Toronto Union Pearson Express | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx | MMM Group Limited

[cplchanb]

Let's hope that Metrolinx learns something from this.......revenues can increase and subsidies decline when you lower the fares.

This clearly proves that people are very price sensitive. This idea of "build it and they will come" is a fallacy if the fares are too high. All the service in the world doesn't make any difference to most people if they can't afford it. This is something that they should keep in mind when they roll out RER. If the trains are as pricey as they are now, it will have little effect hopeful ridership increases.

UPX, at 15 minute intervals, is essential a RER type service. Rising ridership is wonderful but when you consider that only 23% of the riders are commuters not bound for Pearson, that doesn't speak well for potential RER ridership. Imagine how the UPX numbers would soar, especially by commuters and Pearson workers, if Metrolinx brought in further reductions on the line by having total fare integration with the TTC. All of a sudden, the trip from Weston to downtown would drop from $5 plus TTC to $5 minus TTC. Not only would this soar ridership but also would be useful for people who don't live right beside a GO station and aren't just going to Union.

UPX proves that fares matter a lot and the fares & fare integration with local transit services will determine whether RER is a dismal failure or a stellar success.

As good of a story it is to see ridership soar, one has to bear in mind that over capacity is also a detriment to a successful operation. Revenue figures havent been released yet, but it seems as if UPX is almost at the sweetspot in offereing good value for service.
Remember this is considered sort of a semi-higher order of transit, so it needs to be priced according (obviously not as high as day 1). Its meant to be full, but not TTC or rush hour GO train full. Perhaps a $1 discount will be just right to attract riders, but not enough to burst the vehicles and have no spare capacity.

 

[mdrejhon]

I'm interested in knowing how their bottom line is. Have they managed to break even on fare revenue vs ridership yet with their latest figures?

For 9100 daily riders at average $8 per passenger, this results in $26.5M revenue per year going forward, assuming this is the new normal, 9100 average for the next 365 days.

I think equlibrium will probably gradually hit 12,000 rides average per day in two or three years, netting $35M/annum. At that point, TTC style crowding kicks in for 3 hours continuous (My reasoning is there is still room for peak capacity expansion: While UPX regularly has standees at peak, there is still UPX seats just before 430 and after 530, peak cramming has not become 3 hours long yet like TTC.... so assuming 3 hours of at least lightly packed standees in morning incoming and 3 hours of at least lightly packed standees evening outgoing....that will bump capacity to approx 12000 riders per day easy)

Assume that after incredibly high first-year budget, the subsequent 2017+ UPX budget becomes cost-cut a little to 60M per year... that mathematically works to about 45% farebox today, and tomorrow 60% farebox recovery. Almost TTC!

Cost per rider at $60M budget at $35M revenue for 12000 riders/day, falls to $13.70 per rider -- less than the beginning years of the Sheppard subway. But with higher ticket prices, so FAR better farebox recovery than Sheppard subway as the $8 average fare revenue means only a $5.70 subsidy on top of the $8 fare. Nearly one-tenth what it was before!

Even today, $26.5M revenue for 60M assumed budget at 9100 riders per diem, results in a $18 cost per rider, or a $10 subsidy on top of an average $8 paid fare. One-fifth subsidy of what it was before. And already less taxpayer subsidy per rider than when Sheppard Subway started. Ironic, isn't it!

Certainly not America's worst in farebox loss, even at that -- and today's numbers is almost certainly in the better half of pathetic North America public transit cost recovery.

Perspective, I guess?

 

[christiesplits]

I wonder what impact the recently added Hamilton - Square One - Pearson - Richmond Hill GO bus has had on ridership? Travelling from Hamilton to Pearson, I would have taken the Hamilton Union Express bus and the UPX northward, but the GO bus to Pearson via Square One is direct and faster.

 

[EastYorkTTCFan]

I wonder what impact the recently added Hamilton - Square One - Pearson - Richmond Hill GO bus has had on ridership? Travelling from Hamilton to Pearson, I would have taken the Hamilton Union Express bus and the UPX northward, but the GO bus to Pearson via Square One is direct and faster.

Praobably not much I would guess most of the poel using it from Toronto and Person are either coming from Toronto Person with Tornto as ther destination.

 

[Megaton327]

I was out filming the UP yesterday and all but one of the consists I saw were two cars, is this typical?

I believe they started service (June 2015) with two 2-car and one 3-car consists, and since the fare cut they have been increasing the proportion of 3-car trains when possible due to the massively increased demand. However, this is counterbalanced by the outrageously unreliable nature of the Sharyo DMUs--I'm quite sure I heard someone shortly after the fare increase report the same 4x 3-car/1x 2-car fleet as you have, but since then many have said it's been mostly 2-car trains again.

 

[mdrejhon]

The elephant in the room is election 2018.

Is the public ready to swallow electrification of UPX?

