News   Apr 30, 2024
 190     0 
News   Apr 30, 2024
 406     0 
News   Apr 30, 2024
 976     0 

2018 Provincial Election Transit Promises

And I and most others, but crucially Ford. would agree. Albeit Ford's specialty is TTC gauge, so there's absolutely no possibility of interoperability with any other trackage in Ontario, or Canada, and only one other in the World. Oh, save for maybe a kilometer or so at the Halton County Railway Museum.

For some odd reason, even with the hundreds more pics that Google gladly supplies if clicking "more"...not one Metrolinx vehicle shows, future RER or otherwise.

Why do think that might be?
Look at all those Google Images of surface subways that look like GO RER!!!

No Metrolinx trains show because Metrolinx has aggressively avoided calling them subways.

Yet GO RER actually proposes the same EMU trains as certain subways in other countries, with similar frequencies.

Fortunately, that's simple to fix.

Rebrand!!!!!!!!!!!!!! To prevent cancelling/screwing up the good parts of RER.

Enough people (true progressive conservatives that believe in GO RER) needs to convince Ford to run with the RER idea and rename it GO Surface Subway Initiative or GO Metro System. As much as progressives hold their noses at Ford, this is a move that must be made to the mutual betterment of Ontario. Preserve the plan, maybe improve its frequency (at least in core Oakville-Pickering segment becoming 5 minute headways), and Ford has his subway.

We can roll our eyes till the cows come home, but there you go -- a subway already under construction to Ford's specifications. We end up wasting only a little money on renaming GO RER -- in order to save the sensible parts of GO RER.

Burying it would be a boondoggle costs-wise, when you can simply do a minor tweak to GO RER, to achieve exacxtly the same thing, shovel-ready, EA-completed, and viola, it's a "subway" to Pickering!

Even Google agrees, GO RER looks like many subway trains. Waste a (much smaller amount) of money rebranding GO RER into GO Metro System or the GO Surface Subway Initiative and get the good RER complete ASAP.

It's just RER renamed, and a little fire lit to get a slightly enhanced RER completed sooner. That's it.
 
Last edited:
The original Scarborough LRT plan was completely grade separated yet the Fords insisted on suggesting it will rip up roads and that it needed to be underground.

You're completely wrong about the Hurontario LRT - it has widespread support (85%).

Based on your reasoning, our first priorities should be to eliminate the streetcar system and have them replaced with subways. Transit is not meant to make things easier for drivers (and to encourage more of them), it's meant to make it possible to travel without a car.

The one issue in Mississauga (where I live) is that we don't get news coverage for our projects. Most people still don't really know what the LRT is and how it will be put into the system. Not even sure if people know they are losing a lane on Hurontario, the 403 - Dundas section can take 15 minutes now, it will be a gong show after. Plus the biggest issue is, it doesn't actually go to where people work. Ottawa at least goes to where the jobs are. Missisauga's employment zones are still fairy far away.
 
Enough people (true progressive conservatives that believe in GO RER) needs to convince Ford to run with the RER idea and rename it GO Surface Subway Initiative or GO Metro System.
Absolutely agreed. We've shared enough posts to be completely onside on this. I think Ford's handlers will have to put that to him. "See Doug, you were right! The RER Subway. Let's call it the RERway!"

I notice even some of Ford's hardcore apologists in these threads realizing it's all just BS, and now the wrestling match is over, it's time to bring in the grownups, and put the Doug Muzzle back on.

Surprised to hear Tory actually saying he wants "Regional Express Rail" built, thats a surprisingly good sign . . .
Yeah, that struck me too, although his subtext is SmartTrack. But still...it might be part of a careful nuancing from Cons to get Ford to stay on the road. His suspension is tramping. Locking his differential might help...
 
Fare integration is an essential part of RER and building a coordinated regional transportation system in general. The days of GO and the TTC having separate fare systems are numbered regardless of Smarttrack. Unless of course Doug nixes that too.
It's a very good chance, if he's left unchallenged by his handlers. Will a vicious beast attack if off his leash? It's a very real risk.
Remains to be seen. Dougie has yet to smash that china shop...
 
Last edited:
Remains to be seen. Dougie has yet to smash that china shop...
Even Wynne's China shop wasn't the fine china Tory was looking for - it was simply reduced $3 GO fares - not full TTC integration. Taking the TTC to GO would have cost $4.50 - compared to a simple TTC trip for $3.


I believe the fare reduction was to be funded by Carbon Tax funds - so it's probably axed, given how all the other items funded by the tax are as well.
 
Even Wynne's China shop wasn't the fine china Tory was looking for - it was simply reduced $3 GO fares - not full TTC integration. Taking the TTC to GO would have cost $4.50 - compared to a simple TTC trip for $3.


I believe the fare reduction was to be funded by Carbon Tax funds - so it's probably axed, given how all the other items funded by the tax are as well.
Yeah, that's as reasonable an argument as we'll get until something miraculous appears on paper.

What's beyond frustrating is @MisterF 's applying sensible clear logic for discussion, but with Dougie on the loose, logic doesn't pertain. He'd bite off his handler's head given the opportunity, just to spite him.

