GO Transit: Construction Projects (Metrolinx, various)

[hw621]

I've heard that's the case- I've heard that REM was in development by Caisse for awhile longer, and it was only announced when it was in a 'buildable' state.

But overall, I agree that transit projects should really go straight into design/tender once the routing is approved and the funding secured. There's way too much hand-wringing over too many inconsequential things at the moment- especially community impacts.

So the consultant friends can have jobs...

 

[raptor]

So the consultant friends can have jobs...

bingo

 

[BurlOak]

So the consultant friends can have jobs...

I think it's related to the type of jobs. Design, and construction are done by engineers and workers.
The consultations are to ensure employment for all the poeple who took humanities courses and can't really contribute to society. They can talk, but they can't do. They are large in numbers, and they went to school for quite some time with quite some cost - so it's only "fair" that society create a whole bunch of work for them. By changing the laws, this work now becomes integral to the success of the project, even though in reality they contribute nothing to the project - and they did not exist when things were actually running better (i.e. the 1950's and 60's and maybe 70's when Toronto truly was a transit leader).

 

[steveintoronto]

^ I was just digging on the REM and Champlain Bridge story, not directly applicable in specifics to this string, but indirectly it's very relevant, as the story is a bit more complex than it at first seems. Googling showed a fair amount on the nice and sanitized stories they'd like you to read, but this one throws a wrench into the light axle load: (As to the sharing of the tunnel, development just this year: https://www.systracanada.com/en-pro...e-hfr-via-trains-on-montreal-s-reseau-express
https://www.systracanada.com/IMG/pdf/16-037_interoperability_rem_via_can_en.pdf )
This discussion is very relevant to the Relief Line sharing with VIA HFR and GO RER.

The New Champlain Bridge – Barely Built for Rail
September 9th, 2016 by ant6n

An investigation into how the New Champlain Bridge is being built for only very light railway axle loads, and how this would make it difficult to build an integrated regional rail system shared between REM, AMT and VIA, but not impossible.

One issue regarding the REM light metro project that has come up during the BAPE hearings, and that has come up in the news several times, is the one of sharing the Mont-Royal tunnel.
The Caisse intends to privatize the tunnel and monopolize it, although the Mascouche and St-Jerome line of the AMT, and VIA rail need to access it. VIA rail needs access the tunnel for its proposed high frequency train between Quebec City and Montreal – the routing via the North Shore and Trois-Riviere is 45 minutes faster, and has more population along the way.
The refusal of the Caisse to design a shared system between the REM, VIA and the AMT is probably the main issue, which also informs most of the concerns related to privatization.
One of the issues for for a compatible system is the change of the electrification from 25KV to 1.5KV. The former is usually used on mainlines and on regional and commuter rail systems, the latter on metro systems.
25kv vs 1.5kv Railway Electrification
25KV provides more power, and due to the higher voltage there are less resistive losses. This means substations, the equipment buildings along the line that feed electricity into it, can be further apart. Fewer substations is great for a system involving large distances. So most long distance, regional and commuter rail systems use or will use 25Kv electrification (including VIA).
However, 25kv electrification also requires heavier transformers on the trains that convert the power to be used by the motors, so the trains were historically heavier.
The Deux-Montagnes line was actually converted in the 90s from 1.5KV to 25kv, and new, more powerful trains were ordered, the MR-90 railcars. Back then, this project cost 300M$. We are now reverting the electrification back, although we don’t know the expense for that.

