[salsa]

Clearly he was referring to andrewpmk's not you. And quite frankly, it's a valid complaint. The mods need to clamp down on those trying to turn every thread into an anti-LRT bitchfest, and continuing to denigrate Ford's infinitely superior predecessor. Instead we actually saw a mod bite when trolled.

Responding to andrewpmk is a complete waste of time. No matter what facts or logic we try to present to him, it makes no difference. Typically he will post something stupid, then disappear for a day or two while we destroy his talking points, then come back again to repeat the same diatribe in the wrong thread. I also see him trolling Steve Munro's blog, and of course the grown ups there have tried their best to teach him a thing or two about transit, to no avail. It's time that we all just put him on our ignore list. Let him talk to himself all he wants, we'll just carry on.

Then I apologize to him for being too harsh.

Like I said, LRT is fine on Eglinton. There's nothing anti-LRT about finding ways to improve it's reliability and security. On the contrary I want this LRT to be as successful as possible.

London must be anti LRT to have found ways to improve theirs... those anti-lrt jerks...

Now, going back to go, having better infrastructure for LRT stations to connect to future GO RER station should not be overlooked

+1

 

[ehlow]

I rarely see any moderating of Transportation & Infrastructure. The other sub-forums are far more heavy moderated. Though that may be because Transportation & Infrastructure is more cordial that some of the other sub-forums, requiring less moderating.

I am not a fan of heavy handed moderating, but something does need to be done about the off topic issue. I don't mind if we go "off topic" if the project is related (eg: talking about the effects of the ECLRT on Yonge crowding on the DRL thread). The networked and political nature of transit means that it is impossible to avoid these off topic conversations. But these long discussions about projects that have absolutely nothing to do with the thread in question need to stop.

I personally find it a bit excessive that every time andrewpmk talks about anything it ends up being about how much he hates LRT or the Eglinton Crosstown, but then again, anybody is free to say whatever they want and what should I expect on a forum about Toronto transit? Therefore, I'm fine with it. At the end of the day I enjoy reading this forum overall, there are some good discussions, information & photos or construction updates (in my opinion) even though sometimes we repeat the same debates over and over.



Anyways, why go with third rail for GO? I was under the impression that most regional rail systems use pantograph & over head wires, and I would think we should just comply with international standards and use standard trains and other equipment.

With GO, I could definitely imagine people being electrocuted if the power line is on the ground. People always explore ravines & rail/hydro corridors, and fences break.

The amazing thing is that with this issue, for once it seems like we're all in agreement that frequent electric GO service is a good idea worth spending money on

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

There are ways to make it more grade separated even for the surface section between Don Mills and Kennedy.

Intersections barriers+(true) signal priority

LRT stations at Grade with enhance pedestrian acces for better security.

We've all seen our share of pedestrians foolishly risking their lives to catch a streetcar disregarding traffic lights thus forcing streetcars to slowdown at intersections (frequent on St.Clair)

These upgrades can always be added later without having to bury the line or elevating it (which seems unlikely).

That looks pretty cool.

 

[ssiguy2]

Sao Paulo is an example of how to turn a commuter rail system into an effective mass and rapid transit system.

They took many of their busier commuter rail lines, electrified the ones that were not already electric, greatly improved capacity, got rid of at grade crossings, and made the fares the same as the standard subway or transit system and voila..........a brand new effective transit system that everyone could afford and rely on. This is not rocket science but the GO electrification report states nothing on fares and it`s the most important part.

Toronto could have a RER type system tomorrow if all the transit agencies and Metrolinx stopped acting like fiefdoms protecting their turf and more like public service agencies working together towards a more mobile Toronto. The reality is now that lakeshore is every 15 minutes, they could have a RER system by tomorrow if they allowed standard TTC fares to be used on it.
The stations are there, the trains are there, the demand is certainly there.........all Torontonians want to do is take the train running by their house and seeing they are already paying for it thru their taxes you wouldn`t think it would be too much to ask.

Electrification will make for great ribbon cutting ceremonies, the policy wonks will feel accomplished, and the greenies will certainly feel all warm and fuzzy but for Torontonians all they will feel is the rain pouring on their head as they wait for the next packed bus to pass them by.

 

[Earlscourt_Lad]

The vast majority of mainline rail systems use overhead wires because it allows higher speeds, safety at level crossings, etc.

From what I gather, the top speed for third rail is something like 150km/h which is likely perfectly fine for a local GO service.

I'm not sure I really buy the weather aspects as a fault either, as the outdoor sections of the subway seem to be okay. Certainly overhead wires are not immune to ice bringing them down (see this past winter).

I don't much care either way, but it seems odd to assume that overhead catenary system is the best "just because".

 

[dunkalunk]

From what I gather, the top speed for third rail is something like 150km/h which is likely perfectly fine for a local GO service.

