LowerBay
Active Member
Could it be that ART offers a service far superior to LRT?
|
|
|
- Thread starter Dan416
- Start date
Could it be that ART offers a service far superior to LRT?
MegaMax
New Member
It depends on how you use the technology, right? LRT, in its high-end fashion, like those in the US cities like St Louis can be very fast. The ICTS in Toronto has not worked out. Surprised they are still planning the route for this technology.
LowerBay
Active Member
It really doesn't matter since the ROW will be exclusive. The only point about ICTS is it doesn't handle snow very well. Other than that, there's no reason to convert to LRT if the ROW remains fully exclusive and not semi-exclusive.
Based on what I've seen, I'd say the SRT and the Eglinton line will be connected together as ART.
CodeMonkey
Active Member
To be fair, the ICTS line in Toronto was the experiment model, and always been since it was built by UDTC over 25 years ago. Now if we're going to like it or hate it, we have to see how Bombardier has change/improved it since the UDTC days.
golodhendil
Active Member
I think the only point is that the way TTC currently operates the ICTS makes it incompatible with snow, not something inherent to ICTS itself.
LowerBay
Active Member
No -- if the reaction rail is covered, the system doesn't work.
golodhendil
Active Member
Apparently, if TTC (or the union) is willing to run the trains throughout the night by going automatic, the way Vancouver (and presumably New York) does it to keep snow off the rail, there should not be as big of a problem with snow as they have now.
kettal
Banned
Why is that? Aside from the strange buzzing sound ART makes, the actual experience is the same.
CodeMonkey
Active Member
That would mean the ART technology would work and the TTC or Metrolinx would start setting up more automated ART systems. The union wouldn't like that, would they?
Lets face it, if a LRT system could be automated they would have "problems" with snow.
LowerBay
Active Member
The perception of ICTS/ART is that it's a mini-subway -- ergo, it ranks higher than LRT. You will never see the TTC downgrade it, or the Sheppard subway.
unimaginative2
Senior Member
How is it different from Spadina and St. Clair again?
I disagree that elevated lines are inherently too ugly. Many of Toronto's suburban streets are, frankly, not beautiful and never will be. Their dominant material is concrete, and buildings are set well back. I'm thinking of most of Don Mills, for example, and much of Eglinton. An elevated trackway through there wouldn't be a major aesthetic imposition in my opinion. I don't think the RT takes anything away from Scarborough Centre. Obviously downtown or in sensitive areas, they would be unacceptable.
ShonTron
Moderator
Elevated railways these days aren't that ugly.We're not going to get Roosevelt Avenue in Queens or Wabash Street in Chicago - think SkyTrain, the 1993 CTA Orange Line, SRT in STC or the Canada Line in Richmond.
kettal
Banned
You honestly can't tell the difference between Spadina, who has 10 intersections per km, versus the Scarborough RT corridor?
unimaginative2
Senior Member
I'm obviously talking about the Transit City lines, not a conversion of an existing rapid transit route.
W. K. Lis
Superstar
You honestly can't tell the difference between Spadina, who has 10 intersections per km, versus the Scarborough RT corridor?
I guess the 401 and Bay Street could be considered as the same, just roads.