I recall that in the years leading up to UP Express that it was claimed that you'd be able to check into your flight at Union Station. I seem to have missed this when I was last there. Are there check in terminals?

There were also rumours that some airlines would even have a baggage check in, specifically WestJet and Air Canada. What became of this?

Union-Pearson Express has the potential to obsolete the need for the island airport if they can make it seem that Union Station is a downtown wing of Pearson International. They're almost there. Being able to check in and drop off your bags at Union Station, then spending some time downtown and boarding the train to your flight would become a very attractive feature of Union-Pearson Express and all but eliminate the market for the island airport.
 
MetroMan said:
I recall that in the years leading up to UP Express that it was claimed that you'd be able to check into your flight at Union Station. I seem to have missed this when I was last there. Are there check in terminals?
Click to expand...
There are airline check-in kiosks at the west end of the station. The problem is that the designed-by-committee UPX station, while rather nice on surface (for something government designed) puts them in a rather secluded area and gives them poor visibility, probably leaving them collecting more dust than they would otherwise. So is the UPstairs lounge -- very secluded with poor non-visible hallway routing.

I bet there's at least a few days where the checkin kiosks were never touched at all. Never saw anyone use them. And there's more than one kiosk -- but only clustered at the secluded end of the station, away from Balzac's and entrance and most popular train boarding area. I'd think 80-90%+ of UPX customers don't even know they exist.

So lots of details (UPstairs lounge for a beer, check-in kiosks, airline departure boards) are often missed by a UPX commuter, even though these details exist. The look is fine to me (B+ or A-) but visibility is a D- grade. Secluded station (far from TTC), and THEN secluded amenities within the station.

At least Balzac's is highly visible. Since sometimes I sometimes catch the Lakeshore West on platform 4, it's far faster for me to grab a Balzac's (accessing the UPX station side entrance via the very quick "secret" Platform 3 bus-door shortcut) than to go to Timmy's/Second Cup in the Bay Concourse. Even if I am standing in the glass atrium and had equal walking distance. Simply because there's almost never a lineup. It's still currently the only (secretly-easily)-accessible coffeeshop from York concourse, until the lower mall opens.

I think adjustments are needed to milk the station properly. Fare adjustments, checkin kiosk relocations, fix the "secluded" feel better, etc.

If we continue to have a great resource of an airport express, we need tweaks (preferably sooner, but no later than during UPX electrification) to address several shortcomings. Since it is here to stay (probably 75% farebox recovery despite mostly empty trains, and full farebox seems is achievable) tweaks are warranted.

MetroMan said:
There were also rumours that some airlines would even have a baggage check in, specifically WestJet and Air Canada. What became of this?
Click to expand...
Nope. That got cheaped out on.
 
Last edited:
Steve Munro is pretty much of the left (as opposed to the NDP). His comments on one TTCriders deputation were quite robust: https://twitter.com/swanboatsteve/status/593501550422528000

They hold themselves out as transit advocates but it seems to be more feelings based than knowledge based advocacy. The comparison of UPX to the Bloor Danforth line leading people to think UPX could like the BD shift 180m riders a year is one of many "interesting" views they hold. In any case, when widebodies to/from Europe land at YYZ in early afternoon and depart in the early/late evening, it's pretty disingenuous to pick the AM rush to count heads on UPX.
 
Let's say, any future government forces us to milk UPX better but without spending too much money. Let's say, we electrify UPX (Since we're electrifying the corridor anyway for GO RER). Use an all-3-car fleet, aim to fill the seats at peaks, with an aim of about 5%-10% standee-permitted factor (~10 trains per day with standees). What price do we aim for? Can the price be low enough that standees would tolerate it, if we aimed for non-crammed standees at peak? Is it practical to increase frequency such as 10 minutes after electrification, or will it eat into corridor capacity too much?
 
mdrejhon said:
Let's say, any future government forces us to milk UPX better but without spending too much money. Let's say, we electrify UPX (Since we're electrifying the corridor anyway for GO RER). Use an all-3-car fleet, aim to fill the seats at peaks, with an aim of about 5%-10% standee-permitted factor (~10 trains per day with standees). What price do we aim for? Can the price be low enough that standees would tolerate it, if we aimed for non-crammed standees at peak? Is it practical to increase frequency such as 10 minutes after electrification, or will it eat into corridor capacity too much?
Click to expand...