When I asked the REM people about the reason for changing the electrification, they told me that “1.5KV is more appropriate for a light rail system”, and that trains using it are lighter. They also told me that the weight of the trains is a big concern, due to the low allowed axle weights on the Champlain bridge, which is built to light rail standards.
They said you that you couldn’t just extend the existing Deux-Montagnes line with its MR-90 vehicles onto the Champlain bridge because they are too heavy.
This seems strange. We’re building a new rail bridge that’s still under construction; and there are already weight concerns?
Rail Weights in the Specification of the Champlain Bridge
I decided to investigate the issue. What are the exact weight requirements on the Champlain bridge?
I e-mailed the New Champlain Bridge to ask about rail axle weights. They forwarded my request to Infrastructure Canada, which pointed me to the Project Agreement between the Canadian Government and the “Signature on the Saint Lawrence Group”, a consortium of SNC-Lavalin and others to build the Champlain bridge.
This is a giant document, provided as a collection of pdf files in English and French, which come in a 175MB zip file. Infrastructure Canada pointed me to Schedule 7, Part 7, Section 4.2.3.3. It reads:
For the SLR phase (as defined in Section 4.1.1 herein) the live loads shall be taken as rail traffic in accordance with EN 1991-2: Eurocode 1- Actions on structures – Part 2: Traffic loads on bridges. Section 6 of the Eurocode together with the Project-specific application rules contained in this Agreement shall be considered applicable for SLR loading.
The structure shall be verified for both Load Model 71 and Load Model SW/0. Classified vertical loads shall be applied. The factor alpha referred to in Clause 6.3.2 (3) of the Eurocode shall be taken as 0.50 and shall be applied to both load models except that the classified value of the axle load Qvk to be used in Load Model 71 shall be taken as 146 kN.
This sounds good! The railway is defined according to a standard, a European one on top of that! They know how to build trains, right? But we still don’t really know what the actual weight requirement is. So the search continues, now for what this “EN 1991-2” specification is, what the “Load Model 71” and “Load Model SW/0” are, and how those alpha and QvKvalues fit into that.

Very technical discussion ensues...
[...]

Why did we design the bridge for such a light standard?

We have to remember that it’s been decades that we’ve been talking about putting a light rail system on the Champlain Bridge. The plan kept changing back and forth, sometimes there was talk of a metro, sometimes of expanding the busway, usually the goal was a ‘light rail’ solution. This usually assumed a very light rail system, something like a tram, sometimes maybe like the Vancouver skytrain.

It’s only with the Caisse’s REM plan, first announced in April of 2016, that there was any official plan to connect the heavy rail Mont-Royal tunnel and the Champlain bridge light rail. One transportation official of Montreal I talked to called the idea of connecting the Deux-Montagnes line and the Champlain bridge corridor “genius”.

I would not be so generous. I would call it necessary.
[...]

http://www.cat-bus.com/2016/09/new-champlain-bridge-barely-built-for-rail/

Further to above, and from one of the links the author references:

[...]
This newfound model was proudly touted as a new form of PPP, a “public-public partnership”. But for the government, this whole thing comes down to an accounting sleight-of-hand: the government refuses to invest enough money in transit infrastructure, so if the Caisse takes responsibility for its construction, then these projects get taken off the government’s books. Any debt or deficit incurred belongs to the Caisse, not the government. Or, as the government puts it: “ce projet-là se ferait à l’extérieur de notre périmètre comptable”.

If that sounds like a good idea, here’s what it means, according to the agreement between the Caisse and Québec: [...continues at length...]

http://www.cat-bus.com/2016/08/how-...lic-partnership-is-privatization-in-disguise/

I'm sanguine on Private Investment being a solution to a number of transit dreams in the GTHA, however, the devil is in the details, and the devil is in QP!

 

[Neutrino]

I think it's related to the type of jobs. Design, and construction are done by engineers and workers.
The consultations are to ensure employment for all the poeple who took humanities courses and can't really contribute to society. They can talk, but they can't do. They are large in numbers, and they went to school for quite some time with quite some cost - so it's only "fair" that society create a whole bunch of work for them. By changing the laws, this work now becomes integral to the success of the project, even though in reality they contribute nothing to the project - and they did not exist when things were actually running better (i.e. the 1950's and 60's and maybe 70's when Toronto truly was a transit leader).

I have a lot of beef with how humanities courses are taught today, but aren't consultants usually grads from business and management programs? Not as bad as humanities perhaps, but still produce many useless HR cretins.

