Jump to content
FlyerD901

General Subway/RT Discussion

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, 63 Ossington said:

From what I have read there were provisions for a future North York Centre Station when constructing the line; ie a roughed-in section which I would imagine including a leveled stretch of track.

Yes, there was a long section of level straightaway that was provided to accommodate the future station when the north Yonge extension was built.  It was neat riding through there when the station itself was being added as the construction went through different phases.  At one point the platform area hand been hollowed out and was lit up with dim strings of those construction lights with bulbs in wire cages and trains crawled through slowly.  The view from the front corner seat on a Gloucester train was great because it was on the side platform side of the train and you could twist to look out either the front or side window and it looked for all the world like an abandoned station when it was at that stage.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So after yesterday’s moving of T1s over to Line 1 and back, I’m still somewhat confused how ATC compatibility works. So is the TTC able to turn off ATC between St. George and St. Andrew while they move trains over? I’m still confused about whether or not in emergency situations the TTC is able to revert back to block signalling or not. If not, what’s the plan if something happens at Wilson Yard or anywhere south of the yard and trains can’t go into service? For example yesterday they would have had to have shuttles running b/w St. Clair W and Union and more to supplement the Yonge Line as well, which seems quite excessive considering the amount of extra T1s sitting around. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CLRV4002 said:

So after yesterday’s moving of T1s over to Line 1 and back, I’m still somewhat confused how ATC compatibility works. So is the TTC able to turn off ATC between St. George and St. Andrew while they move trains over? I’m still confused about whether or not in emergency situations the TTC is able to revert back to block signalling or not. If not, what’s the plan if something happens at Wilson Yard or anywhere south of the yard and trains can’t go into service? For example yesterday they would have had to have shuttles running b/w St. Clair W and Union and more to supplement the Yonge Line as well, which seems quite excessive considering the amount of extra T1s sitting around. 

The new signalling system also has a limited capability to allow trains that are not ATO equipped to operate over it. Much like the old signal system, it has blocks which are delineated by signals. The difference is that instead of each block being the approximate length of one train, each block is now much, much longer. If the signal system detects a non-equipped train in the block, it will prevent anything else from entering until it has cleared.

 

So yes, you can run the T1s on the portion of the YUS that is ATC-equipped. But because the blocks are so long, the distance between trains becomes long too, and so it becomes extremely problematic to try and run revenue service like that.

 

As for why they didn't run trains up on the University section of the line, that was because they simply didn't have enough equipment to. There were only 14 trains available on Yonge - the derailment occurred before any of the service trains could go through - and so the decision was made to focus the service on Yonge. Even with the 5 T1 sets, that's only 19 trains - and realistically they need more like 27.

 

The other thing to consider is that even though they may have lots of equipment lying around, they may not have enough crews for all of it. A lot of YUS crews are not (or no longer) cleared to operate the T1s, just like a lot of B-D operators are not cleared for TRs. Those 5 trains on the YUS came from somewhere, and it was likely that most or all of them were regular BD service trains.

 

Dan

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, smallspy said:

As for why they didn't run trains up on the University section of the line, that was because they simply didn't have enough equipment to. There were only 14 trains available on Yonge - the derailment occurred before any of the service trains could go through - and so the decision was made to focus the service on Yonge. Even with the 5 T1 sets, that's only 19 trains - and realistically they need more like 27.

 

The other thing to consider is that even though they may have lots of equipment lying around, they may not have enough crews for all of it. A lot of YUS crews are not (or no longer) cleared to operate the T1s, just like a lot of B-D operators are not cleared for TRs. Those 5 trains on the YUS came from somewhere, and it was likely that most or all of them were regular BD service trains.

 

Dan

I don't think they would run non equipped trains in service. Plus, the derailment happened on the southbound track south of St. George at the turnback switch. Even if they did choose to run a couple trains on that section of the line, there wasn't a place where they could easily turn back southbound.

 

Why they didn't turn back the trains from Spadina instead of St. Clair West I don't know, it's possible they had to cut power down there while they were re-railing the work car.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks @smallspy for the great explanation. One more question is what would the approximate cost or feasibility of equipping 5 or 6 T1 trains with ATC equipment and having those trains run in regular B-D service and be able to run on the YUS if needed? Isn’t the limited flexibility to move trains over somewhat risky? Any issue that prevents trains getting from Wilson to the University/Yonge sections can cripple service. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, CLRV4002 said:

Isn’t the limited flexibility to move trains over somewhat risky? Any issue that prevents trains getting from Wilson to the University/Yonge sections can cripple service. 

Had the derailment been slightly further south near Museum ... or anywhere south of there, even ATC-equipped trains would not have been able to get through.

There's going to be situations where everything goes down. Sure, could throw some $ to cover some of these contingencies. But it won't cover a lot of situations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Turtle said:

Why they didn't turn back the trains from Spadina instead of St. Clair West I don't know, it's possible they had to cut power down there while they were re-railing the work car.

No easy place to get people onto and off of the trains down there. Neither Dupont nor Spadina really have the capacity to handle those kinds of passenger loads, and the roads are not really well suited for it, either.

 

Kind of the same situation when the central portion of the B-D shuts down. Even though they run the trains out to Chester, the station isn't capable of handling the crowds, so they offload at Pape. (Although it could and should be argued that Pape doesn't really have the platform/stairway/mezzanine capacity, either. But that's another discussion.)

