[CDL.TO]

I believe that the Sheppard Subway plan had the GO station being moved south of Sheppard. I see the an elevated Sheppard line having an elevated station on top of the GO station - actually, just East of it. I think I left about 125m to drop 6m to go under the CP line just after the Agincourt station.

The idea was that it would be built where the CP line crosses the GO Stouffville line, creating a potential three-way transfer point with TTC subway, GO Stouffville, and GO Seaton/Havelock lines.

It would more closely follow the path of the creek, rather than having a 90 degree turn.

 

[BurlOak]

the subway would have gone under the highway, just like the LRT will.

Yah, I know that. Subway can only go at like a 2% grade , whereas LRT and SkyTrain can go at 5%+. If you know of where a plan and elevation of the LRT tunnel can be located, that would also have the information needed to figure out if there is another way across 404.

 

[rbt]

Yah, I know that. Subway can only go at like a 2% grade , whereas LRT and SkyTrain can go at 5%+. If you know of where a plan and elevation of the LRT tunnel can be located, that would also have the information needed to figure out if there is another way across 404.

More specifically, Toronto Rocket trains have that 2% grade limit.

If you allow TTC to have a different (more expensive due to increase motor strength) rolling stock then that grade limitation changes for a similar sized vehicle.

 

[smallspy]

Yah, I know that. Subway can only go at like a 2% grade , whereas LRT and SkyTrain can go at 5%+. If you know of where a plan and elevation of the LRT tunnel can be located, that would also have the information needed to figure out if there is another way across 404.

Subways can handle 5%, ART is capable of 8%.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[M II A II R II K]

They could order LRTs that have wheels underneath the carriage so they'll fit right in the existing Sheppard stations, and then in the street the tracks can be sunk at the stops so people can walk straight on like at the stations. And for this line only.

 

[44 North]

Subways can handle 5%, ART is capable of 8%.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

Whoa, 8%? I didn't think that'd be possible. Would a modern ART/LRV require the hopper full of sand like the streetcars to prevent slippage or when the tracks are wet?

 

[jcam]

They could order LRTs that have wheels underneath the carriage so they'll fit right in the existing Sheppard stations, and then in the street the tracks can be sunk at the stops so people can walk straight on like at the stations. And for this line only.

That would only work if the LRT ran by third rail in the tunnel and switched to catenary once above ground, because as it stands, a low floor LRT couldn't fit into the Sheppard tunnel because of the catenary. The Bombardier page for Flexity Freedom notes that it can be 100% catanery free. Also, it notes they make high-floor Flexity LRV as well.

As for depressed stations, I imagine you could split the difference between a ramped platform and depressed stop...so long as the drainage is good in whatever is built.

Boston runs electric buses in tunnels with catenary and then switches to gas once above the surface...I imagine there are dual mode systems out there.

 

[crs1026]

Boston runs electric buses in tunnels with catenary and then switches to gas once above the surface...I imagine there are dual mode systems out there.

And Seattle runs buses and LRT in the same tunnel, and they use the same platforms. (Only problem being people who stand too close to the edge, and get smacked by passing bus mirrors, which end up having less vertical clearance because the platform is a few inches higher than a traditional bus stop.). But I'm not sure I would advocate converting Sheppard into a bus tunnel, electric or otherwise.

I think we ought to be able to agree that some manufacturer somewhere would be able to build a railed vehicle that could fit in the existing subway tunnel, and still perform as an LRT in the not yet constructed surface section. Yes, it would be different than Flexity or TR, but many major systems have more than one spec of railed vehicle. Seems to me this option would be preferable to a mid-trip transfer, and also preferable to further subway construction on Sheppard.

- Paul

 

[smallspy]

Whoa, 8%? I didn't think that'd be possible. Would a modern ART/LRV require the hopper full of sand like the streetcars to prevent slippage or when the tracks are wet?

ART is the name for Bombardier's LIM-powered system as used on the Scarborough RT and Vancouver's Skytrain.

Most modern LRVs are capable of not much more than 5% grades, but the TTC's are capable of 8%, as they have all axles powered. And yes, they have an automated sanding system for accelerating and braking when needed.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[nfitz]

And Seattle runs buses and LRT in the same tunnel, and they use the same platforms. (Only problem being people who stand too close to the edge, and get smacked by passing bus mirrors, which end up having less vertical clearance because the platform is a few inches higher than a traditional bus stop.). But I'm not sure I would advocate converting Sheppard into a bus tunnel, electric or otherwise.

I've never seen anyone hit by a mirror. But I've seen the Seattle LRT vehicles sit in the tunnel before entering each station waiting for all the buses to get out of the way.

It doesn't really work that well, or efficiently. The Seattle Link isn't really that heavily used, and only runs 8 trains an hour at peak. Which is why they keep planning to stop running buses in the tunnel. Though it looks like they've pushed this off yet again.

Ridership is growing though, they are over 30,000 riders a day now (about the same as the 505 Dundas streetcar - a lot less than the Sheppard subway or SRT). If they ever get anywhere close to TTC like ridership, they'd have to end the sharing. I doubt it's an option for Sheppard.

 

[M II A II R II K]

Once the "debate" is over they can finally move forward with a continuous LRT line. They could also dump those Sheppard T1s on an extended BD line at first, until they replace all the T1s.

 

[nfitz]

Once the "debate" is over they can finally move forward with a continuous LRT line. They could also dump those Sheppard T1s on an extended BD line at first, until they replace all the T1s.

I doubt there will ever be LRVs running in the existing subway.

TTC has proposed replacing the T1 trains on the Sheppard line with 4-car TRs, with the first train in operation by late this year, and complete conversion in 2016. So T1s aren't an issue.

 

[M II A II R II K]

Well then they can just trench down the middle of Sheppard and have the TRs run under intersections like on Allen. They can forget about urbanizing Sheppard which wasn't really likely to happen anyway.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

That would be expensive.

 

[Uncle Teddy]

The LRT that's planned is more than sufficient for Sheppard East today.