 

[crs1026]

I have a lot of beef with how humanities courses are taught today, but aren't consultants usually grads from business and management programs? Not as bad as humanities perhaps, but still produce many useless HR cretins.

As a career HR guy, I’m taking the high road, but please cease and desist - or I will be happy to remind you of all the times where the guys with iron rings missed the big picture.

Consultations are just fine, if the data collected is actually used. Lots of time, it’s just for show. But consider how often town halls has been the only forum where people on this forum can actually get data or push aan ‘expert’ for an answer... or raise an issue where the pr spin is sidestepping a problem. We get good value out of those consultations.... but yeah, maybe they could be more straightforward.

- Paul

 

[Neutrino]

Sure, there are good HR guys, but plenty of ballast and I stand by that point.

 

[BurlOak]

As a career HR guy, I’m taking the high road, but please cease and desist - or I will be happy to remind you of all the times where the guys with iron rings missed the big picture.

Consultations are just fine, if the data collected is actually used. Lots of time, it’s just for show. But consider how often town halls has been the only forum where people on this forum can actually get data or push aan ‘expert’ for an answer... or raise an issue where the pr spin is sidestepping a problem. We get good value out of those consultations.... but yeah, maybe they could be more straightforward.

- Paul

HR is there to sort out employment issues - I don't view them as a part of a project team.
I found that the actual detail design team is the afterthought. Depending on how strong the project manager is during preliminary design - they will be influenced more by things like environmental, heritage, public realm, appeasing political direction, easier communications, etc. all decide the scope of the project more than the actual designers (the ones who are tasked with solving the main goals) do.

 

[steveintoronto]

'Waited far too long': Opposition motion calls for clear timetable for GO service expansion to Guelph, Waterloo Region
NEWS Apr 04, 2019 by Graeme McNaughton Guelph Mercury

The promise of bringing two-way, all-day GO train service to Guelph and Waterloo Region has been promised for many years — and one MPP says people need to know when that is actually going to happen.

On Thursday afternoon, Laura Mae Lindo, MPP for Kitchener Centre and the NDP's critic for anti-racism, and for citizenship and immigration services, will be putting forward a motion at Queen’s Park, calling for the provincial government to put forward firm financial and time commitments on extending more frequent train service to the area.

“Based on the feedback I’m getting from constituents in my riding and beyond, they’re pretty disheartened,” Lindo told the Mercury Tribune on Wednesday.


“They’ve waited far too long, and they’re losing jobs over this. They’re not necessarily confident that any government is going to follow through.”

Guelph MPP Mike Schreiner said he is in full support of the motion.

"It's absolutely essential to the economic vitality and the innovation corridor, and so there's so many strong arguments for it," he said.

"The minister keeps telling me that announcements are forthcoming and good news is coming. But yet, we haven't heard about any of that. We haven't heard any details yet. And there has been no announcement."

In Lindo’s motion, she is calling for a plan to be made available by June 6, the last sitting day at Queen’s Park ahead of the summer break.

“It’s just so the community knows what steps are going to be organized in the plan, they can be assured that resources have been provided to make the plan a reality.”

https://www.guelphmercury.com/news-...-service-expansion-to-guelph-waterloo-region/

 

[crs1026]

HR is there to sort out employment issues - I don't view them as a part of a project team.

Had that argument enough times. One Project exec told me he wanted the HR team located in an office building “outside the fence, where you belong”.
That didn’t last long ;-)
There’s the issue of planning how the project is organised and staffed, finding the people, getting ‘em hired, onsite and oriented. It takes engineers to figure out what to do and how to do it, but the HR deliverables are part of a good project execution plan, and a good project management process includes HR outputs.
Funny how many people issues arise while pouring concrete.

- Paul

 

[nfitz]

Not sure why the default response is hostility.

I didn't see that as hostile.

