[tayser]

Now that hydrogen is out of the picture, what do YOU guys think is the best answer? For myself it's obviously battery because I can't think of a single advantage catenary has over catenary battery. I am also on the record for single level EMU and think double level would be a ghastly mistake.

So, instead of just bitching at me, what do YOU propose for RER in terms of both technology and train types and why?

Here's one: EMUs without batteries (or more to the point: EMUs where they're not/won't be drawing on an onboard energy source for a significant amount of time - EMUs in general already all have batteries on board [for other purposes]) are/will be lighter and therefore there will be, over time, have less impact on tracks/other railway infrastructure, lowering the maintenance impacts & cost, and likely will have improved accel/deccel performance.

 

[ssiguy2]

The best answer and what I propose is Metrolinx/IO picking a winner of the RFP and the Province reaching Financial Close with ProjectCo (the proponent). I don't care about the exact specifications.

You should care because what's the best solution for Metrolinx's finances does not necessarily mean it's the best solution for the travelling public.

 

[MrGoose]

You should care because what's the best solution for Metrolinx's finances does not necessarily mean it's the best solution for the travelling public.

This is a ding against battery trains...

Catenary trains have superior performance characteristics and are more reliable.

 

[sacred]

Any more and we gonna need a battery thread

 

[dowlingm]

I am happy with the hydrail outcome for GO simply on the grounds that it removes an excuse for not proceeding with a technology which is available off the shelf now - it simply becomes a question of allocating the budget and going to market for rolling stock and construction.

If people really want to see how hydrogen trains work in Ontario, the option remains open for the province to fund replacement of the Sarnia-Toronto VIA Rail service with a hydrogen multiple unit, fuelled in Sarnia. If operations in summer or winter caused range anxiety for round trips (assuming Alstom/Cummins' promised 1000km range would become something like 700-800km in practice) then have the unit run back and forth to London and separate that service from London-Kitchener-Toronto.

 

[robmausser]

I am happy with the hydrail outcome for GO simply on the grounds that it removes an excuse for not proceeding with a technology which is available off the shelf now - it simply becomes a question of allocating the budget and going to market for rolling stock and construction.

If people really want to see how hydrogen trains work in Ontario, the option remains open for the province to fund replacement of the Sarnia-Toronto VIA Rail service with a hydrogen multiple unit, fuelled in Sarnia. If operations in summer or winter caused range anxiety for round trips (assuming Alstom/Cummins' promised 1000km range would become something like 700-800km in practice) then have the unit run back and forth to London and separate that service from London-Kitchener-Toronto.

The province could also run a seperate pilot project service to Sarnia, ontop of VIAs exsiting service. Doesnt have to be a replacement.

Theres only one train to Sarnia on VIA a day, another parallel train service would be hardly unwelcome.

 

[ssiguy2]

The entire VIA fleet has to go emissions free within 30 years and, except for maybe some short-run routes, hydrogen is the best option not least of which is because it is the ONLY option. To electrify VIA's monstrous system using catenary is beyond ridiculous. Of course CN & CP are going to have to do the same thing and VIA will probably just wait til those 2 companies built out their hydrogen infrastructure and then just tap into it. This allows VIA to go emissions free without the astronomical initial infrastructure cost.

As far as RER, whatever one's take on catenary vs catenary -battery is, it would be a huge mistake if Metrolinx decided on strictly a catenary style train even if they put up all the wires. Any train should have enough battery power to run at least 30 km without a catenary connection. This allows for immediate extension of service, puts the system at far less the whims of Mother Nature, and allows maintenance and rehab of the catenary system to be done without shutting down an entire line. Using 'limited range' battery back up system also has the advantage of allowing the system to be phased-in as opposed to 100% catenary systems which is an all or nothing deal.

I think 2 level trains would be a huge mistake but the only exception would be the, as noted above, the UPX as it will have vastly fewer on-off passengers than regular RER, and there is a need for more space for luggage. It also gets rid of the problem of the UPX stations being much shorter than RER ones and hence allows for higher capacity without the expensive station upgrades.

 

[APTA-2048]

I am happy with the hydrail outcome for GO simply on the grounds that it removes an excuse for not proceeding with a technology which is available off the shelf now - it simply becomes a question of allocating the budget and going to market for rolling stock and construction.

If people really want to see how hydrogen trains work in Ontario, the option remains open for the province to fund replacement of the Sarnia-Toronto VIA Rail service with a hydrogen multiple unit, fuelled in Sarnia. If operations in summer or winter caused range anxiety for round trips (assuming Alstom/Cummins' promised 1000km range would become something like 700-800km in practice) then have the unit run back and forth to London and separate that service from London-Kitchener-Toronto.

They can also follow San Bernardino's hydrogen fuel cell Stadler trainset when it's delivered in 2024.

 

[drum118]

Lets hope ML and bidders are keeping a eye on research and other improve changes for building new system and updating old systems. Learning experience from Europe would go a long way in building our system with today knowledge than past knowledge.

As for hydrogen, we look and talked about in the early days of Waterfront Transit development and rule other as there wasn't anything on the market at the time and approve that could be use. All development and testing today have been signal level cars and short trains that will not fit the needs of the GO System today or 10 years down the road. Let others be a test subject and once there is approve equipment, the GO can do their own testing of equipment over a short test span. Only then will we may see hydrogen been use for some or all of the GO System.

 

[ssiguy2]

^^^ Yes, I can see that happening maybe in 10 years and especially when the entire GO network including outer commuter rail has to go emissions free.

Curious drum118...................what do you think would be the best solution for RER technology and train types?

 

[drum118]

^^^ Yes, I can see that happening maybe in 10 years and especially when the entire GO network including outer commuter rail has to go emissions free.

Curious drum118...................what do you think would be the best solution for RER technology and train types?

I prefer to see an EMU setup where trains are setup as 3 to 5 car units that could become 6, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 15 car train to meet the need of X line at X time of day. Where service is every hour compare to the rest of the line, you uncouple a 3 or 5 car unit from the set that can handle the ridership with a shorter train going in the opposite direction as well the section seeing hourly service.

When the hourly train returns to the station it uncouple from, it will recouple to the next train to carry on to Union.

Since there is a need for 2 crews, one will run the hourly section only and the other the main section.

Until something better comes along, prefer the Stadler EMU.

Breaking trains down and remaking them up at X point is common in Europe from what I have seen as well 3-4 sections making up a train. Doing this will require riders to understand that you will not be able to walk end to end of a train and they must make sure they are on the section being cut off to carry on.

The section being cut off could be a DMU/EMU, DMU or Battery power/EMU. Can have charging station at stations, especially at the end station.

DD equipment to be use from day one.

 

[ssiguy2]

Interesting idea with 'splitting the trains'. Am I too assume, due to having charging stations, you would be most supportive of EMU/battery trains?

Also, what the hell is DD?

 

[Undead]

^Doubledecker, I imagine. I can already imagine the complaints and memes arising from people being in the wrong part of the train and missing their stop lol

 

[Coolstar]

The EPR addendum for GO electrification is up!

GO Electrification

Read technical reports about GO Electrification.

www.metrolinxengage.com

Seems to be a new service level plan though I can't remember what the previous plan was.

 

[Allandale25]

^ Which document is that from? Or which tab/topic did you find it under?