the metrics somehwhat - the crossovers ahead of the platforms are located a decent distance away, forcing a reduced minimum possible headway assuming that only one track will be used for loading and unloading at off-peak times. But at peak times, with the crossovers located behind the platforms, it allows for a pretty low minimum possible headway as one platform would be dedicated to offloading trains and the other to loading them. Is 90 seconds possible? With this track layout, and assuming a decent ATC/ATO system - it certainly seems to be. Exhibition will be an interesting case. There will be a main, overhead concourse that will service all of the platforms that the new station will contain. According to the preliminary site plan designs, the existing tunnel will remain however, although it will only serve the GO train platforms (and eventually the streetcar platforms as well). Dan
×
×
  • Create New...