No. Not one subway line matches the SRT. And there are dwell times for that as well. I'm not saying that it's much faster; but it isn't slower, which is what some here try and pretend.
The technology is clearly not suited to the Toronto climate; but let's trash it for the right reason!
I disagree. Not only does the SRT have a dwell time, but given the reports of how overloaded it is in rush hour, it's more strained as a subway train at peak.
And you conveniently ignored the most important part of the logic, which is the longer station spacing and larger number of stations.
Let's do a simple
gedankenexperiment:
Suppose line A has 12 stations 5 d-units apart, and line B has 4 stations 10 d-units apart (a generous assumption, since the majority of YUS and BD stations are more than twice as close as most SRT stations, and they have more than three times the number of stations as the latter).
Then suppose line A trains run twice as fast as line B (say, 10 d-unit/t-unit vs 5 d-unit/t-unit), and give it the benefit of the doubt that line B has the same dwell time as line A (say, 3 t-units).
Make the simplifying assumption that the trains run start-stop (no time for acc/dec) so the trains run at constant, highest speed between stations, which favours in the calculations whichever train has the higher acc/dec.
Doing the math, line A takes 0.5 t-units to go from station to station, while line B takes 2 t-units.
The total time for line A is 41 t-units, over a distance of 50 d-units, giving an average speed of 1.22 d-units/t-units.
The total time for line B is 18 t-units, over a distance of 30 d-units, giving an average speed of 1.67 d-units/t-units.
Thus, a line that runs faster trains (line A) has a slower average speed than a line that runs slower trains (line B), simply by virtue of longer station spacing and more stations.
And in real life, the subways are less than twice as fast as the SRT, the stations are even closer and there are even more stations than in this scenario, so the average speeds are even more skewed.
These things were designed to be smaller, lighter, with faster acceleration; why would one not assume that it would be faster?
Acceleration has nothing to with speed. And saying that the trains are designed to be smaller and lighter would automatically imply higher speed, is like saying streetcars and peoplemovers, being designed to be lighter and smaller, should have higher speed than the TGV or shinkensen because the latter are bigger and heavier. Those are simply different and unrelated design criteria, and one does not imply the other.
Anyway, until we have real data about the operating speed of the two trains, this is the best and most logical we can do. My point is not that the SRT is "worse" in any way, I actually like the ART technology, and if not for network connectivity considerations I would favour keeping the ART in some form (that's O/T). All I was trying to say, is that LRT is slower
and more importantly has smaller momentum than HRT in general and thus has less of a need for PSDs.