Krypto98
Active Member
Vaughan mills works with a seasonal bus to Wonderland. Any further north lacks the density and would be better served by brt or lrt
|
|
|
micheal_can
Senior Member
I had thought about to Canada's Wonderland in the past, but there isn't enough density for it. Maybe an LRT in the area could be done, part of the VIVA system.
Leo_Chan
Senior Member
Angry VIVA Silver noises
micheal_can
Senior Member
Why angry? It would make some sense.
Leo_Chan
Senior Member
I am angry that this was planned to be implemented in 2018 (Moving to 2020 - Page 21) but there has been no appearance in planned service changes ever since.
micheal_can
Senior Member
I think they are busy with adding busways to add more lines.
JSF-1
Active Member
So I made this hypothetical service map for the Lakeshore East Line as part of GO RER just to see what could be done if we put our minds to it. Its based off of the service maps you would see in Japan; for example here's the map for the Odakyu Railway (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odakyu_Electric_Railway#/media/File:Odakyu-linemap.svg). Barring in mind the technical side of this type of service pattern, I split the line into 3 services; Local serving all stops, Rapid skipping some stops, and Express which skips the majority of the line. Locals and Rapids would operate all day in both directions, while Express trains would be peak-direction only. I don't think any of the other lines would have a 3-tier split in its service pattern save for the Lakeshore West and Kitchener Lines as they are probably the only other lines with the ridership/ridership potential to justify it. The other lines would probably be just fine with a basic Local and Rapid "skip-stop" services. I plan on making more of these for the other lines, so if you want to suggest better stops for the different services go ahead.
micheal_can
Senior Member
How many additional tracks would be needed to ensure Local could be kept at 2WAD 15 minute service without loosing any existing services? Does the line have the space for those extra tracks?
JSF-1
Active Member
Well you really don't need more than 2 tracks to pull it off so long as you have enough stations on the line with passing capability and good scheduling. Since I am using Japan as an example for that map I will also use them for the explanation. That being over in Japan the overwhelming majority of train services only use 2 tracks; the various express services are maintained through the aforementioned stations with passing capabilities and some really good scheduling. In fact a single line using 4 tracks is almost unheard of over there with the only example coming to mind being the Odakyu Main Line, everyone else just uses 2 with some 3/4 track stations sprinkled in along the line. If we could pull off a Japanese style schedule or even something remotely close we would be spoiled for time slots along the line with 4 tracks when you consider what the Japanese can do with 2. Thus to me the complication isn't with track space as we have enough of that, but just adding some more track space to certain stations. Which ones depends entirely on the level of service we want to provide.
Woodbridge_Heights
Senior Member
As aweful as that connection is. I think it's important to have at least rapid service stopping at Danforth, if not the Express service as well. Perhaps guildwood could be dropped instead
micheal_can
Senior Member
Do we have the space to add track at those stations?
I like the format, it's clean and easy to read. A few comments though:
1) It's unlikely that the local service would extend all the way out to Bowmanville. If anything, the service would be layered, with routes running local on the outer stretches (say Bowmanville to Pickering), and then running express or semi-express to Union. The local service will likely terminate at Pickering.
2) There's no large 'anchor' community like Hamilton on the other end of LSE, so it's unlikely there will be demand for the express route that you depict. LSW, Kitchener, and Barrie would likely be the only 3 routes to feature such a service pattern, given the size of the cities at the ends of the line.
3) Gerrard is unlikely to be warranted, given the connection between LSE/STF and the OL will be made one stop down the line at West Harbour, and that the Gerrard site will have an OL station.
micheal_can
Senior Member
2) I would argue that Oshawa is the anchor, even though it is not the end of the line. Just like LSW actually extends to Niagara Falls, but the anchor would be Hamilton.
It is, but it's nowhere the size of a Hamilton or a Kitchener. The population and ridership in Durham is pretty evenly distributed between the 4 stations there. Oshawa may have the slight lead currently because it's the EOL and sees a lot of drive-in traffic from further east, something that should diminish when the Bowmanville extension comes online.
By contrast, once frequencies to West Harbour increase, I think we'll see a significant increase in the amount of people using that station, and that's something that won't really be affected by the opening of Confederation or Casablanca or any of the other stations on the Niagara extension.
JSF-1
Active Member
Made another service map, this one for the Stouffville Line. This one is much simpler as the Stouffville Line doesn't need anything fancy, a Local and basic rapid service would serve the line just well. I wondered about where an appropriate start for the Rapid service would be, considering both Mount Joy and Unionville as possible starting points. I chose Mount Joy since it is at the north-east corner of Markham and so can still draw riders from the city, while Unionville is a bit to far down the line and would miss the north-east end of Markham. You can make a case for a rapid stop at Centennial, I did simply because of Markville Mall but you can just have the Rapid trains continue past to Unionville. Local service only at Agincourt for now as there is no reason for anything more at the moment. However should the Sheppard Line be extended east than you can have the rapid service stop there as well. I took the suggestion to remove the stop at Gerrard even though I believe that section of the LSE could use a mid-block station since the distance between Danforth and the proposed East Bayfront Station is about 5km. For the current GO service that is fine, but for an RER service that kind of gap in such a developed area kind of defeats the point in my opinion. Either way a stop at Gerrard (just like one at Lawrence East) would be local stops with the rapid service by-passing it.
Also I am going to add that I won't be making one of these for the Richmond Hill and Milton Lines as they won't be electrified and thus won't be part of the RER network. Richmond Hill itself doesn't even warrant anything more than a local service although the same can't be said for the Milton Line.
Also I am going to add that I won't be making one of these for the Richmond Hill and Milton Lines as they won't be electrified and thus won't be part of the RER network. Richmond Hill itself doesn't even warrant anything more than a local service although the same can't be said for the Milton Line.
Last edited: