[steveintoronto]

Of note were some out-there ideas I haven't seen floated before, such as extending UP Express service to Unionville and 401 and 407 GO Rai; lines. I know it is just a study but thought it was of interest.

Excellent find! If not in this thread, one of the others discussed various options for extending UPX at the airport end, and also as a 'through running' service at Union.

Your post is very timely, as this *has to* be revisited, and Ford et al would be remiss in not doing so, as it is already extant, it caters to the "elite" at present, transfers to/from GO buses at the airport, according the Metrolinx own Bylaw have to be permitted at (gist) 'the cheapest rate possible to match using any other routing' and it would be an immediate 'feather in their dunce cap' to show they are looking to improve the lot of the suburban commuter into and around Toronto. Not to mention that claimed headway possible with present switches and signalling (IIRC) is 7.5 mins or better.

The only bug-boo is that the present Sharyo stock fleet won't be expanded, so the added load would be a problem (which exactly underlines the need for expansion) but the solution is to electrify the corridor, perhaps continue running the present Sharyos under catenary as is, and double or triple the fleet with EMUs to do the local stops, and expansion beyond Pearson. UPX could then be what it was always intended to be: "Express" to the airport from Union, perhaps with one mid-point stop. This would also allow a slightly faster average track speed and thus increase frequency potential for a given amount of rolling stock.

I also posit that the 'Rest of Hydro' will be privatized. Part and parcel of that could be either offering or imposing as part of the agreement is a DBFOM for the elecrification of at least that corridor, done by a 'private electric corp entity'. This allows the public the knowledge that progress is afoot without it impacting taxes or the debt/deficit in a negative way.

Must run right now, but look forward to discussing this further. I'd like to see others add to this, there's been some excellent ideas from other posters on this.

 

[Leo_Chan]

Wouldn't through running the UPX at Union require a second platform and tracks connecting it with Track 1/Platform 3?

 

[steveintoronto]

Wouldn't through running the UPX at Union require a second platform and tracks connecting it with Track 1/Platform 3?

That's an excellent question, and I was about to address that detail as I failed to include it with the above, I'm a bit rushed right now.

In fact, the UPX could continue to exist pretty much as it is save for less stops, which would contribute to an over-all higher average speed for the route since the EMUs will be faster accelerating and stopping, and perhaps with permission from Transport Canada, a higher top speed. Some Airport passengers would have to use the EMUs to the connecting station(s) to attain the UPX.

There's a very real option to *bypass* the present UPX platforms at Union and the Airport so as to allow the Sharyos to sit for their next return trip while the EMU service, which could be 'through-running' by-pass on other tracks. It could be that the EMU service continues north from Malton, or splits off the present flyovers at Pearson to bypass the Airport Terminal, perhaps even doing a loop through the Airport to return, and having a "GO Transfer Station" for buses.

Cues can be had from other airports, like Heathrow, de Gaulle, etc. In London's case, Crossrail headways are going to be 2.5 mins through the central core tunnel for all trains, including those running to Heathrow. The ability is even less than 2 mins with present technology. They also have a state of the art signalling and control system (albeit cobbled together from three different existing ones) so 7.5 mins for the present UPX corridor should be easily attainable. (Or even slightly less) The present track layout would have to be reconfigured though to separate the K/W service from the UPX/Plus ones, but other posters would be far more informed of what's necessary to do that.

The discussion is timely as a fourth track is now being laid along some of the Georgetown Corridor. Rather than RER and present heavy diesel sharing track, surely it's far better to leave much of that 'as is' and better utilize the UPX pathings? That would also solve the platform height question to a great degree.

Edit to Add: The UK's largest bus terminal, by far, is at Heathrow Airport!

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

If we are looking to connect pearson with the east end wouldnt it be easier to run a service on the CN (?) E/W line the parallels the 407? A wye would be needed north of the airport to loop back south-east. But why would the line need to travel through union?

