Danforth Line 2 Scarborough Subway Extension

[TheTigerMaster]

The centre rail in LIM trains pulls the train forward using magnets. This allows cars to be built without motors, which means smaller, lighter and faster cars and smaller tunnel sizes (theoretically reducing construction costs).

It's surprising that the LIM technology never really took off. Systems today are still generally being built with traditional subway cars or underground trams. I suppose LIM came along so late that the larger cities already had established metro networks, and interoperability with their existing network and maintenances facilities was more important than lower construction costs or faster vehicles.

 

[Voltz]

Is this to reduce friction?

Where is the fourth rail? Under the centre track?

The third and forth rails are stacked on top of each other.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

In addition to the technical failures the RT also failed because of a poor route design and that ever important transfer one stop before Scarborough's most important growth area. These are very important to residents overall. Even more so when we had a poorly integrated and completely off the radar unfunded LRT lines elsewhere in the large borough.

Don't get me wrong Transit City had some good bits and meant well in some respects. But what is left of it is all that should be left. Time to move forward.

If the route was so poor, why did we consider it for the subway? McCowan is going to to run up the costs of this subway. RT corridor or Brimley is much better.

 

[44 North]

I know somewhere there are some black and white Government of Ontario renders of an ICTS Downtown Relief Line connecting to Union Station (pretty sure you've posted them before). Which is odd because, as you mentioned, even the the 80s they knew that ridership demand on the Relief Line would be very high. Far higher than a system explicitly designed for "intermediate capacity rapid transit" could handle.

I know in the 1960s, the TTC wanted to build an underground streetcar-based Relief Line that could be easily upgradable to run standard subway cars. I wonder if the ICTS Relief Line was planned to be similarly upgradable.

Those images more or less showed conventional subways, but meant to look a bit sleeker and futuristic. They're 6-car long, in stations ~150m long, with three doors per car. So not like Line 3 ICTS. And the blueprint specs are basically interchangeable with conventional Toronto subways, which was noted in the report.

But theoretically the RL could've used ICTS and still provided capacity above conventional subways on Line 1 or 2 at the time. Instead of 6-car ICTS trains (75m long) run at 90sec and with 18k capacity, it could've been snaking 12-car trains with 36k. That'd be kinda silly though.

Point is a city can build a 'light/intermediate' subway line without relying on a unique brand or oddball propulsion system, just as it can build a 'heavy' subway without using conventional TTC rolling stock. We could design the RL to run 2.7m-wide trains run in 150m long 6-car consists, and we could design a Sheppard extension to run 3.1m-wide trains in 100m long 4-car consists. All using conventional parts and technologies. In other words it's the infrastructure and train size that should qualify a line as light or heavy, not a specific brand like Bombardier's Innovia.

 

[Steve X]

Is this to reduce friction?

Where is the fourth rail? Under the centre track?

The SRT runs with +300V DC from the third rail and -300V DC on the forth rail giving a 600V DC difference. If you look carefully at this picture: https://www.thestar.com/news/city_h...revealed-for-one-stop-scarborough-subway.html
You'll see two power rails.

By steer, I meant it pulls the train. Trains don't actually steer.

The centre rail in LIM trains pulls the train forward using magnets. This allows cars to be built without motors, which means smaller, lighter and faster cars and smaller tunnel sizes (theoretically reducing construction costs).

It's surprising that the LIM technology never really took off. Systems today are still generally being built with traditional subway cars or underground trams. I suppose LIM came along so late that the larger cities already had established metro networks, and interoperability with their existing network and maintenances facilities was more important than lower construction costs or faster vehicles.

I'm not surprised. The technology needs a 4th rail and a LIM rail. Both a pretty hefty thing to maintain. It's not about building the system like what Rob Ford thinks. It's about maintaining the system. A 4th rail gives the TTC a 2nd collector shoe to maintain and replace from wear and tear. The LIM doesn't work well when it's cover by ice. The LIM being a electromagnet also attract (magnetically) a lot of metal objects and coins. The guys at the SRT doors open were saying how they'll collect a whole bunch of quarters every time they clean the tracks. Such stuff doesn't happen on conventional railways.

If anyone just want a system that can turn on tight curves, a high floor LRT system is just as good plus it can have level crossing. This allows Calgary to expand their C-Train platform to 4 cars lengths while the SkyTrains are suffering with overcapacity and just hoping the new Innovia 300s would bring more capacity. A seen with our TRs, the absents of more doors didn't solve much of the claimed capacity TTC said the TRs offer. In other words, they just dwell as long while people continue to block the doorway.

 

[OneCity]

If the route was so poor, why did we consider it for the subway? McCowan is going to to run up the costs of this subway. RT corridor or Brimley is much better.

You are asking a loaded question based on two lackluster plans.

But the simple answer is there will be no stops with the subway so the RT route should be considered. I fully agree if we are building a one stop subway we should use the route if cost savings can be had. If we are building some type of useful local transit with stops, and certainly if we are building on a separate technology from anything else in the City then current RT route is a disgrace and an epic fail in transit design.

 

[BurlOak]

I am so happy we didn't build the Relief Line with this technology. It would've provided woefully inadequate capacity.

Ya,

Imagine how bad Toronto transit would be now if we had a DRL line running from Science Centre down Don Mills to downtown, and the SRT from Malvern to Mount Dennis. We would now be discussing what route the second DRL would be taking to get through downtown.

