|
|
|
BurlOak
Senior Member
Wow. Good job. Thank you.
BurlOak
Senior Member
rbt
Senior Member
Motors are sized for passenger comfort. Wheel/Rail traction is another limitation. SSIGuy is very well known for stipulating things that happen in his head alone as facts and ignoring any external information source that doesn't align with his personal fictional fact sheet.
Toronto subways are purposfully run in "low-rate" mode. There is a switch somewhere that could set them (T1's at least) into "high-rate" and they would magically accelerate faster. There is some debate about why we run in low-rate mode because the TTC official story isn't terribly believable (throws off signal timings or something like that; so why not change the signal timings?)
officedweller
Senior Member
Here's the MKII acceleration info:
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
The JFK Airtrain has faster acceleration - maybe because it's a single car - ditto for the Yong-In Everline:
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Data for the Calgary LRVs says that their acceleration is in line with the JFK MKIIs at 1.34 m/s/s
http://www.calgarytransit.com/html/technical_information.html
Boy are they HEAVY!
24.82 m long and 42.0 tonnes.
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
The JFK Airtrain has faster acceleration - maybe because it's a single car - ditto for the Yong-In Everline:
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Data for the Calgary LRVs says that their acceleration is in line with the JFK MKIIs at 1.34 m/s/s
http://www.calgarytransit.com/html/technical_information.html
Boy are they HEAVY!
24.82 m long and 42.0 tonnes.
Last edited:
Tulse
Senior Member
Palma
Senior Member
4" is the same as saying they are the same width
BurlOak
Senior Member
2 Questions. I admitadly did not do a comprehensive search, but I thought I’d ask here instead:
1. Are there any examples of ICTS that are elevated and covered? I was thinking to keep snow off, but maybe covered to reduce noise may have also been done.
2. Are there any examples of LRT that are elevated? Would the overhead cables be an even greater visual distraction.
smallspy
Senior Member
Various officials will tell their own parts of it - which may or may not be true as well - but at least one major part of the story is that in high rate mode it is expected that more maintenance will be required on the traction motors and gearboxes, as they will be working harder. This was actually given in a report many years ago about the installation of the Speed Control System on the subway and why it wouldn't be activated on the B-D line until the H4 cars were retired. Of course, as it is SCS is only currently active on the Sheppard Line despite all of the equipment system-wide having it installed.
Dan
Toronto, Ont.
rbt
Senior Member
I really wish they didnt' take the name ICTS (Intermediate Capacity Transit System) as a product name because a very large number of other systems have the similar capacities; such as Frankfurt's U-Bahn system or even Sheppard Subway as currently installed (4-car trains, minimal and defective speed control system).
Anyway, I don't think there are elevated and covered ICTS installations. Installations which experience snow include Toronto, Vancouver, New York (JFK airport) and Detroit.
Last edited:
Darwinkgo
Active Member
CDL.TO
Moderator
Ones that are elevated for at least part of their route? Probably too many to list.
BurlOak
Senior Member
So why is elevated LRT not considered for parts of Eglinton?
The big problem with Eglinton LRT is that a 5 to 7 km stretch of a 30 km long line (from Black Creek to Sheppard/Markham) is median and the rest is grade separated. There is a kilometre or so between Brentcliffe and Don Mills that could easily be moved to the south side of the road – and I believe that Steve Munro advocates for this as well. This leaves a 5 to 6 km stretch from somewhere East of Don Mills to somewhere near Kennedy (since both Don Mills and Kennedy will be underground) as the weakest link on the route.
How much would it cost to elevate this portion? Median LRT is about $50M/km and costs I have seen from Vancouver are about $100M/km. So it is a matter of an extra $300M or $400M. I wouldn't pay the $2 to $2.5B extra that is needed to bury the entire line, but a few hundred million is not excessive.
When it comes to extension to the airport, there is plenty of room in the Richview corridor that the line could be elevated, trenched, or covered. So without too significant of a cost premium, it is possible to have a high capacity LRT line across the entire city.
At Sheppard, I see a bit of logic in continuing the subway, but there the distances paint a different picture. A 5 km long existing subway would need extensions of 8km East and 5km West. It may be better just to view the existing subway as a lost, sunk cost and proceed in another manner. For Finch, it is even more difficult to make any argument for subway.
Last edited:
M II A II R II K
Senior Member
If the job were done properly with priority there would be no need for slow downs or stopping at red lights between stops, and even no need for crossing bars.
Also if an American city of all places can pull that off recently. There's no excuse for a botched job here.
Dan416
Senior Member
Do you trust the TTC to do it properly?