News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 8.5K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 39K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 4.8K     0 

Refurbished 60 year old diesel-locomotives? You are f-ing kidding me right? If that is the case and it ends up happening, I am going to boycott this Blue22 thing as of now- not that I ever really found it, in its present incarnation to be that great anyways.

Do we not deserve any better? I guess not eh.
 
Regarding the APM - the following is from Chapter 7 of the Masterplan and answers a couple of questions we have had about the system:

************

The cable-pulled technology used for the APM provides a total capacity of 2,150 passengers per hour per direction (pphpd). This capacity is expected to accommodate the long-term demand. Provisions have been made in the design and construction of the APM guideway to allow for the conversion of the current technology to a self-propelled technology that would allow significantly more capacity when warranted.

The current APM technology also has expansion limitations. The only possible expansion to the system is a second station at Terminal 1 when Pier H is in place, for a total of four stations. In addition, the trains may be expanded from six cars to seven cars to increase capacity to 2,500 pphpd. The system cannot be extended to the east beyond the Viscount Road Station.

************

So that leaves the following question in my mind:

If the conversion is made to self-propelled technology, will trains have to remain on only one track, or will they be able to switch tracks at the ends, allowing for more than two trains? If so, could that technology be extended down to an Eglinton/Renforth Transit Hub?

42
 
RDCs aren't that bad, I rode them on Vancouver Island and between Sudbury and Cartier, ON. But they are 60 years old and would be funny to see for a super-premium airport rail link. Trinity Rail Express (Dallas) also operates a few.

EN9.jpg
 
Nice find, interchange. So the LINK shuttle is not permanently tied to the cable pull system. Good to know.

They could also have a rail link terminate at Viscount, but the plans don't seem to accomodate that possibility. While it would add a transfer to those headed to Piers E or F (or possibly Pier G), it would not add any transfer to anyone headed to T3 or future Pier H.

Oh, as for your closing of the Pier F thread, shouldn't we wait until we feel the wind? Anything we say here should encompass the "...and beyond" though.
 
Shontrons: Oh, it's going to take forever to feel the wind! By the time we do, it will be a breath of fresh air for this thread.

Meanwhile, here's another answer to questions from the older thread:

************

5.3.3 Airbus A380 Readiness

The world’s largest commercial passenger aircraft, the new Airbus A380 entered service in October 2007. Although no carrier has stated an intention to operate this aircraft at Toronto Pearson yet, the GTAA considered the operational requirements of the A380 in its airport redevelopment plans to ensure that the Airport will have the ability to accommodate the aircraft when required without major reconstruction. However, a few modifications to Toronto Pearson’s infrastructure would be considered as outlined below.

All runways at Toronto Pearson are wide enough to accommodate the A380. In addition, paved shoulders that are required for the A380 have already been added to Runway 05-23, and are currently being added to Runway 06L-24R as part of a rehabilitation of the runway. Paved shoulders could be added to other runways in the future as required. Runway 05-23 has been identified as the preferred runway for A380 operations as adequate lateral separation exists between it and parallel Taxiways H and J to accommodate the aircraft without restrictions.

However, when the A380 taxis between Runway 05-23 and the terminals, operations on adjacent taxiways would be restricted to specific aircraft sizes. Although the turning radius of the A380 is smaller than the Airbus A340-600, which already operates at Toronto Pearson, a limited number of taxiway fillets could be widened at key taxiway intersections for ease of manoeuverability.

As will be discussed further in Chapter 6, Terminal 1 and its associated apron has been designed to support A380 operations on two of the Hammerhead F gates. One of the gates has been fully equipped to handle the A380, while the second gate would require some modifications prior to accommodating the A380. Terminal 3 and its associated apron could also handle the A380, if required, on two of the gates on Pier C, with some modifications.

************

Here are the Chapter 6 bits referred to above:

************

Two gates on Hammerhead F (Terminal 1)were configured to accommodate larger aircraft such as the Airbus A380. Each of these gates can connect two bridges to an A380-class aircraft, one to the main-deck door and one to either a second main-deck door or to an upper-deck door.

The expanded Hammerhead C (Terminal 3) includes two gates which can be modified to accommodate larger aircraft such as the Airbus A380.

************

So, now we know.

42
 
Filip said:
Pearson is really moving ahead. Seems like the project to build office buildings at the Viscount station is dead. Shame, that would've given Pearson a Schiphol type development.
Click to expand...

Not true. From Chapter 14 (Land Use) regarding Commercially Developable Lands:

************

The South 409 Development Lands, a portion of Area 6A, are located across from Terminal 3, bounded on the east by the extension of Hwy 409 to the terminals, on the west by the Airport LINK train station and associated guideway, and on the north by Viscount Road. Excellent opportunities for development exist there due to the favourable location with over 1,000-foot frontage on the north side of Airport Road, direct access to the terminals, and close proximity to neighbouring hotels, offices, and other commercial services.

* and more about it:

Airport East Access (Area 6A)
• A commercial office and hotel complex is to be developed in this area, south of the Viscount Road Airport LINK train station.

************

I think it is just missing from the rest of the Masterplan as it concentrates on what the GTAA is going to build, whereas regarding these lands they will merely being seeking expressions of interest from developers who might want to build on them.

42
 
Seantrans: Yes, while probably not bad from a sentimental stand-point, but honestly I think they are completely unsuitable for such a task.

p5
 
Hey! I like Fishbowls!

Now if only we still had PCCs in revenue service. We'd be in the same league as San Francisco, Boston (Mattapan) and Kenosha, Wisconsin!
 
chapter 7 is corrupt.
 
Now keeping the old PCC's running is something completely different- I lament the fact that those were taken out of service and I think we should reinstate them on various routes. Why not, and not just for nostalgic reasoning either, but because they were fantastic to ride in...(and for nostalgic reasons)!!!

Nonetheless, this doesn't apply to the above illustrated locomotive..no sir it don't! Keep em' away from transit duty, and build us some new trains..

p5
 
interchange42 said:
Provisions have been made in the design and construction of the APM guideway to allow for the conversion of the current technology to a self-propelled technology that would allow significantly more capacity when warranted.

************

So that leaves the following question in my mind:

If the conversion is made to self-propelled technology, will trains have to remain on only one track, or will they be able to switch tracks at the ends, allowing for more than two trains? If so, could that technology be extended down to an Eglinton/Renforth Transit Hub?

42
Click to expand...

I think the "provisions" are the massive guideway columns and beams that look like they are capable of supporting an LRT guideway - in which case, the trains would be able to switch tracks.
 
interchange42 said:
Try downloading it again. I had no trouble with it, but had to download 14 a second time before it came in correctly.

42
Click to expand...

strange, now the links are completely gone! (tested with 2 browsers) :eek:
 
Sorry to be a pain, but where are you guys seeing this master plan document?
I opened the link provided in the first post but I don't see the link to the document there.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top