nfitz
Superstar
2-3 coaches? On Lakeshore? Do you have a reference for that? I've seen some speculation here, but not to that degree.
I was expecting 6-car trains at a minimum.
Last edited:
|
|
|
- Thread starter innsertnamehere
- Start date
I was expecting 6-car trains at a minimum.
Willybru21
Active Member
The first series of Bi-Levels that were built in 1976 should reach the end of their life without any further rebuilds by 2035. The newest series was built up until 2021, so going off that, theoretically the 350 newest coaches would reach the end of their lives by 2080.
I’m not saying that they should be ran that long (we aren’t VIA Rail and EMU’s are superior in every single way), l’m just pointing out how long they theoretically could last.
Willybru21
Active Member
2-3 is super low and I highly doubt that, 4-5 is more likely.
Sunnyside
Active Member
I could see 3 coaches- most new evidence seems to suggest higher frequencies (6-10tph) than Metrolinx originally intended (4tph/15m frequency). The only question is if you have enough locomotives to run that kind of service, which it seems like they are expecting they will. Not surprising if we are ordering enough locos to entirely supplant the core of the network as it exists today.
Also worth factoring in that diesel locos are still going to be operating on every line, shouldering the brunt of express services within the electrified service area, given they are still to be the network's backbone outside of it. There will be alot of diesels to go around at that point. So, for every few electric 3-car consists, you'd have an 8-12 car diesel consist coming from Hamilton/Niagara on the express run.
Perhaps this is part of why they want to ensure they have no conflicts to Kitchener... those diesels can and should do multiple jobs at once. Coordinating with the railroads will become key to ensuring we don't have trains just sitting around, The more consists that are operating, the better it is for everyone, I'd think.
I suppose my point is we will be car-constrained before we are locomotive-constrained. As long as capacity is increasing on the whole, everywhere, then the length of a midday electric train on LSW is not super material.
TheHonestMaple
Active Member
lol what did I just read. Those old bi-levels were purchased at a time when they made sense, when the lines were not electrified. Once they do become electrified, the business case completely changes. Buying EMUs make perfect sense. Why on earth would you electrify the entire network, only to run equipment that isn't really optimized for it. Yes, it will cost money to replace. But the improvement to service will attract new widership and continue growth. You have your blinders on.
Bojaxs
Active Member
That would be silly. But that actually exists. This is exactly what the MBTA does. They don't own a single electric locomotive.
TheHonestMaple
Active Member
I mean I know the plan is to run electric locomotives. But it only makes sense to just replace aging bi-levels with EMUs like CalTrain. And sell any existing ones to anyone who wants to buy.
Bojaxs
Active Member
Mate! Did you not read the last page of this thread?
TheHonestMaple
Active Member
Yes, some people in this forum seem to think buying EMUs is pointless and we should stick with an aging fleet just because.
canarob
Senior Member
Barrie and Stouffville will be fully electric, no?
ARG1
Senior Member
Who? Give us a name. Make sure you actually look at their financing/expansion plans to see that they would be willing to buy.
It would help if you addressed the actual points people gave you. Nobody here has uttered the phrase "just because".
Dresden runs it's entire S-Bahn network using electric locomotives and does so just fine. Like the whole debate is just grasping at straws, EMUs are not significantly more efficient that it justified scrapping 800 or so perfectly decent bilevels, whilst spending billions on replacement EMUs.
It is speculative, but I don't think it's too much of a stretch. There have been numbers that suggest something as low as 5-6m headways on some lines (part of the reason why we're implementing ETCS). Considering lines like Barrie operate hourly service using just 6 cars, I don't think 2-3 cars on some trains is unreasonable.
goodcitywhenfinished
Active Member
We certainly have the fleet size to achieve economies of scale if a retrofit was undertaken.
T3G
Senior Member
Aging Bilevels? Have you actually bothered to take a look at the fleet rosters? Most of the BiLevels are less than 20 years old. And those that aren't have quite recently been refurbished (the Series I cars were finished about 6 years ago, the Series II cars are getting work now). So essentially your suggestion boils down to "I want to see an EMU in Toronto, so let's sell of all of our perfectly fine equipment that we've just sunk big money into, at a knockdown price*, to a customer that doesn't exist." Brilliant.
* Because no one is going to be buying second hand cars for full price.
nfitz
Superstar
As it's unlikely that a profit-making company will be having a fire sale on the bi-levels, the biggest question is what form new equipment will take.
Presumably with the inevitable passenger growth of more frequent service, the existing fleet won't suffice.
That's where I expect we will first see EMUs.
Presumably with the inevitable passenger growth of more frequent service, the existing fleet won't suffice.
That's where I expect we will first see EMUs.
crs1026
Superstar
Exactly. Railcars are not purchased or retired to gratify spectators. They have an economic life which is driven by financing, cost of operation, depreciation and book value, etc. The decision to switch models is driven by a spreadsheet exercise which recognises advantages of new models offset by differences in cost. Buying too soon has a cost which may be avoidable by keeping old things running longer.
No one is saying that GO will never have EMU’s. They will have them when the time is right - as determined by the spreadsheet exercise. But not before.
- Payl