drum118
Superstar
I asked that Question at last month Mextrolinx meeting and I was told they would get back to me, but the EA was schedule to start this year.
The line was supposed to be 3 tracks by 2012, but that was stated years ago.
|
|
|
- Thread starter drum118
- Start date
I asked that Question at last month Mextrolinx meeting and I was told they would get back to me, but the EA was schedule to start this year.
The line was supposed to be 3 tracks by 2012, but that was stated years ago.
Dan416
Senior Member
That is disappointing to hear.
TOareaFan
Superstar
then what is th cost and what is the benefit of 30 minute frequencies on Lakeshore?
EnviroTO
Senior Member
Costs of $2,507M, and benefits of $4,567M for full electric express rail and 30 minute off-peak service. How unfortunate those costs benefits are. 
doady
Senior Member
Yeah, going from 60 min and 30 min would increase the ridership at lot, and the extra revenue would probably more than offset the extra costs. 60 min frequencies always kills the ridership. 45 min should be the minimum for any transit route.
smallspy
Senior Member
Compared to the rest of the lines, very little.
Staffing for the stations is already paid for - it doesn't matter whether you operate 24 trains over the course of a day or 120, your station staffing will remain fixed. The only incremental costs are those associated with the trains themselves - staffing, track time costs, fuel, maintenance, etc. There is no additional infrastructure necessary, therefore there are no capital costs associated with it.
On most of the other lines, you have to pay for the infrastructure to allow for all-day service - upgrading the signalling to CTC (or comparible), additional sidings or lengths of doubled mainline, more platforms, etc. Then there are the operational costs with running each train, as well as staffing each station for the rest of the day.
Unfortunately, the railways have done a very good job of not allowing the public to see what the actual track time costs are - and these appear to be the single largest operational cost of running the trains - so we'll likely never actually be able to know what the actual dollars are.
Dan
Toronto, Ont.
45 minutes is kind of an odd scheduling time for that though. If you're going to have to consult a schedule, something like 5, 10, 15, 30, 60 is more appropriate, because it's easier to memorize. "Every 10 minutes on the 4s" for example. Having taken the Lakeshore West GO off-peak quite frequently, it was very nice to not have to check a schedule for the trains, because you just have to remember "Burlington GO, inbound at 14 after the hour". Switching to a 45 min schedule I think would be more of an inconvenience than a convenience. Not that much benefit in terms of actual time saved, but more confusing for riders. 30 minute frequencies though I would completely support.
TOareaFan
Superstar
I guess what I was wondering was how many new riders it would create?
Many of those off peak trains are already operating way under capacity and, I would guess, recovering far less than the system wide 85%
Are there thousands of people in Oakville and Burlington not using the train on weekends and evenings because of the one hour frequencies? My guess is no and the system would end up carrying a very similar number of people spread over more trains.
Add any off peAk service, though, to any of the other lines and you are adding net new riders.
At the margins there is more to be gained by adding service on the other lines!
Many of those off peak trains are already operating way under capacity and, I would guess, recovering far less than the system wide 85%
Are there thousands of people in Oakville and Burlington not using the train on weekends and evenings because of the one hour frequencies? My guess is no and the system would end up carrying a very similar number of people spread over more trains.
Add any off peAk service, though, to any of the other lines and you are adding net new riders.
At the margins there is more to be gained by adding service on the other lines!
I would venture to guess that the reason that it wouldn't help weekend ridership too much is because on weekends, most of the trips to and from Toronto are for family-related activities. The infrequency of trains, the fact that it's a group of people travelling (the added cost of multiple fares), the potential inaccessibility of the destination (Grandma's house on a suburban street in Toronto), and the lack of weekend traffic create a perfect storm for a reduced likelihood for transit use.
Woodbridge_Heights
Senior Member
GO could run shorter trains at shorter headways during the off peak, giving the appearance of better service while not running trains that look empty. Of course then you need more trains on the line, more conductors, etc, etc.
Everyone knows, though, that off peak ridership is much much lower than peak and so the same capacity is not needed.
Everyone knows, though, that off peak ridership is much much lower than peak and so the same capacity is not needed.
DavidH
Senior Member
And of course, this would bring considerable costs in breaking apart and reforming trains several times a day.
doady
Senior Member
I wasn't suggesting that Lakeshore see 45 minute service (it should be 30 minutes or better). I was just pointing out my experience with transit: routes with 60 minute frequency never see ridership growth - only routes with 45 minute frequency and above see ridership growth. You talk about 60 minute frequency being easier to memorize, and that's true, but with 60 minute frequency people are forced to memorize. With 60 minute frequency, people can't just walk to the stop at any time, and so there's few new riders. It is hard to argue for the virtue of 60 minute frequency when so few people use routes that have 60 minute frequnecy, such as the Lakeshore trains in the off-peak.
Very true. I realize that you were just trying to point out why 60 was a bad idea, I was just stating my preference that if the frequency is going to be anything higher than 30, it should at least be 60.
Going back to the separation of the trains in order to run smaller trains: I wonder if it would be possible to attach the front of a locomotive to the rear of one of the specially-designed end cars (or pair two end cars together back-to-back). This way during rush hour you could still have 10-car or 12-car trainsets, but once rush hour is over, the trains separate at one point, and you have two independently functioning trains. This would also eliminate the need for the train to travel backwards for one direction, as you would have a locomotive at both ends.
I know VIA does this with some of their Toronto to Ottawa/Montreal routes. The trains travel paired together until Brockville, where they stop for 5 minutes to split the trains, and then they head off in separate directions.
Just a thought on how to better tailor capacity to demand in both peak and off-peak.
Dan416
Senior Member
Really all GO lines should be on 30 minutes or better service.
nfitz
Superstar
That's pretty much what GO has promised for 2020 ... though as they've been making similar promises on Lakeshore for 5 decades, it probably means little.