[jordanmkasla2009]

"There are TRANSIT signal lights?? Surely this advanced technology hasn't been used in our hemisphere. IT'S BEEN USED TWO TOWNS OVER??? Incredible. We will have to study this remarkable breakthrough. What a time to be alive."

Those signals in KW were given special exemption from the HTA to be used. They cannot be used anywhere else unless the province amends the HTA to allow them.

 

[jordanmkasla2009]

The consortium isn't wrong about costs. In a P3 agreement everything is baked-in in terms of cost assumptions. For example, faster service means harder braking, meaning more frequent brake pad replacement, which costs more. Speeding up Line 6 is possible, but certain parts of the contract will need to be looked at and adjusted based on these cost assumptions.

That's not necessarily true. You could in theory have Alstom tweak the trains control software to have a more aggressive regenerative braking profile which would reduce the wear on brake pads.

So basically we should expect the same slow speeds on Line 5. Including in the underground portion. All in an effort to keep costs low.

In order to speed up the trains we have engage in contract negotiations. So ridiculous!

the underground portion is ATC controlled so it's less likely that the underground portion will be speed limited.

For clarity here. Both statements are actually correct.

The schedule is timed at each stop, otherwise you couldn't get a schedule for when the next tram will arrive. The schedule isn't just advisory, its limiting. TTC operators are not permitted to leave a timed stop early.

So in that sense, if you set a schedule that sees a vehicle arriving at one end of the line 50 minutes after departing the opposing terminal, then yes, it does determine the speed-as-operated.

However, it does not determine the maximum speed possible and as the schedule is, within the laws of physics, operator availability and budget a choice by the operating agency (and/or its partners), the schedule need not be set for such lethargic operation. Clearly, it should not be.

The answer given by Lali is technically correct, but utterly misleading. He knew that too.

the other part of this equation is also true. The trains use Thales SelTrac CBTC which in this instance uses both Automatic Train Protection (ATP) and Automatic Train Supervision (ATS). If you program in a specific schedule into the ATS portion, it will automatically institute a speed restriction and control dwell times to maintain that specific schedule AND modify that speed restriction around the moving block inputs from the ATP portion. If you program in a more aggressive schedule, you'll get more aggressive speeds so long as those speeds don't conflict with ATP moving blocks. If the TTC wanted to, they could right now input a schedule that would permit the trains to operate up to 60 km/h in all sections in between stations, but they have been told not to do that until at least after the spring when the Soft Opening period ends. So right now the speeds are being limited by the ATS/ATP signaling systems on top of not having true active TSP.

 

[afransen]

@kevinrupasinghe.bsky.social

I wanted to compare what I saw on Seattle's Line 1 LRT with Toronto's Finch LRT. In Seattle, you can see left turning cars waiting while fast-moving transit gets priority. Help TTCriders make it happen in Toronto: www.ttcriders.ca/greenlight 📸: @wk1998.bsky.social / @kevinrupasinghe.bsky.social

bsky.app

Just the opex savings of transit signal priority for transit systems should justify their use. Being able to operate a line with a meaningfully smaller number of transit vehicles is pretty substantial savings, without even considering that better/faster service will attract better ridership and farebox revenue.

 

[Bordercollie]

Just the opex savings of transit signal priority for transit systems should justify their use. Being able to operate a line with a meaningfully smaller number of transit vehicles is pretty substantial savings, without even considering that better/faster service will attract better ridership and farebox revenue.

Don't think logically

 

[Bojaxs]

Well, here it is. Same guy who outran the streetcars, manages to outrun the Finch West LRT by 18 minutes.

View this content on Instagram

View this content on Instagram

 

[Northern Light]

Anytime someone tries to compare the Gardiner to elevated rail show them this.View attachment 702358

May i suggest, irrespective of the merits of elevated transit, that this is a problematic graphic, because it would imply that people are fine with the Gardiner and everyone wants to live, work or shop next to it. A walk under or adjacent to the Gardiner would reveal otherwise.

I'm confident you know that. But you're overselling your argument.

***

As it so happens, I do disagree with virtually all of the elevated sections of the Ontario Line for reasons I've well documented, and which most people here now agree with, reluctantly in many cases. ....

In short, because the Ontario Line (Joint Corridor section) has sabatoged GO Service for more than 4 years now, with no end in sight. Some disagree with my assessment of the long-term capacity implications for GO, VIA, and HSR, they're wrong, as they will learn in due course, just as they have about the short (or not so short) term implications for GO Service. Which will have been reduced for no less than 5 years by the time this wraps up and maybe as many as 8.

Additionally, there has been no financial savings over tunnelling as this point. There was supposed to be 800M saved in the Leslieville section.... ...you can't run 2 years over on a 3-year project and not have blown that and more.

Up at Thorncliffe the issue isn't just the serious ecological damage done by the route choice, its that they've managed to miss 2 key trip generating nodes through improper station placement.

