reaperexpress said:
Here is the page you're looking for.
Click to expand...
Many thanks! I'll study it more intently later, but what immediately jumps off the depiction is "Pearson Junction" (alias Woodbine). As drawn, it would allow either a single or dual shuttle, with no x-over needed, (Read: Single track sole occupancy operation, no sophisticated signaling) from "Pearson Junction". I know that will not sit well with some, but if the vehicle(s) used for that shuttle are other than Sharyos, it just might allow the existing fleet (18 units from memory?) to do a Bramalea to Union local service until it can be electrified. That 'shuttle could also be battery run, recharged every time it docks at either end of the shuttle run, or catenary used even before the rest of the corridor, and an LRV used.

Edit: Just looking more closely at map again....and you've already broached the "P" shuttle! The flexibility is built in to accommodate either run-through or shuttle.

Is the second track through Malton extant, or just a matter of laying one down, and is a twin track even necessary to do Bramalea beyond Weston? Desirable, obviously, but to get things running in the imminent future, will the present single one to Bramalea suffice?
 
Last edited:

Attachments

  • image.jpeg
    image.jpeg
    1.6 MB · Views: 673
  • image.jpeg
    image.jpeg
    1.3 MB · Views: 657
Last edited:
steveintoronto said:
Is the second track through Malton extant, or just a matter of laying one down, and is a twin track even necessary to do Bramalea beyond Weston? Desirable, obviously, but to get things running in the imminent future, will the present single one to Bramalea suffice?
Click to expand...

The diagram of Malton is accurate on that page I linked. There are 3 tracks, but only 2 are useable by GO since the third only continues onto the York subdivision. It would take only a minimal amount of work to get full triple track from Union to Bramalea. There are just a few connections missing around Malton and Bramalea stations. However, it would mean reclaiming a track currently used only by freight trains.

mdrejhon said:
Aldershot likely cannot be discontinued -- it is almost as busy as Oakville in morning peak. Hundreds unto hundreds boarding one train. I walked a train as it departed. Every single quad above below averaged 1 person, about 350-500 on that particular 7:30am train even before it rolled into Burlington. (That's the one train that often gets standees before reaching Oakville). I have even seen all nearly 2,000 parking spots taken at Aldershot. Many cars have Cambridge plates as well as places like Ancaster, it is pretty much "the westmost station" north of the lake on the Lakeshore before it curves around, so it has a massive commuter catchment.
Click to expand...

We have been through this before.

Aldershot is also about to urbanize a lot more...developers are now about to build a massive amount of Euro-style modernist cube 3-storey towns and new retail shopping right next to Aldershot GO ...there is a big advertizing blitz around Aldershot Parking South as well as ads within the station, and I saw a sign nearby recruiting retail too..

Retail is part of this development adjacent to Aldershot GO south parking lot.
Click to expand...

Interesting, I had no idea there was such development around the station. This certainly changes my opinion of the place - there is some source of demand for off-peak travel after all.

I wave off the silly nonsense Fantasyland notion that Aldershot can ever be discontined as a GO station...even if I agree it probably should never have been built as an Amtrak-style manoever in the earlier rail decimation.
Click to expand...

Where did I ever say that Aldershot should be discontinued as a GO station? You made this claim in 2015 (linked above), and it's no more true now than it was then.
 
reaperexpress said:
There are just a few connections missing around Malton and Bramalea stations. However, it would mean reclaiming a track currently used only by freight trains.
Click to expand...
That was my impression, but thought I might be overlooking a few crucial details.

Edit to Add: I'm still delving on the differences between the UPX and the Sonoma-Marin SMART version of the Sharyo DMU, especially as that relates to gearbox and final ratio. I believe it was Vegeta who mentioned the tendency for the vehicle to easily creep above the mandated speed limit ("80 mph"), the SMART models are rated top speed of "79 mph" and one has to wonder if that's due to final drive ratio, taller for UPX due to the mechanical gearbox and thus less loss, or a governor. Clue here:
[...][The trains are equipped with positive train control that automatically monitors speed and brings the vehicle to a halt if traveling too fast, said Lisa Cobb, SMART’s systems and vehicle manager][...]
http://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/4647527-181/test-runs-reach-79-mph?gallery=5127239&artslide=0

The US press seems to have much greater access (read: accountability) to details missing in Ontario's case. Still digging on this, and engineering description has not shown yet.
 
Last edited:
A lot of people don't understand that Aldershot is the GO Station for much of Hamilton. For the majority of the west of the City, it's far more preferable and faster to reach because of the particulars of the highway network, Hamilton GO Centre's urban remoteness, and the convenience of bus connections. From Waterdown to Westdale, it would be the station of choice for people who actually use the system.

Frankly, as someone who has used Aldershot for around 10,000 trips, I would consider stopping service at Burlington for any period a design of someone who looks only at maps, and has no actual experience riding or using the system.
 
