GO Transit: Construction Projects (Metrolinx, various)

[mdrejhon]

The EA will cover the stretch from Burlington West - a little bit west of Burlington Station - to Bayview Junction. I'm not entirely sure why they've decided to use the GO station names, since they aren't the accurate locations in this case.

Thanks for the clarification!
Got it, so this EA covers Burlington West to the Bayview Junction.

And probably the future $150M Stoney Creek expansion would cover the corridor expansion between Bayview Junction and Stoney Creek (I imagine probably announced before July 1, 2017, for Confederation Station's namesake on the sesquicentennial of Canada). That would complete the corridor expansion into Hamilton needed for AD2W 30-minutes.

It seems that saner heads have prevailed, and have impressed upon Metrolinx that a grade separation isn't likely to be needed at Bayview Junction or anywhere south on the stretch to James North Station for quite some time.

I hope you're right. A Metrolinx agreement with CP for passenger-priority crossover rights to keep trains on schedule, maybe?

 

[nfitz]

The situation is much better for the CN trackage (JamesNorth/StoneyCreek trackage) than for the CP trackage (Hamilton downtown trackage), so there will be much less interference between freight trains and GO trains.

If delays were almost daily at the James North station and caused by freight blockages in the 1980s, what then has changed that would stop this now?

 

[mdrejhon]

If delays were almost daily at the James North station and caused by freight blockages in the 1980s, what then has changed that would stop this now?

I know it's just semantics, but you mean the adjacent Hamilton CNR Station (now Liuna Station), as James North GO Station didn't exist yet.

This is a good question, I presume freight services have declined since the 1980s. I read somewhere there's now only a few freight trains a day on the CN line, something like 3 or 4.

 

[nfitz]

I know it's just semantics, but you mean the adjacent Hamilton CNR Station (now Liuna Station), as James North GO Station didn't exist yet.

I was referring to the CN station on James North. I believe it went by the name of Hamilton GO, and VIA referred to it as Hamilton. It's a few metres east of the new station, but only a few, the platforms overlap.

As it's the only station that GO stopped at in the 1980s, I don't see the need for clarification.

 

[Jonny5]

This is a good question, I presume freight services have declined since the 1980s. I read somewhere there's now only a few freight trains a day on the CN line, something like 3 or 4.

That would make sense. I assume Stelco and Dofasco used a significant share of the resources of that yard in the 80's for shipping in/out production materials and finished steel products, but now Stelco is completely closed down and Dofasco is producing far less than before.

 

[smallspy]

I hope you're right. A Metrolinx agreement with CP for passenger-priority crossover rights to keep trains on schedule, maybe?

Who's talking about CP? We're talking about the James North Station, and the tracks running into it.

If delays were almost daily at the James North station and caused by freight blockages in the 1980s, what then has changed that would stop this now?

How about that the number of freight trains on the line has plummeted to about a third or less of what it was?

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[nfitz]

How about that the number of freight trains on the line has plummeted to about a third or less of what it was?

Has it? I thought freight traffic had increased in recent years. Or is it a function of that line in particular, and CN isn't using it as much as it used to.

 

[smallspy]

Has it? I thought freight traffic had increased in recent years. Or is it a function of that line in particular, and CN isn't using it as much as it used to.

Total traffic has increased in most locations, yes. It wouldn't surprise me to find out that the cross-border traffic using the Grimsby Sub is at the same level or higher than it was 30 years ago.

The difference, however, is that there used to be a LOT of local traffic along the line, even until the very early 1980s. This has all but disappeared.

The other thing that has happened is that instead of 20 4,000 foot long trains, we are instead seeing 6 or 7 11,000+ foot long trains per day.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[mdrejhon]

Has it? I thought freight traffic had increased in recent years. Or is it a function of that line in particular, and CN isn't using it as much as it used to.

Not sure if it's that line.
It is probably bounced back up from its low point, but the freight traffic is far lower than back in the heydey.

So relatively speaking, there's probably more freight traffic than last decade, but probably far less freight traffic than the early 1980s.

The line used to be incredibly busy with freight in Hamilton's early days. Many decades ago, train traffic in many places used to be often 3x, 5x, even 10x to 100x+ more in many locations during the early half of this 20th century, before the air travel boom and the existence of the continential freeway network. Grand train stations, such as this 32+ track station in St. Louis, MI from over 100 years ago, serving 22 different railroad services (Toronto Union just has GO, VIA and UPX). Now, today, St. Louis Union is just a shopping mall. Over the 70s, 80s, 90s, and the early 21st century, train traffic is waxing and waning, but the low point on many train lines happened in the recent few decades. Big time investors such as Warren Buffet and Bill Gates (former CEO of Microsoft owns 13% of our CN!) invested in the railroads and brought a freight resurgence, so more freight trains are moving about than the low points near the end of last century. But it's still not nearly as much as back in its heydey.

 

[TOareaFan]

Total traffic has increased in most locations, yes. It wouldn't surprise me to find out that the cross-border traffic using the Grimsby Sub is at the same level or higher than it was 30 years ago.

The difference, however, is that there used to be a LOT of local traffic along the line, even until the very early 1980s. This has all but disappeared.

The other thing that has happened is that instead of 20 4,000 foot long trains, we are instead seeing 6 or 7 11,000+ foot long trains per day.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

serious question....is there much difference in track operations between 80k feet of trains and 77k feet of trains? Isn't the amount of space/time consumed roughly equal?

 

[smallspy]

serious question....is there much difference in track operations between 80k feet of trains and 77k feet of trains? Isn't the amount of space/time consumed roughly equal?

Considering the two circumstances, yes and no. The actual physical amount of track occupied by the train equipment is the same, yes. There is, however, fewer blocks in total occupied by the fewer trains, as each train needs to keep the same length buffer behind it, regardless of actual length of the train.

The longer trains will also require fewer locomotives to operate, and also fewer crews - and so it will cost less operationally to run fewer trains.

Longer trains do have their costs though, so the savings aren't so cut-and-dried.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[TOareaFan]

^thnks

 

[DonValleyRainbow]

Apparently GO is looking at an elevated solution to the Davenport diamond.

 

[drum118]

Apparently GO is looking at an elevated solution to the Davenport diamond.

Most people will oppose this, but it the right way to do it.

CP will drive this deeper using a TBM as they don't want the mess as West Toronto Diamond construction. They can live with the elevated line construction.

There is a thread for this project.

 

[BurlOak]

Most people will oppose this, but it the right way to do it.

CP will drive this deeper using a TBM as they don't want the mess as West Toronto Diamond construction. They can live with the elevated line construction.

There is a thread for this project.

I'm not sure how many people use this line, but can it terminate at the new Downsview Station and then close this section during construction. Also, the bridge at St. Clair could be replaced at the same time.

I am a bit confused at the cost estimate of this project. In one place the Star article says:

Raising the tracks would take about $500 million and two years less than the alternative, which was to bury them, according to Metrolinx.

elsewhere it says:

There's no cost estimate yet for the Davenport Diamond project,

How do they know tunnelling will be $500M more expensive if they do not have an estimate?