hw621
Senior Member
Without electrification
|
|
|
And from April 28 to October 31, kids 12 and under ride FREE on the GO Barrie line!
Know before you GO! Just a few things to keep in mind before you travel:
- Children do not require a ticket to travel.
- If a child transfers from a local transit service onto GO, they will not be eligible for the co-fare discount. This doesn’t apply to TTC, as children 12 and under always travel for free.
- If you plan on bringing a large group of kids, please call us at 1-888-GET-ON-GO (438-6646) in advance so we can help accommodate your group.
- Eligible Routes: GO Transit Barrie Corridor (All Barrie trains and Bus routes 63, 65, 68, 69 including their variants).
- Transfers: For trip segments travelled on other corridors and/or bus routes, valid fare payment will be required.
But why just Barrie Line? To be honest I am quite upset with this - don't kids on the other lines not entitle to same treatment?~https://www.gotransit.com/en/travelling-with-us/promotions-and-events/barrie-line-trains
Looks like GO is trying to increase weekend ridership on the Barrie line. It's not a bad idea actually. Likely close to revenue neutral compared to using a group pass, but "kids ride free" is more immediately positive sounding.
I just want it all done now, electrification or not.Without electrification
But why just Barrie Line? To be honest I am quite upset with this - don't kids on the other lines not entitle to same treatment?~
I just want it all done now, electrification or not.
This kind of highly-targeted marketing and discounting plan has worked to great success for VIA over the past decade or so, and with UPX as well, so it stands to reason that it should work on GO as well.
If you mean 2WAD in the technical sense, that's possible. The latter clause is not achievable as RER on a largely duplicated track network, however, which is what GO is. It also bears consideration that most suburban railways electrified by the 1930's, and many from coal-derived electricity. Ontario is awash in cheap hydroelectricity, thus the capital expenditure now seems both fiscally and environmentally prudent. Why any political party would consider expensive diesel - - beyond their electors simply not wanting to understand the benefits of electrification - - is beyond me.
Electrification is crying for a P3 solution. Unbundle it from the Mother-of-all-DBFOM procurement that ML is working on. Bid the electricity supply (including financing the capital spend required to implement) on its own so there is a known and discrete envelope. Compare that to the price of diesels over the same period. The electric price may not be cheaper - but it's definable, and it puts it outside the core capital envelope (that may look excessive to the voter), and maybe it becomes something that Ottawa could fund from cap and trade.
Besides, keep the eye on the prize. If Doug is voted in, we need to protect track building above all. Get basic 2WAD in place, and ridership growth will demand added capacity, and electrification is integral to that. If we have to live with Doug, give him a reason to look good building RER. Saying he put RER in place for half the cost is his opportunity to shine. Let's get as much of it as we can.
- Paul
An interesting idea and a reasonable, conservative approach.
I'm not against P3 - it has proven a decent degree of success in building Vancouver's rapid-transit, and now Montréal's as well. What I am against is tearing up the current electrification procurement plans - if these discussions were being had 40+ years ago, so be it, but Ontario and in particular the GTA long ago used up its window for backtracking and our lack of suitable regional transit is costing us in lost productivity.
If you mean 2WAD in the technical sense, that's possible. The latter clause is not achievable as RER on a largely duplicated track network, however, which is what GO is. It also bears consideration that most suburban railways electrified by the 1930's, and many from coal-derived electricity. Ontario is awash in cheap hydroelectricity, thus the capital expenditure now seems both fiscally and environmentally prudent. Why any political party would consider expensive diesel - - beyond their electors simply not wanting to understand the benefits of electrification - - is beyond me.
For me, I'm with Paul. The highways are awful. We need something on the ground now. At least by 2020.Electrification is crying for a P3 solution. Unbundle it from the Mother-of-all-DBFOM procurement that ML is working on. Bid the electricity supply (including financing the capital spend required to implement) on its own so there is a known and discrete envelope. Compare that to the price of diesels over the same period. The electric price may not be cheaper - but it's definable, and it puts it outside the core capital envelope (that may look excessive to the voter), and maybe it becomes something that Ottawa could fund from cap and trade.