We are much better with the system we have now.

 

[W. K. Lis]

You are asking a loaded question based on two lackluster plans.

But the simple answer is there will be no stops with the subway so the RT route should be considered. I fully agree if we are building a one stop subway we should use the route if cost savings can be had. If we are building some type of useful local transit with stops, and certainly if we are building on a separate technology from anything else in the City then current RT route is a disgrace and an epic fail in transit design.

Maybe the powers-that-be are assuming that in some future century, they might dig a station (or two) between Kennedy and Scarborough Town City? In case of transporter problems.

 

[micheal_can]

Ya,

Imagine how bad Toronto transit would be now if we had a DRL line running from Science Centre down Don Mills to downtown, and the SRT from Malvern to Mount Dennis. We would now be discussing what route the second DRL would be taking to get through downtown.

We are much better with the system we have now.

^^^^^
This here is more true than anyone wants to believe.

If the line had been extended, it would make the DRL LIM technology. This would have spurred growth along the route. This might have made Scarborough a much more desired location than it currently is.

 

[EastYorkTTCFan]

Maybe the powers-that-be are assuming that in some future century, they might dig a station (or two) between Kennedy and Scarborough Town City? In case of transporter problems.

I wonder if after the subway is built if they would possibly end up building the LRT anyway, that way it could fed to either end of teh subway much like the buses do and even continue further into Scarbrough?

 

[gweed123]

I wonder if after the subway is built if they would possibly end up building the LRT anyway, that way it could fed to either end of teh subway much like the buses do and even continue further into Scarbrough?

I could see the LRT being built eastward from STC, maybe even extended west to an Ellesmere RER station, but not paralleling the Stouffville corridor. Centennial College is a pretty major trip generator, so getting some kind of RT service there would be good.

What I can potentially see happening is an LRT line being built more or less along the Ellesmere corridor from the Stouffville corridor to UTSC via STC and Centennial College. This is especially true if the Sheppard East LRT gets canned. Heck, even if it doesn't, east of Kennedy Ellesmere is a more worthy RT corridor than Sheppard is anyway.

 

[salsa]

And with luck, make provisions for a future station at Brimley/Eglinton as well.

Why? The Eglinton Crosstown extension will have a stop in the same location.

 

[crs1026]

Imagine how bad Toronto transit would be now if we had a DRL line running from Science Centre down Don Mills to downtown, and the SRT from Malvern to Mount Dennis. We would now be discussing what route the second DRL would be taking to get through downtown.

And Yonge Line 1 would already be extended to Richmond Hill, because the 'relief' would already be in place, at least until 2025 or so.

- Paul

 

[robmausser]

The centre rail in LIM trains pulls the train forward using magnets. This allows cars to be built without motors, which means smaller, lighter and faster cars and smaller tunnel sizes (theoretically reducing construction costs).

It's surprising that the LIM technology never really took off. Systems today are still generally being built with traditional subway cars or underground trams. I suppose LIM came along so late that the larger cities already had established metro networks, and interoperability with their existing network and maintenances facilities was more important than lower construction costs or faster vehicles.

The reason it didnt take off is because you are replacing small motors in the train cars with a huge motor that runs the entire length of the track.

The benefit is a lighter train, but the disadvantage is now instead of maintaining some rail cars with small motors, you are maintaining this huge LIM system that runs the entire length of the track, sits out in the elements, on high guide ways at times and inconvenient locations.

Other technologies (smaller electric motors, light weight carbon fibre materials) have brought the weight of rail cars down in ways where you don't need some elaborate elctromagnetic system that is a pain to maintain.

The system is only beneficial when you need fast moving trains that can take tight tuns and steep inclines, thats why you see the system often used nowadays in Asia for Airport Shuttles and small systems like this. It can run quick and nimbly around very dense areas. Thats really the only advantage anymore.

 

[ssiguy2]

Exactly. As for the SRT itself, the reason for it's failure is 100% the fault of the TTC.

The first damn thing they did when they got the vehicles is spend a fortune to install driver control at the head of the train on a system that is specifically built to be automated. Of course this was totally due to the fact that the TTC doesn't want any automated lines lest it upset the transit union.

The reality is that Vancouver took a bit of a lemon {due to it's initial issues} and made it into lemonade. The result is an excellent rapid/mass transit system while Toronto decided if it couldn't get the streetcar then it was going to let the line rot and make it so unreliable, uncomfortable, and unpleasant that sooner or later Queen's Park will have to replace it. Even Steve Munro has done nothing but praise Vancouver's SkyTrain system and used it as an example of how the TTC has done everything in it's power to make the SRT a failure. The result is Torontonians have rightly come to hate the SRT and the city is now stuck with having to pay $3 billion {and counting} on a replacement that won't expand the city's rapid transit network by 5 feet.

This shocking and irresponsible in/action on the SRT means other lies like the DRL , Eglinton West, Smart Tracks, Yonge extension, and actually expanding the Sheppard lines so it's not just a stubway, have to be put on hold and their costs will continue to rise while Torontonians won't be getting a foot of extra rapid transit. Heads should be rolling over this but they won't however it will make for a great new TTC Royal Commission on the failures of the line and nobody does transit planning studies quite like Toronto.