Fascinating. So the Yonge Trains dropped off two or more cars to go past Union Station? And the Bloor trains going downtown when I rode them through the Y only had four cars? My gosh....how the memory fails. I distinctly remember having to walk back through three cars from the first to get to watch the guard in his cubicle from the first day the train ran from Keele. And he was in the middle of the train.

TTC used to run trains of varying lengths, depending on demand.

If my memory serves me correctly, during the absolute earliest days of the Yonge Line, TTC did run trains as short as four Gloucester cars on the line for at least part of the day (I do have to double check this). With the Gloucester cars being 17 metres each (shorter than modern cars) these trains would've been 68 meters, about half the length of the subway platforms. As demand rapidly grew, all trains were soon operated in a six car, 102 metre configuration, which is about the same length as modern 4-car T1s and TRs. Several years later, the Yonge Line was finally upgraded to 8-car operation, which is the same length as modern 6-cars T1 and T4

Likewise, the early days of the Bloor-Danforth Line did see variable train lengths. 4-car H-series trains were used, which were more or less the same size as 4-car T1 and TRs. This didn't last long either, as lengths were increased to 6-cars as demand increased.

4-car H1 picking up at passengers at Broadview in 1966:

201163-hawker-siddeley-1966-bloor-s0648_fl0212_id0007.jpg


4-car H-series car on Yonge Line traveling towards Keele Station via University Line:
PHOTO+-+TORONTO+-+YONGE+STREET+SUBWAY+-+OPEN+SECTION+-+NEW+HAWKER+CARS+HEADING+S+-+1966.jpg


Recall that the wye system was used upon opening of the subways on Bloor, Danforth and University, so these 4-car H-series trains you see would've also been run on Yonge-University.

Likewise, Sheppard Line currently runs 4-car trains, but the platforms can fit six-car trains, whenever demand warrents it. The Relief Line is also expected to be run using 4-car trains initially, but can be expanded as demand increases - this expansion in train length will likely happen when the northern extension is built, as demand is expected to be quite high (20,000 pphpd) once that extension is operating.
 
Take a close look at not only this reference, but all through the case study:

View attachment 105645

"based on the traditional 60-year lifescycle". 4-car trains. But you claim that's only "initially"

Train lengths can be changed trivially, without waiting for the lifecycle of the equipment to be complete. This is rather basic knowledge. As an RER fan, I'm sure you've seen GO Transit add/remove cars from trains, and mix old and new equipment, as necessary. The subway works the same way

With the G-series cars, the TTC ordered additional G cars so they could form longer train out of them (this is why some G's were steel, and others aluminum). TTC made at least seven orders of M1, H1, H2, H3, H4, H5 and H6 cars, and these cars were mixed as necessary to make longer cars to accommodate demand. This isn't rocket science.
 
TTC used to run trains of varying lengths, depending on demand.
During peak? I suspect those four car trains through the wye were run on weekends. They certainly weren't on the days I used them to get downtown.

And how can the modelling for "60 years" be accurate if the cars are only "initially" for four car lengths? There's still a massive hole in the story. Are there to be only four car trains until the *long* section is added? If so, then the modelling lends itself to an even greater error. The "4-car trains" are mentioned in many comparative charts through-out the report.
As an RER fan, I'm sure you've seen GO Transit add/remove cars from trains, and mix old and new equipment, as necessary.
No they don't, and SmallSpy detailed this and why. I wish it were the case. The consists are made up in the yard once a day, if they're not already made-up from the previous day's run. These aren't Scharfenberg couplers.
Train lengths can be changed trivially, without waiting for the lifecycle of the equipment to be complete. This is rather basic knowledge.
Exactly...if you wish. You do realize you've now made my point on the 60 year life cycle being based on "4-car trains" as being very faulty?
Where did you hear that the DRL will use four car subway trains?
I think you should address TheTigerMaster...
 
Last edited:
During
No they don't, and SmallSpy detailed this and why. I wish it were the case. The consists are made up in the yard once a day, if they're not already made-up from the previous day's run.

I know. I didn't mean to suggest train length could be changed day-to-day to meet micro-fluctuations in demand. I meant to suggest train lengths could be changed to adjust for more macroscopic demand changes. So as demand increases over the years, operations could shift from four-car operations, to six-car, for example. It's not as if train lengths would be changed at the end of each run.
 
And how can the modelling for "60 years" be accurate if the cars are only "initially" for four car lengths? There's still a massive hole in the story. Are there to be only four car trains until the *long* section is added? If so, then the modelling lends itself to an even greater error. The "4-car trains" are mentioned in many comparative charts through-out the report.

If the Relief Line Long requires exiting trains on the line to be upgraded to six-car sets, the incremental cost for those additional cars is attributed to the Relief Line Long, not the Relief Line Short. Those extra cars need to be purchased because of Relief Line Long, not Relief Line Short.

If you look at Metrolinx's Yonge Relief Network Study, they actually assume the Relief Line Long will use 8-car sets, which is much longer than what is likely be built.
 
And they can start off with the full platform length from the beginning. With shorter trains the platform doors at the end would remain permanently closed until longer trains are used.
 
And they can start off with the full platform length from the beginning. With shorter trains the platform doors at the end would remain permanently closed until longer trains are used.

Iff they decide to install screen doors - it would be a no-brainer, but then again our city government isn't exactly known for brains.

AoD
 
If you're building new stations from scratch particularly all being on the same line they could at least throw platform doors in.
Why they aren't doing this on Eglinton beats me.

So many minor design flaws that they are going cheap on, the Leslie alignment and station capacity at Yonge-Eglinton being the primary ones.
 
Maybe because Eglinton tracks aren't electric and no one is really going to jump in front of an LRT.

I am not sure if the latter isn't going to be an issue - I am fairly certain LRTs are just as deadly.

AoD

Considering someone got ran over by one of the new streetcars earlier this week jaywalking over the Spadina line, I wouldn't dismiss the concern either.
 
8 car unit trains? That will never happen. The people in the houses behind the Riverdale mall would go to war against the Leslieville NIMBY's if Metrolinx tried to expropriate a couple of dozen houses to dig out a longer station.
 

Back
Top