I'm not sure I really buy the weather aspects as a fault either, as the outdoor sections of the subway seem to be okay. Certainly overhead wires are not immune to ice bringing them down (see this past winter).

I don't much care either way, but it seems odd to assume that overhead catenary system is the best "just because".

If you have the money to install electrification, it makes no sense to install 2 different systems and require all trains to operate both catenary and third rail. Outer potions of the line will go faster than 150km and have level crossings which will make installing third rail incredibly impractical.

Overhead lines are not completely immute to icing, neither are rails.. Overhard lines do however have a smaller surface area making icing less of an issue.

 

[mpd618]

If you have the money to install electrification, it makes no sense to install 2 different systems and require all trains to operate both catenary and third rail. Outer potions of the line will go faster than 150km and have level crossings which will make installing third rail incredibly impractical.

Yeah, plentiful level crossings on the GO network make third-rail power pretty impractical, I think.

 

[nfitz]

I'm not sure I really buy the weather aspects as a fault either, as the outdoor sections of the subway seem to be okay.

Seem to be okay? I posted earlier today that there ARE currently problems, and all the reasons they'd be much worse for electrified GO service than subway. Given how much problems they've had in New York City with the LIRR third rail because of snow, despite their significantly milder climate than here, why would we want to go down that path?

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Anyways, why go with third rail for GO? I was under the impression that most regional rail systems use pantograph & over head wires, and I would think we should just comply with international standards and use standard trains and other equipment.

With GO, I could definitely imagine people being electrocuted if the power line is on the ground. People always explore ravines & rail/hydro corridors, and fences break.

I hope I didn't give the impression that I was anti-pantograph. I have no issues with them being used. I was just wondering out loud if third rail is really that bad in the snow.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Not to mention, if you have multiple lines on the corridor, you will need multiple third rails - and given its' construction that can get expensive. Given the support pylons for overhead wires can be shared, it offers a pretty distinctive advantage cost-wise I'd think.

AoD

 

[ssiguy2]

These are already commuter rail corridor so just switching them from DMU to EMU is the best use of limited funds and would allow diesel trains to use them until the entire system is electrified. That won`t be for a while especially on the Barrie Line so overhead catenary will work well and allows the line to operate while the wires are being constructed unlike making them third rail which requires shutting down whole lines for long periods.

This is simply a RER type system but they do not have to be considered just commuter rail. This type of system is what Sydney and Melbourne use...............they are not subways but have downtown tunnels, high frequency EMUs, both double and single level, and mostly grade separated especially in the inner city areas.

Presto will mean squat for Torontonians. All Presto will do is allow you to more easily pay the fares which you can`t afford regardless. Presto is not fare integration but just an easier way to pay and anyone who says `wait for Presto` is either incompetent or a liar.

 

[nfitz]

These are already commuter rail corridor so just switching them from DMU to EMU is the best use of limited funds and would allow diesel trains to use them until the entire system is electrified.

Though I don't think there's any plans for GO Transit to obtain any DMUs. Only by UPX.

It seems uncertain if GO will go to EMUs when they electrify. Initially they'd talked about using electric locomotives instead.

 

[trainiart]

Snow is just part of the problem with the third rail. Third rail is so much limited to low voltage, that it will either require insanely close spacing of transformer substations, bear significant power losses (due to poor transmission at low voltage) or both. Basically, for modern heavy rail systems it's a non-starter.

 

[gweed123]

From what I gather, the top speed for third rail is something like 150km/h which is likely perfectly fine for a local GO service.

I'm not sure I really buy the weather aspects as a fault either, as the outdoor sections of the subway seem to be okay. Certainly overhead wires are not immune to ice bringing them down (see this past winter).

I don't much care either way, but it seems odd to assume that overhead catenary system is the best "just because".

Personally, I favour overhead for GO REX simply because of the safety issue. With the above-ground sections of the TTC subway, the entire area is fenced and there are no at-grade crossings, meaning the only way to access the tracks is to hop the fence. With the GO system, there are much larger sections of track that can be easily accessed.

Even if all grade crossings are eliminated from the GO system, that's a much wider area to patrol for trespassers. With the current setup, the only real risk of walking along the tracks is being hit by a train. Adding 3rd rails adds the possibility of electrocution. Someone would have to try really hard to electrocute themselves using an overhead power system. That's not to mention things like wildlife, who may come in contact with the third rail simply because they were hopping across the track.

Though I don't think there's any plans for GO Transit to obtain any DMUs. Only by UPX.

It seems uncertain if GO will go to EMUs when they electrify. Initially they'd talked about using electric locomotives instead.

That would make sense if they wanted to use the existing bi-level stock. However, they seem to be talking about moving to smaller trains and easier-to-board trains, which would likely necessitate new rolling stock. If that's the case, it would make sense to go with EMUs.

 

[salsa]

An overhead catenary system appears to be more advantageous than third rail, but unfortunately the aesthetics are not so great.