[W. K. Lis]

The longest tram in the world is at 56m with 12 sections, in Budapest.

Note the grass on the right-of-ways. Forbidden by Toronto, apparently, by EMS and fire. We'll see if they allow grass on the Crosstown LRT or not.

 

[M II A II R II K]

So long as it doesn’t stop at red lights that are not stops.

 

[robmausser]

The longest tram in the world is at 56m with 12 sections, in Budapest.

Note the grass on the right-of-ways. Forbidden by Toronto, apparently, by EMS and fire. We'll see if they allow grass on the Crosstown LRT or not.

Technically not one car, but coupling 3 Flexity Freedom LRTs on the Crosstown would be longer than this still.

It will certainly be a sight to be seen, just like the 12 car GO trains, which I call towns on rails.

 

[micheal_can]

Technically not one car, but coupling 3 Flexity Outlook LRTs on the Crosstown would be longer than this still.

It will certainly be a sight to be seen, just like the 12 car GO trains, which I call towns on rails.

Could they do that with the Flexity Outlooks?

 

[robmausser]

Could they do that with the Flexity Outlooks?

The Flexity Outlooks on the streetcar system don't currently have a way to connect with each other in normal operations mode. Only for shunting around one streetcar with another. Meaning they aren't linked so a driver can open the doors of the back one etc.

It could be modified yes. But they are already so long, and we would have to modify the platforms at stations to fit them.

It would only be a good idea on the Spadina and Harbourfront Line. In mixed traffic it would be a nightmare, and the St.Clair line doesnt have the ridership.

With the close stop arrangement of the streetcar system, it would be best just to operate more independent streetcars at higher frequencies.

 

[micheal_can]

The Flexity Outlooks on the streetcar system don't currently have a way to connect with each other in normal operations mode. Only for shunting around one streetcar with another. Meaning they aren't linked so a driver can open the doors of the back one etc.

It could be modified yes. But they are already so long, and we would have to modify the platforms at stations to fit them.

It would only be a good idea on the Spadina and Harbourfront Line. In mixed traffic it would be a nightmare, and the St.Clair line doesnt have the ridership.

With the close stop arrangement of the streetcar system, it would be best just to operate more independent streetcars at higher frequencies.

So, If they ever decided to modify Spadina and Harbourfront, again, they could make it more LRT like.

 

[aquateam]

Can someone tell me what the differences between the EC and the streetcar system are? As far as I can tell, they are virtually the same, except for rail gauge and cars used.

There have been debates on this, mostly in the Fantasy subway thread, where we debated how to represent the street-running lines, e.g. why does the Finch LRT show up on the rapid transit map but not St. Clair/Spadina? Most of the differences are differences of degree, not of kind, and LRT is on a spectrum.

They don’t have signal priority at all intersections, significantly lower vehicle capacity, more frequent stop spacing and operate about half as fast as the Crosstown LRT (about 22 km/h vs 11)

That is really more due to the different street layout in the "suburban" part of Toronto than any design aspect of the line or of the vehicles. Eglinton is wider and has many fewer signalized intersections than the legacy streetcar system, so the buses already go faster than our subway does downtown.

And that is why I am confused.

For the stops, couldn't one argue that the Streetcars are noting more than a LRT with on demand stops?
If they changed the signalling priority on the Streetcars, could that make them more like an LRT?

Yes, I can see the clear difference between a Streetcar line and a Subway line. But the LRT mess is the confusing part.

The LRT also has on-demand stops. robmausser just said that the mandatory stops are wider spaced so there would be a higher proportion of stops that are on-demand (where theoretically you could go without stopping, if no one presses a button.)

Spadina, St. Clair, and Harbourfront were all referred to as "LRT" when they were first built.

 

[cplchanb]

Technically not one car, but coupling 3 Flexity Freedom LRTs on the Crosstown would be longer than this still.

It will certainly be a sight to be seen, just like the 12 car GO trains, which I call towns on rails.

slightly OT but in terms of go trains, and perhaps ECT, would it be better to have smaller but more frequent consists or 1 long train less frequently?

 

[micheal_can]

slightly OT but in terms of go trains, and perhaps ECT, would it be better to have smaller but more frequent consists or 1 long train less frequently?

Is it better than all people waiting for the train at all stops can get on?

 

[cplchanb]

Is it better than all people waiting for the train at all stops can get on?

well thing is...its give and take....you take more poeple on at once but there will be thsoe who will be screwed by infrequent scheduling ie Richmond Hill Line if they miss their train.
I would rather have options than to bank it all on 1

 

[micheal_can]

well thing is...its give and take....you take more poeple on at once but there will be thsoe who will be screwed by infrequent scheduling ie Richmond Hill Line if they miss their train.
I would rather have options than to bank it all on 1

Some lines should have shorter trains. Think of it this way, the 3 subway lines do not all have the same length, or the same frequency. However, the lowest ridership trains are long enough to take all the passengers.

 

[aquateam]

slightly OT but in terms of go trains, and perhaps ECT, would it be better to have smaller but more frequent consists or 1 long train less frequently?

From a user's perspective: smaller but more frequent. You spend less time waiting for the train and there's less variability in the schedule for you (if you just miss a train, it'll have less impact on your total travel time.

From an operations perspective: bigger trains but less frequent. Fewer drivers to pay/train per passenger, and bigger gaps in the schedule to manage headway with (more time to recover if there's a delay.)

That's the beauty of an automated system: there is a very low marginal cost to additional off-peak service since there are no additional driver shifts. To increase capacity you just increase the train frequency, so you can have small but frequent trains.

 

[smallspy]

That's the beauty of an automated system: there is a very low marginal cost to additional off-peak service since there are no additional driver shifts. To increase capacity you just increase the train frequency, so you can have small but frequent trains.

That's assuming that you're using a staff-less automated system, which is not going to be the case in Toronto. And even then, there's a low marginal cost for additional service, but there is an additional cost, as those additional vehicles need to be cleaned and maintained, and additional enforcement staff may be required as well.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[micheal_can]

That's assuming that you're using a staff-less automated system, which is not going to be the case in Toronto. And even then, there's a low marginal cost for additional service, but there is an additional cost, as those additional vehicles need to be cleaned and maintained, and additional enforcement staff may be required as well.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

Vancouver has had automated trains since the 80s. The Subways in Toronto could too, but the unions would never go for it.

 

[smallspy]

Vancouver has had automated trains since the 80s. The Subways in Toronto could too, but the unions would never go for it.

I'm not sure that the ATC/ATO system that the TTC is installing would allow for automated door closing. I've never been able to find out that level of detail.

But if it doesn't, than there needs to be someone staffing a cab at all times. There's no getting around that.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.