 

[Leo_Chan]

If we are looking to connect pearson with the east end wouldnt it be easier to run a service on the CN (?) E/W line the parallels the 407? A wye would be needed north of the airport to loop back south-east. But why would the line need to travel through union?

That's proposing to create a completely new transit line in a corridor where there's not existing passenger rail infrastructure. Whereas using existing passenger corridors through Union is much cheaper, but longer travel times (assuming UPX trains can get priority over freight).

 

[Neutrino]

If we are looking to connect pearson with the east end wouldnt it be easier to run a service on the CN (?) E/W line the parallels the 407? A wye would be needed north of the airport to loop back south-east. But why would the line need to travel through union?

Tell me wye...

 

[steveintoronto]

But why would the line need to travel through union?

To get to the other side. Ummm...there's a damn good reason it's the southern terminus now, not least it's the largest rail and bus hub in the City.

As to 'through-running' it's the aspiration of almost all modern central hubs where possible.

Excellent explanation and diagrams here:
http://www.rethinknyc.org/through-running/

 

[Leo_Chan]

To get to the other side. Ummm...there's a damn good reason it's the southern terminus now, not least it's the largest rail and bus hub in the City.

As to 'through-running' it's the aspiration of almost all modern central hubs where possible.

Excellent explanation and diagrams here:
http://www.rethinknyc.org/through-running/

That's a really nice explanation of through-running trains. Union Station currently doesn't have this restriction on most platforms, so service can just change to implement through-running. The only reason this isn't a thing is the lack of service in the reverse-peak direction, otherwise this can already be implemented.

 

[steveintoronto]

That's a really nice explanation of through-running trains. Union Station currently doesn't have this restriction on most platforms, so service can just change to implement through-running. The only reason this isn't a thing is the lack of service in the reverse-peak direction, otherwise this can already be implemented.

I believe the K/W proposed RER is to be 'through-running' to the Stoufville line:
"All four scenarios assume through operation between the Kitchener and Stoufville lines." https://www.railwayage.com/cs/metrolinx-sets-toronto-rer-options/

For now, electrification first stage could be for the UPX pathing (as it was always planned to be) and then do a through-run to just east of Union if platform space is limited. This would be later extended up the Stoufville or Richmond Hill lines with an eye on it being tied into the Relief Line. Stone two birds with one kill.

The Airport end is open to a number of possible arrangements, including Malton station becoming the interchange hub for GO buses with the EMUs, and VIA stopping there too for connections. It would be the cheaper option v tapping off the present flyovers in and out of Pearson to do a loop around Pearson.

 

[SaugeenJunction]

To follow up this conversation on the Transit Hub, Kitchener Line and Stouffville Line through-running, and the RER line to the Transit Hub, here is some (not new time-wise, but I think un-posted) stuff I dug up.

From the Annual Report 2017 - The Better We Move report:
Metrolinx CEO Phil Verster is quoted, esentially confirming the through running of Kitchener and Stouffville Lines (and also mentioning 10-min service on the Stouffville Line):

Let’s take a moment to imagine what the future may look like. On the Stouffville GO corridor, we plan to build new stations at Lawrence-Kennedy and Finch-Kennedy. Together with existing stations at Eglinton-Kennedy, Milliken and Unionville, we can transform transit access for hundreds of thousands of people in Scarborough and York Region.

We plan to operate four trains per hour on key parts of the GO network – all day, every day – and we are also considering an even more intensive 10-minute service on the Stouffville line, similar to a subway.

But let’s not stop there. This high-frequency GO service on the Stouffville and Kitchener corridors – in the familiar “U shape” that mimics the TTC’s Line 1 subway – can become a seamless and direct service between Toronto Pearson and Liberty Village, East Harbour, Gerrard and all the stations on the Stouffville line.