This is the first EA-complete route AND the most controversial service ("That airport train boondoggle", as many still say, alas) is already head of line. I'm definitely cheerleading for electrification, but I can see the worries on the wall...

They need to toot massively increased ridership, and try to market UPX sufficient enough in order to break the 10,000 average -- A five figure number are always a nicer boast for any public transit line. Win over the electorate, and succeed in beginning to electrify GO.

So, my vision is they HAVE to rebrand UPX slightly for a more palatable GO electrification begin.

They may try to rebrand it (ala SmartTrack or a renamed GO RER service) as a 2018 ploy.

As one possible option of many, it's technologically feasible to merge SmartTrack + GO RER + UPX into a unified EMU. When Metrolinx orders EMU (possibly Stadler KISS), they can order some models that can do both high/low floor doors -- just like the Caltrain order. So that a 3-coach or 4-coach Stadler KISS consist can service both UPX and GO platforms.
-- The midlevels would have the baggage racks, and accessible seating.
-- The upper/lower passenger seating levels would be for regular seating.
-- The trains can shorten to 3 or 4 coach for UPX stations
-- The trains can be reallocated elsewhere on GO even as part of a 12-coach consist (only low-level doors open)

Look ma, high doors! For UPX stations!

This allows compatibility with both RER, SmartTrack & UPX simultaneously.

Most EMUs that GO orders would be low-door only.
But a few EMU sets would have both levels, in order to service UPX stations.

This specific trainset is available in low-door-only config (GORER compatible) & dual-level door config (GORER+UPX compatible); Metrolinx could order both -- and order only enough dual-level to completely satisfy UPX demand, plus a few extras for total fleet flexibility.

Boarding speed of a bilevel is compensated by slightly longer dwell made available by EMU's quicker acceleration ability (Despite being bilevel, the KISS EMU can accelerate slightly faster than UPX -- 4kph/second acceleration rate -- and without overheating).

It would be only one 3-coach or 4-coach consist that services (slightly modified) UPX stations, but the UPX-compatible consists can just join into a regular GO train at other times when not in use. Which means GO can afford to purchase a few extra UPX-compatible EMU's and run unused UPX consists as part of regular GO trains (leaving high doors unused when servicing low platforms). Bilevel + 4-coach would massively increase the passenger capacity of UPX stations too.

The Georgetown corridor is capable of allowing 7.5 minute service interspersing the Bramalea-Unionville (formerly SmartTrack) service with the Union-Pearson (formerly UPX) service. The trains of the merged UPX+SmartTrack+GORER would look exactly the same (except for the appearance of high doors on the Pearson trains). The different final destinations will be displayed on info-displays ("Pearson" vs "Bramalea") at stations and onboard the train. So people commuting Union-Bloor-Weston gets 7.5 minute service, and people commuting either Union-Pearson or Union-Bramalea would get 15 minute service.

This could go a long way of allaying the fears of alienating 2018 electorate of "Why electrify that UPX boondoggle" if it's merged UPX+GORER+SmartTrack in one EMU train.

This might end up becoming necessary if they want GO electrification to survive election 2018 without the UPX first-mover "EA already done, it's first" black cloud hovering above it.

....and fleet efficiency for the win!

 

[smallspy]

I believe they started service (June 2015) with two 2-car and one 3-car consists, and since the fare cut they have been increasing the proportion of 3-car trains when possible due to the massively increased demand. However, this is counterbalanced by the outrageously unreliable nature of the Sharyo DMUs--I'm quite sure I heard someone shortly after the fare increase report the same 4x 3-car/1x 2-car fleet as you have, but since then many have said it's been mostly 2-car trains again.

5 trains are needed for daily service, so I'm not sure how you could run a 15 minute service with only 3 trains. And the increasing proportion of 3-car trains has nothing to do with the fare decrease, but rather with the slowly increasing reliability of the fleet.

Supposedly, the cars have not fared well so far this winter, and we're barely into it. That would account for having more 2-car trains out than had been normal of late.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[ssiguy2]

UPX is RER in the making if Metrolinx finally decide to swallow their pride and admit that it's business case for serving as a Pearson-Union express was a failure and the line would serve hundreds of thousands of potential transit riders if it became part of the standard transit system.

Mdrejhon..........appreciate your pics but with respect I think they would be a bad choice for RER. Double decker trains are ideal and logical for commuter rail service as people just tend to get on at their stops and then don't move until they all get to Union and then the whole train empties out all at once. They are great for the mass movement of people from many stations to a terminus. Their short comings, however, become far more apparent on RER or suburban systems.

RER-type systems, unlike commuter rail, have a lot of on/off traffic at different stops and double deckers are very problematic for unloading/loading. Due to shorter distances, people tend to clog near the doors, and going up/down stairs is also cumbersome and they don't have as many doors as a regular EMU. Combined with more regular passengers unlike commuter trains which tend to be for office workers, you also get a lot more seniors, disabled, and women with baby carriages who clog near the entries due to immobility of easily negotiating the stairs. In short their dwell times at stations are significantly longer than single level EMUs.