 

1 hour ago, CLRV4002 said:

Thanks @smallspy for the great explanation. One more question is what would the approximate cost or feasibility of equipping 5 or 6 T1 trains with ATC equipment and having those trains run in regular B-D service and be able to run on the YUS if needed?

The development cost is the same regardless of whether its one train or all 59, so why bother limiting it to only a small subset of equipment?

 

And considering that the T1s are getting close to the twilight of their careers, it's hard to make a justifiable business case for it - and especially if it only for situations that only arise a handful of times a year.

 

1 hour ago, CLRV4002 said:

Isn’t the limited flexibility to move trains over somewhat risky?

What is riskier is designing a system to handle both equipped and non-equipped trains equally. That was the TTC's original plan, and after 3 years of work all they had to show for it was some new signals and circuits around Union Station.

 

If the revenue equipment is going to be kept separate - as it has for much of the past 50+ years - you're better off keeping the systems independent as well. No sense in needlessly complicating things.

 

1 hour ago, CLRV4002 said:

Any issue that prevents trains getting from Wilson to the University/Yonge sections can cripple service. 

As has been the case since the opening of the Wilson Yard in 1978. Not really much that can be done.

 

Dan

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, smallspy said:

No easy place to get people onto and off of the trains down there. Neither Dupont nor Spadina really have the capacity to handle those kinds of passenger loads, and the roads are not really well suited for it, either.

Is having everyone get off at Spadina and walk down the passageway to Line 2 really any worse than unloading them all at St. Clair West? Though Spadina's not accessible.

I assumed the problem was power issues. Where was the work car exactly?

Perhaps it become safer once the new exit and elevators open at Louther Avenue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, nfitz said:

Is having everyone get off at Spadina and walk down the passageway to Line 2 really any worse than unloading them all at St. Clair West? Though it's not accessible.

I assumed the problem was power issues. Where was the work car exactly?

Perhaps it become safer once the new exit and elevators open at Louther Avenue.

I was thinking the same thing. Plus it’s direct access to the 510 or one stop to Bathurst (511) to go south as well and takes the pressure off the 512 to get to the Yonge Line. They could have added more streetcars to the 510 and 511 to head south instead of to the 512. If they were able to do that but also run the shuttles from St. Clair West to Union as they did I don’t see why not. It must have been the power shut down. 
 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, nfitz said:

I assumed the problem was power issues. Where was the work car exactly?

 

Don't know, I'm only guessing by what people told me (rumours) and which switch was clamped when service resumed through there.

 

The switch that was clamped is on the southbound track, on the crossover south of St. George at the turnback location where they would turn a southbound train back northbound. Don't know what happened, how it happened, or how it was possible to have happened. My opinion is worthless and unqualified here, but I don't think we will hear the real cause. My guess is human error, but not something the work car crew did.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, nfitz said:

Is having everyone get off at Spadina and walk down the passageway to Line 2 really any worse than unloading them all at St. Clair West? Though Spadina's not accessible.

Infinitely worse. That corridor is not a place where you want to have thousands and thousands of people funnel down. Hundreds sure, but not trainloads.

 

Quote

I assumed the problem was power issues. Where was the work car exactly?

The workcar was northbound on the southbound track south-east of St George, and was transiting the crossover to the northbound track.

 

I stand to be corrected on this, but I believe that they have updated all of the power cut and traction power feeds on that stretch to allow them to shut down individual stations without affecting the neighbouring stations.

 

Quote

Perhaps it become safer once the new exit and elevators open at Louther Avenue.

I doubt it. The rest of the station layout isn't changing.

 

3 hours ago, Turtle said:

The switch that was clamped is on the southbound track, on the crossover south of St. George at the turnback location where they would turn a southbound train back northbound. Don't know what happened, how it happened, or how it was possible to have happened. My opinion is worthless and unqualified here, but I don't think we will hear the real cause. My guess is human error, but not something the work car crew did.

Regardless of what the cause is, two derailments affecting service in almost as many weeks doesn't look good on the TTC - especially since the time between derailments on the system has traditionally been measured in years, not days. One way or the other, not only do they need to figure out what the cause was of this derailment, but also to appear to take steps to resolve it.

 

Dan

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, smallspy said:

Infinitely worse. That corridor is not a place where you want to have thousands and thousands of people funnel down. Hundreds sure, but not trainloads.

 

The workcar was northbound on the southbound track south-east of St George, and was transiting the crossover to the northbound track.

 

I stand to be corrected on this, but I believe that they have updated all of the power cut and traction power feeds on that stretch to allow them to shut down individual stations without affecting the neighbouring stations.

 

I doubt it. The rest of the station layout isn't changing.

 

Regardless of what the cause is, two derailments affecting service in almost as many weeks doesn't look good on the TTC - especially since the time between derailments on the system has traditionally been measured in years, not days. One way or the other, not only do they need to figure out what the cause was of this derailment, but also to appear to take steps to resolve it.

 

Dan

So even with bi-directional running, they couldn't navigate trains around it so that they could be put into service on the Yonge side? Was the work train blocking the whole crossover? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd think the safety risks of running a train through a crossover that's even partially occupied by unmovable equipment far outweigh the benefits. What if the derailment was caused by a misaligned switch and you derail a second train through the same crossover as a result?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, HB_1024 said:

I'd think the safety risks of running a train through a crossover that's even partially occupied by unmovable equipment far outweigh the benefits. What if the derailment was caused by a misaligned switch and you derail a second train through the same crossover as a result?

 

  • Haha 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...