[cplchanb]

Platform gaps are not the end of the world. Passenger trains around the world have vehicle-side gap fillers to enable level-boarding.

That's fine but why would it be necessary for ML owned track when cp/cn shouldn't have the say on this. Just another unnecessary expenditure

 

[EastYorkTTCFan]

That's fine but why would it be necessary for ML owned track when cp/cn shouldn't have the say on this. Just another unnecessary expenditure

Because of situations like this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_...members of,Montreal and Toronto-Ottawa routes.

 

[crs1026]

That's fine but why would it be necessary for ML owned track when cp/cn shouldn't have the say on this. Just another unnecessary expenditure

ML owns the right of way (and trackage) but CN in particular retains residual rights to send freight trains over the routes they have sold to ML. So the clearances have to accommodate freight trains to the standard clearances.

- Paul.

 

[smallspy]

so are the stupid platform gap rules a tc thing or a cn requirement thing?

Transport Canada

Dan

 

[luk3yd]

How many tracks through Union would need to be “protected” to allow freight trains to pass through? 1? 2?

Could it be possible as part of the track/platform realignment to utilize gauntlet tracks (a la ION in Waterloo) to support infrequent freight diversions and allow level boarding for the passenger platforms?

 

[generalcanada]

How many tracks through Union would need to be “protected” to allow freight trains to pass through? 1? 2?

Could it be possible as part of the track/platform realignment to utilize gauntlet tracks (a la ION in Waterloo) to support infrequent freight diversions and allow level boarding for the passenger platforms?

to be clear on the conversation above, There will be level boarding, that is 100% going to happen, not immediately though. Nor in the near future with USEP
It will be done on the main construction package rebuilding all of the other platforms and tracks at union. As for when that is...who knows

 

[drum118]

How many tracks through Union would need to be “protected” to allow freight trains to pass through? 1? 2?

Could it be possible as part of the track/platform realignment to utilize gauntlet tracks (a la ION in Waterloo) to support infrequent freight diversions and allow level boarding for the passenger platforms?

It will be platform 27

Gauntlet tracks require more space between tracks in the ROW and which one will have it that has the leases impact on GO service as well fitting it in?? There are lines in the US that use the gauntlet track for DMU services as well LRT. More stations means more switches and maintaining them.

 

[reaperexpress]

LSW will be ECTS l2 only to Oakville as CN stills run service west of there and more so from Burlington Junction.to Hamilton/NF.

This is not true. CN running does not prevent Metrolinx from implementing ETCS. Metrolinx clearly stated in the ETCS backgrounders that they will have lineside signals for use by CN trains. If you're going to make things up, please preface the statements with "my guess is that..." or something along those lines.

https://www.metrolinx.com/en/discover/world-standard-signalling-system-to-improve-go-train-service

ETCS can be implemented up to the end of Metrolinx ownership at Burlington station, which will also be the end of electrification. Eventually the electric local trains from Burlington to Oshawa could operate entirely in ETCS. Diesel express trains will need to switch systems to travel beyond Burlington.