Last edited:
Jonny5 said:
A lot of people don't understand that Aldershot is the GO Station for much of Hamilton. For the majority of the west of the City, it's far more preferable and faster to reach because of the particulars of the highway network, Hamilton GO Centre's urban remoteness, and the convenience of bus connections. From Waterdown to Westdale, it would be the station of choice for people who actually use the system.

Frankly, as someone who has used Aldershot for around 10,000 trips, I would consider stopping service at Burlington for any period a design of someone who looks only at maps, and has no actual experience riding or using the system.
Click to expand...
not that it matters...but I always pictured you as younger than that.
 
steveintoronto said:
That was my impression, but thought I might be overlooking a few crucial details.

Edit to Add: I'm still delving on the differences between the UPX and the Sonoma-Marin SMART version of the Sharyo DMU, especially as that relates to gearbox and final ratio. I believe it was Vegeta who mentioned the tendency for the vehicle to easily creep above the mandated speed limit ("80 mph"), the SMART models are rated top speed of "79 mph" and one has to wonder if that's due to final drive ratio, taller for UPX due to the mechanical gearbox and thus less loss, or a governor. Clue here:
[...][The trains are equipped with positive train control that automatically monitors speed and brings the vehicle to a halt if traveling too fast, said Lisa Cobb, SMART’s systems and vehicle manager][...]
http://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/4647527-181/test-runs-reach-79-mph?gallery=5127239&artslide=0

The US press seems to have much greater access (read: accountability) to details missing in Ontario's case. Still digging on this, and engineering description has not shown yet.
Click to expand...

I haven't been able to find concrete evidence of the vehicle specs either. But I suspect that part of the issue may be the railway itself. I've tracked speeds on a fair number of trains along the segment between Pearson Junction and Weston, which was described as getting upgraded from 80 mph to 90 mph in earlier GTS planning documents. I realize that UP is mandated to stay below 80 mph, but I would expect VIA to exceed that if the speed limit allowed. But even severely late VIA trains stay below 80 mph, which suggests the speed limit was never changed.
 

Attachments

  • Aldershot.jpg
    Aldershot.jpg
    1.5 MB · Views: 972
Last edited:
reaperexpress said:
I haven't been able to find concrete evidence of the vehicle specs either.
Click to expand...
Quick post as I'm running back out for glorious sunshine, but tripped across this, as I'm determined to find out as much as I can on UPX' variant (I'll detail what I've found later) but note! Dowling, who posts here, gets around!
Re: SMART - Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transit

by dowlingm » Fri Feb 22, 2013 10:35 pm

Does anyone have confirmation as to the powerplant in these DMUs? Google is being vexingly vague on the matter. TIA.
Click to expand...
http://www.railroad.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=60&t=55974&start=30

Dowling goes on to write:
Re: SMART - Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transit
by dowlingm » Mon Feb 25, 2013 11:13 am

thanks guys. Presumably (surely) the same powerplant is going in the Metrolinx ones - trying to get a handle on likely ambient noise using manufacturer data as the complaining from vocal residents groups along the Toronto Air Rail Link construction zone is something else. I don't know if anyone else is doing powerpacks of that size for railroad applications in the US anyway, and MTU's wouldn't work for Buy America content.
Click to expand...
Three years ago, and other than a few details (in this very forum on the gearbox)(ZF six speed as opposed to a fluid one *I believe* SMART has stuck to)(It's a requirement in their request for proposal) still a very relevant question.

So Dowling, if you're reading this, have you found out any more on this? I continue to look, but it may be futile...

Edit to Add: I thought to post a bit more context to Dowling's posts, but there are so many good ones there it's hard to know where to edit, so I highly recommend accessing the forum:
http://www.railroad.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=60&t=55974&start=30
 
The answer is so easy it's pathetic.....................give the line to the TTC , let QP electrify it, have the TTC buy catenary subway cars and run it as just another subway line and problem solved.
 
ssiguy2 said:
The answer is so easy it's pathetic.....................give the line to the TTC , let QP electrify it, have the TTC buy catenary subway cars and run it as just another subway line and problem solved.
Click to expand...
LRVs in Tram-Trains would be the choice if that route were taken, and then they could be inter-operable with the Finch and Eglinton lines, albeit the choice of catenary power might dictate dual-voltage (25kV AC/750v DC) vehicles, which is done in other jurisdictions. TC might have stipulations on separating the track with the heavy rail operations. That's a big question pending with VIAs electrification, so a big change on Transport's part might be in the offing. It certainly shouldn't be "given" to the TTC, however, as with the crosstown LRTs, they might have some operating arrangement, but then that complicates overlapping staffing for stations that are already GO staffed.

Edit to Add: Here's one in the UK with an actual British Rail Class number:
[...][The 37m-long dual voltage (25kV ac 50 Hz/750V dc) vehicle, which is designated class 399, will be shipped from the port of Santander to Southampton, where it is due to dock on November 28, before reaching Sheffield on December 1.][...]
http://www.railjournal.com/index.php/light-rail/vossloh-despatches-first-sheffield-tram-train.html

[...][The introduction of tram-trains will allow Supertram services to travel on the national rail network. Passengers will be able to board one of the new vehicles at Sheffield Cathedral and travel directly to Parkgate Retail Centre in Rotherham, via Meadowhall South and Rotherham Central station, in about 25 minutes.

