andomano
Active Member
Have you not looked at the preferred plan? There are physical barriers that prohibit those stations. Isn't varying topography a bitch?
|
|
|
- Thread starter Dan416
- Start date
W. K. Lis
Superstar
One question not in the FAQ that I want answered is: Will the trains operate under full Automated Train Control (ATC)?
Apparently there are various flavours of automation,
See this link from Bombardier.
Apparently there are various flavours of automation,
- Automatic train protection (ATP), which controls vital, safety-critical functions
- Automatic train operation (ATO), which controls the actual train driving functions
- Automatic train supervision (ATS), including routing, schedule adherence and fault monitoring functions.
See this link from Bombardier.
kEiThZ
Superstar
^^ A lot of those problems arise from their insistence on using the creek. If they just used Progress, they wouldn't have any of those problems. Indeed, during the very first presentations, the staff were talking about running the thing at-grade through the hydro corridor until the neighbours got upset at the noise potential of that. Since then it's magically migrated to an elevated ROW.
And pray tell what varying topography is so problematic that the entire thing needs to be elevated? The only stretch that's a topographical obstacle is the stretch from Bellamy till Centennial. And even that wouldn't be challenging at all if they used the street.
And pray tell what varying topography is so problematic that the entire thing needs to be elevated? The only stretch that's a topographical obstacle is the stretch from Bellamy till Centennial. And even that wouldn't be challenging at all if they used the street.
Voltz
Senior Member
The most recent proposal had the SRT underground through the railway corridor north of milner, although things may change with the next round of proposals
kEiThZ
Superstar
It just seems to me remarkably boneheaded to switch technologies and then deploy the extension as they would an ART Mk II and not take advantage of the benefits of LRT (like cheap stations).
superman
Active Member
and the advantage of slower speeds...
I think most people on these forums who are against LRT is because of its speeds being not grade-separated.
Having it be grade-separated / LRT = cheaper than subway but as fast = win-win. If only the rest of transit city followed suit.
drum118
Superstar
Has anyone every walked the plan routes north of the 401 to see what the area looks like??
Can you see the elevation of the land mast from the Google earth view map??
There are video's and photo's up on youtube under SRT that show the area at ground level.
I have stated to TTC from Day One that the line has to be underground as there are too many issues for ground level as well overhead.
Can you see the elevation of the land mast from the Google earth view map??
There are video's and photo's up on youtube under SRT that show the area at ground level.
I have stated to TTC from Day One that the line has to be underground as there are too many issues for ground level as well overhead.
andomano
Active Member
The land north of the 401 is relatively flat... as it was a heavy rail corridor at one point in time.
Dan416
Senior Member
The disadvantage of LRT is that if you decide to run it like a subway (= underground, fully grade-separated) then it costs as much if not MORE than a subway. LRT is really only appropriate as a supplementary corridor technology where speed isn't an issue and it can be at-grade. What makes subways expensive is the grade-separation, not the rolling stock. And what do you know, it's grade separation that provides "rapid" speeds, not the subways themselves which have lower maximum speeds and worse acceleration than LRVs due to their size and heft. If you're going to go to the trouble of grade-separating an entire line, there's no reason to have it LRT instead of HRT. The only reason to use LRT is if you're running it like a streetcar.
drum118
Superstar
When did the RR last ran???
What was built after it??
The ROW looks like this is a cross section
Houses------------
ROW---------
Houses--------------
You need to talk to LA about their tunnels as they need to happen in various places for various reason. Then there is a few other systems doing this.
As for speed, speed for who???
andomano
Active Member
It's the old CNoR sub that led from Toronto to Ottawa.
I sketched this up a while ago... http://maps.google.ca/maps/ms?hl=en&safe=off&ie=UTF8&t=h&msa=0&msid=116910688688129869106.00046159f1819ba3cfee2&ll=43.774317,-79.218979&spn=0.185432,0.440483&z=12
I sketched this up a while ago... http://maps.google.ca/maps/ms?hl=en&safe=off&ie=UTF8&t=h&msa=0&msid=116910688688129869106.00046159f1819ba3cfee2&ll=43.774317,-79.218979&spn=0.185432,0.440483&z=12
drum118
Superstar
The houses on the east side is higher in elevation than the ROW while the ones one the west side is lower than the ROW. The first section north of Sheppard is very level.
Some video's of the ROW
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FesFxIZmtfo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-P6EW0E1eM8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-igCSC7IgZ8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PW2H9wJZRVo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=trZ5RR27a9w
The ROW cannot be use south of Sheppard as it too close to too many places.
The School north of Sheppard will be an issue.
Sir Novelty Fashion
Senior Member
At this stage in the game, I think these images from the TTC have about the same real-world import as fantasy subway maps that railfans post here. Every level of government's in the hole, the municipal government's about to turn over, and the TTC's capital plans are the first to go whenever that happens (especially when said plans were the pet projects of a departing regime).
Which is sad, in a way, because speaking as a taxpayer, the fantasy maps were much more cost-effective to produce.
Which is sad, in a way, because speaking as a taxpayer, the fantasy maps were much more cost-effective to produce.
kEiThZ
Superstar
I spent a decade living very close to the corridor. I jogged through it all the time as a teenager. It's not some insurmountable geological feature as some would set it out to be. It's dirt that can be pushed around and made flat. And indeed, in the very initial proposals the TTC presenters mentioned running it at-grade. When residents voiced their displeasure, they proposed making it elevated which made the neighbours more upset and that's why now the whole thing is a tunnel.
The question from me, is why not take the opportunity of a technology change to make some changes in the plan. If they can either tunnel under the 401 or move the portal closer to the 401, they can probably fit in a station at Milner. And if LRT is really cheaper to build, why not fit in stations at Markham and Milner. Surely, there are some savings coming from having more compact stations at Centennial, Bellamy and Malvern.
superman
Active Member
Is a grade separate LRT/mid capacity system really more expensive than subways? If so, why would Vancouver and Hong Kong be building these systems (Canada Line/South Island Line).
If it is though, i still think making it grade separate is a good common ground between having a full blown subway and a groudn level local streetcar service.