raptor said:
Well, they have to find something to oppose to.
Click to expand...

Id almost say that its more reasonable. Why pay for something that will last longer if certainty of technological transportation methods will completely change etc etc.

In 50 years we hopefully will have built another subway system along with relief line. The relief relief line!
 
robmausser said:
Id almost say that its more reasonable. Why pay for something that will last longer if certainty of technological transportation methods will completely change etc etc.

In 50 years we hopefully will have built another subway system along with relief line. The relief relief line!
Click to expand...
Be interesting to see how GO RER (or whatever the PC's insist on calling it) effects transit expansion.
 
robmausser said:
Id almost say that its more reasonable. Why pay for something that will last longer if certainty of technological transportation methods will completely change etc etc.

In 50 years we hopefully will have built another subway system along with relief line. The relief relief line!
Click to expand...
We will be lucky if this thing gets built in 50 years.
 
asher__jo said:
Be interesting to see how GO RER (or whatever the PC's insist on calling it) effects transit expansion.
Click to expand...

Not much if its not reasonably priced with co-fare. If its not a reasonable co-fare with the TTC and reasonably priced in downtown, all GO-RER will be is relief from commuters getting off at Union. Rather they will get off the stations more local to the area they work in Toronto. Or worse use TTC as the last mile, in which case will add to the capacity problems on the TTC.

If good price/co-fare it will offer some relief from the TTC system.
 
robmausser said:
Not much if its not reasonably priced with co-fare. If its not a reasonable co-fare with the TTC and reasonably priced in downtown, all GO-RER will be is relief from commuters getting off at Union. Rather they will get off the stations more local to the area they work in Toronto. Or worse use TTC as the last mile, in which case will add to the capacity problems on the TTC.

If good price/co-fare it will offer some relief from the TTC system.
Click to expand...
At least when they get on at Union, they will be filling up counter-peak direction capacity unlike those coming down from York Region via subway.
 
WislaHD said:
Do we know headways and vehicle capacity?
Click to expand...

No, just like GO RER, Metrolinx won't know how it will be achieved until the winning vendor is selected. The bid will specify maximum headways, total capacity, and travel time expectations.

Reality is, using 450m long trains running every 5 minutes during rush is unlikely.

Trains will be as small as practical and as frequent as practical to keep stations (the big capital expense) as small as possible.
 
robmausser said:
Id almost say that its more reasonable. Why pay for something that will last longer if certainty of technological transportation methods will completely change etc etc.

In 50 years we hopefully will have built another subway system along with relief line. The relief relief line!
Click to expand...

Not to mention....we may have emerging technologies and other urban/planning changes that may change how the city functions in 50 years. Planing for further than 20 or 30 years is basically like throwing darts at a board.
 
rbt said:
No, just like GO RER, Metrolinx won't know how it will be achieved until the winning vendor is selected. The bid will specify maximum headways, total capacity, and travel time expectations.

Reality is, using 450m long trains running every 5 minutes during rush is unlikely.

Trains will be as small as practical and as frequent as practical to keep stations (the big capital expense) as small as possible.
Click to expand...

Theyve touted 100m trains at every 90 seconds during rush hour.

What technology that will be is up to the developer.
 
Hell will freeze over before 90 second headways are sustainably achieved. Not on this line. Not with this many passengers. Not with trains so small.

If Metrolinx wanted a snowballs chance in hell of achieving those headway’s, they’d need substantially larger trains (larger than the TRs, I’d wager) to decrease dwell times. And even then, they’d certainly fail. High frequency service requires an abundance of excess capacity

If the success of Ontario Line is predicated on these unsustainable headways, well then the whole plan needs to be overhauled
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top