It is the first tram-train to be built for the UK, but the project is drawing on the experience of tram-train systems in Europe, specifically Karlsruhe. The Karlsruhe Model is often cited as the first tram-train system in Europe and has been the basis of other projects around the continent. The German city has also recently begun operating a new fleet of Vossloh Citylink tram-trains similar to those being trialled in Sheffield.
[...]
What really makes a tram-train is its ability to adapt to different electrification and signalling systems. Sheffield’s Class 399 vehicles are dual- mode, allowing them to operate under the 750V DC catenary on the Supertram network and the national network’s standard 25kV AC OLE. The route to Rotherham will be electrified at 750V DC – a project due to be completed by the end of 2016 – but a dual-mode vehicle was seen as essential given plans to electrify the Midland Mainline to Sheffield by 2023.

The switching process is automated. An Automatic Power Control (APC) system, which uses magnets embedded in the ground outside of the rail, separates the two power supplies with a neutral section of track. As the vehicle travels over the first magnet it triggers the circuit breakers to open. The tram-train then coasts through the neutral section before detecting the new voltage and closing the circuit breakers. Although it is an automated process, there is a manual override which would allow the driver to close the circuit breaker if needed.
[...]
http://www.railengineer.uk/2015/12/23/sheffield-tram-train-making-square-pegs-fit/

The US (Caltrans and other jurisdictions) is already allowing mixed light and heavy rail, in Caltrans case at the same time, change is going to have to come to Canada too.
 
Last edited:
steveintoronto said:
LRVs in Tram-Trains would be the choice if that route were taken, and then they could be inter-operable with the Finch and Eglinton lines, albeit the choice of catenary power might dictate dual-voltage (25kV AC/750v DC) vehicles, which is done in other jurisdictions. TC might have stipulations on separating the track with the heavy rail operations. That's a big question pending with VIAs electrification, so a big change on Transport's part might be in the offing. It certainly shouldn't be "given" to the TTC, however, as with the crosstown LRTs, they might have some operating arrangement, but then that complicates overlapping staffing for stations that are already GO staffed.

Edit to Add: Here's one in the UK with an actual British Rail Class number:
[...][The 37m-long dual voltage (25kV ac 50 Hz/750V dc) vehicle, which is designated class 399, will be shipped from the port of Santander to Southampton, where it is due to dock on November 28, before reaching Sheffield on December 1.][...]
http://www.railjournal.com/index.php/light-rail/vossloh-despatches-first-sheffield-tram-train.html

[...][The introduction of tram-trains will allow Supertram services to travel on the national rail network. Passengers will be able to board one of the new vehicles at Sheffield Cathedral and travel directly to Parkgate Retail Centre in Rotherham, via Meadowhall South and Rotherham Central station, in about 25 minutes.

It is the first tram-train to be built for the UK, but the project is drawing on the experience of tram-train systems in Europe, specifically Karlsruhe. The Karlsruhe Model is often cited as the first tram-train system in Europe and has been the basis of other projects around the continent. The German city has also recently begun operating a new fleet of Vossloh Citylink tram-trains similar to those being trialled in Sheffield.
[...]
What really makes a tram-train is its ability to adapt to different electrification and signalling systems. Sheffield’s Class 399 vehicles are dual- mode, allowing them to operate under the 750V DC catenary on the Supertram network and the national network’s standard 25kV AC OLE. The route to Rotherham will be electrified at 750V DC – a project due to be completed by the end of 2016 – but a dual-mode vehicle was seen as essential given plans to electrify the Midland Mainline to Sheffield by 2023.

The switching process is automated. An Automatic Power Control (APC) system, which uses magnets embedded in the ground outside of the rail, separates the two power supplies with a neutral section of track. As the vehicle travels over the first magnet it triggers the circuit breakers to open. The tram-train then coasts through the neutral section before detecting the new voltage and closing the circuit breakers. Although it is an automated process, there is a manual override which would allow the driver to close the circuit breaker if needed.
[...]
http://www.railengineer.uk/2015/12/23/sheffield-tram-train-making-square-pegs-fit/

The US (Caltrans and other jurisdictions) is already allowing mixed light and heavy rail, in Caltrans case at the same time, change is going to have to come to Canada too.
Click to expand...

what are the maximum and realistic service speeds of these tram trains. It seems that they just really made a tram fit on standard rail gauge and overhead wiring. I am not sure if they are intended for express
services like UPX. I'd bet that those dinky wheels would rattle themselves off after a while travelling at 100km/h. Not to mention the vibrations for the passengers. I think these T/T are more suited for metro related and low speed crosstown/interregional applications, not express services.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top