Here's a map from this report (low quality in PDF), but seems to show the whole Kitchener RER line dropped to Pearson, and keeps Malton and Etobicoke North GO. Not Metrolinx official but could be an indicator of workings behind the scenes.

Also, in the GTAA Pearson Master Plan (page 85), they seem to want this work done by 2027, 2-3 years after RER is set to open:

In addition to offering light rail connectivity, the transit centre’s first phase will be designed to accommodate a heavy-rail station for RER and HSR services along the Kitchener GO corridor. As discussed above, this RER/HSR connectivity will require realignment of existing tracks or a new branch of the main line; we project that this work can be completed as early as 2027.

Anyways, the GTAA has hired a firm to complete planning, and hopefully work on this can start ASAP.

 

[steveintoronto]

^I know some posters are a lot more optimistic on the touted GO expansion being maintained by the present regime. I'm not. The "line by line audit" will reveal the obvious: Ontario cannot afford the many promises of expansion been made. (Not to contradict myself, but the caveat is "unless done with an almost completely private investment(s)). That is true for VIA HFR, Ont HSR, and certainly for GO, DBFOM already being the name of the game.

However, the 'pragmatic adults' (what few there are, if any) in Ford's cabinet will realize that the great unwashed masses can't live on buck-a-beer alone. They need rations to eat, and that can be achieved by chopping back promises to embrace that which can be done cheaply and efficiently. The good news is that SSE cannot go ahead by any practical means of mufflegab. Subway construction is just too radically expensive. The audit will be Doug Dirt's out.

What is presented above re: 'RER light' is highly do-able as a compilation of promises distilled into one backbone. And the present UPX infrastructure and pathing is ripe for the job. It will have to be electrified though, that has to be a given, as ordering more compatible Sharyos is out of the question, both for cost and for performance.

I see the gist of the above plan one of the only *practical* ways forward for an Ontario on a Third World Budget. "Buck a Ride"? It also embraces the possibility of VIA HFR having a better way into Union from the northeast.

And of course, a GO bus hub at Pearson (or adjacent if the GTAA declines, which would be unwise) is a bog obvious idea to connect rapid and copious movement into/out-of TO's northwestern sector.

 

[robmausser]

^I know some posters are a lot more optimistic on the touted GO expansion being maintained by the present regime. I'm not. The "line by line audit" will reveal the obvious: Ontario cannot afford the many promises of expansion been made. (Not to contradict myself, but the caveat is "unless done with an almost completely private investment(s)). That is true for VIA HFR, Ont HSR, and certainly for GO, DBFOM already being the name of the game.

However, the 'pragmatic adults' (what few there are, if any) in Ford's cabinet will realize that the great unwashed masses can't live on buck-a-beer alone. They need rations to eat, and that can be achieved by chopping back promises to embrace that which can be done cheaply and efficiently. The good news is that SSE cannot go ahead by any practical means of mufflegab. Subway construction is just too radically expensive. The audit will be Doug Dirt's out.

What is presented above re: 'RER light' is highly do-able as a compilation of promises distilled into one backbone. And the present UPX infrastructure and pathing is ripe for the job. It will have to be electrified though, that has to be a given, as ordering more compatible Sharyos is out of the question, both for cost and for performance.

I see the gist of the above plan one of the only *practical* ways forward for an Ontario on a Third World Budget. "Buck a Ride"? It also embraces the possibility of VIA HFR having a better way into Union from the northeast.

And of course, a GO bus hub at Pearson (or adjacent if the GTAA declines, which would be unwise) is a bog obvious idea to connect rapid and copious movement into/out-of TO's northwestern sector.

I honestly think all we will get from this administration is all way 2 day Go trains but using the current diesel fleet, and the expansions to Niagara, Bloomington, etc.

 

[steveintoronto]

all way 2 day Go trains

?

 

[Leo_Chan]

all way 2 day Go trains

?

We're going to have GO trains to the Moon?

 

[Neutrino]

?

lol you know what he meant