Melbourne and Sydney have similar suburban rail type systems and Melbourne use to use double decker EMUs like Sydney does now but realized that the more people use it for non-downtown travel, the slower it gets. It has got rid of them all and replaced them with single level trains and they have prove themselves faster and better able to keep to schedules due to far shorter dwell times. Sydney has realized this as well and has begun ordering single level EMUs.

This is why you see double decker GO buses which have far fewer stops and serves long distance travel but don't see them used for standard bus routes by local transit systems. Yes, they are different from trains but I think you see the analogy.

 

[dowlingm]

Cummins have (hopefully) diagnosed the principal engine reliability issue as noted by SMART, so once the Metrolinx cars have been fixed hopefully the remaining issues will be similarly solvable. For Metrolinx financial sake we should all hope so!

I have a hard time seeing a UPX replacement as something other than a single level EMU unless we're giving up on UPX as an airport train for anyone with more than a very small carry on bag. We just have to buy enough of the damn things to run 3 car trains all the time, and preferably not wasting space with cabs in the middle cars.

A Kawasaki M8 order of 24 (or more if 12 minute headways were to be attempted) might do nicely if the production line was still open when the catenary is strung. In the alternative, 6 or more Sharyos in EMU config with each three arriving allowing three diesels to go for repower to maintain fleet size until all the diesels are re-delivered.

 

[steveintoronto]

I wonder if upon ordering additional cars there might be a seat reconfiguration or addition of more hand holds to deal with standing passengers.

If you mean the Sharyos, no more will be ordered, nor should they be. They cost a fortune, and will now cost twice as much. They were a poor choice due to ridiculous TC regs that even the US FRA offers waivers for now. Canada remains decades behind in innovation.

 

[dowlingm]

If you mean the Sharyos, no more will be ordered, nor should they be. They cost a fortune, and will now cost twice as much. They were a poor choice due to ridiculous TC regs that even the US FRA offers waivers for now. Canada remains decades behind in innovation.

It's not like EuroDMUs are given away for free.

 

[smallspy]

Cummins have (hopefully) diagnosed the principal engine reliability issue as noted by SMART, so once the Metrolinx cars have been fixed hopefully the remaining issues will be similarly solvable. For Metrolinx financial sake we should all hope so!

If only the engines were the primary cause of failures.....

Cummins has resolved the vast majority of the short-term issues, and is working on fixing the long-term ones. There are all sorts of other issues that Cummins has no part of.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[steveintoronto]

It's not like EuroDMUs are given away for free.

Then name another US city that's using the Sharyos. The production line is now finished, and to re-open it would mean paying twice the figure SMART and Metrolinx got theirs for. I've quoted the documentation stating that in this thread prior.

In searching for the quotable information on the Sharyo costs, I ran across this of note: (It's actually a tale of three cities, as the more apt comparator is the Coaster Express out of San Diego, using....wait for it, UTDC bi-levels and F40s, operated by....Bombardier Transportation.

Blog Post

MTC and Wikipedia

• Marin County
  |
• Transportation

A Tale of Two Cities, and Their Trains
Posted by: Richard Hall - October 24, 2016 - 9:31pm
SMART and Metrolinx Toronto could be considered to be sister train systems - together they clubbed together to buy trains, or Diesel Multiple Units (DMUs), from Japanese manufacturer Sumitomo Nippon Sharyo. These DMU units have been in widespread use in Japan as an Electric Multiple Unit, but its use in Toronto and Marin is different. This time it has been coupled with a tier 4 diesel engine - in this case the diesel is made by Cummins. While this is a proven diesel engine, the DMUs and this engine have never before been paired - so SMART and Metrolinx are taking risks using this combination.
[...continues at length...]

https://marinpost.org/blog/2016/10/24/a-tale-of-two-cities-and-their-trains

 

[dowlingm]

I'm sure it's been discussed but what about the rolling stock used in the Denver A-Line. Just looking at this line makes me wish that UP had been more like this.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Line_(RTD)

The Silverliner Vs that had SEPTA borrowing stock from MARC, Amtrak and NJT to cover emergency fixes? No matter how bad the Nippons are, they ain't *that* bad.

 

[ssiguy2]

Denver's new airport line is the best analogy of the UPX. It opened at roughly the same time, goes from Union to the Airport with some intermediate stations, uses a current rail corridor with a new section nearer the airport, runs every 15 minutes all day, is 35km long, and travels up to 80 mph. Denver's line however is more successful and has not received the public scorn of UPX because it is electric and part of the standard transit network and not built as a Bay Street tax write-off. It carries 18,600 passengers a day which is almost exactly twice the UPX in a city half the size of Toronto with a fraction of Toronto's ridership numbers.

UPX is but a shadow of what it could be...........a real transit line providing rapid transit to the people who actually paid for it.