News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 8.8K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5K     0 

GenerationW said:
It was never possible. Not sure why anyone would literally believe that instead of seeing it as campaign rhetoric.

He needs to call for a ban on handguns.
Click to expand...

Chow was admittedly pretty far from the mark there, but I swear that nothing pales in comparison to the religious schools plan.

Sometimes I wish Tory would look at his record and just stop trying in politics.
 
Here is a wild and crazy idea........

Why not just save a cool billion and reconfigure the line to accept MK111 cars and then use the extra money from that and the Eglinton LRT and make it one long elevated line from Jane to STC using the Eglinton tunnel. They could easily expand it to serve areas further west like UT Scar. Remember Vancouver is currently building a supposeded expensive tech SkyTrain that is 11km with 7 stations and a one km tunnel for just $1,4 billion.

This whole SRT thing is a farce and it started with Miller. Metrolinx originally wanted to do what I just suggested until Miller came along with his LRT everywhere plan. This LRT is going to be not only the most expensive ever built on this planet but due to having to share the road it will also be far slower, less reliable, have lower capacity, and be a hell of a lot more expensive to run then if they just made the whole SRT/Eglinton route SkyTrain. This whole thing is a farce.
 
ssiguy2 said:
Here is a wild and crazy idea........

Why not just save a cool billion and reconfigure the line to accept MK111 cars and then use the extra money from that and the Eglinton LRT and make it one long elevated line from Jane to STC using the Eglinton tunnel. They could easily expand it to serve areas further west like UT Scar. Remember Vancouver is currently building a supposeded expensive tech SkyTrain that is 11km with 7 stations and a one km tunnel for just $1,4 billion.

This whole SRT thing is a farce and it started with Miller. Metrolinx originally wanted to do what I just suggested until Miller came along with his LRT everywhere plan. This LRT is going to be not only the most expensive ever built on this planet but due to having to share the road it will also be far slower, less reliable, have lower capacity, and be a hell of a lot more expensive to run then if they just made the whole SRT/Eglinton route SkyTrain. This whole thing is a farce.
Click to expand...

Why would we want to use proprietary Bombardier tech?
 
ssiguy2 said:
Here is a wild and crazy idea........

Why not just save a cool billion and reconfigure the line to accept MK111 cars and then use the extra money from that and the Eglinton LRT and make it one long elevated line from Jane to STC using the Eglinton tunnel. They could easily expand it to serve areas further west like UT Scar. Remember Vancouver is currently building a supposeded expensive tech SkyTrain that is 11km with 7 stations and a one km tunnel for just $1,4 billion.

This whole SRT thing is a farce and it started with Miller. Metrolinx originally wanted to do what I just suggested until Miller came along with his LRT everywhere plan. This LRT is going to be not only the most expensive ever built on this planet but due to having to share the road it will also be far slower, less reliable, have lower capacity, and be a hell of a lot more expensive to run then if they just made the whole SRT/Eglinton route SkyTrain. This whole thing is a farce.
Click to expand...

I think Miller made the right decision to go with LRT instead of linear induction technology. By going with a standard, it means we're not at the mercy of Bombardier. We have a pretty bad experience with linear induction technology here in Toronto, given how the SRT was forced on us. And while ICTS is limited to grade-separated transit, LRT is more flexible, so we can save a lot by staying at-grade instead of elevating everything (which, besides being expensive, really limits where we could build, is ugly, etc.) Although I'll admit I'm a fan of the fact that ICTS is automated.

Given the decision for LRT, it made sense to convert the SRT, so that we are using the same technology throughout (shared facilities, economies of scale, etc) rather than try to upgrade a failed system.
 
aquateam said:
I think Miller made the right decision to go with LRT instead of linear induction technology. By going with a standard, it means we're not at the mercy of Bombardier. We have a pretty bad experience with linear induction technology here in Toronto, given how the SRT was forced on us. And while ICTS is limited to grade-separated transit, LRT is more flexible, so we can save a lot by staying at-grade instead of elevating everything (which, besides being expensive, really limits where we could build, is ugly, etc.) Although I'll admit I'm a fan of the fact that ICTS is automated.

Given the decision for LRT, it made sense to convert the SRT, so that we are using the same technology throughout (shared facilities, economies of scale, etc) rather than try to upgrade a failed system.
Click to expand...

That decision to go LRT has resulted in significant delays since people want grade-separated transit.
In the end we will probably wind up with the only LRT in Toronto being the Eglinton LRT so all this shared facility stuff will be meaningless. If we would have gone with the Eglinton/SRT SkyTrain, then the SRT portion would probably already been completed (or at least completed in advance of the PanAm games), since the closure time would have only been 8 months. We also would have had a nice pot of money to build the DRL.
 
nfitz said:
The Eglinton Crosstown will be automated, just the same way the SRT is now, between Brentcliffe and Mount Dennis. It was mentioned in some of the project documents.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the tunnel part will be automated and have higher frequencies than the at-grade part, up to 2 min frequencies in tunnel, 3 min outside. Some trains can operate only in tunnel. I read this I think in the EA amendment about the west end Mt Dennis changes to the line.

BurlOak said:
That decision to go LRT has resulted in significant delays since people want grade-separated transit.
In the end we will probably wind up with the only LRT in Toronto being the Eglinton LRT so all this shared facility stuff will be meaningless. If we would have gone with the Eglinton/SRT SkyTrain, then the SRT portion would probably already been completed (or at least completed in advance of the PanAm games), since the closure time would have only been 8 months. We also would have had a nice pot of money to build the DRL.
Click to expand...

BurlOak, LRT can be fully grade separated, and also automated. The decision to go with LRT is separate from the decision to go at-grade or elevated or underground. We're talking Skytrain technology vs LRT, both can be elevated, underground and automated.
 
BurlOak said:
That decision to go LRT has resulted in significant delays since people want grade-separated transit.
Click to expand...
What do you mean? The timeframe was 2019/2020 before the decision to switch to subway, and then optimistic date was 2023.

And the LRT IS grade-separated transit - just like the SRT. Why do you think it would become non-grade-separated given the alignment is unchanged, and the extension to Sheppard includes an underground station at Sheppard east of Markham Road??
 
innsertnamehere said:
ECLRT is capable of 90 second frequencies underground, 3 minute frequencies above ground.
Click to expand...
Surely it's nothing to do with below-ground or above-ground - but a function of if it is grade-separated or not.

What's the basis of your 3-minute maximum frequency above ground? Even the existing streetcars do better than every 2 minutes, despite frequent intersections.
 
innsertnamehere said:
ECLRT is capable of 90 second frequencies underground, 3 minute frequencies above ground.
Click to expand...

nfitz said:
Surely it's nothing to do with below-ground or above-ground - but a function of if it is grade-separated or not.

What's the basis of your 3-minute maximum frequency above ground? Even the existing streetcars do better than every 2 minutes, despite frequent intersections.
Click to expand...

Yes innsert, interested to hear the reasoning behind this.
 
TheTigerMaster said:
LRT can be automated as well. There's nothing special about ICTS automation.
Click to expand...

How would this work in the context of the ECLRT, though? I mean, since the ECLRT goes through intersections where it has the potential to interact with pedestrians and cars, it should require drivers. And if it's automated for the tunneled section, does that mean that either a) the trains go in an automatic mode and the drivers nap/find something useful to do/check POP or b) some trains are automated, some manual. Automated trains short-turn at the end of the tunneled sections and manual ones continue to the surface section?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top