Toronto Eglinton Line 5 | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx | Arcadis

[urbanclient]

Any word on when the LRV's can go the full 80 km/h underground? Hope that happens sooner rather than later.

I can tell you right now, that will make little to no difference. You can model this with some physics. We know the distance between stations, and we have a good idea of how it accelerates and brakes. We know how long the platform and train is. A 20 km/h higher top speed would result in a few seconds saved at most between two stations.

In some cases, where station gaps are shorter, reaching 80 km/h won't even be possible.

Better TSP, and faster intersection speeds on the surface will actually improve things.

 

[adys123]

I can tell you right now, that will make little to no difference. You can model this with some physics. We know the distance between stations, and we have a good idea of how it accelerates and brakes. We know how long the platform and train is. A 20 km/h higher top speed would result in a few seconds saved at most between two stations.

In some cases, where station gaps are shorter, reaching 80 km/h won't even be possible.

Better TSP, and faster intersection speeds on the surface will actually improve things.

Based on the views of the driver's interface, it appears that an increase in the speed to 80 km/h in the tunnels from 60 km/h will also increase the part where trains slow down when approaching stations from 35 km/h to 55 km/h. So that can save some additional time as well.

 

[urbanclient]

Based on the views of the driver's interface, it appears that an increase in the speed to 80 km/h in the tunnels from 60 km/h will also increase the part where trains slow down when approaching stations from 35 km/h to 55 km/h. So that can save some additional time as well.

How does a top speed increase (60 to 80) lend itself to a platform speed limit (~35 to 55) increase? Do you mind explaining the logic here?

55 to 0 in 90 metres (platform length) implies 1.3 m/s^2 deceleration. That ain't happening.

As an aside, the faster the top speed, the earlier the train must brake to adhere to the platform speed limit (assuming it can hit 80 km/h for that segment in the first place).

 

[adys123]

How does a top speed increase (60 to 80) lend itself to a platform speed limit (~35 to 55) increase? Do you mind explaining the logic here?

55 to 0 in 90 metres (platform length) implies 1.3 m/s^2 deceleration. That ain't happening.

As an aside, the faster the top speed, the earlier the train must brake to adhere to the platform speed limit (assuming it can hit 80 km/h for that segment in the first place).

The interface shows the current speed limitation with a different colour between the current limit and the maximum limit of the segment. And it adjusts based on the position, the area that it goes down to 35 km/h shows that the "infrastructure" limit for that area is 55km/h. Understandably, it just means that it will slow down slightly later.

 

[urbanclient]

The interface shows the current speed limitation with a different colour between the current limit and the maximum limit of the segment. And it adjusts based on the position, the area that it goes down to 35 km/h shows that the "infrastructure" limit for that area is 55km/h. Understandably, it just means that it will slow down slightly later.

Ok fair. But I doubt the trains will enter the platforms at speeds faster than 35 km/h (not sure if entering platforms at 55 is what you are implying).

 

[Johnny Au]

In the near future after the western extension to Renforth is done, there can be three cars per train if demand warrants.

For now, two cars per train suffice.

 

[hw621]

If what you're saying is true, then they're adhering to the (now padded) schedule after some TSP improvements were made at 8 intersections.

I remember dwell times being reasonable on Line 5, not one minute. Look at the countdown timer on the driver's screen in the video below, it was usually ~30 seconds total stationary time for each underground station:

TSP at 8 intersections: https://archive.ph/nYcjy

I also rode the line for the first time today. Long dwell time is also something I noticed. Why would they do this after TSP implementation? Just to make the experience equally bad?

 

[Obsidian]

In the near future after the western extension to Renforth is done, there can be three cars per train if demand warrants.

For now, two cars per train suffice.

3-car trains will mean less frequent service so i doubt the TTC would move to 3-car trains and keep to 2-car to maintain frequency when the extension opens.

 

[Obsidian]

I also rode the line for the first time today. Long dwell time is also something I noticed. Why would they do this after TSP implementation? Just to make the experience equally bad?

If the schedule didn't change then they would need to run the undergrounds section slower to compensate for the faster above ground section.
The line is still in a phase opening so all these things are still being worked out.

I would wait until after Green light extension is implemented in May to make a judgement on the line.

 

[McGillicuddy]

3-car trains will mean less frequent service so i doubt the TTC would move to 3-car trains and keep to 2-car to maintain frequency when the extension opens.

On the other hand, it is almost certainly cheaper for the agency to have two drivers move two three-car trains than it is for them to have three drivers move three two-car trains. And as seat capacity is the same, you can present this as a neutral change, when it's actually a service cut.

 

[T3G]

On the other hand, it is almost certainly cheaper for the agency to have two drivers move two three-car trains than it is for them to have three drivers move three two-car trains. And as seat capacity is the same, you can present this as a neutral change, when it's actually a service cut.

See also: the cutbacks they instituted on almost all of the streetcar routes post-Flexity...

 

[nfitz]

See also: the cutbacks they instituted on almost all of the streetcar routes post-Flexity...

Despite many promises to residents that there'd be minimal cuts from the Flexitiy's, and mostly to peak, with off peak staying similar.

 

[afransen]

For short trips. Which is also why (double-decker!) buses are faster for many short trips in London - not having to travel down to the bowels of the earth.

This is also why rapid transit (especially of the tunneled variety) should be emphasizing speed (for more medium to long distance trips) rather than frequent stop spacing which are tailored more for short distance trips.

 

[A 6264]

I am assuming this means some trains will be 3-car instead of current 2-car, but I do not think that all trains will be 3-car at peak.

Platforms have markings on the floor saying where the trains do not stop. I don't know what they will change to when we eventually get a mix of 2 and 3 car trains, but I've presumed there are no plans to expand to 3 cars now, and it's not part of the full service rollout plan. Perhaps a few years in the future, the line will change from all-2-car to all-3-car trains.

 

[A 6264]

Above ground section has too many stops, there is not enough density to explain it. Walmart has a stop, no frills has a stop, gas station has a stop, toyota dealership has a stop, random parking lot has a stop. Everybody gets a stop!

The Golden Mile area is a huge shopping strip stretching from Victoria Park (No-Frills) to east of Warden. It's possible the dense spacing of stops is deliberate, to support shops and shoppers. Is this really any different from Yonge subway downtown? Having Line 5 above ground in this area is to the malls' advantage, because there is less time getting on and off the train, compared to those deep stations. Different rtypes of routes for different neighbourhoods. I know not everyone will agree.