 

[BurlOak]

Had that argument enough times. One Project exec told me he wanted the HR team located in an office building “outside the fence, where you belong”.
That didn’t last long ;-)
There’s the issue of planning how the project is organised and staffed, finding the people, getting ‘em hired, onsite and oriented. It takes engineers to figure out what to do and how to do it, but the HR deliverables are part of a good project execution plan, and a good project management process includes HR outputs.
Funny how many people issues arise while pouring concrete.

- Paul

Your talking on the construction side. I was referring to the Design side.

 

[TransitBart]

You guys are hard core. This would be funny were it not so true.

 

[dowlingm]

I don't recall heavy rail ever being in contemplation for the Champlain Bridge. Maybe I missed something, but I have only seen heavy-light coexistence discussed for the Mont Royal tunnel.

 

[steveintoronto]

I don't recall heavy rail ever being in contemplation for the Champlain Bridge. Maybe I missed something, but I have only seen heavy-light coexistence discussed for the Mont Royal tunnel.

If you read the entire article, you'll see that it's not suggested that it was, but rather whether the stated specs of the bridge permit HFR EMU interoperability, a study of which I also linked with that article surmise I posted.

But here's the essential point, one I made specifically and detailed for the following two UK Class of trains, but I went one step further, adding the 717, that's slightly lighter still, runs on third rail, uses the Great Northern tunnels which are of a smaller diameter than the TTC has planned for Relief Line south, and run on 750VDC and 25kVAC, and started service just a few weeks back.

[...]
But the most relevant examples are in Britain. There, the weight of vehicles is largely optimized to reduce maintenance costs. The result is that manufacturers build very light trains. Two vehicles are being produced right now to be used on networks that are each composed of a downtown tunnel connected to many branches (sound familiar?): Thameslink and Crossrail.

Both use automation in in the tunnel section, both use 25KV electrification, and are based on railcars 20m vehicles (like the REM). And both use rolling stock that obey the 14T axle limit:

• The class 700 built by Siemens for Thameslink
• The class 345 built by Bombardier for Crossrail

British Rail class 345 and 700
Both these vehicles show that it is possible to fulfill several constraints of a possible shared system for REM, VIA, and AMT, using existing technology that has already been built.
[...]

I posted all the details in the Relief Line south string They were erased a few days back by 'management' at this site as being "off-topic". How Toronto can you get?

Is it any wonder this city is stuck in the dark ages? Even detailing workable, affordable, forwardly integrated *off the shelf* solutions to need gets you a slap in the face.

Top speed for the Class 345 is 100 mph. It's 90 mph for the 700 series, save the 717, which is 85 mph. And the Brits will run them that fast too. And on 2.5 min headway to start, (Thameslink already bettered that) and less than 2 min later. Because they can. The 700s are being run totally ATO through London's core in tunnel.

The Siemens in-cab system uses optimum acceleration and braking on board the Class 700 Thameslink trains while maintaining a smooth ride for passengers.Mar 27, 2018
Thameslink Programme launches UK's first self-drive mainline train ...
https://www.networkrail.co.uk/passengers-ride-uks-first-self-drive-mainline-train/

Thameslink first with ATO over ETCS - Railway Gazette
https://www.railwaygazette.com/news/.../thameslink-first-with-ato-over-etcs.html
Mar 20, 2018 - The Siemens-built Class 700 EMU ran between stops using the ATO ... of ETCS and ATO through the Thameslink core in the September 2015 ...

Main Line ATO Becomes a Reality | Rail Engineer
https://www.railengineer.co.uk › Rail News
Jun 4, 2018 - The 115-strong Class 700 train fleet all came fitted with ETCS and ... The Thameslinkcentral core ETCS operation commences just south of ...

And as the VIA study will show, the Relief Line if built like the REM will also be compatible for HFR and RER EMUs too:

Interoperability Study to Operate HFR VIA Trains ... - SYSTRA Canada
https://www.systracanada.com/.../interoperability-study-to-operate-hfr-via-trains-on-m...
Interoperability Study to Operate HFR VIA Trains on Montreal's Réseau express métropolitain (REM).

See also: https://www.systra.com/IMG/pdf/systra_ra2017_gb.pdf