Dougie's little train set. Doesn't matter who bought it, I'm playing my way, even if Lionel doesn't fit on the Hornby Dublo gauge....or else. (As he proceeds to smash all the detailed models built by others) "Daddy said I own them!"
 
Even Wynne's China shop wasn't the fine china Tory was looking for - it was simply reduced $3 GO fares - not full TTC integration. Taking the TTC to GO would have cost $4.50 - compared to a simple TTC trip for $3.
That's still cheaper than taking a TTC downtown express bus to the TTC subway! Whjch currently costs 2 tokens - or $6.

$6.50 if you are paying cash!
 
Now that it's calmed down a bit as per "The Toronto subway that ate the world"...I can let on that in some cases, subway *in the internationally understood use of the term, even though it's a North Am one* is being expanded in some quarters, albeit there's quite a bit more to this, as Paris is also expanding a *third* commuter rail network (regional) beyond this: (I'll post reference and discuss that later)
Since World War Two, some cities have sought to extend rapid transit into their suburbs by leveraging legacy commuter rail lines. Building on prewar examples from Berlin and Tokyo, they initiated a variety of treatments to modernise their commuter rail: electrification, integrated fares, high all-day frequency, and cross-city connections.

All this turns commuter rail into an express metro line. The city that has done the most in this direction is Paris, which since the 1970s has built a network called the RER, with five lines labeled A through E.

It is the cross-city connections that are the costliest to provide, since they almost always involve new tunnels under city center. Cities can build cross-city tunnels in two ways. One approach involves high investment: the tunnels are longer and involve several stations, often in difficult-to-construct locations. The main example is the RER A, whose construction involved about 17 km of new tunnel and seven underground stations, running on an east-west axis through central Paris.

The other approach is lower-investment: tunnels are the shortest possible connecting commuter rail terminals. The main example is the RER C, whose construction involved just 1 km of new tunnel and no new stations, creating an southeast-to-southwest line on the Left Bank of Paris.

This is a spectrum rather than a binary division: RER lines B, D, and E are intermediate between the high investment that went into the RER A and the low investment into the RER C. In layout, the RER B is quite similar to the RER A, but managed to leverage a legacy line reaching within 2 km of city center.

The same division between the two approaches holds outside Paris, too. In London, Thameslink is similar to the RER C, whereas Crossrail, with its long new tunnels, is like the RER A, as is the planned Crossrail 2. Berlin's North-South Tunnel from the 1930s, creating a new axis in the city complementing the older east-west Stadtbahn, is like the RER A.

North American projects, including the SEPTA Regional Rail tunnel in Philadelphia and the ongoing Toronto RER project, are both like the RER C. The Regional Rail tunnel connected two commuter rail terminals to create a mainline the shape of an inverted L, with some lines self-intersecting. Toronto is fortunate enough not to need new tunnels at all, since all commuter lines serve Union Station, some coming from the east and some from the west.

The main benefit of the RER C style is that it is much cheaper. It involves less tunneling, and the city can choose to build fewer stations. When tunneling deep underground, the stations are the most expensive element: for example, in New York's Second Avenue Subway, built deep to avoid street disruption, the tunnels cost $415m whereas the three new stations cost $2.2bn total. The central segment of the RER A cost about 5bn francs, corresponding to about €600m per kilometer in 2016 prices; no other rail tunnel in the world has cost so much except some New York lines and Crossrail. Crossrail, the other major modern example of this type of construction, is even costlier, perhaps £750m per kilometer.

The main benefit of the RER A style is that it lets commuter rail act as an express metro line. Such tunnels do not follow the shortest path between legacy terminals: both the RER A and Crossrail were designed as express east-west lines through city center, with stations connecting to most intersecting Metro or Underground lines. And they are not just commuter rail schemes but also relief lines for the busiest metro lines, namely Metro Line 1 and the Central line. RER C-style lines do not necessarily provide this: the RER C is parallel to Metro Line 10, the least busy in Paris.

[...continues with maps, text and details particular to specific conurbations...]

The biggest cities should probably plan on at least one RER A-style commuter line. London came to this conclusion when it began the Crossrail program; despite the high cost, it is now very likely to build Crossrail 2. The largest North American cities should learn from this and consider some truly metro-like commuter lines rather than just lines in the mold of the RER C.
https://www.citymetric.com/transpor...o-models-cross-city-commuter-train-lines-2704

Much more by this author here:
https://pedestrianobservations.files.wordpress.com/2017/11/nyupresentation2.pdf
 
Last edited:
^ Fare integration, as per previous posts. All discuss some form of fare integration TTC/GO. Rather than argue the details, let's flip this over and examine the very likely outcome of events: Fare integration is off the table.

Now what? *Almost everything* with what's been proposed/projected/planned for the last few years has been based on the inevitable integration of fare by distance being neutralized, such that Travelling Joe picks whichever means gets him/her there best at the same cost to doing so (This is already tried and true in various world class cities, now including ferries or jet riverboat in some).

How can Ford possibly manage to not completely shatter all of that? It's a logical question to a man that thinks logic is for elites and patsies.
 
@nfitz Speaking of the downtown expresses buses - driving south on the DVP last Friday at 6:30 pm, I saw a 144 heading north - empty. Was an interesting sight!
 

Back
Top