At the end....this will be something we lament for decades to come.......

I fix many of these dumb mistakes before they happen, regrettably, this was one I could not.

***

This does not mean elevated transit does not have a place; it may well, but in the context of the projects that have used it (SRT) and will use it O/L, in Toronto, its been mis-used.

On that former point, I have no objections to elevation along the portion of the SRT that was elevated. I object to a route on which virtually no one lived, and which under-performed in ridership as a result. the SSE route is much preferable, but w/e you think of elevated, good/bad or sideways, it simply wasn't going to happen on that alignment.

Things are almost always more complex than the dogmatic on any side of any issue make out.

 

[T3G]

Well, here it is. Same guy who outran the streetcars, manages to outrun the Finch West LRT by 18 minutes.

Apropos of nothing, I have been surprised to hear quite a few people say nice things about the bilingual announcements. I hated them, every time it said "prochain station" in that sing-songy voice I could feel a bit more of my soul slip away. I really wish Metrolinx would nut up and just pay a person to do their announcements, their text to speech software is just awful.

 

[Northern Light]

Apropos of nothing, I have been surprised to hear quite a few people say nice things about the bilingual announcements. I hated them, every time it said "prochain station" in that sing-songy voice I could feel a bit more of my soul slip away. I really wish Metrolinx would nut up and just pay a person to do their announcements, their text to speech software is just awful.

I like the idea of bilingual announcements, in the Toronto context; though I have not yet had a rider on Line 6 to hear the variation employed here.

I have to say though, the word station in both English and French is really unnecessary from a syntax point of view.......... Coxwell, est la Prochaine, Coxwell is Next should suffice. No need to be overly wordy.

 

[T3G]

I like the idea of bilingual announcements, in the Toronto context; though I have not yet had a rider on Line 6 to hear the variation employed here.

I have to say though, the work station in both English and French is really unnecessary from a syntax point of view.......... Coxwell, est la Prochaine, Coxwell is Next should suffice. No need to be overly wordy.

It's the same TTS software as heard the GO network. To their credit it's not *as* verbose as on the former (though it felt like they were trying, having two languages announce the doors are closing as the door chimes sound), but still not a fan. Even the TTC (rail) one sounds better IMO.

 

[ProjectEnd]

It has nothing to do with splitting hairs, it has to do with where the information came from and more importantly what is its basis.

In this case, the consortium is worried that increased vehicle speeds will result in increased wear on the vehicles - which means that they will need to be serviced more often, and thus affects their bottom line. Of course they are going to complain about it, and because the contracts are written in the way they are, they win in this case. Which is patently absurd.

Dan

 

[A 6264]

Apologies, this is the wrong forum for this picture, but I'm not sure which is the right one. Since we talk about new signage on this forum, I'll put it here.
CityNews has an article up with map showing weekend subway closures. I really don't think they made this themselves, so the TTC must have provided it.
Notice anything wrong?

 

[smallspy]

I implore you read this quote from @lastcommodore for my sentiment on this issue and other members' posts with evidence that this is the TTC playing dumb and acting powerless. When in fact, they likely have the ability to make changes, but they would rather sit on their hands and do nothing. There is a clear pattern of behaviour of the TTC coming up with any and all excuses to avoid changing anything besides slowing down service even further i.e. Flexity streetcars, Line 1's top speed is reduced etc...:

I am aware of discussions that have happened that are not in the public sphere. Thus why I posted what I did.

You can choose to believe them or not - that's on you.

Dan

 

[PL1]

Apologies, this is the wrong forum for this picture, but I'm not sure which is the right one. Since we talk about new signage on this forum, I'll put it here.
CityNews has an article up with map showing weekend subway closures. I really don't think they made this themselves, so the TTC must have provided it.
Notice anything wrong?
View attachment 702501

TMU station (formerly Dundas)?

 

[lastcommodore]

Apologies, this is the wrong forum for this picture, but I'm not sure which is the right one. Since we talk about new signage on this forum, I'll put it here.
CityNews has an article up with map showing weekend subway closures. I really don't think they made this themselves, so the TTC must have provided it.
Notice anything wrong?
View attachment 702501

"There is no subway service between Osgoode and College stations due to planned track work." implies termini at college and osgoode, but the diagram indicates those stations are also closed.... Also for Ossington-St. George

 

[A 6264]

"There is no subway service between Osgoode and College stations due to planned track work." implies termini at college and osgoode, but the diagram indicates those stations are also closed.... Also for Ossington-St. George

Good point, I didn't catch that. It's the old "between point A and point B" problem, when they mean to say from and including A to B. How do people get jobs writing media stories, but never learned about common mistakes like this? Most of us learned these things in high school English class, or just from life experience. (And it's not an ESL problem; it would be the same logic mistake in any language.) (Pardon my grumpiness.)