Markster said:
One wonders how long the interline would have lasted if they'd designed the track configurations at Bay and St George so that all trains going one direction were on the upper level, and all trains going the other were on the lower level.
Click to expand...

Very good point. The configuration where trains in the same direction could appear on either level is definitely a flaw in the design. That was the biggest complaint with interlining, was it not?

crs1026 said:
The interline was a bit ahead of its time technically. It might work better now that we have digital technology, but that's a moot point now. It would just move the problem elsewhere. Imagine the crowding at Queens Park or Union if people had to wait for one or two trains before the right one came along. Yonge-Bloor and St George might be less congested, and reopening lower Bay might help the transfer too, but the other downtown stations would all be affected.

- Paul
Click to expand...

But remember, only the University line split, so anybody on the Yonge side heading northbound in the PM rush would still have every train northbound to Finch. The Yonge line is where the capacity crunch is. The "every 2nd train" thing would be going southbound, counter-flow to the general peak. It would also increase usage on the University line, since going there would avoid going around the loop. If someone works at King & Bay, walking the extra minute to St. Andrew would be faster than going to King and riding around.
 
Just placing the platforms in the middle at Bloor would have made life easier today. While it took work at Union to add a second platform it would have been hell trying to add one in the centre. Someone learned something when they designed Sheppard and Yonge.
 
A Spanish Solution should have been built on both track levels at Yonge-Bloor station back in 1966, but again, it would predate Monty Python's Spanish Inquisition sketch by four years. It would also predate Atlanta's Five Points station (which has Spanish Solution on both track levels) as well.
 
gweed123 said:
Very good point. The configuration where trains in the same direction could appear on either level is definitely a flaw in the design. That was the biggest complaint with interlining, was it not?
Click to expand...

That was especially a problem in non-peak hours when missing a train consumed a few minutes. (I'm old enough to remember it, but only just barely). If interlining only happened at rush hour, it would be less of an issue given today's headways.

But remember, only the University line split, so anybody on the Yonge side heading northbound in the PM rush would still have every train northbound to Finch. The Yonge line is where the capacity crunch is. The "every 2nd train" thing would be going southbound, counter-flow to the general peak. It would also increase usage on the University line, since going there would avoid going around the loop. If someone works at King & Bay, walking the extra minute to St. Andrew would be faster than going to King and riding around.
Click to expand...

Good point - for Yonge stations there would be no impact.

You would still have the problem of people waiting at Yonge station for through westbound trains on Bloor. At St George, fewer people would be on the platform at all, because they ride through. At Yonge, there would be no avoiding it.

And on Bloor-Danforth, one in four inbound passengers would either wait one train, or take the first train and make a change at one of Bay or St George. Bay would be OK, but that's a lot of potential transfers at St George.

- Paul
 
gweed123 said:
But remember, only the University line split, so anybody on the Yonge side heading northbound in the PM rush would still have every train northbound to Finch. The Yonge line is where the capacity crunch is. The "every 2nd train" thing would be going southbound, counter-flow to the general peak. It would also increase usage on the University line, since going there would avoid going around the loop. If someone works at King & Bay, walking the extra minute to St. Andrew would be faster than going to King and riding around.
Click to expand...

University Line is set to go over capacity in about 20 years. The wye wouldn't work with these demands.
 
WislaHD said:
My understanding is that the interline option was something imposed by the province and that the TTC never desired to commit to. So the TTC didn't bother implementing it properly and were eager to set it aside after the experimental phase.
Click to expand...
TheTigerMaster said:
Never heard of that. Why would the province impose interlining?
Click to expand...
WislaHD said:
I'd have to look it up in Ed Levy's book later tonight. He provides a good description of what went on at the time.
Click to expand...
So I looked and apparently it was both the Province and Metro Toronto council who co-jointly pressured the TTC to try the interline option for a 6-month period.

Interestingly, once the TTC split the interlined service, the University Line was very underused. So much that it stopped service after 9:45pm on weekdays and didn't operate on Sundays for the next few decades.
 
crs1026 said:
That was especially a problem in non-peak hours when missing a train consumed a few minutes. (I'm old enough to remember it, but only just barely). If interlining only happened at rush hour, it would be less of an issue given today's headways.
Click to expand...

Peak period only interlining is an interesting idea. I wonder if a NB-EB/WB-SB wye can be built between Bloor-Danforth and the DRL, to allow for some westbound B-D trains to jump directly onto the DRL for a trip downtown. This would significantly reduce transfers at Pape, and most DRL passengers will be coming from east of Pape anyway.

Come to think of it, such a connection may be required anyway in order to connect to the Greenwood yard. There will likely be no connection to YUS, since the connection points would all be downtown, and a wye would be astronomically expensive. IMO, the best option is for the DRL to use Greenwood and for B-D to relocate their yard elsewhere, or at least some of it. This is where my previous Honeydale station/yard complex came into play.

crs1026 said:
Good point - for Yonge stations there would be no impact.

You would still have the problem of people waiting at Yonge station for through westbound trains on Bloor. At St George, fewer people would be on the platform at all, because they ride through. At Yonge, there would be no avoiding it.

And on Bloor-Danforth, one in four inbound passengers would either wait one train, or take the first train and make a change at one of Bay or St George. Bay would be OK, but that's a lot of potential transfers at St George.

- Paul
Click to expand...

Yes that's true. I guess one would have to ask though what the NB-WB transfer volume would actually be if interlining returned. It would mostly be people coming from north of Bloor who would be making that movement. The vast majority coming from south of Bloor would likely opt for University instead.

TheTigerMaster said:
University Line is set to go over capacity in about 20 years. The wye wouldn't work with these demands.
Click to expand...

I'm not suggesting it be re-implemented, since it would really screw up things with the Spadina line. The only way it would really work is if you routed the DRL up Spadina from Queen and then connected it to the existing Spadina line north of Bloor. The current track between Spadina and St. George would become a non-revenue track, and the interlining could be re-instituted. This setup would in effect truncate the University line and make it only a relief valve for the Yonge line.
 
been hearing about some sneak peaks about the federal budget I think it might have funds for DRL, could be funds for EA immediately. Another big item is social housing but is irrelevant here
 
TheTigerMaster said:
Can you link to one of those stories? I can't find anything on Google.
Click to expand...

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/...ng-formula-to-municipalities-sources-say.html

And municipal officials can expect good news on two fronts: A change to the traditional one-third funding formula — at least for some projects — and financial help for the prep work needed to get those infrastructure projects off the ground.
Click to expand...

Municipalities will get good news on another front, too — it’s expected the government will agree to help pay the bill of the costly prep work needed to lay the groundwork for infrastructure projects, such as engineering studies and environmental assessments.
Click to expand...
 
Relief Line was identified as the top transit priority in a poll of Torontonians. 30% of Torontonains identified it as top priority:

Eglinton Crosstown, and Scarborough transit were second a third respectively.

SmartTrack was the least prioritized. Only a third as many people identified it as top priority as did the Relief Line.

http://poll.forumresearch.com/data/... News Release (2016 03 23) Forum Research.pdf
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top