- Our fleet is already adequate for entirely three car operation: we will have 18 cars, and it takes 5 trainsets to operate the line. 18/3 = 6 trainsets of 3 cars, which is 5 running and 1 spare.
- The trip estimation was that even at the current pricepoint, we would be filling the seats in 3-car trains during peak periods. I obviously can't say for sure, but my impression is that dropping the price to a quarter of that level is would result in more than a 10% increase in ridership. I think it's safe to say that at the current price, standing is unacceptable, and at GO rates it would be acceptable. But I don't think any of us have the resources to determine where that tipping point would be.
- We likely can't reliably operate more than 4 trains per hour with the current infrastructure. The constraint is the single-track Union terminal, which results in the line's entire layover needing to be at Pearson.
The 75 minute round trip is: 25 minutes Pearson-Union, 8 minutes at Union, 25 minutes back to Pearson and 17 minutes at Pearson.
It's possible we could run a 70 minute round trip (6 min at Union, 14 at Pearson), but that may be cutting it tight thereby increasing the probability of cascading delays.
 
Last edited:
reaperexpress said:
- Our fleet is already adequate for entirely three car operation: we will have 18 cars, and it takes 5 trainsets to operate the line. 18/3 = 6 trainsets of 3 cars, which is 5 running and 1 spare.
- The trip estimation was that even at the current pricepoint, we would be filling the seats in 3-car trains during peak periods. I obviously can't say for sure, but my impression is that dropping the price to a quarter of that level is would result in more than a 10% increase in ridership. I think it's safe to say that at the current price, standing is unacceptable, and at GO rates it would be acceptable. But I don't think any of us have the resources to determine where that tipping point would be.
- We likely can't reliably operate more than 4 trains per hour with the current infrastructure. The constraint is the single-track Union terminal, which results in the line's entire layover needing to be at Pearson.
The 75 minute round trip is: 25 minutes Pearson-Union, 8 minutes at Union, 25 minutes back to Pearson and 17 minutes at Pearson.
It's possible we could run a 70 minute round trip (6 min at Union, 14 at Pearson), but that may be cutting it tight thereby increasing the probability of cascading delays.
Click to expand...
Why such a significant difference in layover time between Pearson station (17 mins) vs Union station (8 minutes)?
 
Presumably because they can't lay over any longer at Union Station with only 1 platform. Which is a surprising limitation.
 
One has to ask whether USRC upgrades will help increase capacity enough for turning the trains over much more rapidly. Or that capacity is better allocated to larger trains. The USRC is one of the biggest bottlenecks so speeding things up with faster crossovers and tighter safe train dispatching (with latest tech, signalling, faster speed crossovers, control centre, PTC, EMU acceleration, or any above combo, etc) would be all the we can do without widening the ROW or tearing it all down, which isn't in the cards.
 
robmausser said:
Does anyone know when the 4th track for Georgetown South is slated to go in?
Click to expand...
Its the #1 track on the north or east side of the corridor depending where you are.

Some of that tack is in place now at various location and it the empty space depending where you are.

Check my Georgetown-Kitchener Corridor Expansion group on Flickr and you will see the locations since I was able shoot on the various sites.

The track on the north side of Etobicoke North is the #1 track once they punch the tunnel under the 401.

At Weston, it on the east side of the centre platform which will see a new platform down the road for it.

At Bloor, beside the Railpath.

Easy to spot as the signal mast in most places are set up for that missing track or have the provision for it at a future date.
 
robmausser said:
Does anyone know when the 4th track for Georgetown South is slated to go in?
Click to expand...

I am not aware of any procurement activity that would lead to this work being undertaken.

The artwork from the Bloor And Weston station consultations show it merely as 'potential'.

The belief that this is 'just around the corner' is a myth, from what I can find from the ML documents that are online. As noted, the engineering for the 401 underpass will be no simple or quick proposition.

If there is evidence to the contrary, I'd love to be wrong about this, but there you have it.

- Paul
 
crs1026 said:
I am not aware of any procurement activity that would lead to this work being undertaken.

The artwork from the Bloor And Weston station consultations show it merely as 'potential'.

The belief that this is 'just around the corner' is a myth, from what I can find from the ML documents that are online. As noted, the engineering for the 401 underpass will be no simple or quick proposition.

If there is evidence to the contrary, I'd love to be wrong about this, but there you have it.

- Paul
Click to expand...

Like you I haven't seen any reference to the additional track being built, although rumours coming out of 20 Bay call for it being in service by 2018 or 2019.

Which makes a bit of sense, seeing as how the MTO will be rebuilding that section of the 401 and building the overpass for the 4th track in 2017-ish.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top