TransitBart
Senior Member
I say let’s get to 2020 first..
ssiguy2
Senior Member
Curious...........can the current double decker GO trains be deployed on the UPX line? I'm not saying they necessarily should be but can they be? Also would double decker EMUs be deployed on it?
crs1026
Superstar
Some authority (GTAA, TC, I forget who) was opposed to diesel locomotive hauled trains being used at Pearson, so while DD cars can be used (adjusting for door/platform height, obviously) you need some way of propelling them. That limits one to EMU/DMU.
Electrify the line, and many doors can open. But - the critical path to electrification likely runs through completing the fourth track, because (if I recall the design correctly from the EA docs) the supports for catenary must be placed outside all four tracks. That means, for instance, doing the relocation of the Railpath. And maybe finishing the 401 tunnel. All will happen with time, but unfortunately not doable as a quick fix.
- Paul
Last edited:
torontocolin
Active Member
Raising fares to intentionally reduce ridership would be the most classically Metrolinx move ever -- people are using our service, but they're not the ones we intended, and we're running out of capacity, so let's find a way to get rid of them!
These are the people who will enable the success of RER. They're willing to pay a premium fare to ride a fast train with good service downtown. These are not customers you want to lose. The first answer should be doing absolutely everything to increase capacity on the line; trying to find ways to run more three car consists and running way more GO trains from Union to Bramalea jump to mind.
These are the people who will enable the success of RER. They're willing to pay a premium fare to ride a fast train with good service downtown. These are not customers you want to lose. The first answer should be doing absolutely everything to increase capacity on the line; trying to find ways to run more three car consists and running way more GO trains from Union to Bramalea jump to mind.
mdrejhon
Senior Member
The deed is done - I don't think they politically are able to raise fares without raising the fares of the GO network.
One compromise might be to charge a peak surcharge, to de-crowd the peak UPX trains a bit.
They do need bigger trainsets at the UPX stations. Preferably expanded to four coaches, and made compatible with EMU trainsets that can stop at both UPX and RER stations.
One compromise might be to charge a peak surcharge, to de-crowd the peak UPX trains a bit.
They do need bigger trainsets at the UPX stations. Preferably expanded to four coaches, and made compatible with EMU trainsets that can stop at both UPX and RER stations.
cplchanb
Senior Member
No since the current go trains are low floor they are incompatible with the upx platforms
cplchanb
Senior Member
I'm pretty sure the platform length has already been maximised so I don't think fourth car can fit unless they only open 3 cars at the stations. They need to go double decker if they are to expand capacity beyond the 3 cars
dowlingm
Senior Member
There are no ways to run three car consists without buying more cars, and they have to have doors in the right locations to line up with the doors.
dowlingm
Senior Member
Possibly AMT Multilevels with an ALP46 facing away from Pearson. Much more weight on the guideway and assumes the terminal track/signals have room for an engine to sit beyond the platform.
Simplest option is Kawasaki M8 3 car consists, and to concentrate effort on increasing Kitchener Line service so that UPX does not have the same differential in service quality that it does at present.
TOareaFan
Superstar
Even if no agency was opposed to it (something I was not aware of until reading your post) it would not work....as has been discussed repeatedly here, the platform at Pearson (and Union for that matter) is only long enough for a 3 car train....if you use a locomotive you are using a key piece of platform length for a vehicle that can't carry any passengers....so you are actually taking a step backwards.
smallspy
Senior Member
There is absolutely enough cars to run only 3-car trains. There are 18 cars in the fleet, and 5 trainsets required for service.
The issue is that the cars themselves are not reliable enough to do it.
Dan
Toronto, Ont.
torontocolin
Active Member
Which is fine. Many of the London Underground stations are shorter than the trains, and the end doors don't open at those stations. When I was in Munich, only certain cars of my S-Bahn train opened at the airport.
This seems like it should be doable sooner than full electrified RER in 2025. Whether it'd be worth it, I can't hazard a guess without knowing costs.
Ultimately, once it's electrified I don't know why the UPX should be considered any different from a Kitchener RER train, outside of the stations at which it stops. If that means, for example, eventually running six car trains where only three cars open at Pearson to meet commuter demand then great. If that many people want to ride the train, and the only obstacle is that the train isn't big enough, well, that seems like a solvable problem to me, even if it means running funny looking trains to deal with different platform heights. If we've already paid for the infrastructure, and we're already paying for the operators, let's maximize the value of the asset.
crs1026
Superstar
Once RER puts good frequent GO service on the Kitchener line, one would expect that UP would focus on true airport business, and that might include a fare differential. In the meantime, the local business is an excellent demonstration of just how badly we need RER and just how much potential it has.
As to the fare to the airport, a few years of loss-leader fare to the airport is quite acceptable to grow the business. Standing-room trains mean the most people possible are using the service. I'm not sure that half-full trains running at full cost recovery are truly good transit policy. Those extra riders aren't clogging up the Gardiner in a limo.
- Paul
As to the fare to the airport, a few years of loss-leader fare to the airport is quite acceptable to grow the business. Standing-room trains mean the most people possible are using the service. I'm not sure that half-full trains running at full cost recovery are truly good transit policy. Those extra riders aren't clogging up the Gardiner in a limo.
- Paul
dowlingm
Senior Member
All depends on the regulatory environment. Bear in mind though that this is an airport train - perhaps the cars with doors would need to be prioritized for those with baggage?
micheal_can
Senior Member
This is the most truest statement anyone has posted.