Besides, keep the eye on the prize. If Doug is voted in, we need to protect track building above all. Get basic 2WAD in place, and ridership growth will demand added capacity, and electrification is integral to that. If we have to live with Doug, give him a reason to look good building RER. Saying he put RER in place for half the cost is his opportunity to shine. Let's get as much of it as we can.
- Paul
I was reading up on New York's new Niagara Falls International station, and was wondering about the potential of extending Lakeshore West Niagara service there to replace the current VIA/Amtrak arrangement. The station would need a new low-level platform within a controlled Canadian customs zone to serve GO service. Currently, my understanding is that the station only handles customs entry into the U.S. - entry into Canada being handled at Niagara Falls ON.
I found that it would only take a slight adjustment to GO's existing Summer Weekend schedule to connect with two daily Amtrak services from Niagara Falls NY, rather than just the one VIA currently connects to. Creating an international connection and eliminating the redundant VIA service may help bolster GO's ridership enough to run the Niagara service year round.
View attachment 141739
Of course weekend service is not much without corresponding weekday service, so also I put together a conceptual schedule for Lakeshore West regional services. Due to concerns about delays at the Welland Canal, trains which arrive in the GTA during peak periods cannot originate any further than St. Catharines. But despite that constraint it is still possible to run a decent intercity schedule in the corridor. I also threw in the counter-peak trips to Hamilton Centre that I think would be really great for that city's development.
View attachment 141740
View attachment 141738
Notes:
Trainsets starting with "G" originate from Lewis (Grimsby) Yard, "H" sets originate from Hamilton Centre, and "U" sets come from somewhere else in the network (via Union).
Travel times include some modest speed gains between Aldershot and Niagara Falls, but these are not necessary to operate the schedule.
Stops in Hamilton Harbour (West Harbour), Stoney Creek (Confederation) and Grimsby (Casablanca) are similarly desirable but not required.
GO transit is a provincial government entity not designed to handle inspections from Border Services or the CBSA.
GO will never cross the border just to make life easier for a few commuters. It would be a disaster for GO passengers heading to Niagara given how long inspections take.
Dan, refresh my memory but doesn't the Maple Leaf get held up and delayed at the border while customs and immigration gives trains and it's passengers the once over?
All I am saying is that if any trains go from Toronto to the new station in NY state it should be VIA as they are better equipped
I was reading up on New York's new Niagara Falls International station, and was wondering about the potential of extending Lakeshore West Niagara service there to replace the current VIA/Amtrak arrangement. The station would need a new low-level platform within a controlled Canadian customs zone to serve GO service. Currently, my understanding is that the station only handles customs entry into the U.S. - entry into Canada being handled at Niagara Falls ON.
I found that it would only take a slight adjustment to GO's existing Summer Weekend schedule to connect with two daily Amtrak services from Niagara Falls NY, rather than just the one VIA currently connects to. Creating an international connection and eliminating the redundant VIA service may help bolster GO's ridership enough to run the Niagara service year round.
View attachment 141739
Of course weekend service is not much without corresponding weekday service, so also I put together a conceptual schedule for Lakeshore West regional services. Due to concerns about delays at the Welland Canal, trains which arrive in the GTA during peak periods cannot originate any further than St. Catharines. But despite that constraint it is still possible to run a decent intercity schedule in the corridor. I also threw in the counter-peak trips to Hamilton Centre that I think would be really great for that city's development.
View attachment 141740
View attachment 141738
Notes:
Trainsets starting with "G" originate from Lewis (Grimsby) Yard, "H" sets originate from Hamilton Centre, and "U" sets come from somewhere else in the network (via Union).
Travel times include some modest speed gains between Aldershot and Niagara Falls, but these are not necessary to operate the schedule.
Stops in Hamilton Harbour (West Harbour), Stoney Creek (Confederation) and Grimsby (Casablanca) are similarly desirable but not required.